Agriculture Committee on April 8th, 2008

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank everyone for their presentations.

I really dislike having to take 30 seconds to deal with Mr. Lauzon's political malarkey, but it can't be left to stand on the record as if it were true, because it is not.

I'd suggest, Mr. Parliamentary Secretary, that you go back to the debate in the last Parliament on Bill C-27, when we were trying to define the dairy terms. You will find there were two obstacles in defining those dairy terms. One of them was by the name of Mr. Ritz, and the other was by the name of Mr. Anderson. That's all I'll say on the subject, but I don't think the discussion today was the place for that kind of comment.

In any event, we've had a good discussion. It comes down to truth in labelling.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I have tried to stay away from the political aspects of this, but since Mr. Easter has to bring it up—and I don't think it is right that he misinterpreted Mr. Lauzon's words—what Mr. Lauzon was actually saying was that the Liberal record on this was like the fish that got away: they almost got it done, but never quite caught it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

This is not a point of order, and we are not going to get into political debate. We have witnesses at the table. We're going to try to be respectful to the witnesses who have come forward to the committee to offer their viewpoints and input into this policy discussion. Let's try to keep our comments on the policy.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

What I was saying, Mr. Chair, is that we're trying to look at truth in labelling, and I guess we need truth in the record here as well.

In any event, there are some in favour of voluntary labelling and some in favour of mandatory labelling. What is critical in both those regards, whichever way we go—and the reality is that Americans are going forward with COOL, whether we like it or not.... The previous government fought on that issue; the current government has fought hard on that issue. I've been on many delegations to the United States, and they're going ahead with COOL whether we like it or not. That's the reality of the world. If we beat them on a trade challenge, they will still go ahead with it. That is the other reality of the world. So let's put that into perspective.

In terms of the two proposals, voluntary or mandatory, if it's going to work we're going to have to have enforcement. Can you tell me your various positions on what is required for us to have the enforcement for both types of labelling—whichever one we may end up with—to ensure that what is labelled as “Product of Canada”, especially in content, is in fact a product of Canada?

[Jacques Laforge]

Wayne, that is why in our submission we talk about putting regulations in place and not guidelines. If they want to use “Product of Canada”, they'd have to follow those regulations to put “Product of Canada” on the package. If they think that is too onerous, and if the percentage of product they are adding into their mix is higher, from an import standpoint, then we'll give them the latitude to use “Processed in Canada”.

We figured out, in talking about labelling over dairy terms and so on, that we don't want processors or industry people coming in here to hitchhike on different things, but we want to have something clear. If it is processed in Canada but not made in Canada, then you have those two definitions. It's up to them to choose where they buy and what they put on the package.

For us, “Product of Canada” involves tremendous hitchhiking that has gotten out of whack. We need to bring back some regulations—and promote them to consumers—that clearly define that if you're going to use that terminology, it's by these regulations.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'll be dropping the gavel in one minute, and I have Mr. Friesen, Mr. Monty, and Mr. Lemieux who want to get in on this.

I'm only going to give you 20 seconds each.

Mr. Friesen.

[Bob Friesen]

It would have to be some sort of auditing or oversight, just as there is in the current labelling of “Product of Canada”. I'm not sure to what level they check that, but in our initiative there would have to be some oversight or auditing to make sure there was credibility in the process.

[Robert Monty]

Just now, I said that I supported mandatory regulations, but regulations are not what I want. Actually, regulations must become much stricter, as I previously explained. I think that I made my position clear on this issue, and everyone knows where I stand.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux]

Labelling must be mandatory, this is where we stand. It is simple and credible. As far as Canada is concerned, basically, it is done on a voluntary basis. Trade-marks are raised to a higher level. This is our opinion, from our point of view.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank all the witnesses for your presentations today. I ask that everybody leave the table as quickly as possible, since the transport committee is coming in right after us.

Mr. Friesen, you talked about your marketing campaign on “Grown in Canada”, and I'd ask that you present to the committee any of your background materials on how much it's going to cost and how you're going to do it through this new organization. I would ask you to submit that as soon as possible. Thank you very much.

With that, the meeting is adjourned.