Evidence of meeting #54 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 programs.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am only familiar with one of the three associations here; I'm talking about Ducks Unlimited Canada, which also exists in my part of the country, and is associated with the Sylvestre family in Berthier.
I only have one question and I would like all three witnesses to answer it. What kind of relationship do you have with farmers? I will start with Ms. Edwards, followed by Mr. Sopuck and Ms. Hillard.
National Manager, Industry and Government Relations, Ducks Unlimited Canada
At Ducks Unlimited Canada, we have a cooperative relationship with producers. We currently have some form of agreement or working relationship with more than 17,000 producers across Canada. And we continue to expand that through things like winter wheat programs, range land extension, and working more cooperatively on issues like agricultural policy.
Vice-President, Keystone Agricultural Producers, Alternative Land Use Services
I'll respond on behalf of the ALUS initiative.
We are producers. Every one of us who supported this program, who worked on the development, went home, and farmed at night. We're representing all the farm organizations across Canada. All the provincial ones have signed onto this through CFA. There are a number of commodity group interests, including the Canadian Cattlemen's Association.
I couldn't put a solid number to it, but I would say that almost every farm organization in Canada, and almost every farmer, through them, supports this approach.
We see this as a far more workable approach, one that gives a direct signal to the farmer. As such, we think it's the way to go.
Research Director, Consumer Interest Alliance Inc.
We try to work cooperatively with the producers whenever we can. We don't always agree on everything. We have an agreement to disagree on issues around some of the marketing systems and supply management. But in a lot of the other areas, we try to work with farmers.
In Manitoba, I sit on the farm stewardship board that does environmental farm plans and on the Manitoba Rural Adaptation Council, which gives out the ACAAF funding in Manitoba, both of which require a representative of a consumer organization. I sit on a number of agriculture committees federally, as do other members of our organization, to bring the consumer voice. And I think on the whole, we get along quite well.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
If things are working well, then keep up the good work.
Thank you very much, I have no further questions.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I have one question. I think Mr. Miller has a couple.
I've looked at the environmental activities that have been taking place and I'm seeing two different streams. One of them seems to be that groups will take donations, tax money, and then they'll come in and buy land in areas and take it out of production, either put easements on it or buy it themselves. The other one seems to be the idea you were talking about today, the farmer-supported services to society.
I'd like you to tell me, both of you, where you see yourselves on that spectrum. And what are the benefits of the two systems, the two ends of...? I think those things happen in my riding, so I'm interested in your perspective on that.
National Manager, Industry and Government Relations, Ducks Unlimited Canada
Traditionally, Ducks Unlimited Canada would be seen more toward the end of the spectrum, using longer-term securement including land purchases to help meet our habitat and waterfowl objectives.
Over the last few years, we have successfully moved more toward easements, which still enable more annual use of agricultural lands, wherein we only purchase a certain bundle of rights from the landowner for agreeing not to break up or drain natural areas on that property.
We manage the lands we own. We manage them for wildlife, as a first priority, but we use grazing or haying of those lands on about a five-year rotation to keep up the stand vigour. So they are in agricultural use once every five years on average across the prairies, depending on where you are.
Over the last 10 or 15 years, we've moved more toward working extensively with landowners on range land extension. We've invested in winter wheat, which provides nesting cover for waterfowl, and we've moved more into the policy area, working cooperatively with landowners on things like beneficial management practices, group farm plans, and working to the joint benefit of waterfowl conservation, in our case, and the producer sustainability on the landscape.
So I think we've seen a shift.
Vice-President , Delta Waterfowl Foundation, Alternative Land Use Services
It's our strong view, Mr. Anderson, that you will get more and better conservation if you develop conservation programs that are in tune with the culture of agriculture and the culture of rural communities. That is why I as a representative of a conservation group am sitting beside the vice-president of Keystone Agricultural Producers. Often Ian and I travel across the country together and give presentations like this.
That has sent a very strong message to other rural communities across Canada, and they are coming on board the ALUS bandwagon very rapidly. Indeed, in Saskatchewan 21 rural municipalities proposed that ALUS pilot projects be done in their municipalities. In Manitoba, for example, the rural municipality of Blanshard is a traditional prairie agricultural municipality, and we have a councillor here with us, Mr. Roy Greer. That council voted on $40,000 per year to put into the ALUS pilot project in their communities.
I think that producers and rural communities have been waiting for conservation and environment programs to come along where they have a say. They design the program and they deliver it. These are not empty words, Mr. Chairman. For our ALUS pilot project in the rural municipality of Blanshard, 75% of the farmers have enrolled in the program.
Our preliminary evaluation shows a very positive result, because when farmers make their own decisions about their land, what they end up with is every single acre is now making money for them. They use these kinds of programs, like ALUS, to optimize their farms and it's a win-win for everybody.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I think a couple of points need to be made here.
Ms. Hillard, you made a comment that you weren't invited to be part of the process, and that's unfortunate. I'm glad you're here. But something that I think your group has to remember, and it needs to be pointed out by industry, is that we have a cheap food policy in this country that's basically come about mostly because of consumer groups like you.
We have the lowest percentage of disposable income spent on food of any well-to-do country in the world, and it's dropping. It's going down as we speak. I always use the example of potatoes or eggs and the price of them. I don't know how the producers who produce them can sell them for that when you figure what meals you get out of them.
So I think that price to a group like yours should be secondary to a safe and abundant food supply. I think groups like you have an obligation to the people you represent and to the people from whom you basically get your products, which are the agricultural producers, to help and promote--eat Canadian, because it's safe, it is abundant, and we want to keep it that way. If we keep going on the road we're headed on, it isn't going to be either. So I think you have to help the industry sell that message.
Another thing, Mr. Sopuck--
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
On the species at risk, I support 100% what you're trying to do, but one problem.... I'll use my own riding. The loggerhead shrike is on the species at risk list. That is not native to my area at all, but special interest groups have got it on the list and they're trying to expand it into my area. I don't have a problem with that, except they want me or the producer and everybody else I represent to pay for it. There are flaws in the system, and we need to correct some of them. So I hope you remember that kind of thing.
Conservative
Research Director, Consumer Interest Alliance Inc.
I'd just like to respond. I don't disagree with anything you've said whatsoever. It's just that the way the marketplace is set up in Canada right now, there really isn't anything we can do except try to work through genuine value chains and through small stores.
The vertical integration in the market chain between the producers and the consumers is such that.... Look at what happened during the BSE crisis. Beef prices to the farmer went down like that, and if anything, the consumer ones went up. You watch the pork prices. We have to find a way of dealing with the marketplace.
Yes, I agree with you, we have wonderful, safe, high-quality, cheap food, but if you put the price up to us, it's not going to go to the producer. And when you find ways around the system such as farmers' markets, then you run risks, because you bypass the system, but you also bypass the food safety system in a lot of cases. So we tend to hold back on supporting that type of enterprise.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you very much.
We're out of time, Mr. Miller.
Mr. Atamanenko.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
I'd like to pursue that, Ms. Hillard, if I may.
You mentioned food safety, quality, and branding Canada, and gave the example of cheese. I'd like to know what you meant by that.
Research Director, Consumer Interest Alliance Inc.
The Dairy Farmers of Canada actually contracted us last year to do focus groups with consumers to find out what they knew about and how they felt about compositional standards for cheese. That of course involved doing a lot of basic research ourselves.
We were absolutely horrified to find that most of the cheese currently on Canadian shelves is not actually cheese, according the standards that fall under the Food and Drugs Act. It is made with modified milk ingredients, which are not allowed under the Food and Drugs Act. That is contrary to the U.S., where they enforce their compositional standards very strongly and post their enforcement decisions online. They said, “We'll shut Kraft down in seven states until they either change their label, call it something other than cheese, or meet the Codex standards.”
That's not being done; it's not being enforced by the CFIA. They're allowing CAPA to take precedence over the Food and Drugs Act and throwing compositional standards in as a quality issue, whereas for us it's a nutrition issue.
One of the points that came out very strongly from this research was that the Canada Food Guide says to eat two slices of processed cheese to replace a glass of milk. We found that you actually needed five and a half slices of processed cheese to replace a glass of milk, and your calories went from 115 to 285. If that's not having a long-term impact on Canadian health....
That's just scratching the surface. We have no Codex standards for yogourt. Ice cream doesn't usually meet the Codex standards. We haven't done a lot of research in other areas, but that's the thin edge of the wedge where the CFIA is not enforcing the way it should.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
I would like to pursue the idea of standards in food quality, safety, and harmonization, which you talked about.
In some of the areas I represent we have very small farmers who sell at farmers markets. Until September 30 of this year, farmers can slaughter a couple of animals and sell them--usually organically grown lamb and beef. This will be stopped because in British Columbia we now have rules through CFIA, due to pressure internationally and nationally, that all slaughterhouse facilities must have inspectors, whether they are mobile, small, or large.
A lot of people are saying this food is probably safer than any food you get out of the big plants, because most of the problems have come out of the big inspected plants. If we carry this further to farmers markets and say that everything sold in a farmers market needs to have some kind of approval, are we counteracting what we want to do here?
We have people in this country who are producing really good quality food. We have a lot of people going to farmers markets. I see a danger in what you're implying, because we will need to have more control, and that will then put these people out of business, as it is putting out of business the small beef and lamb producers in my area. Then we'll be moving more into the corporate world with those middlemen that we're all trying to fight against.
I'd just like to get your comments on that--and maybe those of somebody else.
Research Director, Consumer Interest Alliance Inc.
Again it's a systemic problem. There is no way to move these innovative products from small producers through the system and into the grocery stores. You have to pay a fortune to get a new product into a decent spot in a grocery store.
The so-called organic or healthy stuff that the big grocery chains are labelling are all based on their own systems. They won't tell us their criteria for calling them organic or healthy. I'm pleased to see that the federal government has made some moves to control some of that, but again it's a systemic problem. You have the very big guys, and you have the little ones.
I applaud in some ways the concept of a farmers market, but I would never buy meat or dairy products from a farmers market. With unpasteurized apple juice, the government had to step in and make rules. People were actually dying because stuff was produced at home and then sold to the public.
The public is so unaware of some of the real issues around food safety. They don't realize how much food safety is in their own transportation, handling, and storage or food. If I knew they'd bring something home from the farmers market, cook it right away, and then freeze it.... But they bring it home from the farmers market, and maybe it wasn't stored quite like it should have been on the way there. They leave it in the trunk of the car until they get home, put it on the kitchen counter until they cook it, and you have an accident waiting to happen.
It's not good for any part of the Canadian food system if we have incidents of serious food infections, as they've had in a lot of other countries.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you. Your time has expired.
Mr. Hubbard, you have the last five minutes.