Agriculture Committee on Nov. 15th, 2011

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Let me ask you, then, another question. On the issue of--this was raised I think by Ms. Raynault--farm transfers, intergenerational transfers, we received a lot of input from farmers that they wanted the definition of related people, such as child or grandchild, expanded to include perhaps nephews or nieces, that kind of thing. The average age of farmers now is around 58 years, and now we have farmers who are 75 or 80 years old and who would basically be transferring their farm to a 65- or 70-year-old person. They'd like to have the option to transfer it more horizontally.

Is that being discussed, or entertained at least, among all of those involved in Growing Forward 2?

[Greg Meredith]

I would certainly say it's raised, but I wouldn't be at liberty to say how we're forming our policy advice on it.

I expect it's raised during pre-budget consultations with the Department of Finance as well, although I couldn't testify to that.

The tax treatment of intergenerational transfers is a very hot topic.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

You're not at liberty to respond: understood.

Can I ask a quick one on SRM?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay. I'm in a really generous mood today.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

But this will be the last one.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

That's fine.

Can you give us your view on any prospect of the SRM issue being resolved? I mean, we're still having to remove the specific risk material. Do you see an end to that program at some point in the near or distant future? Can you give us a time?

[Greg Meredith]

Unfortunately, no. The process is quite complex.

The complaint that gives rise to your question is that it's more costly in Canada to remove the SRM material during the processing process. The industry has raised frequently that this is a competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis the United States. They point to the fact that we both, Canada and the United States, have what I believe they call a “manageable risk” rating from the IOE. They ask why there are different standards if we're both in the same risk category vis-à-vis the international standard.

The answer to that is relatively straightforward. It takes more for us to get into that standard. In the absence of our procedures for SRM, we wouldn't be in that standard at all. We would be much lower. That would be quite a critical problem for our export industry in particular.

The reason we have to do more to get into the same level of standard as the United States is that we've had quite a few more incidents of BSE. The United States claims to have found one case, and we're at, I believe, 16, roughly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

That was a very good explanation of that question, Frank. I mean, it was our industry that, in order for us to sell export, asked for that.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Yes, I understand that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

It's unfortunate that we have to do more to be basically--

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Compliant.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

--on a level playing field, but that's the way it is.

I think we've had some great questions and great answers today.

Thank you very much, Greg, for being here again. It's always a pleasure to have you.

We'll see everybody on Thursday.

The meeting is adjourned.