Agriculture Committee on Nov. 18th, 2010

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

I just want to take a second here first before I start with questions of the witnesses. I always find it very frustrating when we have our Liberal agriculture critic, Mr. Easter, across the way, who often tries to portray things as much different than they really are. Certainly he was talking about the Interlake region and obviously the issues that they're dealing with there right now, and he mentioned talking to a few people just recently.

I want to point out that our Conservative member for Selkirk—Interlake, James Bezan, has been working very hard on the situation to support his producers and to deal with the situation. I know that he has been talking to us, certainly, as members of the committee, and he has talked to the minister many, many times. Mr. Easter, kind of Mr. Johnny-come-lately as he always is, talks to a few people and then somehow tries to claim that he's standing up for farmers.

Well, I'll tell you that I certainly don't ever see him do much to stand up for farmers. Certainly we can only look at the gun registry vote for an example of that. He claims to support them and then he flips and flops and doesn't do anything for them. I just want to make sure to make the record is clear on that one and make it very clear that our member in Selkirk—Interlake has been working very hard in support of the producers there to help them with the situation they're dealing with. I know that they're very appreciative of it, and I know that I am as well as a colleague of his in the Conservative government.

Let me just go on to the issue that I want to discuss. That's the biotech and research and science issue and how important that is to the future of farming. I know there are many farmers out there who certainly understand that. We certainly heard that when we toured the country on our study on the future of farming. Many of the young farmers in particular understand the role that needs to be played by research and by science. Biotechnology is a big part of that. I hear that all the time from farmers and from those in the industry: they really do understand that it's an important part.

Certainly, we've had bills, like the NDP bill that was brought forward, that many farmers are very concerned about. We heard the Liberals of course making their position once again a flip-flop position on the issue, like we always get from the Liberals. But I just wanted to have a bit of an update from you on where things are headed in the future here, because I know that certainly over the last couple of years there has for sure been a bit of an emphasis on trying to find ways to team up our research with specific commodity groups.

I'm just curious to hear if you can give us some details and an update on how things are progressing in that area in terms of science and research, on how that will be beneficial, and on how it has been beneficial at the farm gate.

[Greg Meredith]

Thanks for the question, because it is a priority area for the minister.

Just by way of background, in our recent consultations leading to the next policy framework, there's no question about it: people are looking at biotechnology and genetic engineering as a supply solution to global food security problems and also as a source of income for farmers in Canada, particularly in new crops with new agronomic attributes, and attributes that contribute to health and nutrition, for example.

In the recent framework, the department has made some significant investments in programs that are designed to develop new agricultural products, and specifically, $41 million in partnering with about 100 different partners to catalyze and facilitate the development of new agricultural products, both food and non-food.

You mentioned partnering up on the science side with other science performers. We instituted a program with nearly $70 million over five years to partner up with about 100 other science performers looking specifically at commodity group problems and challenges.

I can give you some examples. We have a wheat cluster that looks at new variety development and agronomic attributes. We have a swine cluster looking at lowering food costs and looking at animal health and safety issues. We're working with the canola and flax people again to look at health attributes and proving nutritional and health attributes for treating cardiovascular disease and things like diabetes. In the pulse sector, which is growing significantly, as the minister mentioned, we have about 100 scientists working with us on enhancing productivity, enhancing nutritional value, and improving processing of what is going to prove to be a major export crop for Canada.

In dairy, we're looking at nutritional value and innovative things that respond to the demands of consumers today for health benefits--for example, by looking at lowering salt in cheese

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Your time has expired, Mr. Richards.

I understand that Mr. Easter and Mr. Valeriote are going to split their five minutes.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Yes, or somewhere along that. In beginning, Mr. Chairman, I just might say that I had seven meetings in the Interlake area on the Thanksgiving weekend. At one of those meetings, there were over 80 producers, and all had between 50 and 80.

The Arborg Credit Union has indicated in that Interlake area—this is no laughing matter—the debt load has doubled in three years, and that's for no new investment, but just for producers to stay where they're at. Putting caterpillar tracks on combines is the only new investment. That tells you how serious the situation is out there.

The member for the Interlake, I might admit, is good at sitting on his horse, Woody, talking about gun control, but he should be representing producers in his area. That's why we're out there.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Now let's come back to CFIA, if I may, for a minute. We have determined--

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Point of order.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

This member has slandered so many people in this meeting today that I'm starting to lose track. If you're going to continue to let him do this--

[A voice]

Check the record, Brian.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

I mean, these guys aren't even here to defend themselves. Now, if you want--

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

No, point taken. If you want to have a--

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

If you want anybody who has defended their constituents and stood up and brought more money to the--

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, that's not a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

That's right, as most of them--

[A voice]

That's not a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Easter, if you want to take up an issue with somebody, take--

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

You let those guys slander me, Mr. Chair, and I'm getting fed up with it, okay?

Now, let's come back to the audit.

We've determined, then, that in the CFIA, Paul, the audit was not held, although it was committed to by the government itself. Instead, we have had a comprehensive survey. Am I correct in that analysis?

[Paul Mayers]

It was a comprehensive review.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay. Fine.

[Paul Mayers]

It was not a formal audit.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Then just to save time, I wonder.... The Minister and the Minister of Health, on September 11, 2009, committed to acting on all 57 recommendations. The minister mentioned a few this morning. I wonder if CFIA could return, in writing, to this committee where the government is at on those 57 recommendations, plus the recommendations of the special committee. You could deliver that to the clerk.

There's only one other question I have before turning to Frank, Mr. Chair. I don't know if anybody can answer this question. The Canadian Wheat Board submitted for two interim payments some time ago. The government had a bill in the spring to try to speed up that process, among other things. In the spring, we offered, in a letter from me to the minister, to split that bill to give quick passage so the government would have to provide a response within 15 working days. It's been a heck of a lot longer than that now.

The final payments have not been set by the government. We continue to wait. Why is it taking the federal government so long to determine the increase on initials so this money can get to producers in the west right away?

[Greg Meredith]

Just for context, I think you're referring to Bill C-27, which would have sped up the process. Currently, you're correct: the process is longer than it has to be. If the bill were to go through, the process would take approximately three weeks.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We offered to split the bill and give it quick passage, but the government didn't accept it. In any event, what's the reason for the delay?

[Greg Meredith]

I don't think there's an exceptional reason. I think it's going through the process. But we can respond in writing if there's anything outstanding.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay.

Frank.