Agriculture Committee on May 1st, 2007

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Thank you.

Just on the number of new crops in it, something we heard a lot while travelling across the country is that there were certain crops that didn't qualify. I think this should satisfy a lot of producers in that regard.

Another thing we heard quite a bit in our travels across the country concerned companion programs, and I didn't get a chance to ask the minister about this.

First of all—and I don't expect you to totally answer for him, but I think you can answer it from the staff side—will any kind of suggestion come forth to the minister from the department on companion programs? Will they be allowed, and if so, how might they be set up?

[Suzanne Vinet]

When the minister referred to there seeming to be a common opinion evolving that we should be looking at some form of regional flexibility, it is in that context: that the minister and ministers from the provinces are trying to look at what kind of flexibility we could bring to an agreement that would cover national objectives.

There was very clear direction from federal-provincial-territorial agriculture ministers that they wanted a focus on national objectives with some kind of regional flexibility. It's in that context that we've undertaken discussions at the federal-provincial-territorial table, and also in listening to what farmers' ideas might be around this.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

One of the complications I see, one that was certainly pointed out in our travels, is that starting to fund one region differently from another is what really complicates things. Can this regional aspect be accomplished while staying reasonably within those realms?

[Suzanne Vinet]

Yes, that's right.

We've just started doing the work in terms of what kinds of principles we might attach to this. One of the very important considerations, for example, has been making sure we don't attract countervailing attention from the U.S. So we have to be careful how we design programs.

It's attaining the right balance between national objectives, flexibility in the region to reflect different regional realities, our local reality, yet take into consideration Canada's advantage in terms of trade obligations, for example. So the definition of this is what we're working on with the provinces and the territories, and still receiving input from the sector.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, Mr. Miller.

I want to get clarification on the comment that Madam Semaan made about the livestock production insurance that's being looked at in Quebec and Nova Scotia. When we had the Manitoba Agricultural Services Corporation at committee in Manitoba, they commented that the delivery for livestock insurance was going to be a no-go. They didn't see how they were going to be able to implement it. Now, this is one of the issues we did bring about as a government, saying that it was going to be made available across the country. So how do we make this possible, when we have some provinces saying they're going ahead with it and other provinces saying it's going to be almost impossible?

[Nada Semaan]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Production insurance, as you know, is a provincial jurisdiction. However, what we have been doing, and as we did find, when we create the frameworks and when we create capacity for learning from other jurisdictions, it's facilitated other provinces to take on....

For example, in terms of the livestock mortality insurance that is now being looked at both in Quebec and Nova Scotia, Quebec had done quite an extensive amount of homework on that. They shared all that data with the provinces and said that this way, you can move a lot quicker.

In addition, one thing I failed to mention is that as well as provincial production insurance, there's a private risk shared management insurance program whereby we work with the industry in terms of finding ways they can insure themselves.

As part of this initiative, the Livestock and Poultry Council in Ontario has developed a very extensive project for livestock production insurance that is private production insurance. This one is now ready for pilot. In Ontario, it's gone through all the phases. It was funded from the PSRMP and it's looking quite.... It's got fantastic possibilities.

We're bringing these types of good-news stories to the provinces. We get the data, the homework they did, whether it be through CFIA in terms of creating the capacity for the reinsurers, and we use that. They can take that and make it a lot simpler to deliver in their own province.

That was how Ontario was able to take over 45 commodities. They based it on the British Columbia acreage loss and the Quebec acreage loss. It would have taken them years to do this if they had to start from scratch. But by being able to use other jurisdictions' learnings, we were able to move it quite quickly.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I want to thank Nada Semaan, who is the assistant deputy minister for farm financial programs; Andrew Marsland, who is the assistant deputy minister for market and industry services branch; Suzanne Vinet, who is the assistant deputy minister of the strategic policy branch; Marc Fortin, who is the assistant deputy minister for the research branch; Pierre Corriveau, who was with us before, acting assistant deputy minister of corporate management; and Graham Barr, who is pinch-hitting today for Steve Verheul, chief agricultural negotiator, negotiations and multilateral trade policy directorate. I want to thank all of you for taking time out of your schedules to be with us here today.

With that, we'd better get in for votes.

We're adjourned.