Evidence of meeting #12 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.
8:35 a.m.
President, Kettle River Stockmen's Association
Ian has some actual numbers that I would ask for him to give.
8:35 a.m.
Ian Hutcheon Member, Board of Directors, Southern Interior Stockmen's Association, British Columbia Cattlemen's Association
I have actual numbers. A former director of Canadian Cattlemen's went through the prices. It's very difficult because of the long supply chain to sort out what comes from where. They priced out a calf who leaves our ranch around 600 pounds. By the time he hits the grocery store shelf, he's worth $3,080.
I don't know how many of you have ever been cow-calf producers, but nighttime is a busy time, often, and the cow-calf producer gets $590 of that $3,080. It's just not sustainable. Your costs are easily $200 or more per calf. These folks all complain that...
What's that, Doug?
8:40 a.m.
President, Kettle River Stockmen's Association
Perhaps you can mention the retail part.
8:40 a.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Southern Interior Stockmen's Association, British Columbia Cattlemen's Association
Oh, yes.
The retail cut is 55%. Basically, after it leaves the packer--in other words, they've killed the cow, put it in bags, and sent it to where it winds up on your grocery shelf--they're taking 55% of that $3,080. And that share has been increasing continuously.
I say to my mother, “What do you think of beef?”, and she says, “It's expensive.” So we give it to her.
It's just an untenable situation to have that kind of money when people are telling you that beef is expensive. People do study after study, and they say, well, the demand is low. But the demand is low because someone's taking too much money off the table, and it ain't us.
8:40 a.m.
President, Kettle River Stockmen's Association
I'd like to make one more comment.
We've been looking at moving to Saskatchewan. We too think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.
8:40 a.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Southern Interior Stockmen's Association, British Columbia Cattlemen's Association
The fence is in the other direction.
8:40 a.m.
President, Kettle River Stockmen's Association
Yes.
The cattle industry all across Canada is just tough. There's no easy way. We've looked at southern Saskatchewan; if you aren't able to run 1,000 cows down there... Most people say you don't want to go down there, you'll just starve to death.
I think there is a chance if we can make our product more into what people... Some of our calves right now are marketed on Vancouver Island. There's a custom packer over there, called Westholme Meat, and he markets natural beef. He markets about 20 head a week.
I think there is some price incentive to go in those directions, but as a whole industry, I'm not sure how.
8:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you.
There's just one note I'd like to follow up on, if you'll allow me.
David, in your presentation you mentioned 10-acre lots, or used that as an example, with a big house built in the middle of them. This could go to the other David or to Madeleine.
I have to compete in my area. I live right near Georgian Bay. It's a large tourist area, so the farms there are bought up largely by people from Toronto, which escalates the price. There are also stipulations in there. If it's graded as what they call number one agricultural land, and if it's a vacant farm, they can build one building on it.
My question relates back to your comment about a 10-acre lot. I'm presuming that this is good agricultural land. We have things in place in Ontario that would prevent somebody from coming in and taking that out of production.
Is there a lack of provincial or municipal rules to deal with that kind of thing? Could either one of you comment on that?
8:40 a.m.
As an Individual
Yes.
These are zoned 10-acre lots. Previously, they were all part of a larger farm but still with separate titles. As you sell off each of the titles, you are entitled to put a home on each title if desired; however, you're limited to that one. So you can't take that 10 acres and keep dividing it down and putting more and more houses on it.
8:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Do you think it's a mistake to allow them to be severed into small chunks like that to start with?
8:40 a.m.
As an Individual
Probably in terms of having a farm large enough or viable in the area, it's a mistake. In terms of land use, it's starting to get so high that I'm not sure if you can make enough from agriculture to support that land. Building a house, you probably can.
8:40 a.m.
As an Individual
I think that's how farmers retire. They sell a lot off, and then they don't have as much to do. They can then farm on not such a full-time basis, and they have some more money coming in. That's how that's been regulated. With the agricultural land reserve it is stipulated that it can't be turned into a subdivision or... It has to remain for food production. If they want farm status for their property taxes, then they have to be farming that land according to the requirements of B.C. assessment.
8:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I can understand them selling it off to retire, but would you not agree with me that it's actually a detriment to young people and the future of agriculture because it just keeps going and going? I'm just playing the devil's advocate here.
8:45 a.m.
As an Individual
I see your point, but if we can't afford to buy it anyway, then maybe someone else should buy the house and rent it to us.
8:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay. That's a fair comment.
We'll move on to Mr. Bellavance for seven minutes.
April 26th, 2010 / 8:45 a.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I will give the people who need the simultaneous translation some time to get properly set up.
Thank you for your testimony. When we came up with the idea of doing a study on the future of agriculture, I first said to my colleagues that, while it was important to think about the future of agriculture, we also have immediate problems that we have to try and solve in order to be able to save agriculture as we know it today. We cannot always have the status quo in everything, but what do we do to make sure that agriculture always moves forward and has a future? At the moment, we have a lot of unsolved problems.
I felt that it was more important to try to solve our current problems first before we think to the future. But one does not preclude the other. Your testimony confirms my thinking in that most of you pointed out the problems in the AgriStability program specifically.
Ms. Van Roechoudt, you mentioned the AgriStability program, as did Mr. Machial and Mr. Dobernigg. When the AgriStability program was established, I told myself that we had to give it a chance. You never know how a program like that will play out. I was afraid that the AgriStability program might be very similar to the previous government's CAIS program that was severely, but rightly criticized. Eventually, it was changed.
But I felt that adopting the AgriStability program was like trading six of one for half a dozen of the other, as they say. When it comes right down to it, there is no difference between it and the CAIS program.
So first, I would like to know if you share that view.
Second, I would like to know what changes could be made to the program to make it adequate and responsive to your needs. You pointed out the fact that, if producers have several years of poor yields, they no longer have access to the program and are left to deal with the problem on their own.
8:45 a.m.
As an Individual
I'm not familiar with the previous program so I can't compare, but this program is meant to equalize fluctuations in the market. When you have ups and downs it helps keep your income stable so you can count on it.
In our industry we have diminishing returns. It's an average over three years, so it won't bring you back up to where you were five years ago; it will only bring you to that average. If your returns are continually going down, the amount helping you also goes down. So it doesn't solve the problem. The problem is our marketplace and being able to sell our products at a fair market value.
8:45 a.m.
As an Individual
The previous program was known as CAIS, and it was a margin-based program as well. AgriStability looks very much like CAIS in the way it operates.
The problem with the margins-based program is that if you don't have those margins, it won't help you. I think when the ALR came into existence, the program that Dave Machial mentioned earlier, I think, was the farm insurance program. It was a cost-of-production program that ensured you would at least break even and be able to cover your expenses.
So a program that looks at cost of production might be helpful.
8:50 a.m.
As an Individual
They have pretty much covered it. Basically we need something that guarantees us our cost of production, because this margins-based program isn't working. If it does kick in it just gets smaller and smaller, to the point where you don't get anything from it anyway.
You have to pay to be in the program. I didn't go into it because my parents were in CAIS. They never saw anything from it, even though put money into it. So I took the approach that I'd rather just keep the money and put it in my pocket rather than depend on something that might not be there for me.
8:50 a.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
What I am hearing here in British Columbia, I have heard everywhere we have been. In Quebec, I am in constant contact with agricultural producers. This is exactly what they say.
Grain producers have proposed the idea of a genuine AgriFlex program. When the current government launched the AgriFlex program just before the 2008 budget, it decided to invest $500 million. If it had been a real AgriFlex program, it could perhaps have made up for the fact that AgriStability did not cover production costs. But this program was not the one that had been initially proposed by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, because it did not include risk management. The grain producers' request was for a program to support provincial programs.
I do not know whether British Columbia has provincial stabilization programs of that kind. In Quebec, we have the ASRA, the Farm Income Stabilization Insurance program. In Ontario, they have the production insurance program. A genuine AgriFlex program would support and complement provincial programs in order to meet specific needs.
We do not have that at the moment. I do not know whether British Columbia has provincial stabilization programs of that kind. If not, should there be one? I know that it is not the role of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food to tell British Columbia what to do. Do you have programs like that?
8:50 a.m.
As an Individual
No. There used to be what was called Farm Income Insurance. It was introduced when B.C. implemented the agricultural land reserve to compensate farmers for having lost their land. I think in the late eighties the B.C. government decided to eliminate that program. We would love to have something like that back.
8:50 a.m.
Conservative
