Agriculture Committee on May 4th, 2010

[Gayl Creutzberg]

There are a few apprenticeship-type programs that exist. They're very small and scattered. One of them is called CRAFT, the Collaborative Regional Alliance for Farmer Training. It was originally out of the States, and there are now five regions in Ontario that are offering it. It's an interesting process, because of course when you have somebody new on the farm come, they smash into things, they break the tractor down, and so on. So these farmers often work for free: the pay goes to repair the equipment rather than pay the farmer.

These farmers, though, at some stage of the game in their business model, burn out. Certainly to see a payment schedule whereby we can pay these farmers to transfer this very valuable knowledge on would be important. We have started paying farmers for things such as farm tours and those sorts of things. Farmers coming in find farm tours very important, and there is a little bit of funding for that now.

We are trying to advocate the whole idea of a similar apprenticeship program for farming as well, but I think it's really difficult to create those partnerships. Then we run into liability issues as well, which that program has started to run into.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

No doubt there are complexities to that as you start the process. I understand.

[Gayl Creutzberg]

We actually run an incubation farm in Brampton. There are twelve or so farmers on it now. But for an organization like ours, it's very hard, with just our few staff, to run farms across the province.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

That's for sure.

A couple of you talked about abattoirs. I believe Doug did, and you talked about the bureaucracies. I understand that difficulty. As someone who's the food critic for food safety, I get all of that. I sat on the subcommittee, as did Larry and Bev, and Frank sat there last year as we went through what happened previous to that. I understand the difficulties that small abattoirs are having, and without any question we need to find a way to remedy that issue. I think Sean and Steve mentioned how we could incentivize these sorts of things.

One of the things I'd like your comment on is the suggestion that we need to keep them open, because it helps the producer to have alternative markets to sell livestock to especially, and maybe—hopefully—it keeps the price up. Instead of the sense that we need to have them comply with whatever the health and safety regulations are, whether they be provincial or federal CFIA, if we were to say to them that we need them as an incentive to farmers and that we would actually help pay for the changes to the abattoir, but not necessarily to give all the dollars back to the farmer, because we would have actually increased the level of competition whereby you're going to sell into the market, would that be helpful in any sort of way—other than just that we need to keep local abattoirs open? I think we need to do that, period. It would serve the broader community in all manner of ways, not just in a competitive sense, if the government were actually using programs to ensure that the abattoirs came up to the standard we require.

[Sean McGivern]

I think there might be some merit in that, but I also think we need to start off with good policy first. We need to have sound policies and not have these incidents happening all the time whereby we're just continuously taking taxpayers' money and spending it on abattoirs so that somebody can go back to their boss and say “I did something today and there was a non-compliance.” I think it's okay some days to find out that they are compliant and that there is nothing they need to change. A lot of these butcher shops have been multi-generational and operating for years, and we have what we call federal plants with up-to-code standards that are killing people. I don't think anybody knows of anybody in a provincial plant in this county who has ever been killed.

I think we need to look at decentralizing our food system as a huge issue. We have everything clambered into very regional, specific locations; then, when you have problems and you have issues, they're massive. I don't know what the answer is, but I know that we need some decentralization of our food system. That's going in the face of everything we've heard over the years, but I firmly believe that's what we need.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you. Your time has expired, Mr. Allen.

Mr. Richards, you have five minutes.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you, and thank you all for being here to share with us your experience, your expertise, and your passion for farming.

It's interesting how two people can take something completely different out of what they're hearing, but I know I'm hearing something somewhat different from my Liberal colleague on the other side. I'm hearing more of a positive message—not that there aren't things that need to be done; not that there isn't a lot of work to do to ensure that there's a future for farming; not that there aren't a lot of things that we need to do to make the industry more attractive to young farmers, but I'm hearing a very positive message from our young farmers all across this country.

They're seeing a future in agriculture, and they want to be a part of it. They're looking at it and understanding that they need to run their farm like a business and take a business approach to the farm. They're looking at innovating, they're looking at diversifying, adding value, and these kinds of things to ensure that there is a future; that they can have a profitable business.

I'm really encouraged by some of the stuff I've heard about today, things such as the feeder co-ops and the Dairy Farmers' program. I know that Alberta Milk has something similar in Alberta, where I'm from; they do the same kind of thing. FarmStart is something I'd never heard of until today. This is something that needs to happen all across the country.

These kinds of things are initiatives that are coming from farmers and from on the ground. There are things that government needs to do, but it's very encouraging when we hear people taking initiative to ensure the future of their industry. I'm just so encouraged by that.

Of course, there are things that government...and we've heard about them today again—it's no different from other provinces we've been in—things such as the regulatory burden that is placed on farmers, which is huge, and of course programs. That's what I want to focus on with my question.

I've heard suggestions at various times across the country, and I find them intriguing, I guess. It's probably somewhat controversial to talk about programs in this way, but I've heard it from a number of farmers and I want to get your thoughts from this panel on the suggestions. It's an amalgam of two things I've heard.

One of them is about programs. I think there's probably no farmer who wants to earn their living from government programs or from their mailbox; they'd rather earn it from their farm. The only question is, of course, is it possible to do that? We've heard the suggestion many times that outside of insurance types of programs, maybe there's not a need for programs; maybe we should look at just an insurance type of program.

We've also heard many times, and I find this very intriguing, the idea of making sure we have programs that are targeted for beginning farmers. I say “beginning farmers” because they're not always “young” farmers but “beginning” farmers.

An amalgam of those two things is the idea that we could look at programs specifically for young farmers, beginning farmers, and have an insurance type of program. Do you see a way that we could move forward in agriculture with that kind of system, and if so, how would it work? I know that's probably not an easy question just to jump in on, but I'd like to see what your thoughts are on it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Grant.

[Grant Caswell]

Well, the FarmStart program sounds like a really good start to the program. Some of it would have to do also with succession planning, which they talked about also, which is not really starting on their own but rejoining an operation that has to become a viable operation as well.

You can't just jump in knowing that you're going to lose your shirt every day and never get it back. That's key. I don't know what exact programs can be manhandled to deal with the whole thing. And you're right: we don't want a cheque at the end of every month as a pay cheque. But sometimes the cheques don't get evenly disbursed either. When there is a problem or a cause, some people will gain access to more of it, while other farmers won't.

It needs to be more of a generalized program so that it covers a wide variety of people in general.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Gayl.

[Gayl Creutzberg]

I'm not too sure what you refer to when you say insurance, but certainly FarmStart is looking at such programs as a dollar matching. Some new farmers think they should be able to buy a farm in their early twenties. We can't normally buy a home in our early twenties. But if they start putting a dollar aside and every dollar is matched, that's one example.

The other one, of course, is finding a way to pay mentors, so that farmers who are retiring could make an income being one-on-one trainers. There is a step-up program right now being offered, but only to those who are in agricultural programs at universities or colleges. It's not available to those we call “second career”, those who are coming into farming in their 40s or 50s. Infrastructure, I think—I heard this early on—is a big part: assistance with building good, solid systems.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Blake, you're out of time.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Time goes fast.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Let's move back to the Liberals.

Go ahead, Mr. Valeriote.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I find it curious, Grant, that you would say people are losing their shirts, and yet the other side would just put a positive spin on this and say everything is fine and we will stay the course.

You know, it's not fine. I'm not saying everything is going to fail; what I'm saying is that we have to do something meaningful in order to change things, because the old dynamic, the old idea of working within the confines of this box and these programs, is not working. It's really that simple, and we're living in denial if we look at it any other way.

Having said that, what I heard earlier and to an extent this morning--I don't know that I heard it this afternoon--was on the issue of competition. I'd like to hear your take on it. That's the consolidation in the fertilizing industry or the processing or the grocers. These industries have consolidated into such small groups that you have become essentially price-takers, with no control at this point in time. The United States has anti-trust laws that can break up these large companies; in Canada we have competition laws that prohibit collaboration in setting prices, but we can't break up these companies.

Do any of you feel that we've reached a time when that needs to be looked at in order to improve your competitiveness and allow you to be less a price-taker and more a price-setter? Does anyone want to talk about that?

[Sean McGivern]

I can say that for the last two years at the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, resolutions have come forth to try to ban captive supply and packer ownership of cattle. I don't know what's going through the farmers' minds, but they're not voting in favour of it. They say they want those packers to be able to own those cattle if they choose to, and I don't know how we help guys, if that's their attitude.

There are feedlots out in Alberta, and they can pull cattle out of those lots one week early, with a few pounds' difference, and lower the price of our market and still have their supply there. They can just go back to the market the following week and buy them that much lower. I don't know how we compete in a beef industry that does that with so few players.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Bruce, would you comment?

[Bruce Saunders]

I think it's a valid question and a valid point.

At one time we raised the point with the Competition Bureau that consolidation was in effect becoming a restraint, and that if we didn't have supply management on the dairy side we would be very vulnerable. The Competition Bureau thought there was really no problem with the current competition on the processing side, or even on the retail side, but they thought supply management should be looked at. Well, supply management is simply 10,000 or 13,000 farmers in Canada getting together and selling as one selling group, but that's what the Competition Bureau thought should be looked at, not the other side.

There has to be an attitude change if that is to get any legs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Hayes wanted to comment.

[Douglas Hayes]

I'll try to expand on what Sean said about the Cattlemen's Association not wanting to prevent packers from owning cattle.

In Ontario here, Cargill is the big player. There are other small ones too, but there are a lot of farmers out there who are scared to stand up and say what needs to be said. If people stand up and say at a meeting that they think the packers shouldn't be allowed to own cattle, they don't know, but maybe the next week the buyer doesn't show up for their cattle; they don't buy their cattle. A lot of people have concerns about that.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Bruce, did you mean supply managed to the extent that they would consider dismantling it when bureaucrats were questioning it?

[Bruce Saunders]

If they were going to review anything, they were going to review supply management and its ability to function as it currently does.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

My goodness.

Do I have more time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You have about 40 seconds.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

All right.

It was said this morning and it was said last week that Farm Credit is really not helping the farmers to the extent that it could. Capital is an issue. I suspect the guy who's coming over from Dubai probably has some large money that he's able to invest, unlike the rest of us.

Farm Credit comes before us and proudly announces that they've made a few bucks. Farm Credit should be breaking even, as far as I'm concerned. It should be a company that lends money, and it certainly has the responsibility of collecting that money, but it should not be making it more difficult for farmers. In fact, as a bank of last resort, it should perhaps be able or willing to take a little more risk than the regular banks.

Has anybody had an experience with Farm Credit? Would anyone like to offer an opinion?