Agriculture Committee on May 30th, 2006

[Danny Foster]

For any individual who has production insurance, that information will be provided by the provincial production insurance agency to the PFRA federal administration in Regina, and we will send out an application with the relevant information. If the producer does not have production insurance, they call the PFRA 1-800 number, and an application will be sent to them. It's an application process. That's how they access the assistance.

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

All right, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Thank you, Mr. Atamanenko.

Mr. Easter, you have three minutes, please.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On the Wheat Board question, Suzanne, the fact of the matter is that if you do a market system, you don't have single-desk selling. That's the reality. So let's not mess around with words. If you have a dual marketing system, you no longer have a single-desk selling system. That's the reality of the world.

On the ethanol/biodiesel program, I just have three quick questions. Has anything been done to ensure that farmers are not just providing another cheap raw material? In other words, will Canadian farmers be given equivalency to U.S. farm product prices for feedstock going into those ethanol plants? It makes no sense from a farmer's perspective to be selling a product below the cost of production. That's number one.

Number two, will you have an equity capital program to provide equity capital so that rural Canada can be involved in the plants themselves and the profits from those plants?

And three, if we're using new generation co-ops, will there be a requirement for the majority to have farm ownership, as there is in the United States, where the required majority of those co-ops is 51% farm ownership?

What I'm saying is that farmers should be involved; the rural community should be involved. They should be able to profit from the production of the product, and they should be able to profit from the output of the business. Unless those requirements are in place, the ethanol/biodiesel system will not do what we want it to do.

[Suzanne Vinet]

The commitment of the government in developing the biofuel strategy is definite. That's why we have already started with the consultation. We're working very closely with the stakeholders, with the producer groups, in developing the approach. The underlying commitment is to make sure that producers benefit from the biofuel strategy.

We're going to be looking at types of initiatives. We've been receiving a lot of input from the sector already on different methods and ways producers want to participate, not only in providing the raw input as you mentioned, but also in benefiting at the output stage of the fuel, either through new generation co-ops or other mechanisms.

We've obviously also been working with the provinces very closely, because they have a stake in this. They are also quite keen in helping meet the commitment of developing the biofuel sector.

As we're proceeding in June, the Minister of Agriculture will be holding consultations with a number of producer groups in seeking input from them on specific initiatives that they want to see undertaken in support of a biofuel strategy.

So this is one that we're developing in partnership with the producers to make sure at the end of the day that they fully benefit from the results of the strategy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

Mr. Devolin, a short question to wind up.

[Barry Devolin, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you.

On a follow-up, in terms of the investment that will be required to create the capacity to hit this target of 5%, do you have a sense of the actual total investment needed in Canada? For example, what is the current capacity to produce these fuels, what does 5% actually mean, how many litres a year is that, and how many millions of dollars in total investment are actually going to be required in the next few years, wherever the source of that investment is?

[Suzanne Vinet]

From a capacity perspective, well, it's roughly doubling the capacity. So we're going to have to work with the industry to see their individual strategies in each of the commodity groups, to see how they want to capture that and how we're going to be able to meet it. As part of this, we are also evaluating how much investment we have to put in.

Also, there is not only going to be creating the business environment to effect the biofuel strategy, but we're also going to be undertaking a lot of scientific work, research work, in support of that as well.

[Barry Devolin, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I'm wondering if you have an order of magnitude in terms of the investment needed--$1 million, $10 million, $100 million, $500 million?

[Suzanne Vinet]

It's in the early stages. That's what we're doing in these meetings with the industry. There's not a day goes by that we don't sit down with the industry. We're also receiving a lot of briefs. We're doing a lot of the analysis right now to evaluate this so that by the time we announce a strategy we've figured out exactly the kind of investment and the kind of initiative that the industry is supportive of and that will be beneficial to them.

So I can't really give you a range at this time because we're right in the middle of doing all that work.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Thank you, Mr. Devolin.

Just to follow up on that, there was none of this work being done, none of this work in the hopper, up until this point. So you have no historical data to work with.

[Suzanne Vinet]

What we have is an understanding of how much ethanol we're doing, but the 5% strategy was an initiative of the new government. So as soon as the government came into place, we started doing the work and meeting with the industry and developing all that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Right, and as Mr. Anderson said, there is a need for expediency here to get it up and running. So we'll leave that with you.

Thank you so much. We've just scratched the surface here today, but we wanted to get everyone on the record in a spring session. As we work towards the fall, of course, we'll get back and visit with you folks again, I'm sure. So thank you for now.

The committee will suspend for one minute maximum, folks, while we bring up some new witnesses here. Time is burning. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

I call this meeting back into session. Thank you so much for making that quick shuffle. I know you've done it before.

With us for the second half, from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, are Krista Mountjoy, vice-president of programs and international; Dr. Brian Evans, chief veterinary officer of Canada; André Gravel, executive vice-president; Judith Bossé, vice-president of science; Cameron Prince, vice-president of operations; and Gordon White, vice-president of finance, administration, and information technology.

If they don't know it, we shouldn't ask it, folks.

Oh, we also have Kristine Stolarik. You're not on my list. Thanks for sticking around. You're no stranger to the committee as well.

Does anyone have an opening statement at all?

[André Gravel, Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency]

No, Mr. Chairman, we don't. We're ready for questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

That's great. We'll work right into questions, starting with a three-minute round.

Mr. Easter, you have your hand up already. The washroom is around the corner.

You've all read the Easter report.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Yes, I hope they have, because there's a lot of good stuff in there.

In any event--and you may have to get back to me on this--on the potato wart issue in P.E.I., I really believe the Canadian Food Inspection Agency did all they could in that matter and are doing all they can to ensure that the potential of a problem from potato wart remains isolated--disinfection going into fields and so on. But I think we have had a situation develop where a potato producer rents land from another farmer, that land is quarantined, and it is understandable that in the first instance the potato producer be compensated for the protection of the industry. The landowner, however, has a lot of restrictions placed on him or her in terms of the use of the land, in terms of disinfecting equipment going in, etc.

What is happening now--we're into year three or four--is that the potato producer still gets compensation for the loss of the use of that land, even though it was leased from the other producer, and the producer, who owns the land and bears the cost of that land being out of production and being able to rent it for potato production at a higher price, is offered no compensation whatsoever. I think that certainly after a period of three years it should roll over that the landowner, especially if he or she is a producer, be compensated.

I wonder, can you address that point?

Secondly, the chicken farmers this morning indicated to us that they're very concerned about compensation on a potential avian flu new flare-up. Is the department or the agency looking at reviewing that compensation so that it can be done quickly and concisely in coordination with the industry?

If you have to get back to me, André, on the potato one, that's all right.

[André Gravel]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As for the first question on potato wart, unfortunately I don't think the agency has an answer at this point in time, because it's a very specific file.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

That's true.

[André Gravel]

But clearly we're going to get back to you, Mr. Chairman, with the answer.

With regard to compensation on poultry, the agency certainly has engaged the industry in discussion of compensation as a result of the outbreaks of avian influenza that Canada has experienced over the last few years. At that time, if you remember, we made a commitment in this committee, in fact, that the agency was going to be reviewing its compensation maxima. We're at a point now where we're almost finished with our review and we've shared some of the figures with industry.

The agency basically has looked at reviewing the maxima, but in a way that would allow higher maxima to be paid for purebred animals. So it's not only for chickens; the review the agency has conducted extends to all animal species, and a big change from the previous compensation package is a breakdown between registered purebred animals and commercial animals.

So we're at the last stage of review on that and we've started sharing that information with industry, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

That review will be tabled when? You've done most of it and it's now back to industry. Is that what you're saying?

[André Gravel]

Yes, it is.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerry Ritz]

Okay, so they're getting back to you with some discussion on that and so on before you...? Okay, thank you.

Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to ask a couple of quick questions.

To Dr. Evans, about this last BSE cow in southern B.C. that we had, I was a little concerned that she doesn't seem to have any connection to the previous BSE cases in Alberta at all, to contaminated feed. Was there any linkage there at all, or what do you think is the source of the infection?

Second, we talked this morning with the minister about competitiveness and the approval of animal health products, the timeframe that's taken to get equal footing with animal health products in Canada versus other places in the world. Own-use import permits is the way we've been managing that, but what else are we doing to expedite that?

The third question I had was on the bluetongue/anaplasmosis. I can't believe we still haven't reached a final decision on this. It's something that's been on the table for the last 15 years. The Canadian Cattlemen's Association and other organizations have been advocating on that. I'm wondering why it's taking so long to come to a decision to move forward on that?

[André Gravel]

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I'll answer the two questions about approval of products and bluetongue/anaplasmosis and then I'll ask Dr. Brian Evans to update your question on BSE.

With regard to approval of animal health products, the agency itself is reviewing some of these products, mainly the vaccines and the diagnostic test kits. Over the last few years we've invested significant resources in updating and upgrading our facility to do a quicker review of these types of vaccines for animal diseases. And I think as far as the industry feedback is concerned, we've done very well in decreasing the backlog of submissions for these types of products.

We also have the opportunity to provide emergency approval for vaccine and diagnostic kits in case something comes up, an animal disease manifestation, for which a product hasn't been done. So from that standpoint, I think the agency has a mechanism to address the potential surge in workload from the industry.

Mr. Chairman, the approval of other health products used in animals, like vet drugs, comes under Health Canada. So from that standpoint I would encourage you to ask them that question. I know we cooperate with them in terms of implementing the maximum residue levels they set for these types of products, but I think it would be better to ask them the question.

With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I'll ask Dr. Brian Evans to answer the question on BSE.