Scot Davidson Conservative
Introduced as a private member’s bill.
This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.
This is from the published bill.
This enactment amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act to provide that the perishable fruits and vegetables sold by a supplier to a purchaser, as well as the proceeds of sale of those fruits and vegetables, are to be held in trust by the purchaser for the supplier in the event that the purchaser has not fully paid for the fruits or vegetables and becomes bankrupt or the subject to a receivership or applies to the court to sanction a compromise or an arrangement.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Currie, you mentioned Bill C‑234 in your opening statement. At the beginning of the meeting, we talked about bills C‑280 and C‑282, and the trouble they're running into in the Senate. Bill C‑234 was reported back to the House with an amendment, but it still includes a grain drying exemption.
What do you want to say to the elected members of Parliament? Should we pass the bill as is or send it back to the Senate, knowing full well that it won't come back?
The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow
Looking at my colleagues, I think we're fine. Therefore, we'll do a letter on Bill C-280 and a letter on Bill C-282, with similar messages. There will be two different letters.
Thanks, colleagues. We appreciate everybody's congeniality on that. Now we will go to our business at hand.
I call the meeting of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food to order.
I will give a couple of reminders.
I know our witnesses have been here many times before, so this is probably a little redundant. The meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. The proceedings will be made available on the House of Commons website. Just so you are aware, the webcast will show the person speaking, not the entire committee. Please don't take photos or screenshots.
To our witnesses, we've had some issues with feedback in the microphones, so please keep your earpieces as far away from the microphone as possible to ensure the safety of our interpreters.
I don't think I need to go through too much; I think everyone has been here before.
Mr. Perron, is this on this issue?
The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow
Thank you, Mr. Perron.
I think we're good on Bill C-280. We've agreed to that. I don't see any concerns.
Do you want a recorded vote, Mr. Perron, or do you want to just go around the table and see where we're at?
The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow
Thank you.
I see pretty unanimous consent on Bill C-280, so I think we can move with that. The analyst can do that letter.
Do we want to put the letter on Bill C-282 to a vote? We could discuss this all day, but we do have some colleagues here who want to testify on this current study. Rather than debating this around the table, do we want to just have a vote on whether to do a similar letter for Bill C-282 that would go to the finance and banking committee?
Mr. Perron, do you feel that should be the way to go?
Lianne Rood Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I was just wondering if Bill C-282 went through a different committee in the Senate than Bill C-280 did in the Senate. It does not make sense to comment on a bill that we did not see before this committee and urge the other chamber to pass something when we did not even talk about it here.
It is not that we are not supportive, but it just doesn't relate to this committee.
Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I agree on Bill C-280, but I'm also supportive of Monsieur Perron's suggestion that we should also include Bill C-282 in that. I think it's no secret that, obviously, we've had lots of supply-managed stakeholders come before committee in the past. It's related to ag. I think our ag committee should be united, in terms of putting pressure on the other chamber to pass the bill, as it is the will of the House. I'm supportive of Bill C-280 and Bill C-282.
The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow
Thank you, Mr. Perron.
The only caveat is that Bill C-282 did not go through this committee. Bill C-280 did go through the agriculture committee. That is the only difference.
If the Bloc wants to do that, you'd probably get support to do it. You may want it to come from the trade committee. I believe it went through that on the House side. That would be my only comment on that.
Are there any concerns?
Mr. Drouin.
Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I completely agree with your proposal. I also suggest that a letter be sent to the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade regarding Bill C‑282. I think you follow the news. This bill is dragging its feet and is being kept in committee deliberately by a few individuals. I think that the elected members of the House must send clear messages when a bill is passed. As you said, only one person voted against Bill C‑280. In the case of Bill C‑282, 78% of the members of the House of Commons voted in favour.
The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow
Thank you.
There's one more piece of business.
I haven't had a chance to speak to Mr. Cannings, but the chair and I spoke briefly over the last few days. There is an issue with Bill C-280 in the Senate. It was unanimously supported by this committee and 337:1 in the House. The chair, the NDP and I thought it might be worthwhile sending a letter to the Senate trade committee reinforcing the fact that this was unanimously supported by this committee. We have done a lot of work on that private member's bill, and it was strongly supported in the House. We thought we would send a letter reinforcing this committee's message.
Mr. Perron.
Scot Davidson Conservative York—Simcoe, ON
Mr. Speaker, it has been one year since my Conservative bill, Bill C-280, passed in the House of Commons.
This important bill would ensure that Canada's fresh fruit and vegetable growers are paid for the food they grow, and it would save Canadians money. However, the Prime Minister's hand-picked senators have held up the bill for months; now, some are actively looking to defeat it. In committee, one Senator even told produce farmers that it was tough luck, as the whole system is crooked, life is not fair and they were just going to have to deal with it. We can talk about being out of touch.
Bill C-280 supports farmers, protects our food security and promotes cross-border trade. Practically every MP voted for it; however, Liberal-appointed senators want to ignore the will of the House and side with big banks instead. They need to get their act together, stand with common-sense Conservatives in support of Bill C-280 and our farmers, and bring it home.
Mr. Davidson was on that trip. We went with a group of Liberals and Conservatives and senators. We met with U.S. officials, both congressmen and USDA officials, to get confirmation that all we need to do to get privileged access back to PACA in the U.S. is to implement Bill C-280 as written. That was confirmed.
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being with us today.
Mr. Lemaire, I'll start with you.
You spoke in response to my colleague Mr. Hoback about the plastics registry and the possible impact under CUSMA rules currently. I think many of the witnesses here today have talked about the need for regulatory harmonization as we move forward with our partners, both Mexico and the United States.
In your response about the probable impact that might happen with food prices because of this, you talked about a Deloitte study and a 30% increase in food costs as a result. I think our committee would benefit from that Deloitte study, if you could share that with us. For our purposes, I think that would be hugely important.
You also spoke about Bill C-280, which is a private member's bill from our colleague Scot Davidson. He's spearheading it. It's in the Senate right now. It received unanimous support in the House of Commons, and I believe the same in the Senate. I think this legislation will potentially pave the way for reinstating the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act protection in the U.S. for Canadian growers.
What does the government need to do to push for this to happen as part of CUSMA, or even prior to CUSMA?
That's a good question.
I'll speak to the question that was asked around the deemed trust discussions.
In Canada, if we move forward with the mechanism around financial protection, then Bill C-280, which is in front of the Senate, would be one of the other tools that would enable working around and within CUSMA. Because it is built within the framework of tri-national modelling, it would give us access to a dispute resolution model within a preferential system that no others have internationally. Then Canadian growers in the fresh fruit and vegetable industry, and exporters, would be able to access that dispute resolution tool.
It just means moving our own bankruptcy protection here forward to enable the U.S. to reinstate that preferential access, due to the reciprocity nature that they're requesting. It's slightly outside of CUSMA, but it's founded within the context of the North American free trade agreement.
We have to give the House and parliamentarians credit. You kept the Senate very busy, and they made the decision to focus on House priorities only. We were moving into the banking committee to review Bill C-280, and that has been postponed now until the fall.
I was actually to testify this morning around the benefits of market stabilization and trade, because if we can introduce the bankruptcy tool for the fresh fruit and vegetable sector, we will regain a trading tool, preferential access to a trading tool with the U.S. that, in the event of a dispute, will provide a clear strategy on sustainability for our fruit and vegetable growers when we ship south.