Agriculture Committee on Nov. 28th, 2007

[Ken Boshcoff, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I'll take my questions based on what Colleen and Kalissa were talking about, but with a slight variation. You talked about food for fuel. At this stage the SRMs still haven't been fully addressed, and there has been lots of talk that we could use SRMs in the production of ethanol as opposed to taking true usable food out of the chain. I'd like you to talk about that.

Again, of course, that would require incentives so we could compete with our neighbours to the south, which gets us to the U.S. policy question about.... Our own CFIA has been very zealous in terms of enforcing things since July 12, whereas the word is that the Americans are doing very little to implement such protection in terms of any threat to the cattle industry.

The third question, because we have limited time, is this. A legislative fix has been suggested to the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act. It defines grain as a storable good, but cattle are defined as non-storable. Non-storables need securities, such as insurance, so they need cattle to be changed to storable so we can become more effective competitors and essentially eligible for more protection.

Can I leave those three to you, please, one each.

[Kalissa Regier]

I can talk a bit about the SRM issue. The SRMs have become a really big problem since BSE hit. One day you could use this material, the next day there was nothing. No program facilitated use of SRMs.

Ideally, we should be able to use a lot of waste products for biofuels to produce energy. I have a lot of hemp straw right now that can't be used for anything; it's got to be burned. But for that to happen, a lot of infrastructure needs to be built, and where does that come from?

We've already seen such aggressive action toward ethanol and biodiesel. Millions of dollar have been spent on that infrastructure already. To say we're now going to go off on this other tangent and use these materials and we'll throw in whatever else we want...these things take years and years to build, and it's a complicated issue.

[Bob Friesen]

I don't know if I understood the question correctly, so let me answer it by saying this. When it comes to research and different areas where we can create the revenue streams for farmers, I think we should also get back the stakeholder advisory committees we used to have for all the federal research stations. I think they were dropped about three years ago. We think they should come back. That would again give the industry the opportunity to provide some real input in areas where they think we could move in the right direction in agriculture.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

Actually, Kalissa, I think hemp straw will be the next cotton. I've seen some wonderful hemp clothing, and there's some really great organic technology with natural enzymes and breaking down the material. You can't tell the difference between it and cotton when it's all done.

[Kalissa Regier]

I just need about $100 million from the government to start up.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

There's actually a company out in B.C. right now that's doing it. I'm hoping to see them expand across western Canada. My area grows a lot of hemp as well.

[Kalissa Regier]

The biggest problem with straw is that it's so bulky, and transportation is just impossible.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

They have to be close to where it is, for sure.

Monsieur Bellavance.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I am waiting because I want to speak to Ms. Ross.

Ms. Ross, if I understood correctly, you said that at your last convention—I think it was last weekend—you discussed food sovereignty, among other things.

Did I understand correctly?

[Colleen Ross]

Yes.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I find this very interesting because when I was appointed as spokesperson for agriculture in 2005, one of the first activities I took part in was a large demonstration, the theme of which was “D'abord nourrir notre monde” (Feed our People First), and it was organized by the Union des producteurs agricoles du Québec in the heart of downtown Montreal.

There are not very many farmers there, so why was it held in Montreal, right in the city? It was to show consumers, many of whom obviously live in cities, that many of the products they find in grocery stores come from nearby farms and that, if we were ever to lose what our farmers provide, we would become completely dependent on farmers from other countries and, with a bit of bad luck at some point, this could cause shortages in certain sectors, disease, out-of-control and uncontrollable price hikes and so on.

The subject had therefore already been raised. That is why I am saying that I find it interesting. Just recently, the Union des producteurs agricoles and Équiterre invited MPs to come and listen to speakers talking about food sovereignty.

I find this interesting because we are sort of drawing a parallel with what happened in the cultural industry. Quebec had been a forerunner in that area, asking that culture not be considered a commodity in international trade. It took seven years, but it managed to have culture excluded and not be considered commodities; in other words, to have cultural diversity finally gain recognition.

I would like you to summarize, if you can, the discussions on food sovereignty held in your area. That could fuel the debate here, too.

[Colleen Ross]

You've asked me about my favourite subject.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Tell us about it in about two minutes or less.

[Colleen Ross]

Okay.

I've been invited to meetings with the Quebec UPA, the UPA DI also. The National Farmers Union are members of la Via Campesina, which is an international farm organization that represents hundreds of millions of farmers and fisherfolk all around the world. It's the alternative to IFAP.

I have the international food sovereignty declaration here. Food sovereignty cannot be redefined. As you describe food sovereignty, that's exactly what it is. It is respecting people's right to culturally appropriate food. When I spoke earlier today, a lot of my language was really based on food sovereignty. We're so tied to our trade agreements. They actually are null and void of consideration for human rights and culture. And food is not a right, because if you give somebody a right, you can take it away again. Food is something that everybody should have access to, and food sovereignty ensures that.

Actually, I was in Africa this year, and so was Kalissa. We were invited to attend the International Forum for Food Sovereignty. It was the first-ever international forum on food sovereignty. We met in West Africa, in a tiny little village in the middle of the desert. It was no Sheraton, believe me. We slept on concrete floors, on mattresses this thick. Five hundred people from all around the world who are fisherfolks and peasants and pastoralists and farmers met together and came up with a consensus document, and this is what it is. This is the international food sovereignty declaration.

We believe that if governments use this as a basis and a foundation for agricultural policy and food policy--and this also talks about economic stability, that we should be economically stable if we are producing food--we would in fact have incredible prosperity. We would have vibrant communities. We would be protecting the environment. Consumers would benefit, farmers would benefit, the environment would benefit. It's like a win, win, win.

Food sovereignty is an excellent model. But let me remind you that it cannot be redefined. This is a declaration that was brought together...and the 500 of us represented millions of farmers. It was a real honour to be there. There were representatives there from UPA DI. They were there as observers only. They couldn't actually participate, because they're not members. They had not really engaged.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'm going to have to actually cut you off.

[Colleen Ross]

It's a very good thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'm sorry about that, but we do have two more questioners to go before bells ring.

Mr. Atamanenko.

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

Thank you. I never thought I'd get the chance.

Bob, you didn't have a chance to complete the question last time, but I'll just maybe take a little different twist. My first question is to you.

Specifically, we talked about WTO, and you mentioned pork exports. We know that the quota now in Europe is 0.5%. My question is—and this ties in with what government should be doing to protect our interests—should we be saying we're not going to negotiate any concessions on our quotas that we have in Canada currently until we bring that 0.5% level up to an acceptable 5%, for example, or 7.5%, which we have in our poultry industry in Canada? Should that be our stance, basically: forget about any concessions; let's bring that up, and then we'll talk?

And the second question—if we have some time; I hope we do—is to you, Kalissa. After all this spin of going forward and backwards and all these policies, you're the future of farming. And we've heard gut-wrenching stories in our tour around the country. What exactly do you expect? What help do you need now to get going to make this business viable? Going through all these documents, what exactly do you need--in three or four points?

Thank you.

[Bob Friesen]

Mr. Chair, I could suggest all kinds of ideas, but very quickly, that's CFA policy. As a first priority, everybody should move up to a common TRQ. As a hog producer, I'm getting 0.5% into Europe, as you said. As a turkey producer, I'm already giving up 5%. So as a priority, that's where they should go. They should also be willing to go to zero in quota, the way Canada's willing to go.

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

Thank you.

Kalissa.

[Kalissa Regier]

Thanks for asking the question.

In three points—

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

You can make it four or five.

[Kalissa Regier]

Well, I just quickly wrote down three, so I'm going to stick with three.

First of all, there is money. We have to be able to make a living. That's simple. Everybody has to be able to make a living. We need to be paid appropriately for what we're doing, and all farmers need to do that. Until all farmers are making enough money, young farmers are not going to be interested in getting into this. They're going to be moving to Ottawa and getting jobs with you guys.

The second thing is--and this is where it starts getting a little bit vague--we need to reinstill the pride in farming. Farmers have been marginalized so terribly in the last 30 years. When I was growing up, nobody wanted to be a farmer. It's starting to change now a little bit, but farmers have been pushed down so far into the ground that there's no pride. Rural communities are so devastated. What I get asked every day is why I would want to live in a small town in Saskatchewan. So we need to put that back into it somehow.

This is a good occupation, and there is a lot of opportunity for young people to make a good living and to have a really great life. We need to somehow bring that pride back.

The third thing I wrote down quickly was community, and that goes in with the pride thing. Young people need to feel as though they have a community they can be a part of and contribute to in a rural area as they're farming. When I say this, I'm thinking specifically of Saskatchewan. That's really my only reference point. There are so many areas in Saskatchewan where there are no neighbours. You don't have neighbours. You live on a farm, and your nearest neighbour is 10 miles away. I know that's probably hard for you guys to relate to, but that's the reality of the situation. Nobody wants to live like that. People aren't going to live like that, so we need to turn that around as well.

Those are, quickly, my three points.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Actually, my riding is very large--56,000 kilometres square. We have ranchers who are 40 miles from the nearest town and 20 miles from the nearest neighbour. That's just the way it is.

My kids love the farm. I'm hoping they're going to take it over as well. They're proud of being farmers, and they're proud of the community they live in.

Mr. Miller, you get to wrap it up before the bells go.

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

Thank you, Mr. Friesen.

Just to go back to the NFU report that was out, once you've read it I would like to hear you publicly comment on it as a representative of your organization--and if I can't get that, then at least as a member of the OFA and eventually of the CFA.

Ms. Ross, I wanted to follow up on some of your comments to one of the speakers. When you were finishing up, you mentioned the fact that you could name some names. I wondered if you could give me some names, because we're all here to cut out any organization or individual who's detrimental to agriculture. I'm wondering if you could give me a few of those names.