Evidence of meeting #4 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Was that the comment you wanted to make? We had you on the list next.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think we need to move COOL up, and particularly how it affects the livestock sector, both beef and pork. I think we should do a short report on the committee's opinion regarding COOL and the changes to COOL and what it will mean in our livestock sector, because we're going to be speaking as the parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture. We do have a voice, and I think there's a lot to be gained by that.
What I'm noticing in our meeting, though, is that we don't really have a mechanism for deciding. When a member has an idea like this, how are we going to decide whether we move ahead with the idea or not? It goes back to our needing to have a way of changing this, otherwise we're going to go around in circles. I'm putting forward an idea here that COOL should move up, you've put forward an idea that we should have the Cattlemen's Association in, and we have an idea over here that the Pork Council should join us. We need a mechanism for agreeing and deciding, yes, we're doing it, or no, we're not, because someone else will have another idea in about two minutes and we're never going to quite resolve it.
I'm suggesting that we move COOL up. I'm suggesting that we prepare a report on that. That's going to take some time. I don't mean a lot of time, but the report has to be prepared and then reviewed. That takes committee time, so we'd want to make sure that we scheduled that in there.
But I would like to know what mechanism you would have for us to actually make decisions at some point. I'm not saying it has to be now, but how do we move ahead with certain ideas so we don't scatter into 10 ideas and not arrive at any decisions?
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
The way I see it is that we have this report that came out of the subcommittee and we should deal with that. If you want to juggle around the order that the subcommittee came up with, that's your prerogative, and I'm hearing that suggested today. Any new items can simply be added to the one that Alex brought up. But right now we're dealing with the report that's in front of us. Everybody's got a copy of it.
When it comes to answering Mr. Lemieux's question about the mechanism, I think we should to try to get a general consensus today on the highest priorities. Sometimes the availability of witnesses will determine that. For example, one issue that we have at the top might have to be moved one meeting because somebody couldn't come, but we'll make sure there are witnesses for one of the other categories that are near the top so we can go on. That's generally how it should work.
I hope that answers your question.
Mr. Easter and then--
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I guess I'll continue with the merry-go-round. Mr. Lemieux's military leanings are coming through here.
I could agree with moving COOL up and moving the cattle industry stuff up. I also like Alex's suggestion of interspersing some of the competitiveness with the program at the end--as per witness availability, when we get to that--and then I think we've got a winner here.
I would like to ask Monsieur Bellavance a question with regard to the potato cyst nematode. Are you planning on bringing CFIA in and asking them some very tough questions about how our producers were affected? We've had some effects in Alberta as well with some problems with sampling and everything else.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
That is a good question, Brian. I want the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to come at the same time as the potato producers who were affected.
To answer Pierre, I agree with him. However, we seem to be reaching a consensus. People seem to agree that we should deal with the livestock industry first. Still, I would like to clarify something, Mr. Chair. You seem to have already contacted people for them to testify as early as Thursday. If we do decide to discuss that first, I want to be sure that we will also have enough time to call our own witnesses. I would like to have certain people from Quebec here, and we will not have just one session on that question. These people must also be allowed to come. It is important to mention that.
If we begin with the livestock industry and, as far as possible, we reach a consensus then to initiate the program review and study competitiveness—that is what I am hearing around the table—we will have an interesting program for a good while. I think we can reach an agreement on that. If you followed my suggestion from a while back, the members could then add the study of certain files, and this would complete our schedule.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I'd like to clear things up about being in contact with CCA. The clerk, in all good faith, went ahead and did that because there are very few witnesses that can come at short notice. It's not confirmed, by any means. If we decide that we want them to come, they can. But we thought it was fair to at least put them on notice, because if we did nothing on that and had today's meeting and then started phoning afterwards, then everybody would say that they'd only been given two days. That could happen with the Canadian Pork Council. We may be able to get the Canadian Pork Council here on Thursday or we may not be able to get them until next Tuesday.
We weren't trying to circumvent the process, or the clerk certainly wasn't.
Most of these witnesses who are in Alex's report--and he's got up to meeting number 13--all go together on a lot of the issues. There's that review of the Competition Act, and it's still part of the competitiveness in the thing, but it's a little more extended. There's more to competitiveness in the marketplace, and it has do with the grocery stores, the petroleum industry, the fertilizer industry, and everything. There are a number of things in there.
Mr. Shipley, you're next on the list.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
If you're looking for a motion, I will do that to make sure we confirm with the Canadian Cattlemen and the Canadian Pork Council for next Thursday. In terms of consideration of other regional organizations--you mentioned some from Quebec--I need a little direction. I certainly have some from Ontario that would love to be here--from the red meat industry, for example. In fact, when we get to the competitiveness, it would be the grains and oilseeds also.
I think, as a committee, whether that's a subcommittee or not, Mr. Chairman, we need to determine if we're going to start bringing in regional organizations, unless those organizations, such as potatoes, may not be grown in every region. Certainly we have them in Ontario also. So I respect that. I just need a little clarification in terms of the regional organizations coming in.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay. My comment is that we decide the priorities today. Then when it comes time, Mr. Shipley, for you or anybody else on the committee to put in your list of witnesses, you include who you think should come forward. I think every member of the committee has that prerogative. We'll do our best to--
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I do have a motion to make sure that the Canadian Cattlemen and the Canadian Pork Council are invited for Thursday. I don't know if that's what you need to move along.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
No, I don't we think we need any motion, just a general consensus.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
They've been put on notice that they could get called. If that's the will of the committee, the clerk will contact them, I presume later today, to give them as much time as possible.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I was just trying to move to the will of the committee.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I'm getting the consensus around the table that this is what we'll probably do. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I have Mr. Easter next and then Mr. Atamanenko.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As far as the clerk goes, that was great preparation in terms of making the initial calls. It's easier to call back and say we can't do it Thursday; then we can do it another time. I compliment you on that.
They agreed on the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and Canada Pork Council. It's a good way to start. I think we need to know from them about the state of the industry and the impact of COOL.
At some point we do need somebody to talk about this trouble in the industry and the problems of regional slaughter capacity. We're losing an industry. The industry is big enough in western Canada that you still have slaughter capacity. We're losing an industry in Atlantic Canada; we really are. And it's very, very serious. It's going to impact on our barley markets and everything else internally. We're very seriously losing the mixed farms operations. We do need to have that looked at.
I would agree with Alex's point on the NFU at the next meeting. I do think they need time. I know people are saying it's a lot of time, but they're looking at the historical perspective and structure of the industry. I think we need to do that.
At the third meeting, Mr. Chair, I think we need somebody beyond the cattle industry itself to come. I don't think the Canadian embassy is doing enough on this issue. To make them understand that we're concerned, I would suggest we either bring somebody up from the Canadian embassy or--I don't even know if we can invite them--from the American embassy. But we need to bring in somebody who has worked on this issue. If they haven't worked on the issue, then we have a real problem. Whether it's from one of the embassies in Washington or one of the consul offices across the country, we need somebody to explain COOL--where it started, where it was, where it is now, and the impact on this industry.
From there, I think we need to start developing a report. At the end of the day, I really think this committee needs to make recommendations on what the Government of Canada can do for the industry. But we also need to send a message from this committee to the United States that we've had it with this protectionism they're going forward with. And certainly I think we'd be recommending that the government challenge them under the WTO.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
I support the idea that we have the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and perhaps if we can get representatives from the pork industry in the first meeting.
I would like to modify my proposal slightly for the second meeting. I believe you tentatively have Darrin Qualman here. Rather than demanding this 45-minute presentation, what I would like to suggest—and I think it could work—is that we ask him to cut it down to 30 minutes and we bring in three cattle ranchers, three people who are on the ground who are not necessarily part of CCA, who can give us some on-the-ground stuff that's happening. We've all talked to these guys. I think between us we can try to get three people. Get them to criticize this report, get them to give us some ideas, and then spend the second hour going around and questioning Darrin and our cattle producers. I think that will be a very productive meeting and a logical follow-up to the actual association presentation.
If you are in agreement with that, I think this would really be good.