Agriculture Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2007

[Errol Halkai, General Manager, Canadian Broiler Hatching Egg Marketing Agency]

To follow up on that question, in addition to what Harold was saying, we are living the experience right now with a producer in Saskatchewan. We feel that the compensation that is being proposed is not sufficient and we've been told the programs he can rely on currently are the CAIS programs. Initial indications are that they won't come close to covering the losses that he's incurred.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Merci.

Mrs. Skelton.

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you very much for being here today.

It is nice to be back on the agriculture committee, which is why I first came to this place.

On September 19, 2007, Minister Ritz wrote a letter to Ambassador Crawford Falconer expressing his concern with the ambassador's text regarding sensitive products. He said, “As you know, Canada has a system of supply management for certain products (dairy, poultry, eggs). That system has worked very well for those producers, and both those producers and the Government of Canada are resolutely committed to maintaining it.”

Also, in the Speech from the Throne our government showed very strong support for supply management. What has that done to help your industries? Has our government support helped your industries?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Who wants to go first?

[Jacques Laforge]

I think those two things together show the international community how important supply management is from an agricultural standpoint in Canada. Basically, farmers can have a decent living from it. I think it shows the international community that Canada is defending its sensitive interests. We need that, and we need more of that. As we get to the end of the negotiations, Canada's sensitivities should be addressed just like any other country's. We're quite pleased that Minister Ritz....

[Technical difficulties--Editor]

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

I would like to ask if there are any comments from any of the others.

[Mark Davies]

To follow up on what Jacques said, I think the working relationship we have with the department and the minister has greatly improved. We're in an international forum now, and we're getting down to the crunch on some of these talks. I think Jacques touched on it when he said this is our sensitive product. Every country has their own “supply management”. It may not be a system like ours; it may be like it, and it may be something else.

I think this letter to Crawford Falconer shows we're serious about what it means to the country and to the producers. I think it has provided the rest of the negotiating community with Canada's intent, and it's clear what it means to our economy and the country.

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

In the last line of the letter he said, “However, we will be taking a particularly firm line on these issues”. I think this really expresses his concern and our concern about what is happening.

I want to ask you something on biosecurity. You said you were disappointed that the national animal health strategy wasn't recognized as a necessary pillar of the next generation of agriculture and agrifood policy. Do you think this is up to the government to do that, to come in with rules and regulations? Do you not think we should work with the groups to bring in the necessary things?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Harold.

[Harold Froese]

Thank you.

Yes, and I think the question is even broader than that. A lot of that pertains to emergency preparedness plans that individual producers, commodities, provinces have. What the national strategy would do.... I think we're maybe seeing the start of it in the traceability working group. And there's a poultry working group. A lot of those programs go across commodities, because many farms have more than one commodity.

We need an integrated system, where the programs have commonalities and the programs can talk to each other. The worst thing is to have an outbreak on a provincial border and the one border a mile away can't talk to the other one in terms of technology. Different levels of government have different responsibilities, so that's why we need--

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

So the provincial boundaries are a major problem in this whole issue?

[Harold Froese]

I was using that as an example. I don't know if they're a problem, but the systems in different provinces and regions need to be able to communicate to each other.

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

But we've found that over time with what I'd call the disasters there is a problem with provincial regulations. Mr. Marit talked about it with crop insurance and the province of Saskatchewan being different from Alberta and Manitoba.

Are your organizations working right across Canada with all your producers to try to get the provinces to see eye to eye?

[Harold Froese]

The short answer would be yes, because we have national programs specifically in the supply-managed sector for all five of the commodities that are national, and then the provinces implement them and work with the provincial regulatory bodies, and other commodities are doing that as well. We need to expand that and then have all levels of government, all commodities, more or less pulling in the same direction.

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

I was wondering if I would be allowed to table this letter from Minister Ritz in case--

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Is it in both official languages?

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

No, I don't have it in both official languages. I can't table it then.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Well, do I have consent to table it even though it's only in English?

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

No, it wouldn't be right.

[Carol Skelton, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Well, hopefully everyone has it anyway.

You mentioned over and over BRMs for primary producers. What suggestions do you have for a non-BRM program in the aspect of Growing Forward? Do you have any suggestions?

Mr. Marit left.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Yes, Mr. Marit took off. He had to catch a flight.

Mr. Fuller.

[David Fuller]

We haven't looked that broadly to have a look at that avenue, to be frank with you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Okay, your time is just about expired.

Mr. Easter, for five minutes, as reluctant as I am to give you that much time.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I can have Carol's time, can I?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I notice a number of people have mentioned in their submissions the standing committee's report in the spring, and I might say that at least on this side of the committee we're very disappointed in the government's response. We felt we had an all-party committee report and it was basically non-committal and vague on most issues.

I might apologize as well: I was speaking in the House on the hogs and beef crisis, so I didn't get here in time.

Let's be a little bit specific. On the Supply Management Five presentation, are you stating that the disaster coverage under the business risk management program isn't adequate? Are you specifically stating that?

[Jacques Laforge]

I don't think we're stating it that way. We're saying there seems to be, and it's not fully understood, a discrepancy between how supply management is treated versus other commodities when it comes to that, and that's what we're trying to find out.