Evidence of meeting #57 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crops.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay, thank you.
We'll now move to Mr. Storseth for five minutes.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you very much for coming. It's always good to talk to you guys.
I have a couple questions.
First, you talked about how GM canola is roughly 80% of the acreage that's accounted for. How many acres are we talking about here?
12:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Corporate Affairs, Canola Council of Canada
Rick, I think in your presentation you said something like 90% or 93% of overall acreage is genetically modified. This year the estimates could be 18 million to 19 million acres of canola.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
There could be 18 million to 19 million acres of canola. I take it that means that our producers, in general, in your industry, feel that GM canola has been a benefit to our individual farmers themselves?
12:25 p.m.
President, Grain Growers of Canada
It's all we grow. We're talking about seed and farmers being in the back pockets of the seed companies and stuff. I always find it funny that all the newest and most expensive canola varieties are always sold out first. Whether it's $5 a pound or $10 a pound for the seed, we know our bottom line.
Are we willing to pay an extra $10 an acre up front for the seed cost to gain $40 or $50 on the back end? We can make that decision. The best--because they're the newest and they're the most expensive, obviously--are always sold out first.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
What would happen to the industry if we didn't have GM canola and we didn't make science-based decisions on these types of...?
12:30 p.m.
President, Grain Growers of Canada
Well, on my farm, we push rotations now to put more and more canola in. We rent land. We'll pay more money for land that has had canola on it so we can grow canola. We'll make deals with, say, feedlots that don't grow canola. We can take their land, and we'll exchange so we can grow canola for their rotation on their land and we'll give them land they grow cereal crops on. It's made all the difference in the world. We'd be losing 25% or 30% of our revenue easy.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
There are much stronger strains now as well, right?
We went through some droughts over the last several years in my area. The only canola that survived was GM canola. That's why it was so much.
March 24th, 2011 / 12:30 p.m.
President, Grain Growers of Canada
Well, it's interesting that the harsher the growing season...the yields. People are actually growing canola now in southwest Saskatchewan when they never grew it before because it would burn up. Now, with the new varieties, that's what people put in first, because they'll handle the environmental factors better than anything.
So it's a total switch, a total flip, from what it used to be.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Mr. Vandervalk, the opposition has raised the issue with markets and so on. When it comes to our grain market, our wheat market, what has been the biggest market inhibitor for you over the last several years?
12:30 p.m.
President, Grain Growers of Canada
I guess the biggest problem is the Wheat Board, essentially. It's been very difficult. And it's not what you would think normally. It's the monopoly, the Wheat Board's monopoly, not being able to forward price and not being able to take the risk out. You know, they come out with a PRO in February of $10 a bushel for durum. That could be $7 by the time I sell it. I don't think any business out there can handle 10%, 20%, 30% drops or not knowing what you're going to sell your crop for.
We can forward price all the specialty crops. That's not the only reason, but it is one of the main reasons you're seeing cereal crops decline.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
My last question is for everybody.
On the investment in science and technology, what is the capacity for R and D in Canada? What would be the ideal numbers you guys would like to see when it comes to science and technology?
Go ahead.
12:30 p.m.
General Manager, Canadian Canola Growers Association
I don't have a specific number, sorry. All I can say is more is always better, and whatever we do have at our disposal through public research, make sure it is targeted in the right area where the industry is going so it can get commercialized and into the farmers' hands more quickly. That technology keeps us ahead of the global competitiveness that we face every day, and it is more a factor in making sure we get the biggest bang for research dollars, be those public or private or farmers' dollars themselves. It's working together as a group, having a plan, and investing in the future in research that will actually pay dividends in the near term. But, again, I don't have a solid number for you.
12:30 p.m.
Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada
I'm always reminded of a line in the movie, Field of Dreams: “Build it and they will come.”
One of the challenges we have is that there is a lot of slippage, especially for the cereal grains in western Canada. Only a small percentage of the farmers in barley, for example, are actually paying all of the research costs because the barley check-off comes off the Canadian Wheat Board final payment, and a lot of barley goes straight to feedlots and there's no check-off deducted. Only a small number of farmers are paying that.
At the grains innovation round table, we just formed a small research funding committee. I'll be co-chairing it along with Don Dewar from the Western Grains Research Foundation. We're going to look at how we can get more and more farmer money into this as well.
In Quebec, for example, if you want the good crop insurance programs, you buy certified seed. They are funding a lot of research back through the people developing seed varieties. In western Canada, we're not doing that. We're going to sit down and ask, not so much for canola because people buy seed, but for the rest of the crops, do we need to have an end-point royalty when you sell your grain? Should there be a percentage coming back that goes into research? That's what Australia does, for example, and they're pulling ahead of us on cereal grains.
Is there a firm number? Is it double or triple where we are today? It's hard to know that for sure, Mr. Storseth. I think, even as farmers, in the next six months we are going to show you a lot of leadership in what we want to see happen and how as farmers we can contribute more and better to make this happen. Then we'll come to you and ask if you want to be our partners in this.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
There's just one comment I'd like to get on the record in regard to science and technology investments. On March 22, 2011, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association sent out a press release saying, “The Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) appreciates the Government of Canada’s focus on research and innovation in the agricultural sector, as announced in Budget 2011 today.” I thought it was important to get that in.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
I didn't know we were going to make political statements here today.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
Anyway, let's stick to the topic at hand.
Thank you, witnesses, for coming.
Gentlemen, you represent a lot of growers, and you represent a lot of acreage that's being planted. Over the last couple of years, this committee has looked at a lot of challenges and opportunities. We've talked about climate change. We've talked about soil degradation. We've talked about an increase in the world food demand. One of the biggest things is the consumer and public awareness on how we're growing things in this country and what we're going to grow. They will determine a lot of it.
If we sat here 50 years ago and predicted what was going to be grown on these acreages, I don't think we would have predicted what's being grown on them right now. I don't think we would have been right.
Let's look at 20 years from now. What do you think will be the crops and varieties and technologies, and how we'll be growing things? Some people alluded to what is being done in Australia and Argentina or wherever, but we as a country...what do you think will be grown on these acreages? I know you represent certain crops, but think how it's changed from 50 years ago. What are we going to be growing on these acreages and how are we going to be growing them in the future?
12:35 p.m.
President, Grain Growers of Canada
From a farmer's standpoint, everything will be more targeted in the future. The fertilizers, the technology, and the seed, everything's going to be targeted to be far more efficient. As far as what we're going to grow, for me, farming is a business. I'm going to grow something that's going to make me the most profit. That being said, it has to be sustainable. If it's not sustainable, it's not going to be profitable for me. It might be profitable from one year to the next, but it's not going to be profitable ongoing. The caveat is that it must be sustainable but also what's most profitable.
The key is what the consumers are going to want as far as some traits, as far as using less nitrogen and less water. I think some of the crops that will be grown will be fairly similar. Maybe we won't recognize how we grow the same crops. That'll be far different.
12:35 p.m.
Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada
If I were to gaze 20 years into the future, the crops themselves may be the same, but as Stephen is getting at, there will be a lot of different traits within those crops. I think we'll see nitrogen fixation. As we have seen with pulse crops and legumes, where they put nitrogen back into the soil, I think we'll see that coming in the cereal grains. I think 20 years from today we'll be there, so we'll be using less inputs and producing more crop, especially on the fertilizer side.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
So you're saying we'll put nitrogen in crops that don't have it put in now.
12:35 p.m.
Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada
Yes. They'll either put nitrogen in or require far less nitrogen. They'll make better use of the nutrients in the soil than today. Even today, a lot of the fertilizer is washed away. A lot of it is not used by the plants, because we have to over-fertilize to make sure enough gets close to the roots. So I think we'll see far better use of the resources that way.
I think you'll see heat resistance and drought resistance. You'll see a lot of health traits in there, whether they are high-oleic canolas or low-lin canolas. You may see traits with more vitamins in them. In 20 years from today I bet we will see wheat with a different gluten structure for people with celiac disease. I think that's where we're going to see things going with the crops themselves. There will be more pulse crops because of the protein. Pulses are very healthy for you with the fibre.
I think we'll just see more and better.... But I don't know if we'll be growing a completely new jujuba bean or something like that. That I can't foresee.
