Agriculture Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2011

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Welcome, everyone, to today's Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. I'm going to start the meeting in the absence of the chair and other vice-chair, with the hope that they'll eventually get here, particularly with respect to the ability of all our witnesses who've come from outside the city to speak to us today.

I'd like to welcome the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, Travis Toews and Andrea Brocklebank; as well as the Manitoba Forage Council, Jim Lintott; and the Canadian Poultry Research Council, Jacob Middelkamp and Dr. Bruce Roberts.

Today's focus is on Growing Forward 2, with specific reference to science and innovation.

We should start, if we can, with the Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

You'll have ten minutes collectively, five minutes each, or one person speaking for ten.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honourable members. We appreciate the invitation to speak with you today.

My name is Travis Toews. I'm the president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association. My family and I ranch west of Grande Prairie in the Beaverlodge area of Alberta. With me is Andrea Brocklebank, our research manager with the CCA, and she will handle all the tough questions today.

In 2010, farm cash receipts from cattle and calves, combined with the multiplier effect from downstream economic activity, contributed $25 billion to Canada's GDP. The cattle industry has been through several years of turmoil, but we are now moving forward and see a strong recovery for the industry, based on strong demand and positive prices.

Canada is the world's fourth-largest beef exporter, and the world's second-largest grain-fed beef exporter. Growth in global beef demand is strong, and Canada is well-positioned to be a leading global beef supplier. A growing global population and rising incomes are driving large projected increases in global beef consumption over the next several decades. At the same time, contraction in the U.S. and global cattle herds has resulted in strong North American prices. The combination of improved demand for high-quality grain-fed beef and reduced global cattle supplies has seen Canadian cattle and beef prices strengthen to a point where Canadian producers have reduced herd downsizing, and some are beginning to expand.

Research and innovation are critical to ensure the long-term sustainability and growth of the Canadian beef industry. Canada must maintain and grow consumer demand for our beef, and be able to produce a competitively priced product in both domestic and export markets.

Research is important for market access. Canada's beef industry consistently advocates for science-based trade and market access regulations. Research provides the science necessary to demonstrate the integrity of our animal health and food safety systems, which are increasingly important in trade negotiations. Research is important to consumer confidence. Research that reduces the need for food safety recalls and improves consumer satisfaction with beef quality supports both domestic and international demands for Canadian beef.

Research is important for industry competitiveness. Our ability to compete with other protein sources, both domestically and in international beef markets, requires research to improve feed efficiency; improve feed, forage, and grassland productivity; and reduce animal health and welfare concerns. Many of the animal health, food safety, beef quality, efficiency, and environmental attributes that underpin the Canada Beef Advantage brand are results of research first conducted by Canada's beef scientists, and then adopted by industry. Continued progress requires long-term research investments to maintain our current standards and to ensure that our industry can respond and adapt to new issues and opportunities that arise. However, we are concerned that a considerable loss of research infrastructure, funding, and expertise may hamper further progress.

Federal beef research funding in Canada has declined significantly over the last 20 years. An 18% across-the-board cut in research funding in 1995 was followed by an additional 30% decline in beef research funding between 1995 and 2007; subsequently there have been cuts as well. These ongoing cuts have seriously impacted research programs, scientific expertise, and facilities. As a result, the viability of some very important research programs in areas such as beef quality, food safety, and forages are faced with death by a thousand cuts. Combined with attrition, continued funding cuts threaten the maintenance of core federal research facilities and are an impediment to attracting new expertise to critical research positions.

These ongoing cuts contradict the clear understanding that research and innovation play an important role in enhancing the competitiveness of Canada's cattle industry. Lagging growth in the competitiveness and efficiency of Canada's productivity over the last several decades has paralleled decreased spending on research and development.

In general, research provides a six-to-one return on investment. This is even higher when producer investments are considered. The growing recognition of the value of long-term research investments has led Canada's beef industry to increase its check-off allocations to research by 150% over the last several years.

However, increased industry funding cannot solve the current capacity and programming issues facing Canada's beef research community. Public funding has a major role to play in ensuring that long-term, high-risk discovery research continues in areas of importance to the public good. This knowledge is critical to creating future solutions and opportunities we aren't even aware of yet. This will require renewed and increased public funding to support research activities; scientists and technical support staff; and the physical infrastructure, facilities, and field and animal resources needed for the work to occur.

Over the long term, increased research investments that improve industry competitiveness and self-sustainability will reduce reliance on business risk management programs and other government funding injections.

Industry-government partnerships are integral to enhancing the competitiveness of the Canadian cattle industry. Under Growing Forward 2, we believe there is tremendous opportunity to extend, improve, and enhance the successful programs initiated under the current Growing Forward program and drive investments in innovation and research.

One of the most significant industry-government investments under Growing Forward was the development of a beef cattle industry science cluster. The cluster brings together Canada's largest industry and public beef-research funders to align dollars and priorities to achieve research outcomes that will meet industry needs. In addition to project funding, some funds are allocated to ensure that AAFC refills some critically needed research positions. Some funding is also directed towards improving technology transfer to ensure that promising research outcomes get adopted.

l'm convinced that the beef science cluster approach will result in a very coordinated, efficient research model. However, government research funding needs to be delivered on a five-year basis, at a minimum. Although previous programs such as APF and Growing Forward were designed as five-year programs, delays and/or gaps in program delivery resulted in a three-year funding cycle with two-year funding gaps that are not conducive to maintaining and delivering a strong research program. Many research programs require long-term consistent funding to bear meaningful results. A three-year perennial forage, environmental, or animal breeding study will generate only preliminary results. It also makes it difficult to attract new research talent to Canada, when longer-term funding portfolios are available elsewhere.

Going forward, it is important that government funding fully leverage industry contributions, recognizing that the beef industry has increased its investments in research. The success of the beef science cluster program will be contingent upon increased federal investment to drive innovation, with investment being reflective of both industry size and contribution to the economy. One of the key successes of the cluster to note is a clear focus on improving technology transfer efforts and research uptake within the industry. Investments are being made to ensure the more effective and timely transfer of research outcomes to the beef industry, with the exploration of successful global models, including Israel's and Australia's. Further investment in this area is a key priority for the industry.

In closing, we would like to provide three points that summarize what is needed to ensure that research continues to support and enhance the growth and competitiveness of Canada's beef and cattle industry.

First, to adequately address issues of a public-good nature in areas such as food safety and quality, environment, and animal health and welfare, research funding must be increased. Investments in research need to be increased more appropriately to reflect the importance of agriculture to the economy and the public good, ensuring its sustainability and competitiveness in the future.

Second, long-term, predictable research funding commitments from both government and industry are critical. Moving beyond the current three-year funding cycle will allow for more meaningful research outcomes.

Third, we will need to ensure a strong research community is there to achieve desired research outcomes and to train new researchers. Ongoing reductions and fragmentation of funding are not helping to attract or retain talented researchers.

Capacity is critical to ensuring that scientific expertise and experience are available to respond promptly, effectively, and strategically to issues and opportunities that arise.

Mr. Chairman, we want to thank you again for the opportunity to present today, and we look forward to your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Mr. Toews, thank you so much.

Mr. Lintott, would you like to go next?

[Jim Lintott, Chairman, Manitoba Forage Council]

Thank you very much for inviting the Manitoba Forage Council to be here today.

My name is Jim Lintott and I farm just east of Manitoba. The Manitoba Forage Council sees itself as addressing and representing all the forage industry in our province.

What is the engine driving the change we must address and adapt to through the science and innovation that we employ on our farms?

Population growth, now set at seven billion people, and rising energy costs are two factors putting increasing demand on our land for food and water. This trend will not change for a very long time. We must adapt to this change and pressure through the use of good science and innovation, with a constant eye to the changing marketplace.

Food--its quality, attributes, and production protocol--is in the media every day, and that is creating both challenges and opportunities for our producers. Only 6.8% of Canada's total land mass is currently classified agricultural. Of that, 44% is in some type of forage production, of which two thirds is unimproved pasture land. There's tremendous potential there.

Rising grain prices are putting pressure on forage lands to be converted to cropland. That in turn will put more pressure on the lower-quality forage lands. As each acre of good forage land is plowed and converted to cropland, it will take more than just one acre of that lower-quality land to replace it. We must find innovative ways to improve that marginal forage acreage so we can support the livestock industry.

There are two ways to improve our forage acreage. The first is to increase the resource base. This can be done by initiating programs to over-seed and re-seed the estimated 6.6 million hectares of unimproved forage lands to increase productivity, carrying capacity, and natural fertility. The same approach can be used to upgrade the so-called improved lands.

This is a perfect example of applying existing knowledge to a new need. This will require the seeding of legumes and improved grass varieties to increase soil nitrogen, and the use of the new grazing techniques to build and improve those soils. This can also build soil carbon, improve water retention for wetland and flood control enhancement, and increase wildlife habitat, all the time building productivity and profitability into the livestock sector.

The resource base can also be increased through the adoption of dual-purpose land management, such as demonstrated in the Garland project. That program demonstrated the use of aspen parkland and cattle grazing in combination as a management tool. We need to move that new knowledge base to the system and add that production base to our grazing resource base.

Getting it done will require programs that demonstrate this new technology on demonstration farms that are backed by detailed cost analysis and input-output balance sheets that can engage the farming community to adapt the new innovations. We see this being facilitated through federal-provincial programs and coordinators who can work in the farming community. Getting it done will also require governments to adjust policies in a timely fashion to encourage change and adoption of innovative ideas.

The second pathway to improve forage lands is through the development of improved species and varieties of forages. In Canada we have experimented with turning the plant-breeding sector over to the private sector. For the past 30 years we have allowed the public plant-breeding industry to die through natural attrition. The effect of that has been twofold.

The first effect has been that in the canola industry we have an excellent example of a business model that allows and even demands variety development. Canola breeding companies can create varieties that lock in margins for the company. You can have a variety that is herbicide-tolerant, thus locking in margins at the bag of seed and the pail of herbicide; and with marketing traits such as Nexera canola you lock in margins for the processing and wholesaling of the actual crop. This ownership of the variety allows for substantial margins to the seed company, of which they can give a share to producers and processors along the way. This encourages investment in plant breeding. This encourages science and innovation.

The second effect of this attrition in our plant breeding has been to prove and point out where private industry will not, or cannot, invest in plant breeding. On this point I have personal knowledge. I’m a part owner of Northstar Seeds Ltd., and we have a plant-breeding company. It is situated in Argentina, and we develop alfalfa and clover varieties for the world markets. We can do this because there is sufficient market for these legumes to give us the volume of seed sales to make the venture profitable. The private industry has not, or will not, do the same for the forage grasses. The pounds of forage grasses sold in North America do not support this level of investment. If we look at the Canadian forage seed industry, we see very few new grass varieties and an ever-shrinking investment in their development. It has created a very weak link in the forage industry.

We need to have the federal and provincial governments make a commitment to pick up this responsibility and fill the gap. We see the potential for partnerships of federal and provincial governments, universities, and the private sector. This is an area where there can be tremendous sharing of science and innovation. That sharing can lead to important developments in the industry. We have infrastructure in place. We need to use that infrastructure to create a centre for plant-breeding excellence—a place that can contribute to the overall agricultural plant-breeding needs.

The forage industry has all the protein production capability it needs with legumes. What is lacking are high-energy, high-sugar grasses for hay and pasture lands that are adapted to the Canadian environment. I believe that the solution lies in the ryegrasses. We need to develop high-sugar ryegrass varieties for western Canada. Currently the high cost of feed grains has a negative effect on the feedlot industry. These increasing costs at the feedlot drive up the need for shorter-keep cattle, cattle that can finish in 60 days on feed. That need puts pressure back on the cow-calf producer. Feedlots will demand 950-pound-plus feeders, and that will require cow-calf producers to become cow and long-yearling producers. To do that, those cow-calf producers will need high-quality pastures and high-quality storage feeds.

The development of high-sugar ryegrass varieties can become the solution to this concern. Every pound that we put on the feeders on the pasture is a cheaper pound to produce. To remain competitive in the world markets, we need to drive down our production costs through increased grazing of high-quality forages—high protein and high sugar.

In addition to improving the marginal forage acreage, there is a need to create greater efficiency in the grazing stages of livestock production. In the poultry industry, chickens are constantly being scaled to determine if they are gaining properly. The producer can then modify his management, and see the direct results as the chickens either continue to grow and gain weight, or not. In the grazing livestock production cycle, we only scale the cattle once, after they are shipped and after it is too late to adjust management techniques for better utilization of the pastures. Today we have the technology to constantly scale calves and stockers as they come for water. This data can be automatically collected using RFID tags for identification, and transferred to computer programs that track each animal’s growth. This then creates a very powerful tool for the management of our pastures and our winter-feeding programs. This would create feed efficiencies and allow for faster rates of gain.

Constant scaling is also a very good tool for genetic selection at the cow-calf level, benefits that would flow through to the feedlot and packing industry. This would create feed efficiencies and allow for faster rates of gain and, in my estimation, improve the pastures' overall health and productivity on a per hectare basis. This technology needs to be part of the new technologies that are demonstrated at the farm level. Once we show the effect of this intensive management practice, producers will buy into the technology.

If we are encouraging innovation and adaptation of new science at the farm level, we need to back that up with equal innovation at the business risk management level. Crop insurance needs to be responsive to the changes, and that translates into the government supplying funding to the provincially based insurance corporations to develop the new insurance products that will be needed to back up our new innovative practices.

I have included copies of the Manitoba strategic plan--it's a five-year plan we developed for the Province of Manitoba--and our forage and research priorities. I have copies of them here. I'm not allowed to hand them out, but you can get them from me. I apologize that we don't have translated versions; notice for this meeting was just a little too short. I have the English versions here, and the French ones should be made available shortly. Please pick up a copy from me as you leave. It will be great bedtime reading.

So we have those two documents.

The Manitoba Forage Council will pursue these goals with the industry and our provincial government. The Manitoba Forage Council will also be working closely with the Canadian Forage and Grassland Association in the development of national research priorities. We see the Manitoba Forage Council priorities dovetailing very closely with those national priorities.

We are requesting that the government develop a dialogue with the CFGA and look for ways for Growing Forward to assist us, provincially and nationally, to respond to these identified needs.

Again, thank you for this opportunity. We look forward to the discussion period.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Thank you, Mr. Lintott.

For the sake of helping our analyst, I would ask that each of you, including Mr. Toews, submit your written remarks, which you've obviously prepared, to the clerk for his use. That would be helpful.

Thank you.

Mr. Middelkamp and Mr. Roberts.

[Jacob Middelkamp, Chair, Canadian Poultry Research Council]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and honourable members.

My name is Jacob Middelkamp. I'm a chicken producer from Alberta and I represent Canadian Poultry Research Council along with our executive director, Bruce Roberts.

On behalf of the Canadian Poultry Research Council and its member organizations, we would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

The Canadian Poultry Research Council was established in November 2001 to provide funding and coordination for national research activities for its members, which include the Canadian Hatching Egg Producers, Canadian Poultry and Egg Processing Council, Chicken Farmers of Canada, Egg Farmers of Canada, and Turkey Farmers of Canada.

CPRC's mission is to address its members' needs through dynamic leadership in the creation and implementation of programs for poultry research in Canada, which may also include social concerns. Our organization began funding research in 2003 and members have since approved nearly $3 million in research funding through the CPRC. Those funds have helped support in excess of $11 million for Canadian poultry research.

In addition to funding, CPRC activities include acting as the project manager for the poultry research cluster program—funded by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada under the Canadian agri-science cluster initiative section of the Growing Forward program—and communicating research results and issues to industry, researchers, government, and other stakeholders. We are also coordinating development of a national poultry research strategy that will be an important tool for future research direction. CPRC recently relocated from Guelph to Ottawa and established a full-time executive director position to support improved coordination and administration of the industry' s national research activities.

Statistics Canada's farm financial survey reported that poultry farmers controlled almost $15 billion of farm assets in 2009. Almost all of those assets are located in rural Canada and make up an important part of the rural economic base. Statistics Canada also reported that poultry farmers generated over $3 billion of farm cash receipts from the sales of poultry products in 2010, with over 7% of total cash receipts from the sale of farm products. Processing adds a significant amount of economic value, and much of this activity helps support our rural economy. The Farm Products Council of Canada estimated the socio-economic benefits of the poultry sector to the Canadian economy to be more than $11 billion.

Poultry production and processing must continually improve productivity and efficiency in an ongoing search for cost control measures and innovative products. Canadian poultry research has achieved significant success in developing new, targeted approaches. One of the best examples of Canadian research success was the development of the omega-3 egg, a functional food with significant health benefits and a commercialized opportunity for our egg farmers.

Poultry farmers and processors are also challenged to continually seek to improve animal welfare and their relationship with the environment. These challenges continue at a time of increasing consumer awareness of, and interest in, the food we consume and how it is produced and processed.

Now I would like to pass this over to Bruce.

[Dr. Bruce Roberts, Executive Director, Canadian Poultry Research Council]

Thank you, Jacob.

Research and innovation is like any other value chain for any other activity that impacts stakeholders at various parts of the chain. Research activities can be viewed as a continuum with major categories including primary or conceptual research, applied research, innovation, and application.

Each stage of the research value chain builds on results from the previous one. A break or weakness in any part of the chain has a negative impact on the other parts and a significant reduction in the return on investment in the research activity.

Factors that will impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the poultry research value chain include accurate identification of issues facing the poultry industry at all points of the production system that is clearly communicated to all parts of the value chain; highly qualified people and modem physical infrastructure; management and coordination of activities to ensure that resources are used effectively; speedy transfer of research and innovation results to the next point on the chain; funding that is carefully managed to balance activities along the chain.

The last point is of critical importance. There is always pressure to concentrate funds at one or another point in the chain. Some believe that we can import primary and applied research from other countries, but this ignores the reality of Canada's geography, weather, and demographic changes. Alternatively, a concentration only on primary and applied research will block or slow the adoption of research discoveries and the resulting economic and social benefits. Funding has to be available to all components of the value chain to ensure a complete, efficient, and effective national research and innovation program that maximizes benefits to the industry, consumers, and society.

Research and innovation are vitally important to the poultry sector. Poultry research and innovation in Canada face challenges in relation to maintaining and enhancing the Canadian poultry research value chain. We have lost poultry research and extension positions at federal and provincial governments and universities. Educational programs at our universities struggle to maintain comprehensive poultry education programs. Many research facilities are old or have been closed.

The poultry industry recognizes the challenges of maintaining the assets necessary to support a comprehensive poultry research structure and is taking steps to ensure future Canadian poultry research capacity. These steps include the development of a national poultry research strategy; enhancement of CPRC to better coordinate national poultry research in cooperation with industry, government, and other partners; a renewed emphasis on consumer- and society-focused research and innovation; and commitment of funds to support the poultry research and innovation value chain.

The federal government is an important partner in the value chain through its internal research capacity, communications ability, and funding. We recommend that the Growing Forward 2 program commit sufficient funds to poultry research and innovation to maintain and enhance the present system's capacity. Programs must recognize the structure of the research value chain so that all parts, from primary research to application, are sufficiently funded. We also recommend the establishment of structures to support communication aimed at adoption of discoveries and innovations as quickly as possible; and the establishment of structures to cooperate with other interests such as health, education, and environment to address common issues.

We thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the House of Commons standing committee in its Growing Forward 2 deliberations.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Thank you, Mr. Roberts and Mr. Middelkamp.

I'd appreciate your submitting your written document and preparations to the clerk. That would be great.

We're going to start our questioning, and we're going to turn to Ms. Raynault for five minutes.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My question is for Mr. Toews. You stated that Canada has positioned itself well to respond to demand, both here and in foreign markets. What markets would you like to break into overseas, and how do you plan on doing this?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Did you hear the question?

[Travis Toews]

I heard the question. Was it directed to me?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Yes, it was, Mr. Toews, if you want to go ahead.

[Travis Toews]

Sure, I certainly heard the question.

What markets are we interested in? We certainly are interested in foreign markets; we believe there is a significant opportunity there. Clearly Asia will be an important region of the world for Canadian beef in the future. It's a region of the world where there is relatively high disposable income on a per capita basis and where there are beef eaters. We are slowly regaining access into Asia at this point in time. We're into Japan, and we hope to see expanded access there. There's Korean market access, and an initiative is going forward; we're hoping to see Canadian beef into Korea by the end of this year.

China is a country of interest in the intermediate and long term, as their middle-class demographic grows and starts to acquire a taste for higher-quality protein. And of course Europe is another region of the world that's of interest to us.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

We have lost some infrastructure in the field of research. What should be done in order to reverse the trend?

[Travis Toews]

In our opinion, the first thing we need to identify is that to remain competitive and sustainable moving forward, research and innovation are going to be critical. How do we accomplish that? Obviously it's going to take an increase in funding.

In the cattle and beef industry sectors in recent time, as I noted, we have established a new model in which to coordinate research across the country among universities, federal and provincial governments, and industry. It's the beef science cluster approach. We think that model will deliver a very efficient form of research. It will allow us to ensure that industry priorities are met in terms of required research. It will also assist in avoiding the duplication that often happens with research when it's done in different jurisdictions and by different parties.

It takes two things: a coordinated approach, which I think we have, and adequate funding.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Given that I have some time left, I will now move to Mr. Lintott.

You said that you need assistance from Ottawa and the provinces. Is it just financial assistance that you need?

[Jim Lintott]

Assistance can be financial, and depending on where you're looking, sometimes it's policy, political will. We're not actually talking about dollars. We're already spending those dollars to have those people here. We need them to clearly understand what the hurdles are in the way of advancing a specific sector of the industry, and we need them to understand how current policies restrict or limit what we are expecting to happen, either at the farm gate or in the marketing areas.

We have a long list of things, if you look in our strategic plan. Simple things such as transportation policy can have a tremendous negative effect on what happens. How we view the movement of containers in this country, and how that is viewed in other countries, creates a very negative effect on moving niche market products within this country, both across the country as well as in and out of the country. It has a tremendous negative effect.

Policy is probably the area where you could have the biggest effect with the least number of dollars. There is still a great demand for dollars, and of course I'm going to hammer on it all day long, if you let me.

We need dollars for plant breeding. Plant breeding does not happen overnight, although the science of today almost makes it look like it's overnight. We've made tremendous strides in the abilities of science to move forward faster, but those are not cheap moves in science; those are expensive.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Frank Valeriote]

Thank you, Mr. Lintott.

Mr. Storseth, for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and may I comment on how nice it is to have a fair chair?

Mr. Middelkamp, I want to thank you very much for your excellent presentation. I do have some questions for you.

[An Hon. Member]

[Inaudible--Editor].

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

Mr. Allen and I are on the Wheat Board committee together. He's been heckling me for twelve hours this week already.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Twelve more to go.

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

As we talked, I noted you mentioned how important it was, particularly for poultry—as it is for everybody—that there are adequate funds. Obviously there's a request for more funds for innovation and science research, and I do agree with you that it's a very important part. But one of the things we've learned as we've undertaken this is that a lot of the times the funds that are available are sometimes difficult to get at, with the bureaucracy and the paperwork. Or they are not for a long enough term, as Mr. Toews mentioned.

Do you see this as being an issue with the poultry sector as well?

[Jacob Middelkamp]

It was Growing Forward 1. In the beginning not enough information was available, and the timespan to apply for it was quite short. The way it is being administered now is way better. Everybody knows practically where they have to be. There is lots of paperwork involved, and we are glad that we can now give the information through Growing Forward 2 to be more up to speed to ask for funding through Growing Forward 2.

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

Mr. Roberts, you talked about more funds. Do you have a dollar value? Is there a number you would like to see with regard to more funds? Do you know how much more you'd like to see?