Agriculture Committee on May 12th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I call this meeting to order.

It's nice to be here in lovely Nova Scotia. I guess a few witnesses still need to join us. That is fine, but we would like to get started. We always seem to run short of time. The sooner we start, the more time we will have.

I'd like to thank our witnesses here again. This is the continuation of our cross-Canada study on the future of agriculture, and particularly how we attract young people and keep them in agriculture.

Without further ado, we have Mr. Peter Elderkin and Ms. Harbottle, speaking as individuals.

Mr. Elderkin, if you can try to keep your comments to around seven minutes or so, that would be great.

[Peter Elderkin, As an Individual]

That's great. Thank you very much.

I was told that the purpose of this was to see how we can keep young farmers in the industry and encourage young farmers. My comment to your assistant who called me was that perhaps I should dye my hair before I get there—

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Peter Elderkin]

—because I exceed the age expectation. But perhaps I have some interest in this because I have four sons.

One is on the farm right now, basically because he's between work, but my four sons do not want to do what I've done. They do not want to have the life that we've had the last little while, and I do not encourage them to do it.

I do not have a formal presentation for you, because basically I stumble when I try to follow a formal one, and I can roll quite well without it.

I've been farming for over 30 years with my father; we're a planter. The farm has been continuously farmed by my family since 1760. My father is quite thankful that I've taken over, because he feels that he won't be the one to wind up the farm. He thinks it's probably going to happen to me.

We have some major problems in the industry. Basically, the major problem we have, which faces existing farmers and new entrants, is an income problem; it's straight and basic. We have programs that are thrown at us and thrown at us one after the other, but we have an income problem. The income problem is nothing that would encourage our children to carry on the operations.

We've had some rather rough years. Our family farm is mainly in fruit now. We were completely in apples, into wholesale. We were one of the first in this province to lose our market access. Back in 1985 we were hit with the changeover in the Sobeys' Clover Group, into the Mason's and Belliveau scenario, so in 1985 we basically lost our market, which was Clover in Moncton. It basically supplied the French shore of New Brunswick.

We've muddled around a number of things over the years. We now have a marketing company with several other farmers, and the intent of our marketing effort is to basically not compete against each other. We, these individual farms, all pack and ship and store. Basically, when we compete, we compete on price. So we've combined our marketing efforts that way. However, we still are outside the marketing chain, and our problem is still income.

Our expenses are through the roof. We see a number of programs being thrown at us, over and over and over, federally and provincially, but it still doesn't address the income problem. Recently, several years ago, I think in 2005-06, there was an options program given. This was an experimental program. Many of you probably are aware of what it was. Basically, it was an income guarantee that took the taxable income of a farmer from his income tax return and took it to...I believe at that time it was $25,000 for a family and $15,000 for an individual.

I believe what we need to do in this country is get away from program after program after program. We need to get into something that is going to address income. When we address the income situation, we will not only address the existing farmers, but we will address the new farmers. They have to know when they come into a business, regardless of the amount they invest—whether it's a small operation or a large operation, it's all the same—that there is a bottom line there. It's time we take a look and put our farmers in the same light that we have put upon the education profession and the health profession. We do not question—or I guess some of us do, but we realize the importance of it—our health system, and we really don't question the income of doctors. The teaching profession has really been stabilized by the fact that they know what they're getting: they're getting enough money to get teachers in there. Actually, they're getting enough money to get a surplus of teachers. But this is cyclical, and everything will be cyclical.

When we have this, it will encourage the farmers to get into the industry, because they'll know that they will get an income.

We need to have an income tax-based system. We all file income taxes. We know what it is; we know how to do it. We need to get away from ad hoc programs thrown at us over and over and into a system such that we take our farmers to... A start for a lot of us would be taking us up to the poverty line. Whether you want to call it an agricultural subsidy or an anti-poverty subsidy, or whatever, this will allow new entrants to come in.

We need pensions for people like me. My children are between the ages of 34 and 20. I have one in a mine in B.C.; he's an engineering co-op student. I have one in northern Alberta who is driving a truck, who makes more...

Are we getting close to time?

Anyway, we need to do something to address this. We need pensions. We need methods of debt reduction. Debt reduction will not be a problem with an income supplement. We need methods to do this.

And we need to have the smooth transition of existing farms. Family farms are the lifeblood of the country. This is aimed at family farms. We need a transition of family farms from one generation to another. Pensions allow the retiring farmer to go out, but maintain the expertise on the farm. This is very important, that we continue the mentorship.

But we need to have an income for our young farmers and for all farmers. This will address everything, right across the board. It will address the farm debt crisis, because interest payments will be made and debt will be paid.

You have to take the whole thing into consideration and cut out your programs. There's probably enough money in the federal and provincial programs in place now to run a program like this without much cost to the consumer. The only problem is that it is going to definitely be hard on the civil service in the agriculture department when we take out the dozens and dozens of programs that are currently being administered.

Anyway, am I fairly close?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Yes, you are. You're right on, actually.

[Peter Elderkin]

Anyway, that's it. As you can see, I have the ability to ramble and probably take up everybody's time here. But thank you for this opportunity to speak. It's something we need to look at very quickly and very seriously. We need to get in there, cut the programs, provide income stabilization. Let's be there; let's back up the people who do not have a backup now. Let's not worry about subsidizing the profitable farms. Let's make sure we're there when they are not profitable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

I'll now move to Ms. Harbottle for seven minutes.

[Cammie Harbottle, As an Individual]

My name is Cammie Harbottle. I'm 28 years old, and I grew up in a small town in rural B.C. Clearly, agriculture is in a crisis, and I'm certain that many of the stories you'll be hearing or have been hearing across the country are about that crisis. But my story is about solutions and success in the face of those challenges.

The first part of my story is about education. My family was not involved in farming or agriculture of any sort. My first real introduction to agriculture came after I quit university in New Brunswick. I was sitting in the classroom reading about random, abstract things in a world faced with critical challenges, and I felt the need to address them in a practical and constructive manner. So I quit university and moved back to B.C. to complete a year-long ecological agriculture program at Linnaea Farm on Cortes Island.

This program is unique, in that it brings together idealistic and dedicated people in a functioning farm context. At Linnaea you can learn to milk a cow, butcher a sheep, run a seed company, and work in the market garden. At Linnaea I also discovered my passion for blacksmithing. This is the kind of education that provides the inspiration and fuel to survive the trials and tribulations that inevitably arise as one begins to farm.

Linnaea Farm was like first-year university for me. I then did a master's and a doctorate--and maybe even became a bit wise--at one of the leading, small-scale organic vegetable farms in Canada. It's just a 25-acre farm, and it supports a family of four and the equivalent of five full-time employees. At this farm, when four greenhouses are destroyed by snow load the farmer buys a brand new one with cash. When the tractor dies, the farmer buys a new tractor with cash. Just to be clear, he does this off 12 acres in vegetables. The other half is in green manure. People are lining up for more than an hour to buy vegetables at the new organic market he started in Salmon Arm, B.C.

This model works. It works economically and ecologically, and it makes people healthier. It's a win-win-win solution. Solution one is that you get an education; solution two is organic market gardening.

After five years there I moved to Tatamagouche to live with my partner and set up my own farm. Now in my second season, I'll cultivate nine acres in a rotation of green manures and vegetables. Like last year, I'll sell at the Halifax farmers' market, at a mid-week market in Tatamagouche, through our community-supported agriculture box program in Tatamagouche, in Truro, and to supportive local businesses.

My farm gross of $55,000 to $58,000 covers salaries for my employee and me, and loan payments for capital expenses. This income is generated from four acres. Unlike many new farmers, I have access to land without a mortgage. I live on a 100-acre farm that is a community land trust.

Community land trusts are a mechanism that removes land from the private property market, guaranteeing its affordability and perpetuity. There are a few examples of CLTs in Canada, but thousands of acres and houses are on CLTs in the U.S. In Burlington, Vermont, over 6,000 houses are on land owned by CLTs. It's a proven and effective model that ensures affordability.

Vibrant and diverse rural communities are solution number four. Tatamagouche has Buddhists, Christians, atheists, artists, and hardcore old farmers. These people have all supported me in many ways, whether it was helping me to escape air from the power steering in my tractor, wrestling greenhouse plastic in a gale-force wind--a slight exaggeration--or even buying vegetables when they had a garden out back. People deeply love their rural communities in Canada, and these communities are a source of great wisdom and strength. The rest of Canada can't forget them.

Solution five is mentors. At every step of the way someone has been there to give me a seeding schedule or tell me how to design a packing shed properly, to set up irrigation in my greenhouse or deal with cutworm. These mentors are the best professors that society can offer, and they deserve that level of recognition.

While I put forward these solutions that my short career has been fortunate to encounter, I know that the majority of farmers around me are struggling beyond the call of duty and beyond what can be expected of any job. For this reason, and because food and farming are critical to society, I joined the National Farmers Union in an effort to support farming across Canada. I've been a member of the NFU for three years, and in November 2009 I became the youth vice-president.

In addition to enhancing the solutions I've touched upon, this committee needs to address the problem of financing. It's an issue we have discussed extensively within the NFU Youth.

Let me tell you about two friends who have started a market garden 20 kilometres away from me. They were both working the oil fields in Alberta and became disillusioned and dissatisfied with their lives. They came back to Nova Scotia to farm on their family farms and grow nourishing food for their communities. They can't access financing to invest in the assistance and infrastructure that will make their farms economically viable. Since they don't own the land, they can't access the Farm Loan Board or the CALA program.

New farmers like these don't have the equity that these programs require. So they're stuck until they are forced to return to the oil fields, which one of them is considering this season.

In conclusion, I present five solutions.

One is education that is practical, theoretical, comprehensive, relevant, and inspires. Canada needs many Linnaea Farms.

Two, the organic market gardening model works in every way. Canadians need healthy food.

Three is access to land. Community land trusts guarantee the perpetual affordability of land.

Four is vibrant rural communities. What young person wants to farm in a rural community with no other young people?

Five is mentors. We need people to be inspired by mentors who can provide wisdom. They need to have the time to spend with us.

These solutions are the seeds, and your job is to grow them out across Canada.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to Ms. Bishop for seven minutes.

[Patricia Bishop, As an Individual]

Good morning.

I'm not sure that the committee is aware of the importance and uniqueness of agriculture in Nova Scotia, and the Atlantic provinces, actually, and of the number of opportunities we have here.

Some time ago, my husband and I lived out in Fort St. John, British Columbia, where we worked on a beef and grain operation. The farmer there thought we all lived in poverty in Nova Scotia, which is a very clear indication that across this country people have no idea of the impact and diversity of agriculture we have here. From our cranberries and blueberries, to vegetables, to all of our meat-growing operations, it's quite diverse. When you have the opportunity to take a tour here, I hope you'll recognize the intensity of what we have here in Nova Scotia.

Our region is different. The Atlantic region is different from other regions across Canada. For that reason, it's important that when we look at policies across the country, we realize that we are not all the same. Policies that may impact positively on the western provinces often will be to the detriment of our smaller region here. It's very dense. The policies don't seem to necessarily help us here in this region.

I don't have all the answers, so I contacted a bunch of people in my network and asked their opinions on what I should make sure to mention here. One thing everyone commented on was profitability. We have to get some mechanism in place to ensure profitability. We talk about the barrier to getting into agriculture being the cost to get involved. Well, that wouldn't be an issue if we had a strong business model that demonstrated that we'd get a return on our investment. Right now the challenge is that we can't figure out a way to pay back the debt we need to incur to get into it. Lots of other businesses in this world have a great deal of debt, but they seem to have a business model, because there's value in their product. Right now we do not have an appropriate value or an appropriate return to the farmer for that product. So profitability is major.

When something like the cost of pesticide--organic or conventional pesticide--is different just across the border due to regulatory challenges, we have to figure out how to make this a somewhat more equitable playing field in terms of trade and the cost of production.

We also have challenges with labour. The increase in the minimum wage is not helping the situation. We obviously want people to have a good level of income, but the increase in the cost of labour is very damaging to our ability here in this region, and I think basically across the country. This is not something that's specific to here, necessarily.

Those are a couple of issues related to profitability.

Also, the committee wants to consult farmers on how to better share information. I think that fostering cooperation is what we need to do. We need to figure out a way to work not in isolation from one another but collectively in our regions and across the country. We need to have common goals and common solutions and leaders and mentors to help us build that collaborative approach.

One part of profitability and agriculture here in this province is research. We have a research station in Kentville. That research station is critical to what we do here in Nova Scotia in terms of our cultivar development, in terms of supporting new entrants to agriculture, and in helping us make sure that we're adapting to change by trying to be innovative. It is a place where we can be developing new opportunities for agriculture. That station is critical to the continuity of productive and viable agriculture in this region.

What else did I have to say? Basically, I see that we need to do more work on incentives. It would be really great if we could have more money in marketing. I was thinking as I was driving here this morning about how so many Canadians know a lot about our history because of those wonderful long television commercials. They are helping us to build culture. But where are the commercials about supporting our local agricultural economy and local farmers, about eating well so that we can have a healthy country and a healthy rural economy, with lots of vibrancy, about supporting the small farms and large farms, and organic production as well, which was mentioned here by Cammie?

All of these different ways of supporting agriculture are what we, as a population of this country, need to take on and believe in and want to support and invest dollars in. We need to have some way--I think the federal government--of saying, here we are with Canadian agriculture. This is what's going on. This is a part of our fabric, of our culture, and of what we are as Canadians.

So it's about our research, our profitability, getting the message out, and putting farmers on the playing field in terms of recognition with the nation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much, Patricia.

I'll now move to Erica Versteeg.

[Erica Versteeg, As an Individual]

Hello. My name is Erica Versteeg, and I'm thankful for the opportunity to speak with you today about some of the challenges that my husband, Tony, and I have faced while trying to get into the dairy industry.

We met at agricultural college while we were attaining degrees in agricultural science. Since then, we have lived and worked on farms and been involved in industry. We have a young family. I work as an environmental farm planning coordinator and Tony works as a production supervisor at a producer-owned dairy. He recently left farm employment when we couldn't reach a sale agreement for the purchase of the farm. We have the goal of one day owning and operating a dairy farm in the Maritimes.

Over the past eight years, we have tried to purchase ten farms, and ten times we found ourselves at the grace of the farmer to make a deal happen. We have never struck a deal because the reality of trying to purchase a dairy farm is that the break-up value of the farm is greater than the business's ability to have cashflow.

I want to be clear; I'm not blaming the seller. They were all willing to leave some assets behind for the sake of having the farm continue. The obligation to ensure a farm's transfer to the next generation does not lie solely with the seller. The sale of a farm has to provide for the seller's retirement and cover any existing debts the business has. This I understand. But farms have to transfer to the next generation or they cease to exist. In the past, we've gone the traditional route when trying to purchase a farm: price negotiation, lender financing, seller financing, the transfer of assets over time, and just plain old sweat equity. But it didn't work. It wasn't enough. We feel strongly that we have the required skill set to succeed in the dairy industry if we could just get our foot in the door.

This past winter, when we were once again presented with a potential opportunity to purchase a farm, Tony and I felt we had to make it happen. There had to be a way. We knew it would likely be complicated, but we thought if we could approach it differently, it might be possible. We sought advice from accountants, lawyers, Department of Agriculture staff, and provincial staff with economic development. We got in contact with our MLA's office, and for the first time we saw something new: outside investment. Is it really realistic to expect someone in their early 30s to have the required equity to purchase a $3 million asset?

We scoured for provincial and federal programs that would be of assistance, and initially we found some that we thought would fit. Sometimes we got a quick answer, like from ACOA, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: we don't do primary agriculture. Sometimes we travelled down the path thinking we'd finally found something that would work. We had a small number of potential investors tucked under our arms, with whom we felt comfortable doing business, and thought we would launch a CEDIF, a community economic development investment fund. They cost $25,000 to $30,000 to form--lots of hoops, hence the price tag. But hey, we weren't looking at purchasing a small business. We felt the costs of developing the CEDIF would be worth it since it provided some security for our investors, a tax credit, and the opportunity to create a self-directed RRSP. The value was on the other end, but upon further investigation, the outcome was the same. The program wasn't going to work for us. We had to have a minimum of 25 investors, not the six we had planned, and no one investor was allowed to own more than 20% of the company.

So what needs to change? We feel that programs need to be more flexible or that exemptions to current program rules be granted on an individual basis. Perhaps a committee to review exceptions could be considered so that ventures that meet the objectives of a program can be considered, even though they don't meet all the criteria. We thought hard about what would make a real difference for many people looking to purchase a farm, and we asked friends who are also on the periphery of the dairy industry and looking to get in.

The idea of a tax break for farmers who sell their farms as a going concern versus breaking them up was the prominent idea. Upon further thought, we realized that while this would create an incentive for those looking to exit the industry to sell their farms as going concerns, a definite gain for the purchaser as well, it was looking after the seller first, rather than directly aiding the purchaser. So why not reverse it? Why not rebate the tax paid to the government by the seller to the new farmowners over a given timeframe? Instead of having the tax dollars disappear--the government doesn't have them--the purchaser would reinvest them right back into the industry. This would really help to decrease the gap between asset value and cashflow ability.

Provincially, there is an interest forgiveness program administered by the Nova Scotia Farm Loan Board whereby a new entrant can qualify for up to $20,000 interest forgiveness in the first two years of the loan. It's a definite help, but pretty small in the scheme of things. The catch is that only one new entrant per business can apply at one time. So this discourages the pooling of capital among new entrants to start joint ventures. Why not expand on this existing program so that two years of interest forgiveness is provided to each new entrant investing in the business?

A program that rewards patient capital would also be helpful. By “patient capital”, I mean funds that are invested in a business for a minimum of five to ten years without the expectation of a dividend in the early years of operation. What we discovered is that it's important to have something to offer potential investors without giving up your position as a majority shareholder.

So where do Tony and I go from here? This week we'll continue to try to close a deal to purchase a dairy farm. And once again, the deal hinges on the grace of the sellers.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Erica.

We'll move to Curtis Moxsom for seven minutes.

[Curtis Moxsom, As an Individual]

Good morning.

Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen, I didn't write any paperwork up. I'm going to try to shoot from the hip. This is the first time I've been invited to one of these conferences, so I'm a little nervous.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

There's no need to be nervous, Curtis.

[Curtis Moxsom]

I agree with Peter. I should have dyed my hair this morning, too, with all these young people here.

[An hon. member]

So should some of our colleagues in the House of Commons.

[An hon. member]

Some don't have any.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Curtis Moxsom]

I've still got mine.

I've been farming for 35 years at a dairy farm in Stewiacke, Nova Scotia. We milk 200 cows. I've also been a livestock broker/cattle dealer for 41 years. My son came into the operation in 2003, and we made a major expansion of over $3 million six weeks before BSE hit. Our gate sales in 2002 were $3.8 million with our cattle sales, and since 2004 they've been down to $1.7 million to $2.1 million, but we still have this loan to pay for, and the interest and so on.

My son is in the business right now, but he's worried, and so am I. We've had a pile of debt and interest to pay. We've had no programs to help us in that respect. There's CAIS, NISA, whatever you call it. It's four years behind when you pay into it before you receive a cheque back on the program, so your money's tied up for four years, with no interest or nothing in it. There's no way in heck that young people can get into the farms today because of the cost. The bottom line, the same as the rest of the panel has spoken about, is the profitability.

I can prove that in the last 10 years we're getting pretty near the same price a litre for our milk, but our input costs have doubled: fuel, grains, labour, machinery--the whole nine yards. So we're not getting a fair return for our dollar.

I have one son on the farm with me. I have one who left. I think he's doing better than the one who's on the farm, but he's a diehard like me; he likes farming. I have three grandchildren coming. One of them is thinking about coming into the farm; the other two are possibilities. I can't see a future for them.

If we want to keep these young farmers on the farm, there are going to have to be programs put back in place. We used to have a lot of programs. We had staff at the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture in Truro. They closed that all out about five to ten years ago. We used to have people we could contact for various things. We had a lot of programs for land clearing, building ponds, and so on. They've taken that all away. Just this year they cut out land clearing. So if a person wanted to expand on his farm and clear some land, there are no grants. They've taken all our apples and carrots away, but the bottom line is they're still costs to us.

Since BSE hit, our cull cows are worth nothing. I ship cull cows every week to Quebec. That's the only federal plant around now. Dairy cows--I was exporting dairy cows to Newfoundland, the United States. I was a buyer for China. That market has crashed. We were getting $1,800 to $2,500 for our heifers. You're lucky if you can sell a heifer today for $1,000, but our costs to raise that heifer are $2,000. So we're robbing our assets trying to pay interest and so on.

The solution I came up with in my own mind is that in order to get these young fellas on the farm, there are going to have to be programs put in place where they have government guaranteed loans or they have interest-free loans for the first 10 years. A committee would be set up of retired farmers or government staff to monitor these people when they start.

If we don't keep Canada farming—we've been talking about this for 30 years—we're going to have produce come in from other countries. I feel our standards in Canada are very strong. Our milk standards, our meat inspection standards, are all high. The quality of the product that's going to come into this country from other countries is a lot less, and the first thing is you're going to have another outbreak of sickness, I think.

Going back to the tourist industry, if you don't have the grassroots farmers, and all the land for your tourists and the beautification and so on, as they call it... I feel that with farmers you have the spinoff for veterinarians, feed salesmen, all the people who work around the industry relate back to that farmer. You close that farm up, he's done.

In my livestock broker business in the last five years, 50% of my dairy clients have closed operations. They said it wasn't feasible or profitable to keep going. They had sons involved. They couldn't afford to get into it to give their parents retirement plans.

So the whole industry is collapsing. I think, personally, for the beef and the pork, it's too late. The dairy industry is struggling. If we don't pick up now, in another five to 10 years we will have no industry left—that's my opinion—unless we get help with programs, grants, and interest forgiveness loans, an incentive to keep these young people on the farms and show them that there's going to be profitability at the end of the road.

That's it for me. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much, Curtis. And thanks to all of you for keeping to the time.

Mr. Oulton isn't with us, but if he does happen to come along, we'll allow him to present.

We'll move into questioning.

Mr. Eyking, you have five minutes.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Brison is going to start off.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Certainly.

Mr. Brison.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you, and I welcome the committee to Kings—Hants and downtown Greenwich. It's like New York City compared to downtown Cheverie, where I live, but I welcome all of you here.

Each of you brings a number of important issues to the fray. These are complex issues.

I deal with trade issues typically as a member of the trade committee, so I'm dealing with things such as country-of-origin labelling in the States or defending supply management with free trade talks to the EU. So I want to start with some trade issues.

What can we do, or what should we be doing, in terms of policies to broaden and diversify markets for Atlantic Canadian agriculture? There is a real demand in places such as China for high-end produce, things like honey crisp, for example. There is a great interest in China in some of the higher margin and relatively new crops that you're producing. Is there a potential for niche marketing, high-end Atlantic Canadian agriculture in the U.S. that we're missing, that we ought to be doing more?

I'm going to lay out a few things. In terms of market access, we have two major grocery distributors in Canada. Both Loblaw's and Sobeys have one regional purchasing group in the Maritimes. We have Buy New Brunswick plans, we have Buy Nova Scotia plans, and we have Buy P.E.I. plans. Are we dividing up the Maritimes to our own detriment, and should we be working together to approach the grocery chains as one regional Buy Atlantic or Buy Maritime program? I'm hearing that from some groups we're meeting with.

I'm listing some of these things, and then you can respond in total.

On supply management, it does strike me that the supply management commodity groups have access to a reasonable income for what they're producing on an ongoing basis. This is controversial in some quarters, but should we be looking at broadening that approach to other commodity groups? Is that the kind of approach that can provide ongoing income that is predictable for farmers to receive a fair price for what they're producing?

On the land-banking issue, this is something that has come up a lot in Kings County in terms of farmers deserving a fair price for their main asset—land—when they're retiring but wanting to keep prime agricultural land in agriculture, and what's the potential federal role for that?

Finally, on research, there's a trend in agricultural research towards centralization. Would you agree that we should be actually doing more decentralization, connecting the scientists by IT and technology but keeping the research close to the farmers and the commodities affected by that research, particularly if you look at the Kentville Research Station as an example of that, as we move forward to higher margin crops and produce?

Thanks very much. I'll look forward to hearing from all of you on some of these.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Who wants to respond?