Agriculture Committee on Dec. 5th, 2007

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

Is this being distributed through the 2007 CAIS program right now?

[Danny Foster]

No, it's through the 2007 AgriStability program, the new program.

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

Thank you very much.

One of the other issues that I think are incumbent upon us to talk about is research and development, and it's one of the keys to opening our markets abroad. Can anybody in the department tell me how much the department is putting into research and development, and in any particular areas, such as byproducts of biodiesel or anything like that?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Fortin.

[Dr. Marc Fortin]

During the consultations for Growing Forward, we certainly heard a message that science and innovation were important for the future of the sector, more specifically in the context of bioproducts. We recognized that prior to the implementation of Growing Forward. Again, the agricultural bioproducts innovation program, which was launched last year, is aimed at discovering new products and new processes to exploit our natural wealth, if you wish, our capacity to grow biomass. Canada can grow biomass like just about no other country on the planet, because of our land mass and our low population.

But we do have to find solutions that are suitable for Canada. Again, the sugar cane approach is unlikely to be successful in Canada. We have been working on selecting projects. The agricultural bioproducts innovation program was slated at $145 million, and the program projects will be announced shortly.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Your time has expired, Mr. Storseth. Sorry about that.

There is one thing I want to just follow up with you, Mr. Foster. You were talking about the cash advance requests by the cattle industry through the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, and your concern over an overpayment. That overpayment is based upon the fact that they are looking for a cash advance based on so many dollars per head versus the advance programs that are all based on—whether it's through AgriStability or through the special advance program—reference margin. Is that right?

[Danny Foster]

Yes. The issue is that basically a payment under the AgriStability program is triggered by a drop in the producer's income. Making a dollar payment per head has no bearing on what their actual drop in income may be at the end of the day, because they may have a large grain operation. It's a whole-farm program.

So a producer might have 100 head of cattle and a large grain operation in 2007. If you make a special advance based on $100 a head, they're going to get that money, but at the end of the day they're not going to trigger a payment under the AgriStability program because they haven't had a drop in margin because of the returns on the grain operation. So the producer ends up having to pay that money back. That's just an example of how, at the end of the day, it may not equate to what you'd get from the program.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

The one thing that's been brought to my attention by my ranchers--I'm a cow-calf operator myself--is that if they want to do an advance on a per-head basis, they're wondering why they can't, when grain and oilseeds, under the advanced program, are allowed to take on market value, and the livestock industry is based on reference margin. Is there any discussion happening within the department? I know that at this table before, we've discussed the possibility of transitioning the special events program into a market value rather than a reference margin.

[Danny Foster]

I have to make a clear distinction here. There are two types of advances available to producers: there are advances or interim payments on existing support programs, like the AgriStability program, which is just an advance on money that's going to go into your pocket and stay in your pocket at the end of the day. That's the target advance and the interim payments that I'm talking about.

There's also another program called the federal cash advance program, which is basically a loan. You go through a producer organization. The money's guaranteed by the Government of Canada. The money comes from the bank, and it goes to the producer. Now, how much you can borrow under that federal cash advance program is limited by the reference margin under AgriStability. That's an issue that's been raised by the cattle industry, and that's an issue we're currently working on at the department to try to see if there's a solution so that the AgriStability program doesn't limit how much a producer can actually borrow. It's tied more to the value of the inventory than the program.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Grain and oilseeds is delinked from reference margin under that program—

[Danny Foster]

That's right.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

—but livestock are?

[Danny Foster]

That's right.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Boshcoff.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, before I begin, with all respect, I notice that you like to ask your questions, and I think that's very fair, because you ask surprisingly reasonable questions. But as you know, you take up a fair amount of time. Normally, to do so, the chair would vacate the chair, take his turn with the regular speakers, and then continue in our agreed-upon order. I just think, in terms of fairness, that's something you should consider.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Boshcoff, I didn't take any of your time, and we have plenty of time here to have these questions asked.

On the same point of order, Mr. Atamanenko.

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

I understand what you're saying, Ken, but I think that you seem to have developed a style, James, where it doesn't really interfere with what we're doing. At least I've been comfortable with that. I think that, without having to change seats and everything, you should have the right to ask a few questions at follow-up.

As I said, so far it seems to have worked, and you've developed that style. I might add that there are people in other committees, Chairman, who haven't developed that.

So I would just like to leave it--that's my suggestion--and we can see. If there are problems, then I think maybe we can work them out.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I appreciate that, Mr. Atamanenko.

If I were going to be political, Mr. Boshcoff, then I would vacate the chair. I'm asking specific questions to get better information for our reports.

But it's your time, Mr. Boshcoff. I'm starting it now.

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

Thank you.

On the issue of catastrophe or disaster for such situations as drought or flood, when we talk about cooperation between the federal government and the provinces and territories, it seems, particularly in the last drought in northwestern Ontario, that there still is no possibility of reconciliation between the federal and provincial governments. The federal minister was with the provincial minister a few weeks ago, and they still can't come to an agreement on a formula. So I would ask where we are, in terms of designing some kind of system that is workable and agreeable, similar to what worked so quickly for British Columbia in their situation.

The second question that I will ask is on Agriculture Canada's role in championing the elimination of interprovincial barriers. I will use the Rainy River district's example of trying to develop an abattoir and meeting impossible barriers when trying to sell into other provinces. Although there are very few differences between what the inspection would be provincially and what it would be federally, it just seemed impossible for them to overcome the federal hurdles to be able to sell into other provinces, such as Manitoba.

Those are my questions.

[Andrew Marsland]

Thank you for the questions.

On the issue of disaster relief and response, on November 17 the federal and provincial ministers did agree to an approach to funding small and medium-sized disasters on the usual 60-40 basis.

I'm sure Danny can provide the criteria that are there, but essentially, they distinguish between a large disaster and small disaster. There's no specific dollar amount, but a series of criteria that apply. If it meets these criteria, then it's a small or medium disaster; therefore, it will be funded on the 60-40 basis.

In terms of the interprovincial trade barriers, we have a standing group of federal-provincial assistant deputy ministers and deputy ministers as well as the regular meetings of federal-provincial ministers. Discussions on chapter nine of the agreement on internal trade have been ongoing for the last couple of years, and we've looked at ways of moving forward on that. As you will know, I think the federation made a resolution on this, the provincial premiers, that they wanted to move forward on this, and we've been looking at ways of dealing with that. We continue to do that and we facilitate those discussions between the provinces as much as possible in looking for a way forward.

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

Then with the time remaining, when we talk about orderly marketing, whether it's supply management or other systems, there's this quote from the National Farmers Union that “The federal government's contention that the destruction of the Canadian Wheat Board will not have implications for supply management is completely false. Both supply management and the Canadian Wheat Board increase farmers' market power, and both types of collective marketing are essential for the survival of Canadian family farmers.”

So from my previous question, with the directive to destroy the Wheat Board, how could that not have an impact on other supply management or forms of orderly marketing?

[Andrew Marsland]

I think the minister in his statements has been clear on his support for supply management, as well as that this item move forward on marketing choice, but those are....

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

Political decisions, one might say? All right, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Okay, Ms. Skelton.