Evidence of meeting #44 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 farm.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
In my riding, I have noticed that more and more young women are taking over on the farm. You have to enjoy the work, because it is there, seven days a week. It is worse than what I do, and these women do not get paid. Hats off to them.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Thank you very much to all of you for being here.
I'm just going to throw some questions out, since we are looking at the future of farming. We're hoping that Nathan, once he finishes his course at the agriculture technology institute, will be able to continue farming if that's a desire. There are other young people who can continue, so we have to look at the future, obviously.
I'd just like to talk about the area of food sovereignty, which we've touched upon. My colleague from the Bloc talked about that. I've been talking to some people across the country, doing a tour and getting some feedback to try to put something together. One of the themes coming through is that many farmers are saying trade has had a negative effect on them. In spite of the fact that we have free trade agreements such as NAFTA, we still have the border closed with B.C., we have the COOL program, we have fruit and vegetable producers who can't make money because products are being dumped in the country. Some are going so far as to say that maybe we should take agriculture out of trade, but obviously that's not realistic. Then we have different standards from different countries, which you've mentioned a number of times here.
So the question I have is, in addition to comments on what I've said.... You know, the supply management sector is working for the poultry industry, the dairy industry, and the egg industry. The question that's been thrown around for other sectors of agriculture is if this is viable. Is this a viable alternative to make sure that we don't have to depend on more markets and trade, and we can have our farmers produce good quality food in Canada? That's providing we can get rid of those interprovincial barriers. I'd like to ask a question on that later.
Let me just throw that out, and if I have some time I'd like to ask other questions. Anybody?
5:05 p.m.
Glen Van Dijek
I'd like to speak to that. Are you asking if supply management would be effective in the red meat sector or in other sectors?
5:05 p.m.
Glen Van Dijek
I would have to answer that I think in Alberta's case, we have supply management and then we also have the red meat sector, beef, and hogs. Probably 90% of the livestock traffic down the highway is red meat, and the rest would be chicken and then dairy products. If we go into supply management, we're going to see our industry shrink even more.
I would like to think that as a country we could negotiate trade deals with others on food security for those countries. We're going to end up exporting something, whether it's going to be meat or it's going to be grains, or we're going to grow a whole bunch more trees. We might as well put the whole country back into growing trees if we're not going to be able to sell the meat. Then five years down the road, because we're not feeding the grain and nobody wants our grain, we can't sell the grain.
So I think a process that possibly could help to get the trade going is trying to sell food security for other countries, not only our own through supply management within our own country, but food security to other countries. That is a trade issue. Work with other countries, and maybe Canada can get security in other products we need to bring in, working that trade back and forth.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
But exports have tripled over the last 20 years, and yet you guys are making less than what you did 20 years ago, if you look at the way.... Is there--
5:10 p.m.
Glen Van Dijek
Exports of what have tripled?
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Exports of beef have tripled over the past 20 years, according to some data that's out there. So I'm wondering if that is the only answer. Ultimately we rely on trade, we rely on more markets, and yet we have beef farmers who are having a real hard time. Is there some other answer? That's the question I have.
5:10 p.m.
Glen Van Dijek
I'd be surprised if exports had tripled. They could have tripled, but beef typically is not a large export commodity out of Canada compared to pork. The pork industry, tonnage-wise, sends a lot more pork out of the country than the beef industry. Alberta beef--that's what I would know of--is largely consumed within the North American continent and into higher-end diets as an export product. I think this whole thing about selling food security to another country is possibly something to look at, rather than trying to limit our production in supply management and providing food security for Canada.
5:10 p.m.
Canada's Outstanding Young Farmers Program
I'd like add something. Let's not forget how competitive we are on a global scale. There are people coming from Holland, Europe. You're looking at their cost price for red meat. I was in China last year, and we saw some of their budgets. We are globally competitive with our cost price. Sometimes you wonder why we can't make the trades happen.
5:10 p.m.
Canada's Outstanding Young Farmers Program
Some of our pork is going to Japan. There's a lot of pork from Denmark going to Japan, too. We have a much better cost price than Denmark, Europe, and many other countries.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Mr. Atamanenko, the time is up. Thank you.
We're going to go to the government side with the Conservatives. We're going to start off with Mr. Storseth.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be splitting my time with a former outstanding young farmer, Mr. Hoback.
I think you can see some of the frustrations that we have. We need to talk to farmers like yourselves who are actually on the ground rather than lobby groups like the NFU. We need to listen to what farmers are telling us. We need to increase our trade, but it's a terribly complex thing that we can't encapsulate in five minutes.
We have to increase food security. Moreover, we have to do what we as a government did with the Colombia free trade agreement and ensure better standards for human rights and pay equity. Then they will be on a more level playing field with our farmers. Generally, one of the big export problems is that our farmers aren't on a level playing field, because of the regulatory burden they are held to here in Canada.
I don't want to get into all the partisan stuff. Glen is from my riding, and I'm going to keep my questions to him. Glen, you're a successful farmer in our area, and I've known you for a long time. You've been big in hogs. You have moved more into grains and oilseeds. One of the things that we as a government have done is “product of Canada.” We've said that we need to have a gold standard—we need the product itself to be at least 98% Canadian.
We believe that Canadians and people around the world will buy the Canadian standard. Do you think that's a good step? Do you like keeping the standards relatively high for Canadian content?
5:15 p.m.
Glen Van Dijek
We need to do everything we can to educate the consumer on the quality of the product we offer under our regulatory environment. There is some inequity. Products are coming into the country without the same kind of regulatory traceability or food safety standards. The quality is possibly substandard, and the consumer is not aware of it. The consumer needs to be educated—the “100-mile diet” comes to mind. Consumer education can only help to stabilize the products grown on Canadian farms.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
From what I'm hearing at round tables, we need to spend more money advertising the benefits of Canadian products, not only here but around the world. Profits are one of the topics of the day. I didn't hear any cattle farmers in the crowd, so anybody can answer this. We had the packing industry here. They spoke about OTM—over 30 months.
There's regulatory disparity. Everybody admits that we need to work on decreasing the $31.70 gap in the regulatory burden on the red meat sector, especially on over-30-month cattle. The solution we have from industry is that we give $24 million proportionately per head. Roughly, you're talking $10 million for cargo, $8 million for Excel, and the rest would be split up. Do you see this as the answer for any industry, or do you think that we should be working on trying to get that money passed through so that farmers get a share of it?
The Canadian Cattlemen's Association comes here and says that they speak on behalf of farmers such as yourselves. They tell us where they think the money should go. I'll just throw that out to you guys.
5:15 p.m.
Canada's Outstanding Young Farmers Program
I'm trying to get it straight. On the $24 million, what they're requesting is that you're going to offset the cost of--
5:15 p.m.
Canada's Outstanding Young Farmers Program
Okay. Again, it's another trade issue where regulatory barriers put us at a cost disadvantage. The key is education of the countries we are trying to export into to prove to them that we have quality meats, safe food. That money will eventually get back to the farm. I believe in the free enterprise system, a supply and demand system. The money will eventually get back to the farm. I'm not convinced that it's necessary to pay it at all.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
December 3rd, 2009 / 5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Thank you, Chair.
I will wrap up, guys. I was nominated to be outstanding young farmer in 2004. I think Kevin Hursch nominated me that year, and I think John won it the year before, if I remember right.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
It was 2001; so it was a few years before.
It's a great organization, colleagues. These farmers sitting around the table are your early adapters. They're the guys who look at something new and take the risk and usually run with it. Sometimes they get burned, most times they make it work. They're the ones who, when they see something not working, are quick to change and make it work. They're the ones who look at their farming operations and ask why they are doing it that way--just because Grandpa did it this way, why are they doing it this way now--and they make those adaptations and do it. Those are the people we are talking to here.
As Brian said before, it's a breath of fresh air, because when we get farm associations here they tend to get very focused. They tend to get inside the bubble here in Ottawa, like we do here, and that's why it's nice to have the breath of fresh air with you guys coming here and giving us your opinion.
I want you guys to all understand. You have the experience in committee here. You can see there will be a little jabbing. It's been very polite today, which I thank my members for. Sometimes it gets pretty hot. A lot of times we get very passionate on both sides. It doesn't mean they're right or they're wrong. It's just that we have different ways of doing things, and we have to respect that.
I also want you guys to know we have Minister Ritz right now, in the beef sector, and basically every break week, which is roughly once a month, he has been overseas. He has not been home. He's fighting for you guys, fighting for market access, looking for ways to get you into a market here or a market there, whether it's beef, whether it's--