Yes.
Evidence of meeting #47 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was industry.
Evidence of meeting #47 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was industry.
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Concerning the impact of biofuels on the farming industry, do you see our going more into biodiesel? Does it give more of a bang for our buck than ethanol?
11:10 a.m.
Director, B.C. Grain Producers Association
I think absolutely, given that canola and biodiesel is bigger in Canada. We have the product to do it, and the world is demanding biodiesel from canola, so I think it's going to have the biggest impact on us. Whether it takes three or four years for the world to start depressing prices—right now there's a very big growth in it—or when it comes and when it starts to level off, I'm not sure. But for the next few years it looks very positive.
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
First, Ross, on your proposal, I know you're saying you want to get your money out of the marketplace, and I don't disagree with that; in fact, I wrote a report along those lines. But Barry Wilson had some startling figures the other day; they are actually scary. Over the last 21-year period, wherein farmers produced $525 billion worth of product, the realized net farm income was $51 billion and the payments from the federal and provincial government were $58.4 billion. So from the marketplace, between 1985 and 2005, we netted negative $7 billion. That includes supply management.
Then, when you look at the other factor, our debt-to-income ratio with the United States is just unbelievable. Theirs is 4:1, and ours is 25:1. We have to recognize that reality.
My question to you on that line is this. If the U.S. is going to be subsidizing, and the Europeans, do we have to, whether we like it or not, basically request that we meet the Americans head on, dollar for dollar? That's question number one.
There may be an angle here. On your higher levels of insurance.... And I agree with you that we're away behind the times on crop insurance; with new varieties coming on and sometimes the averaging that is done, we need to be higher than we are. But if we went to higher levels—I think you said 40 bushels of canola may be within range in your operation—would you know whether it would still be considered “green programming” under WTO? If we went to higher levels, and if it's green.... We have to change our funding so that it's green, not amber or....
The second question is really to you, Joe. I'm intrigued by the 95% minimum pricing you proposed. We need to look at that. I expect there are trade implications. Do you have any proposals on the domestic marketing side about what we can do there?
Those are my two questions.
Ross?
11:10 a.m.
Director, B.C. Grain Producers Association
In your first comment, Wayne, on meeting the subsidies of the United States or Europe or whatever it is, certainly I sense your frustration, and you would sense it with every farmer, that Canada is being the boy scout. With every government I can remember, that's more or less what we've been. We've always said we can't match the treasury of the United States or Europe, and we just won't go there.
Could we have another pillar—I would suggest another pillar—under the APF that has something to do with international trade, and in it have somewhat of a grandfathering clause, or a mechanism whereby we could look at international trade and how it affects agriculture, and use that as the vehicle to address it? That would seem to be a better fit to me. It keeps it focused on looking at that effect. This may have some validity to it; it would focus it. Right now, the issue gets spread out, but the issue is everywhere; it's in every commodity. We tend to pigeonhole each other and say, “Well, that's an issue for you, but not for me.” Maybe if we had a pillar, we could look at it that way.
As to changing how the subsidies work, in the United States we're now going to see the American subsidies not be within their farm plan. It's going to be an environmental subsidy, because it's going to go into ethanol. That doesn't reduce the price of the product on the world market.
It's a great way to do it. Europe has always put their money right in the farmer's pocket. It doesn't affect the trade and the commodity prices; they do it a different way, find a different mechanism, if they want to support farmers. If we want to support farmers but not specifically tied to the commodity, that's a lot more palatable to me. It allows the market to give me my money.
Will crop insurance be or not be green? It will only not be green if we can't justify how we reached the figure. If there's a way of...not Olympic averaging or something like that, but finding a way to use historical figures to achieve it, whether it's an acceleration factor.... It has to be something you can reasonably quantify. I don't think crop insurance would be that big a manipulation to figure out.
I hope that answers your question.
11:15 a.m.
BC Fruit Growers Association
It's interesting that you should pose the question of what can we do on the domestic marketing side for the industry. As I said before, we are in a situation where 50% of what is consumed in Canada is being imported. How do we transition the industry into a level of competitiveness that sustains itself, particularly in a domestic market?
If you look at the U.S. Farm Bill, most of the money was going to corn, rice, cotton, soybeans, and grains. But guess what? They left the specialty crops out of the equation in the first farm bill. Now they're talking about targeting specialty crops, and that includes fresh fruits and vegetables. They'll be concentrating more effort in those areas, and perhaps reducing some of the corn subsidies that Canada is challenging the U.S. on.
They propose to put $3.2 billion over five years into institutional buying for healthy snack programs in their schools. We started one here in B.C. They're going to put some serious dollars into that. So they'll be sourcing local products, perhaps buying up excess products they would normally have to dump into somebody's market. They're going to turn it into healthy eating programs in the U.S.
I believe that in Canada the government has to lead by example. It is totally unacceptable to find apples in the House of Commons from Washington State, when there are plenty of apples to be sourced in Ontario. If you can't find the unique varieties, for God's sake bring them from B.C.
11:15 a.m.
BC Fruit Growers Association
We need institutional buying programs as a good starting point, because that sets the example. Buy Canadian, buy local, buy quality, buy for food safety.
We need to use the Canada brand. If we're going to use that, put some credibility around it. Put limits on what the Canadian content should be. If it's a processed product, it should have a high concentration of Canadian ingredients to be able to use the Canada brand. Let's use it domestically, because the marketing strength starts at home.
11:15 a.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
I was told the other day--and you can confirm this--that apple concentrate coming from China is mixed with 80% Canadian water and they call it a product of Canada.
11:15 a.m.
Glen Lucas General Manager, BC Fruit Growers Association
That is correct. As long as it's processed in Canada it's called a product of Canada.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Dick Harris Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
This discussion has turned interesting. Do we have Washington State apples being supplied in the House of Commons?
11:15 a.m.
BC Fruit Growers Association
I believe so. An MP from this area, Ron Cannan, from Kelowna—Lake Country, in his first year in Ottawa, was appalled to find products from Washington State in the Commons cafeteria. He contacted our vice-president at that time from Kelowna. Our vice-president systematically took two boxes of apples to the airport and put them on a plane. They were delivered to Ottawa. Ron Cannan proceeded to distribute those apples in the House of Commons, just to make a point. What are we doing eating U.S. fruit and not setting an example for Canadians?
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Dick Harris Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
We'd better fix that in a hurry. Ron Cannan is indeed a great MP from the Kelowna riding.
I've noticed in the grocery stores an increasing amount of tree fruit from China, in nice packages. They all seem to be perfect. It's almost like they're artificial, in a way. What is the impact currently on the Canadian tree fruit producers? What fears, if any, do you have for future fruit imports from China? I understand they're going into this on a pretty large scale, so what's your thought on the future of this?
11:20 a.m.
BC Fruit Growers Association
You're right about Chinese produce. They produce some exotic pears.
On the apple side, you'll find Chinese Fujis for the most part, which they produce in great quantity. I'm not sure of the import figures to Canada, because they had a trial export period of time when the amounts weren't that great.
The biggest impact to date from China has been the takeover of the Far East markets—Hong Kong, Singapore, and so on. They've taken them away from North American suppliers. We used to send a few apples there from B.C., but Washington State was the biggest supplier. That's why we're seeing the suppliers' excess product, which they haven't made the adjustments for, coming across the border into Canada, often at dumped prices.
What is our fear with China? I know they have increased exports. But at the same time, the word coming out of China is that they now have a huge economic engine. They have an emerging middle class, which wasn't there before. They have greater wealth in the hands of Chinese. They also have a family policy now that allows two children, so the population is increasing by seven million per year. Between the better economic situation and the increasing population, the Chinese will have more disposable income to purchase healthier foods, including apples. They will be consuming a lot of their own country's production increase.
Our neighbours to the south published a very interesting article of their analysis of the Chinese situation. So we hope that is going to happen.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Dick Harris Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
No kidding.
May I pass on my remaining time to my colleague?
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Mr. Ross, both you and Linda appeared to be lukewarm on the idea of the 15% top-up to NISA. I believe the CFA pushed that at the former government, and certainly at ours. Is it time for us to have one national voice for agriculture, instead of many smaller voices?
We probably won't have the time, but I'd like to hear more about the apple industry. As a beef producer, it always bugged me that we were shipping beef out of the country and yet I was competing locally. My wife would go to the store and see U.S. or New Zealand beef. That's a problem in the fruit industry as well. I don't have an answer for it, but if you have time, do you have any comments?
