I'm a dairy farmer from the North Okanagan. I'm also a director of the B.C. Milk Producers Association, and I'm here as a director of the B.C. Milk Producers Association today.
The B.C. Milk Producers Association has been the voice for dairy farmers in British Columbia since it was founded in 1936 as a committee of the B.C. Federation of Agriculture. Our purpose is to advance the legitimate business interests of this province's dairy farmers and to promote a vibrant, sustainable industry that supplies high-quality dairy products to the consumer. Representing the interests of all dairy farmers in B.C., BCMPA is pleased to participate and provide input to the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.
Over the last four decades, Canadian dairy farmers have operated their businesses in a supply-managed system in which farmers produce milk to meet consumer demands. Supply management promotes the steady production of high-quality milk. It is a sustainable agricultural system that encourages consumption of local products. It allows dairy farmers to earn a living from farming, not from taxpayer dollars.
We believe that the next generation of agriculture and agrifood policy should fully integrate all components of Canadian agriculture. It is the framework for policies for agriculture and agrifood as a whole. The principal goal should be to achieve profitability and growth for every sector. Therefore, it must go beyond simply identifying solutions to problems; it must also identify and strengthen the components that are successful.
The next generation of agriculture and agrifood policy must identify and strengthen those programs that work to maintain farm incomes and producer bargaining power in the marketplace, programs such as Canada's collective and orderly marketing system, including supply management and its three pillars: production discipline, import control, and producer pricing. These programs should be strengthened and defended in international agreements to ensure the strength and stability of those programs in the future.
I will discuss our views on the current level of recognition of supply management and suggest ways in which government can acknowledge it as a business risk management program in the new agrifood policy framework.
The first generation of APF failed to properly recognize supply management as a business risk management program. The only reference to supply management within the framework agreement reads as follows, under “Supply Management”, in subsection 17.1: “For the purposes of supply-managed commodities, supply management constitutes a risk management tool.”
BCMPA's view is that this is a poor recognition of supply management, because the wording does not include recognition of the three pillars. It uses the word “tool”, as opposed to “program”, in a bureaucratic language that is limiting.
The APF is an overarching policy framework and therefore must not exclude supply management. All provinces and territories have signed on to the first APF and have signed the implementation agreements with the Government of Canada. Only three of the provinces--Ontario, P.E.I., and Quebec--have recognized supply management and its three pillars in their implementation agreements. They went as far as recognizing supply management as a cornerstone of Canadian agricultural policy in section 28.3, “Purpose of Supply Management”:
The Parties remain committed to the supply management system, which is a cornerstone of Canadian agricultural policy and constitutes a vital risk management tool. The Parties recognize the importance of preserving the three essential pillars of supply management: (1) control over imports of products and several by-products; (2) a pricing policy administered according to production costs; and (3) production management.
According to Statistics Canada, in 2004 supply-managed production represented 20% of the total cash receipts for Canada. One-fifth of Canadian agriculture cannot be left aside from an overall Canadian agricultural policy framework.
Wording has been developed by supply-managed groups to better recognize supply management as business risk management, but also to define its three pillars. This wording should be included in the next generation of agriculture and agrifood policy, and it should read as follows:
The APF fully integrates all components of Canadian agriculture. It is a framework of policies for agriculture and agri-food as a whole. The principal goal should be to achieve profitability and growth for every sector and, therefore, must go beyond simply identifying solutions to problems; it must also identify and strengthen the components that are successful. The APF identifies and strengthens those mechanisms that work to maintain farm incomes and bargaining power in the marketplace such as Canada's collective and orderly marketing systems, including supply management and its three pillars. These mechanisms should be strengthened and defended in international agreements in order to ensure the strength and sustainability of these programs [and the farmers who live under it] in the future. Also, supply management needs to be clearly defined, as a program, under the Business Risk Management pillar: Supply management systems are Federal-Provincial agreements initiated and supported by appropriate legislation that regulates the marketing of dairy, poultry and eggs in Canada. These systems are dependent upon the support of three equally important pillars: a) Producer Pricing Pricing Pricing mechanisms are based on farmers collectively negotiating fair market returns for milk, poultry and eggs; and reflect what it costs to produce the food. b) Import Controls Import control measures are essential to efficiently plan production to meet Canadian demand by permitting imports to the level of access agreed to at the World Trade Organization. Proper mechanisms to administer and classify products that are imported under TRQs are also essential. c) Production Discipline Production discipline allows for the balance of supply and demand, thereby promoting price and market stability. Production is determined regularly to efficiently reflect changes in consumer demand.
In conclusion, we would like to restate our position. Supply management needs to be clearly defined as a program under the business risk management pillar. More emphasis should be put on programs that work to maintain farm incomes and producer bargaining power in the marketplace, programs such as Canada's collective and orderly marketing systems, including supply management and its three pillars: production discipline, import controls, and producer pricing.
Thank you for this opportunity.