Agriculture Committee on May 26th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

We're going to call the meeting to order. Could I ask everybody to come to the table, please?

Before we turn it over to our witnesses, you have a housekeeping matter in front of you. It is a budget item of $39,550. This is basically to be able to pay the travel expenses of the various witnesses we've seen on our tour for the future of agriculture study. I'll entertain a motion on this.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

So moved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

It's moved by Mr. Easter. Discussion? All in favour?

(Motion agreed to)

It's carried unanimously.

Thank you very much, lady and gentlemen. With that, we'll turn it over to our witnesses.

Thanks to all of you for being here today. With weather like this, I know you'd sooner be on the farm, but we appreciate you coming here.

First of all, we're going to turn it over to Travis Toews, president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

Thanks, Travis.

[Travis Toews, President, Canadian Cattlemen's Association]

Thank you, Chairman.

My name is Travis Toews. My family and I ranch west of Grande Prairie, Alberta, and I'm currently the president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

The topic of young farmers and ranchers and the future of agriculture is a very important topic and one that's important to me personally. I have three teenaged children who enjoy and appreciate agriculture and are considering their future course of studies and career direction.

The question of what we need to do to encourage young people to take up a career in agriculture is a good question, but one that I believe we often needlessly complicate. I believe that a career in agriculture, and specifically a career in the cattle industry, would be the first choice of many talented and motivated young people in Canada, but they must first be assured that there's some expectation of a profit for a well-managed operation.

While I don't believe that government or, maybe more accurately, the taxpayers of this country owe us the right to make a living in agriculture, there is a critical function government must perform to ensure that producers have every chance to succeed. The cattle industry is dependent on exports; we compete in a North American and a global environment. In order to succeed, we must ensure that our industry has a very competitive business environment.

For the Canadian cattle industry, I define competitiveness as: competitive market access into all the major beef-importing countries of the world; the most efficient and cost-effective regulatory environment possible; and implementation of cutting-edge research and technology.

We continue to have limited or no access for Canadian beef products into the important Asian markets of Japan, Korea, China, and Taiwan. Our access is also limited in Mexico, and country-of-origin labelling legislation in the U.S. has decreased U.S. demand for Canadian live cattle.

We are pleased that the Government of Canada has taken action at the WTO with Korea and the U.S., and that Minister Ritz continues to make market access a priority by travelling to these countries, pressing for market access. While we've made some progress in certain markets, the bottom line is that we remain at a competitive disadvantage on the market access front.

We have high expectations for the market access secretariat, and we're very pleased that the minister acted on this key recommendation. However, the secretariat continues to be a work in progress and will require further adjustment and mandate to meet the industry's vision of moving Canada's negotiating capability to the top of the podium.

We also have high expectations with the EU free trade negotiation. We have commissioned a study to determine the potential opportunity that duty-free access into the EU would create for the Canadian beef industry. While the study is not yet complete, early indications suggest that significant opportunity will exist.

However, this negotiation must provide for very substantial duty-free market access and also provide resolution to the technical issues that currently hinder our access. If the negotiation is a success, it will provide incentive for a segment of our industry to adopt required production protocols and produce specifically for this market. I would see small and mid-sized operations having an advantage in meeting these protocols.

Our regulatory environment plays a huge role in determining our global competitiveness and, ultimately, our profitability. I recently spoke to this committee on the effects of the enhanced feed ban and the economic effects it's having on our competitiveness, but that's not the only regulatory issue.

While the veterinary drug directorate has made strides in dealing expeditiously with new product approval requests, we continue to have less access for food animal production products than do our competitors, and we also pay more for the products we have access to. The regulatory requirements need to be improved and streamlined to encourage companies to apply for approval of food animal production products in Canada.

We also need to ensure our regulatory approach for new feed-grain variety registration. We need a registration process that encourages the development of new seed varieties, which is also an essential component to our overall competitiveness as an industry as a whole.

There are many other small regulatory costs levied at municipal, provincial, and federal levels and they all, incrementally, negatively affect our competitiveness.

In order to be competitive in the long term, the cattle industry in Canada must also have access to cutting-edge technology. Productivity will be key as we compete with other high-quality beef exporters.

Investment in research and development must continue, and we need a process in place to properly prioritize and coordinate projects. To this end, we are pleased with the formation of the beef science cluster, but we must ensure that, in this tight fiscal environment, adequate funding remains for critical research.

CCA has also initiated the beef information exchange project, which will allow supply-chain participants to share production information up and down the supply chain. We believe this infrastructure will provide the information necessary for primary and seedstock producers to improve genetics and production practices and also provide them with the opportunity to differentiate their product. Feed yards and packers could also use this information in procuring cattle to fit certain production and genetic protocols.

In this period of extreme financial volatility, producers require access to risk-management tools. A cattle price insurance program has been implemented in Alberta that manages the three basic components of price in one tool. These components are the futures risk, the currency risk, and the basis risk. We are working to develop a model that can be implemented nationally and believe it could be a very useful tool for producers to manage their price risk in this volatile environment.

The cattle industry in Canada grew and flourished due to abundant access to grassland forage, feed grain, clean water, and access to valuable markets. Producers have persisted through tough times and through good times and have taken responsibility for their decisions with an attitude of independence and resilience.

These factors are still present today. I believe that if we can deal with the competitiveness issues before us, the cattle industry in Canada has the potential for a bright future, a future that will attract the involvement of young people across the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much, Travis.

I'll now move to Eugene Legge, president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture.

Welcome.

[Eugene Legge, President, Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture]

Thank you.

I'll speak slowly so you can understand what I'm saying. I've been told I have a little bit of an accent--

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Eugene Legge]

Actually, I thought this was more so about young farmers--

What...?

[A voice]

That's for us.

[Eugene Legge]

Probably even better for you, too, right...?

Actually, I thought this was more about young people than us seasoned people sitting around this table. It is interesting to see that.... We try to encourage young people to get into agriculture, and in our province it's key, because we're so new in the way of agriculture. In our province, we've been in the farming industry for only 40 or 50 years, so how do you get young people like the person on my right interested in something that is not very productive, to say the least?

Young people are very well educated versus what I was when I started agriculture 40 years ago. They enter this business with a debt from student loans before they get there; then they're expected to raise capital to start farming somewhere in this country. They do have business plans, and they'll say very quickly that they have a huge debt looking at them, because most farmers who sell their operations are looking at their farms as their pension plan and a way of living in the future.

We know, or we've been told, that the Canada's pension doesn't seem to be the be-all and end-all for us senior people, so you have to look after yourself in the way of providing financial aid for yourself in the future. If you are a farmer, that farm is your aid in the future, there's no question about it.

Another question is about opportunities in farming. The first thing we have to do is put profitability back into farming. It's not there right now. We see some glimmer of hope in some of the supply-managed sectors, but even then we're hearing some horror stories about the price of quota and how we get people to buy into supply-managed sectors. It's getting too expensive to get in there.

Starting up a farm is hard enough, especially when you're starting from scratch and you have to go out and clear land. In our province, we are still clearing land. We need another 40,000 hectares. When you look at the numbers in our province, we grow 15% of our vegetables, 2% of our beef, and 0.5% of our pork. We're self-sufficient in dairy and self-sufficient in eggs and 70% in chicken. For sheep, it's probably about one-seventh of a per cent, so you can see in our province.... We also have very little grain. We could be self-sufficient in grain if we had the land base cleared. That's the challenge. It's up to us.

Not only are we seeing young people starting in agriculture in our province, but we're seeing people who are 30 years old and 40 years old. Now, to my mind, that's getting close to the age of a seasoned farmer, not a young person.

More and more demands are being put on today's farmers, such as paying the cost of looking after the environment. We own, I suppose, the majority of the land in this country, and we are expected to look after this land base.

We're asked to provide food safety. We've always been told that we have the safest food in the world, but we have to prove it now, and there's a cost.

If you're into livestock, animal welfare is raising its ugly head again. You have to provide for animal welfare and document it. You must have your doors open if someone wants to come in and look at what you're doing.

Those are a few things from my notes here. I'm probably better at answering questions than I am at speaking.

I'm wondering what we have to do to entice the young people here, like Chan and Jill, who are sitting either side of me, to want to go into agriculture. If you don't make any money, why would you want to go down that road? Most kids are now coming out of school with $40,000 or $50,000 worth of debt, and then, if they want to get into a supply-managed commodity, they have to turn around and look at $3 million or $4 million more.

At today's prices, if you can't get at least a 5% or 10% return on your investment, you're not going to last. Because every time you turn around, someone is out there with their little hand out.

In the last five years, you've seen your fuel prices go through the roof, your fertilizer prices go through the roof, and also your labour costs, if you can get the labour to work on the farm--it's gone. Your workers' compensation premiums have gone up. Your unemployment premiums have gone up. Every time you turn around, there is someone trying to get that little tiny 5% that you have--if you have 5%.

And at the end of the day, if you don't have anything to put in your back pocket, you're not going to get people to get involved.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much, Eugene.

Now, from the Newfoundland and Labrador Young Farmers' Forum, we have Chan Wiseman.

Chan, I think we saw you two or three years ago out on the east coast. I thought I recognized you. Welcome back.

[Chan Wiseman, Vice-President, Newfoundland and Labrador Young Farmers' Forum]

Thank you.

Yes, I was in Nova Scotia. You guys didn't make it out to Newfoundland.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for inviting Mr. Legge and me. I do recognize a couple of faces around the table from the last time that I spoke. I think that was in 2007. I'm certainly glad to be here and I'm certainly glad to enjoy some of the warm weather. When we left it was seven degrees Celsius in St. John's, so this is a little too warm, actually; it's the other extreme.

In any event, thank you for the opportunity to present a Newfoundland and Labrador perspective in terms of young farmers and the future of farming in Canada, but also specifically in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Before I begin my formal comments, I would like to provide a brief background about me and about our young farmers organization. Certainly, being a devout Newfoundlander and Labradorian, I never miss an opportunity to talk about us and our province.

I've been involved with the Newfoundland and Labrador Young Farmers' Forum since 2003. We're a young organization. We're a volunteer organization. We don't have staff who are working on initiatives and so forth. We're a bunch of passionate, energetic young farmers who really want to advance the industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

We're trying a number of initiatives to enhance the visibility of the industry, and also to enhance the business skills of our young farmers, because in today's global market, you certainly have to understand global economics and good business practices. As well, you need to have that solid business plan in place if you're going to have a viable industry. Our ultimate goal, as I said, is to try to make farming more viable in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I'll be up front: Newfoundland and Labrador is very unique in terms of the rest of the country. In a lot of regards, we are underdeveloped in terms of agricultural production at the primary production level. The industry is probably worth about half a billion dollars to the economy of the province, but we import a lot of food.

Eugene supplied some numbers regarding what we grow in the province and what we actually consume provincially. We are very unique in terms of the rest of the country.

As well, we import a lot of food for the dairy industry in order to feed dairy cows in order to produce the milk that we produce. So from that perspective, we are a little unique.

Today I'm going to have a two-pronged approach. I looked at the e-mail that was sent to the Federation of Agriculture. There were two questions in that e-mail.

One was that you wanted some feedback in terms of Growing Forward programming and where we are currently in terms of implementation and getting funding out the door to young farmers and other industry stakeholders. But I'm also going to talk about some of the challenges facing the sector in this country and also in Newfoundland and Labrador. I do have a couple of recommendations in terms of solutions on how we can improve the situation from an agricultural perspective.

I would like to start my formal comments by recognizing the support of the Newfoundland and Labrador government. Our provincial agriculture department is housed with the Department of Natural Resources in the province, so it's in quite a large department. Natural Resources would basically oversee all oil and gas development, all energy development, mining, forestry, and so forth.

In the mix of all that, agriculture sometimes doesn't get a high profile, but the department certainly has been very supportive of our young farmers' group and also of the Federation of Agriculture. We also receive a lot of support from the federal government through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The officials and personnel on the ground are doing a fantastic job in terms of listening to our ideas and the solutions we propose for the industry.

On May 1 of this year, we held our leadership summit and annual general meeting for the Newfoundland and Labrador Young Farmers' Forum. Throughout that day, we had a panel discussion on funding opportunities for young farmers. We also did a number of leadership development workshops focusing on network development.

We also had a Dale Carnegie trainer come in and speak with our group to help develop some of the softer skills of young farmers, because I believe it's very important, if we're going to have a viable industry in the province and have open communication with government, to be able to articulate our ideas so we can get action on a lot of issues that we feel are important.

We also had a presentation with one of our partners through the Outstanding Young Farmers program. We had a couple down from P.E.I., Greg and Tania MacKenzie, who Wayne may know from P.E.I. They spoke about their success story in agriculture. I certainly believe that taking this positive approach to agriculture and highlighting a lot of the success stories will really motivate young farmers.

Certainly, a lot of the costs associated with organizing an event of this nature were funded through Growing Forward. I believe that is an excellent example of how we support young farmers. We build their leadership skills and we build their business skills, because at the end of the day, that's ultimately going to make agriculture more viable.

Overall, the agrifood development branch and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada are actively engaged with our organization and are listening to our ideas and views. Also, this past March, we coordinated a round table discussion with young farmers from across the province. We brought in young farmers from Labrador and all across the island as well. We discussed Growing Forward programming, education and training, food security, access to land, research, and attracting new entrants.

Currently, we are in discussions with the agrifood development branch, through the provincial government, to explore ideas of how to raise awareness of career and entrepreneurial opportunities in agriculture for young people in our province. Also, we are researching retention activities for members of our organization, such as training, networking, and trade missions.

At this stage, it is difficult to determine whether our efforts will materialize in a quantitative manner and more young people will become engaged in farming activity. We will continue to work with both levels of government to evaluate the success of our efforts during the next three years of the Growing Forward program. I certainly believe that a healthy dialogue is important to ensure that we invest strategically and that policy direction is reflective of the views and opinions of those engaged in agricultural activities.

In terms of some challenges facing the sector, I think first we have to reflect on the reasons why young people generally are not considering agriculture as a possible career. Many barriers prevent young people from starting a farm enterprise. We are certainly all aware that most young people who are farmers were raised on a family farm or have a well-established connection to the agricultural industry or the farming community. For a person with no connection to farming, the capacity to start or take over a farm is very limited. That's a fact.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, there is opportunity for growth in agriculture, specifically in vegetable production and the red meat sector. There are challenges that face these commodities, and we all know what those challenges are, but at the primary production level there is a real opportunity to stimulate agricultural growth and to create economic development.

For example, we import roughly 85% to 90% of the vegetables consumed in the province and an even higher percentage of red meat. Based on these import figures, a business case can be made that Newfoundland and Labrador could produce more food for local consumption.

So why don't young people consider pursuing such a worthwhile opportunity?

Here are a couple of reasons. There are high start-up costs. The ability to borrow is limited. Eugene talked about student debt for young people as a major issue. There is the instability of farming income. Also, the bureaucratic process to access and secure land is something that's a huge barrier, especially in our province, and I'm sure it's the same right across this country. Another reason is the availability of formalized training programs.

Also, the farming lifestyle is not attractive. There certainly are a lot of attractive aspects of farming, but there are a lot of unattractive aspects as well, such as long hours, stressful work, and lack of financial security.

One of the other reasons that a lot of young people don't consider agriculture is that they're simply not aware of the opportunities. I think we need to initiate an awareness campaign as well.

How can the federal government assist the farming sector in Canada and in Newfoundland and Labrador?

I have five recommendations.

My first recommendation is to facilitate the creation of research projects to support the sector to make it more innovative, efficient, and competitive. Newfoundland and Labrador research is ongoing and has benefited the sector tremendously. Currently, research is not well coordinated in terms of connecting industry—farmers—to academia and researchers.

My second recommendation is to continue to work with the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum to understand the needs and expectations of young people and also to retain those who are engaged in farming activity.

My third recommendation is to identify outreach initiatives to expose young people to farming in order that the next generation will have, one, a greater appreciation of agriculture, and, two, will consider farming as a potential career option.

My fourth recommendation is to develop incentive-based programming to attract more young people to farming. An example of this would be an interest-free loan program.

My fifth recommendation is to recognize the unique nature regarding challenges and opportunities regionally and/or provincially. While Canadian agriculture has many common issues, there are specific needs with respect to the provinces and territories that must be recognized. Funding programs and policy direction should reflect the uniqueness of a particular region in order to provide the conditions that will allow the ability to address challenges and pursue opportunities.

Up front, I mentioned that Newfoundland and Labrador is very unique in terms of where we are in agriculture production, and we certainly believe there should be recognition of that uniqueness.

That concludes my formal remarks. I will also e-mail a formal submission. Trying to be environmentally friendly, I didn't bring copies, so I'll send it along via e-mail.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

That would be great, Chan. If you send that to the clerk it will be translated in both languages and passed out to members. Thank you very much.

I'll now move to Jay Fox, president of the Manitoba Cattle Producers Association.

[Jay Fox, President, Manitoba Cattle Producers Association]

Thank you.

My name is Major Jay Fox and I am a cattle producer from Eddystone, Manitoba. My wife and I own and operate Steadfast Ranch, a cow-calf operation based in the heart of Manitoba's cattle country. I am a proud fourth-generation cattle producer. My history and my legacy to the fifth generation of the Fox family are my ultimate motivation.

That said, my motivation is also for the cattle industry. If the industry as a whole is suffering, my own individual efforts are defeated. For our industry to be sustainable moving forward, cattle producers are in desperate need of programs that work, regulations that are properly addressed, and new markets that are developed both locally and globally.

I'd like to address a number of these issues today.

Concerning business risk management programs, Manitoba cattle producers are pleased that we were able to receive agricultural funding in the recent years, but through that exercise, we discovered that many producers who needed assistance were not eligible. It became apparent that some were not eligible due to their political location, even though they were faced with extreme moisture or drought conditions.

I have also personally seen producers who were eligible and able to take advantage of the interim advance through AgriStability and then receive funds for AgriRecovery. But their dollars were clawed back when they did their AgriStability forms the following year.

Because of this, the Manitoba Cattle Producers Association, our provincial association, has worked on developing two different programs with our national outfit here, the CCA, to address this need: hay and pasture insurance and cattle insurance. These two programs are bankable. They are based on your individual IPI. If structured properly, in consultation with industry, we would have the right programs in place for people who need them.

Manitoba cattle producers are clearly in support of market access for our producers. The more options we have to sell, the higher the rate of return and profitability. One challenge we see for trade, however, is how the cost of SRM disposal has hurt our industry. while producing little additional market access. We are not harmonized with the U.S., and it's costing us more money. When it costs more money, it comes right out of the grassroots producers' pockets.

Historically in Manitoba, before SRM regulations, dead stock would be picked up by private companies and rendered at no charge to producers because they had a value for that product. Now they no longer pick up dead stock and no rendering whatsoever takes place. Abattoirs have to pay extra funds for handling and disposing at landfills. Because dead stock is no longer picked up from producers, one of the side effects we're seeing across the country is an increase in problem predators.

Producers are continuously given a discourse on biosecurity: food safety and traceability issues and the like. We take all of these issues seriously, but all these issues have costs. Producers do not have the equity to fund all of these issues. We have a CCIA system that is internationally recognized, which industry both participates in and supports. If more producer data is needed or required, then the government and the public should be willing to pay for it. Producers are doing their share.

With regard to traceability, any traceability systems must be on a national level, for provinces should not be allowed to implement their own provincial traceability systems or food safety systems because it is counterproductive. We need to have a national herd, not a collection of provincial herds; therefore, the federal government needs to take the lead.

We have been living with TB in the wild elk herd in Manitoba's Riding Mountain National Park for over 20 years. It should have been stamped out years ago, but political inaction allows the disease to persist while cattle producers operating around the borders of the park are relentlessly asked to test and implement management practices. There must be a clear eradication strategy for eliminating TB in Riding Mountain National Park before government can realistically expect producers to consider any other new regulatory initiatives.

Producers are natural environmental stewards because being so is necessary for us to sustain our business; without grass and forages, we wouldn't survive, because we wouldn't have feed. It is also something that cattle producers take great pride in, yet now we're being advised that in order to be recognized as environmental stewards, we must adhere to government-imposed mandates and potentially face new carbon taxes.

It is frustrating when we do all the right things yet the benefits the public is already receiving due to our environmental stewardship are not recognized. Worse yet is when we are incorrectly viewed as part of the problem--for example, in campaigns such as “Meatless Mondays”.

In the absence of national programs, our provincial government has begun a pilot project on hay and pasture insurance. It is of the utmost importance to have something in place on this and on cattle price insurance for this fall. These are tools that producers need to provide some predictability to our business.

To close, on behalf of the cattle producers of Manitoba, I want to emphasize that even those of us who have survived the last several unprofitable years are constantly having to decide whether to stick with it or not. We are committed to ensuring the sustainability and advancement of agriculture in our province and our country, but the bottom line is that unless government controls and regulations come hand in hand with government responsibility, then fewer and fewer of us will choose to mitigate the risk of ranching in Canada.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much, Jay.

We'll now go to Jill Harvie, who is last but certainly not least.

Jill, I believe you farm near Olds, Alberta. Thanks for being here.

[Jill Harvie, Rancher, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I grew up on a purebred Hereford operation about 20 minutes from here in a town called Navan. After my studies in agricultural business and science at the University of Guelph and at Olds College, I began my career with Cargill and now work for the CCA.

Just last year, my parents sold their electrical business and cattle operation in Navan, and now I'm a part owner in their farm near Regina, Saskatchewan. I am also an active owner in my husband's family operation, which runs about a 250-head purebred cow-calf operation near Olds, Alberta. My husband, his brother, and parents run the farm full-time and I work off the farm. The two remaining brothers are pursuing other careers.

Why am I in agriculture? There's no better feeling than feeding the world while taking care of our animals and nourishing the land.

I see countless opportunities for young farmers in the future. We have an extensive land mass and breeds that perform very well in Canada's climate, while providing a competitive advantage in beef quality and cattle performance.

We have diversified our operation from live cattle sales to focus on efforts in genetic sales internationally. My husband and I recently returned from Australia, where we promoted and sold semen and embryos.

What a great opportunity to visit a similar competitor/customer in the world market. Even with a high dollar, this export-dependent country is thriving. There is a resurgence of young farmers building a future in beef, encouraged by their government, which seems to be nimble and aggressive in market access.

A great example of how Australia supports its export sector was in its response to the U.S.-EU duty-free quota agreement, where Australia's regulator did what was needed to get Australia access under the EU quota. Canada's regulators continue to sit back while Canadian beef exporters miss out.

However, I left Australia feeling encouraged, with some genetic sales in my pocket and a vision of what we could achieve in Canada. But we need government agencies that are quick to react to our needs and aggressive in their approach to gaining market access.

This will occur only by first addressing the culture within the CFIA. CFIA must build the capacity to service our needs in export-focused win-win viewpoints. An effort needs to be made to consult industry and hire from a pool of resources with a beef background. CFIA must allocate efforts on key markets while removing unnecessary regulatory barriers that I see in the genetics world way too often.

This leads to my next point. We urgently need to become competitive with the United States. Why not look at a North American standard in SRM removal? Canada's enhanced feed ban costs is averaging $31.70 per head on OTM cattle. These regulations need to be realigned with those of the U.S. for our cattle sector to survive.

In this highly competitive marketplace, my generation is prepared to take on new initiatives that build our competitive advantage. Our ranch takes many risks by heavily investing in our products, knowing full well that it is a risk-reward scenario with many variables, such as conception rates, semen collection, and flush results. However, what we need is a constant at CFIA that negotiates terms for meaningful access. Young farmers need to see that CFIA is a partner, not a barrier, to a successful business.

Industry and government partnership investment in initiatives such as the Beef InfoXchange System and investment in cattle genomics are substantial for seedstock in the beef world. Imagine the efficiency gained by identifying traits of cattle that finish two weeks earlier than normal. We need to continue such investments but quickly realize that they will not be put to use in Canada unless our industry survives.

Finally, I cannot stress enough the importance of investment in the transition from baby boomers to generations X and Y. We need to prepare solutions for successful intergenerational transfer while supporting such initiatives as young leaders forums, mentorship opportunities, and consumer education.

I've been involved in 4-H, youth breed associations, and fairs and exhibitions throughout the years, all of which are great venues to educate ourselves and our cousins from the city about beef. Most recently, I had the opportunity to represent Canada at the Five Nations Young Ranchers Round Table in Denver, Colorado. This program was created by Kim O'Neil from the Canadian consulate in Denver and the Five Nations Beef Alliance.

Accompanied by two other Canadian ranchers, I took part in multiple activities from touring case-ready plants to the International Livestock Congress. Finally, there was the round table at the consulate, where each nation shared its beef industry successes and challenges. All five nations, including Australia, New Zealand, U.S., Mexico, and Canada, are in the final stages of producing a YouTube video that will feature each participant at their home operation talking about the land they love and why they choose to raise cattle and feed the world a highly nutrient-dense protein called “beef”.

I am truly passionate about agriculture. I hope you can see that. I'm not alone in this. There are many young faces trying to decide if they can afford to be in this business. Other nations are paving the way to a healthy, sustainable beef industry and I know we can do the same.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much, Jill.

We'll now move to questioning for seven minutes.

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank you folks for coming. These were interesting presentations.

It's been an interesting set of hearings right across the country, from coast to coast, actually, and the common theme everywhere is that without profitability young people will not come into the industry. Secondary to that, there are a lot of current safety nets, current programs, that are not working in this country, which is far different from what we're hearing from the minister.

Mr. Chair, if I could come to one issue that, as Mr. Fox said, has been an issue for 15 years, it's Rocky Mountain National Park and TB. I'm sure Pierre must get a lot of calls on it. I know I do, and I have been for years.

I'm just suggesting, Mr. Chair, that part of the problem there is not just Agriculture Canada. In fact, I think Agriculture Canada is a small player in that. It really is Parks Canada and their involvement. It's just to suggest to the chair that maybe we need to call both departments in together--and if there are any others--and ask them to look at that issue. Call in a person in from Winnipeg, because I don't know how cattle farmers in that area survive at all. They're spending all their time with frustration.

Anyway, that's just a suggestion that maybe we could talk more about later, Jay.

Travis, on the SRM, specified risk materials removal, I think all the cattle people have mentioned that being still a serious issue. Where are we at with the money the minister announced on that issue? I think we tried last October, in a motion from André, to get money out to producers based on an all-industry proposal that came forward, and we weren't successful.

Where is that money at now? Has it been paid out? Have producers received that money? Have the plants received that money? Are the producers seeing the benefit of that money that was announced in the budget?

[Travis Toews]

From my understanding, the details are still being developed. Of course, the funding was earmarked to us at costs of disposal, and to the best of my understanding, funds haven't been paid out at this point.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay.

There's another question I had for you. You mentioned cattle price insurance, which is an Alberta program. Coming from the east, where Eugene comes from, we don't have a lot of programs in eastern Canada that are there in western Canada, yet we're impacted by surpluses--if there are surpluses--right across the country.

Does the cattle price insurance program qualify under AgriFlexibility or is there any involvement? I just met with people recently on the cattle market price insurance program. Is there any involvement from the federal government in that or is it just strictly the province?

[Travis Toews]

In Alberta, I don't believe there's any federal involvement at this point in time. In fact, the Alberta program is considered to be funded by producer premiums.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

So it's actuarially sound with producer premium subsidy objective...?

[Travis Toews]

It is supposed to be actuarially sound. Correct.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Coming to the younger farmers, you said, Chan, to identify outreach programs, and I guess it was to expose agriculture more. Jill mentioned 4-H. What specifically are you talking about there?

And I agree with you. When you get young people out there on the farm--with the exception of the problem of profitability--they like the industry and they want to get into it. Capital access is a problem and so on. But what kinds of programs are you talking about?

[Chan Wiseman]

Well, there were sort of two ideas in the outreach initiative. One was so that the next generation would simply have a greater understanding of and appreciation for agriculture.

I think the public plays a tremendous role in terms of supporting the industry. We have a very complacent public. Most people want to pay for a product that they can just purchase very conveniently at store, at any store, at a Wal-Mart or a Loblaws. I certainly believe it's a public campaign as well. I think you really have to look to the next generation in society, to the next generation of Canadians as well. If you can expose young people to agriculture so that they understand the industry, I think that would be really important. Most kids today believe their apples come in a plastic bag from the store, and it's really not the reality. That was one part of the outreach initiative.

The other part was to expose young people to agriculture and to farming and to expose them to the opportunity that's certainly there. Eugene and I both talked about the business opportunities for young people in Newfoundland and Labrador. I'm talking about going right down to the elementary school level, to the primary school level. We have a number of initiatives. I know that these initiatives are happening across the province in terms of agriculture in the classroom, but it certainly needs to be a key component of the curriculum. It needs to be a key component of elementary education right through to the high school level.

That's where I'm going in terms of outreach. It certainly would go across provincial borders in terms of working with the department of education, for instance.