Bill C-355

Prohibition of the Export of Horses by Air for Slaughter Act

An Act to prohibit the export by air of horses for slaughter and to make related amendments to certain Acts

This enactment prohibits the export by air from Canada of live horses for the purpose of being slaughtered or fattened for slaughter.

[Captain Tim Perry, President, ALPA Canada, Air Line Pilots Association, International]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Good morning. My name is Tim Perry. I am a professional pilot and have been for over 21 years. I'm a 737 captain at WestJet Airlines. I am currently the president of ALPA Canada, which is the Canadian division of the Air Line Pilots Association, International.

I am pleased to appear before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food today on behalf of our members in Canada regarding Bill C-355.

By way of a brief introduction, the Air Line Pilots Association is the world's largest airline pilot union and non-governmental safety organization. ALPA Canada represents 90% of the professional pilot workforce in Canada. They are employed by 22 airlines across the country.

ALPA provides critical services to its members, including airline safety, security, pilot assistance and labour representation.

I'd like to begin by stating that the primary responsibility of the pilot in command of an aircraft is the safe operation of that aircraft before takeoff, in flight and after landing.

ALPA Canada believes that Bill C-355 does not recognize this. As a result, it will negatively impact our members by putting an unnecessary and redundant obligation on them, which is accompanied by excessive penalties if in contravention of the proposed legislation.

Further, we maintain that it is improper to place any additional responsibilities on a pilot when the pilots' responsibilities are already clearly defined in the Canadian aviation regulations and the Aeronautics Act.

We also believe that all responsibilities relating to the required written declaration in the proposed legislation should be the sole responsibility of the chief officer of customs of the airport, as identified in the bill.

For the reasons stated above, ALPA Canada suggests that Bill C-355 be amended in the following ways.

In clause 4, under “Prohibitions” and "Copy of declaration”, we request that paragraph 4(2)(a), which states, “the pilot in command or the operator of the aircraft”, be removed in its entirety.

In subclause 4(3), “No departure without declaration”, paragraph 4(3)(b), which states, “for a person in charge of the aircraft to take the aircraft on its flight”, should also be removed.

We are happy to provide these comments to the clerk.

We maintain that paragraphs 4(2)(a) and 4(3)(b) are unnecessary and put additional responsibilities on the pilot, who should remain focused solely on the safety and the operation of the flight, and this should remain the case.

Before I conclude my remarks, I would also like to take the opportunity to state that it is always our expectation that when legislation or regulations are being considered specifically with respect to the aviation industry, our members and potentially to aviation safety, there should be outreach or consultation with our association. In this case, that did not occur.

Thank you very much. I'm happy to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I call the meeting to order.

Colleagues, we're going to get started.

Welcome to meeting number 97 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

I'll start with a few reminders.

This committee meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. As you know, the webcast will always show the person speaking, rather than the entirety of the committee, and screenshots are not permitted.

Colleagues, pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, January 31, 2024, and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 8, 2024, the committee is resuming its consideration of Bill C-355, an act to prohibit the export by air of horses for slaughter and to make related amendments to certain acts.

We have four witnesses on today's panel, so I am going to be moving quickly, colleagues, and I will be very tight on the time. Usually I'm quite liberal, but I'll be a little conservative today, I guess.

From the Air Line Pilots Association, International, appearing by video conference, we have Captain Tim Perry. Thank you for being here, Mr. Perry.

From the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition, we have Sinikka Crosland, who is the president. Welcome.

From the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, we have Dr. Trevor Lawson. I believe he's a constituent of mine as well, so it's great to see you, Dr. Lawson.

From the Humane Society International/Canada, we have Ewa Demianowicz. We look forward to having your testimony.

You're joined by Dr. Nicholas Dodman, professor emeritus at Tufts University. He's joining us by video conference.

As you can see, colleagues, there are lots of witnesses and there will be great testimony here today.

I'd like to welcome Mr. MacDonald from Avalon, who's subbing in today on behalf of Mr. Drouin. We also have Mr. Dalton on behalf of Mr. Barlow.

Without further ado, I'm going to get right to it. We'll have five-minute opening remarks from each organization or witness.

Mr. Perry, from the Air Line Pilots Association, you have up to five minutes. It's over to you.

[William Shore]

There are two currently that are federally licensed. There's one in Alberta, and I've talked to ownership there. That's in the process of being sold so it will not be eliminated.

Ever since Bill C-355 has been discussed, we have tried to contact many, many smaller plants throughout Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan to discuss with them the possibility of processing these horses for overseas export, and 100% of the time we have been turned down, so there is no—

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

The Animal Transportation Association mentioned this in their submission. I want to quote this very quickly. They state:

Logistically, Bill C-355 will pose significant challenges for equine transporters and airlines operating in Canada. The requirement stipulating that every horse departing Canada via air transportation must be verified to not be intended for meat processing before export is unprecedented and introduces complexities not seen in other countries. This requirement imposes an additional burden on equine transporters and airlines, necessitating thorough verification processes to ensure compliance.

As an operator whose business is focused on this transportation, not only here but internationally, would you agree with this statement? Would you like to expand on the impact that this will have on the transportation industry, for example, on CBSA or airline pilots?

[Kenneth Serrien, Managing Director, Overseas Horse Services Ltd.]

Chair and committee members of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, my name is Kenneth Serrien, and I'm the managing director of Overseas Horse Services Ltd.

Overseas Horse Services Ltd. is a transportation company that organizes flights for sport and companion horses in Canada. We've been flying horses all over the world, to and from Canada, since 2008. Our company arranges everything to facilitate the import and export of these horses, such as quarantine, stabling, blood testing, health papers and general logistics.

Sport—racing, dressage or show jumping—and companion horses and the business surrounding that, which includes horse sales plus ground and air transportation, generates an estimated $150 million per year in Canada. The majority is generated by major competitions such as Spruce Meadows, Thunderbird Showpark, the Royal Winter Fair, Wesley Clover Parks, major-league show jumping and the Woodbine racetrack, all of which are highly dependent on the ability to import and export horses by air. Currently, around 1,000 horses are being exported from and imported into Canada by air every year, and many are shipped to attend these competitions.

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of this committee and share my and my colleagues' opinions concerning Bill C-355, as this bill can have serious consequences for the air transportation of sport and companion horses.

Please note that there is a significant difference between handling sport or companion horses and handling horses for fattening and slaughter. All of the horses we transport have been trained to be handled and are halter-broken. They are used to regularly being transported by road or air. As a result, we can load these horses in a safe manner in divided standing stalls on the plane, where a maximum of three horses are loaded per stall in their own segregated compartment. Horses for slaughter, however, are not used to regular handling and lack basic behaviour training. Therefore, they require a different loading protocol.

Here are some of my comments regarding the bill itself.

First of all, I have a comment about the declaration that is proposed. Pilots and CBSA have no expertise in horse behaviour. They don't know if an animal is in distress or not. They would not recognize the difference between a companion or sport horse and a horse for fattening and slaughter. Therefore, relying on them to make decisions regarding the welfare of horses during transportation could be impractical and potentially risky. Prior to every export, we already submit an export declaration via the Canadian export reporting system, or CERS, which is part of CBSA and Statistics Canada. We're already doing export declarations and providing all the information to CBSA and Statistics Canada. Per my above comments, I am concerned about the implementation of this process, especially as cargo planes have very irregular and often changing operating hours.

The second point I'd like to talk about is detention. The bill asks that the chief of customs at every airport detain a horse until they have a copy of the declaration. Again, I'm concerned about this implementation. How and where will these horses be detained at airports? Most airports lack the proper facilities to detain horses. In Calgary, we have a specialized animal facility that has the potential to detain 12 horses at a time. Toronto Pearson airport has the potential to detain only three horses, but other airports that regularly handle horses for export, such as the airports in Vancouver, Montreal, Ottawa, Hamilton, etc., don't have these facilities. You cannot detain a horse without having proper holding facilities, as it jeopardizes the health of the horse greatly and would also be considered inhumane and unsafe for staff.

Additionally, because the horses are under quarantine status, you cannot bring them back to their point of origin in Canada. There are a lot of steps involved in transporting horses by air from Canada—for example, quarantine protocols, testing, health papers and trucking—so detaining the horses could have grave consequences for the movement itself and for the CFIA staff who are supervising these movements.

The last thing I'd like to talk about is the “false or misleading information” part of the bill. I'm very uncertain how this can be enforced and evaluated. The transportation companies and airlines are wholly dependent on the information provided by the client or the horse owner regarding the purpose of export. Additionally, how do we know where the horse eventually ends up overseas? There is no traceability in Canada, the EU or anywhere in the world.

These are some of my concerns after having read this bill. It's my opinion that the implementation of this bill would greatly hinder the process of exporting horses from Canada for show and companionship purposes.

I greatly appreciate the opportunity you have provided to speak on this matter.

Thank you very much.

[Dr. Jonas Watson, Veterinarian, As an Individual]

Good day, and thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee.

I'm here today as a veterinarian, as a horse owner and as one of the great majority of Canadians who oppose the live horse export industry.

Canadian horses shipped for slaughter to Japan are deprived of food for the full duration of their transport, which can last up to 28 hours and sometimes exceeds that. We can presume that the prevalence of prolonged hunger in these animals is high and increases in severity the longer they travel. After only 12 hours of transport without food, horses are at increased risk of developing painful gastroenteric disorders such as stomach ulceration.

These horses are also deprived of water for the entire duration of their travel. Physiological biomarkers of dehydration have been detected in horses after as little as one hour of water deprivation. Prolonged thirst leads to dehydration, discomfort and suffering.

How does the experience of 28 hours of food and water being withheld feel to a horse? It's probably very similar to how you might feel after sitting on an airplane all day with nary a pretzel nor a ginger ale.

In 2022, the European Food Safety Authority's panel on animal health and welfare recommended that during transport, horses should be provided with constant access to food and water, or should at least be offered these at regular intervals of no more than four hours, for a period of 30 minutes.

Post-transport colic is a phenomenon that can appear within a few hours following travel. Post-transport colic emergencies require the prompt attention of a veterinarian. If colic develops during overseas transport, there is little to nothing that can be done. We have no way of knowing how many of Canada's exported horses go on to suffer this fate as a consequence of transport or how, and if, they are even treated.

The respiratory tract is one of the physiological systems most susceptible to infections in horses after long‐distance transport. Clinical respiratory disorders, such as pleuropneumonia or shipping fever, have been detected in horses after journeys as short as 10 hours.

A 2016 study published in The Veterinary Journal showed that horses transported by air had a prevalence of shipping fever of 11%. Journey duration was confirmed as a risk factor that is difficult to control in the face of flight delays and quarantine requirements.

One of the most important preventive measures to ensure horse welfare during travel is habituation and self‐loading training, which helps minimize transport stress and reduces the incidence of problem behaviours and injuries. This sort of training is undertaken by valuable horses used in sports such as show jumping and other competitive events.

The horses we send to Japan, on the other hand, have not been desensitized to transport of any kind, having spent the entirety of their short lives on a feedlot. Their stress begins even before the animals have left Canadian soil, as evidenced by their experiences disembarking from the trucks.

Videos filmed in my hometown of Winnipeg have documented handlers at the airport attempting to unload horses using long sticks to aggressively prod the animals through holes in the trailer walls. This repeated jabbing and poking represents a total disregard for the animals' well-being, and this despite the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's assertion that everything that happens to these horses prior to departure takes place under strict CFIA supervision.

The CFIA has also been questioned before this committee about the compatibility of horses when housed together in transport. CFIA personnel indicated to you all that determination of compatibility of cohorts is based solely on uniformity in size. That means that if four same-sized but temperamentally incompatible horses are boxed together for the journey, it's left to them to not fight with, kick or bite each other.

I would note that each of these hazards—horse temperament, separation from other horses and regrouping with unfamiliar horses—is among the many identified by the EFSA as having negative welfare consequences during transport.

Finally, let us not forget where these horses end up. They end up in Japan, a country with an abysmal track record when it comes to animal welfare.

Some examples of Japan's poor treatment of animals include its ongoing support of commercial whaling, its farming of bears for the illegal gall bladder market, and its annual dolphin hunt, in which wild dolphins are either butchered alive for meat or caught and shipped around the world to spend their lives in captivity, swimming with tourists.

Closer to home, I have far more faith in this country's commitment to animal welfare. I have great respect for Canada's farmers and the essential workers who feed our country and the world. However, the live horse export industry does not feed Canadians. It caters to a foreign market of super-elites, whose gustatory special needs have been prioritized over the health, safety and well-being of Canada's horses.

The oath I took as a veterinarian requires me to promote animal welfare and prevent animal suffering. The live horse export industry is cruel to animals and inconsistent with the values held by most Canadians. As such, I support Bill C-355 and hope you will all listen to your constituents and ensure its passage.

Thank you.

[Jennifer Woods]

I do. I believe this is a precedent that has been intended to be set. One of the big proponents of this bill, responsible for the petition, states on its website, when asked why it advocates for horses only, that it considers horses pivotal in this movement. It says that if society and our lawmakers can agree that we shouldn't slaughter or eat horses, logically, the next step will be to examine the welfare of all animals for food.

When asked the question directly in relation to Bill C-355 on whether the bill wouldn't have been more effective if the statement “by air” had not been part of it, the answer in part is that it has been their experience that if their ask too much from the government, they risk getting none of it. They say small steps are more effective in achieving their goals, because there is less of industry convincing their leaders that the steps being taken are too drastic and unfair.

They go on to say that when Bill C-355 becomes law, the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition and other like-minded organizations will continue to defend horses from slaughter and export for the same purposes by any means of transport.

As the old adage goes, “If they tell you who they are, believe them.” It has been directly stated that this is to set a precedent.

[Dr. Judith Samson-French, Veterinarian, Banded Peak Veterinary Hospital, As an Individual]

Thank you for having me at the committee.

I am a practising veterinarian of 35 years. I've worked with large and small animals. I have included equine veterinary medicine and surgery for over 12 years in my practice. I have worked with import and export of animals as well. I have also worked in a horse slaughterhouse. I am one of very few veterinarians in Canada to have done so. I know some about horses, transport of animals and slaughter.

Obviously, animal welfare is a mandate of veterinarians. It is our mandate to find it unacceptable to abuse animals. That's a no-brainer for us. To put it clearly, as a veterinarian, it is a given that animals should have a life worth living, not worth avoiding, and a peaceful, painless death. Obviously, standing against either part of this statement makes one a monster and certainly goes against our veterinary oath. For this bill, however, Bill C-355, we will concentrate only on the second part, the peaceful, painless death.

The slaughter in Japan is unknown to us, because CFIA has no jurisdiction there. It's problematic not knowing how, not whether. We're not discussing whether slaughter should happen.

The transport issue focuses from feedlot to airport to loading in the belly of an airplane to Japan via one stop or two in Alaska to a quarantine station.

Before going into details of the Canadian horse transport by air, the objection is not about slaughter but about getting to slaughter. For best animal welfare, animals should be slaughtered as close as possible to where they are farmed. This issue is not new. Australia is already raising concerns about sending sheep and cattle to slaughter on gigantic freighter ships for a long journey to be slaughtered in Asia and Africa. The transport is also the issue, not the slaughter. Australia is trying to phase out live transport.

Similarly, in the U.K., the animal welfare bill on livestock export is also looking at phasing out any air transport for slaughter. Going after the air transport of animals for slaughter is not a slippery slope for agriculture. I know some will raise the concern that if we ban live exports, there will be something else the public will put pressure on after that.

My contention is that this is in no way a slippery slope, but the opposite, because live export has raised big concerns and has shed much light on how we treat animals. The message should be clear that the live export of horses should be stopped so it doesn't tarnish the entire agricultural industry. Right now it is a matter of public concern and, really, why is it not the farmer's concern?

Let's jump into the transport issue itself.

By the way, I have gone to the Calgary airport three times. I was alerted that this was happening, and I could not believe that we didn't send horses straight to Bouvry. I'm from Calgary. Obviously we didn't send them straight to Bouvry slaughterhouse.

I have gone to the airport three times to watch the loading of horses into crates. I did it three times because I thought what I saw the first time was an aberration. I also watched several videos of horses in Japan being unloaded. The staff there is or was clearly untrained. I saw videos of horses being hit in the head with white paddles while they were still in the crate at unloading. They had no escape room, and that's certainly not the way to handle flight animals. What we're showing the world here is that, with the live export of horses, we do not prioritize animal welfare, which is quite the opposite to sending them to slaughter.

The World Organisation for Animal Health, the OIE, mandates specific standards for humane equine transport that include segregation of horses, emergency access and provision of food and water for a journey over six hours. Canada is a member of the OIE, but we do not comply with those regulations. It is clear that our existing transport and cruelty laws are not enough to protect horses exported by air for slaughter. In addition, the weak laws are not even enforced if flights go over time limits and abuse is reported. In Calgary, if we add up all the time, we're very, very close to 28 hours. If we have bad weather, that takes it over the permitted time.

Let's dive into the specific welfare issues of the live export.

Number one is overcrowding. Overcrowding occurs due to the number of animals in the container. The animal cannot maintain its preferred position or adjust its body position in order to protect itself from injuries or avoid being crushed or trampled.

This is a glaring omission of welfare standards in live export, because if a horse is fatigued, hurt or just prefers to lie down, it can't do so. I've observed that in animals such as ostriches.

If, on takeoff, the horse that's in the back lies down, all the other horses are going to trample it. On landing, if a horse goes down at the front, the other horses will trample it. It's very difficult for a horse to get up if it is overcrowded, because it needs forward and backward movement as well as lateral movement.

Number two—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 96 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food. I'm going to start with a few reminders.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. Just so you are aware, the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

Colleagues, as you know, this first panel will be audio only.

Screenshots and taking photos of your screen are not permitted.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, January 31, 2024, and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 8, 2024, the committee is resuming its consideration of Bill C-355, an act to prohibit the export by air of horses for slaughter and to make related amendments to certain acts.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses for this first panel. We have Witness 1, and I remind colleagues to refer to this witness as Witness 1 at all times during the proceedings. That person is appearing as an individual. Also appearing as an individual is Dr. Judith Samson-French, a practising veterinarian at Banded Peak Veterinary Hospital, who is joining us by video conference. From J Woods Livestock Services, Jennifer Woods is an animal care and welfare specialist who is joining us here in the room.

Thank you, Ms. Woods, for being here.

Welcome, everyone.

I'm going to provide up to five minutes for opening remarks for each witness, and then we're going to turn it over for questions.

I'd like to start with Witness 1.

I'll turn it over to you. Go ahead, please.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you for that. I gather that the possibility could be considered, but that, ultimately, it wouldn't really satisfy you.

In your presentation, you mentioned the needless suffering that horses undergo during transport, even on a short three-hour drive. You also said that the maximum transport time of 28 hours was sometimes exceeded.

Basically, the intent of the carriers and the standards in place is to prevent animal suffering as much as possible. I think everyone agrees with that.

To be very honest with you, Ms. Mitchell, I really wonder about the precedent that will be set if Bill C‑355 is passed. Other animal species can experience difficulties during transport. Could we not end up, as is the case in other states, in a race to ban the export of other animals? There are a lot of industries involved. We export a large number of animal species, including pigs, cows and chickens. What do you think?

[Kaitlyn Mitchell]

No, Bill C-355 would not impact our domestic horse slaughter industry. It's specifically focused on the export of horses for slaughter overseas.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

You're saying you'd be surprised, but you don't have.... The CFIA is the science-based department and the officials are saying the standards are the same.

Just quickly, would Bill C-355 ban the slaughter of horses in Canada?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here.

I'll turn to Equestrian Canada first.

You were talking about the concern regarding the unintended consequences of Bill C-355. You were talking about the potential consequences. What would be the financial implications if this bill were to pass unamended?

You were talking about the impact it could have on breeding and on horses coming to and from Canada for events, festivals and shows. Do you have any data on what the financial implications of this could be?

[Katherine Curry, President, Racetracks of Canada Inc.]

I'd like to thank the committee for inviting me to speak to you today with respect to private member's bill C-355.

I'm the president and chair of Racetracks of Canada. We're an industry association that represents the 30 racetracks across this country, including standardbred, thoroughbred and a one-quarter horse track in Ajax. Our mandate is to further the interests of the horse-racing industry and advocate for racetrack operations across Canada.

Canada's horse-racing industry represents $5.7 billion in annual GDP, employs over 47,000 people and has over 45,000 active horses. We unequivocally support Bill C-355. Racetracks absolutely do not condone the slaughter of horses. In fact, each track has programs in place to prevent this procedure and practice with respect to racehorses.

Having said that, we want to ensure there's no impact caused by Bill C-355 with respect to the ability to transport horses into and out of the country for racing purposes. It may be as simple as a sentence in the bill that exempts either horses being transported for sport or horses being transported for horse-racing purposes.

I'm happy to answer any questions, and I thank you again for your time today.

[Kaitlyn Mitchell, Director, Legal Advocacy, Animal Justice]

Good afternoon. Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before the committee today to speak to this incredibly important issue.

As Canada's leading national animal law organization, Animal Justice wholeheartedly supports Bill C-355, which would end the export of live horses from Canada for slaughter overseas. This is a relatively new practice, which appears to have started less than 20 years ago, when an American company relocated to western Canada.

Exporting live horses to Japan for slaughter causes significant and unnecessary suffering to horses. For this reason, the vast majority of Canadians from all provinces and of all political stripes support a ban on this practice.

Horses shipped to Japan for slaughter endure an extremely long and stressful journey and are subjected to conditions that are much worse than those sport and show horses see when transported to and from events. I've observed these shipments with my own eyes many times at the Winnipeg airport. I have watched as workers jab horses with poles to get them off the trucks and have seen them loaded into small wooden crates barely larger than their bodies. Once they're in these open-sided crates, they wait on the noisy airport tarmac to be loaded onto the planes, even during frigid winter temperatures.

In contrast, Air Canada's equine transport service ships a maximum of 18 horses per flight, ensuring spacious conditions and humane conditions for transport. Horses transported for slaughter are often loaded onto flights that carry 100 horses—or even more—at a time. You heard a lot this morning about how the rules are the same, but in practice the conditions are different.

The committee has before it clear and compelling scientific evidence showing that the way horses are exported for slaughter, the way they are treated, is completely unacceptable and puts them at risk of fear, panic, extreme thirst, hunger, fatigue, injury and illness. Some have even died en route.

Tragic incidents of horses dying during transport or becoming seriously injured are deeply concerning and highlight the dangerous nature of this practice. However, I want to be clear that even when horses survive the journey without any apparent injuries, their welfare can still be severely compromised, as the expert evidence before you clearly shows. These are animals with a high centre of gravity, highly sensitive hearing and strong flight instincts. Recent scientific research shows that even short road trips of three or more hours can affect horses' endocrine and immune functions.

The time to end this practice is now.

I've heard some committee members suggest that our existing laws are enough to protect horses exported for slaughter, but as an animal protection lawyer, I would like to be absolutely clear that this is not the case. Provincial animal welfare laws and the federal Criminal Code are seldom used in the agricultural context. They are primarily applied when someone is deliberately cruel to an animal, such as beating an animal or starving them. Suffering caused by standard industry practices, including transport overseas, is exempt.

The health of animals regulations prohibit transporting horses for more than 28 hours without food, water and rest, but even that meagre limit is not always enforced. Just this week, Animal Justice was in court in Winnipeg, where a judge agreed to lay a charge against a horse export company for a shipment that went well over the legal limit and during which at least three horses collapsed. The CFIA refused to take enforcement action.

We calculate how long these horses are denied food, water and rest based on when the plane touches down in Japan, as if the second they land they're given food and water and they can immediately rest. Of course, we know that's not the case. The reality is that the horses' journey is far from over at that point. After the dozens of horses are unloaded from the planes and taken out of their crates, they're loaded onto trucks and then transported to quarantine facilities. The fact is, I don't know how long that journey takes. We simply do not know how much longer the journey goes on after the plane touches down, but it raises serious concerns that many of these shipments may actually go over the 28-hour limit.

I urge you to support Bill C-355 and bring our laws in line with the values of Canadians.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.