Evidence of meeting #15 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was farm.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Your time is up, Mr. Allen.
We'll now move to Mr. Zimmer for five minutes.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
Thanks for coming.
I have a question for Dan.
I'm sure you're aware of fellow-British Columbian MP Dan Albas's Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act. It basically deals with the interprovincial problems and takes down those barriers.
You've explained a little bit about the benefits if we do that. Can you explain specifically the benefits to the domestic market in terms of the numbers? If that bill is implemented, as we hope it is, what's going to happen for Canadian producers afterward?
4:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Vintners Association
We have been looking at amending the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act for many, many years. We first attempted to work with the liquor boards to establish and put in place a personal exemption. However, we had no success. Their alternative was to make an attempt to sell more 100% Canadian wines in their retail stores across Canada. That has happened to a certain degree, but not to a level that would enhance our competitiveness and grow our market share in Canada.
Taking a look at Mr. Albas's bill, the best benchmark that we have is the United States. In 2005, the Supreme Court made a ruling to open up the borders to interstate trade in wine. Since 2005, 37 states have amended their state laws to allow for direct-to-consumer delivery, including 70% of controlled states in the U.S., the equivalent of the liquor board system we have here.
The total direct-sales market in the U.S. represents about 2% of total wine production, of which 1% would be wine purchased at the tasting room—in other words, the type of sales that are taking place right now. When he's selling a case of wine to a tourist in his winery, the vinter has no idea whether that consumer is an Ontario or a British Columbia resident. It's a sale.
The other 1% of direct sales in the U.S. are shipped by the vintner from a tasting room to another state, through a winery wine club, via the Internet. Believe it or not, you can sell wine on the Internet in the United States. Or it's done over the telephone or that form of direct shipment. That's what we're seeking here in Canada. We anticipate that it would probably be similar or about 1% of total Canadian wine sales.
Now, speaking about 100% Canadian wines, not the international Canadian blends, 95% of the international Canadian blends sell for under $10 a bottle. Shipping a bottle of wine from British Columbia to Ontario, or vice versa, costs roughly $4 per bottle, so you're looking at wines that are probably over the $15 price point.
If you follow that mechanism of 1% of total VQA sales in Canada, you're looking at probably somewhere between 25,000 to 30,000 cases of wine per year. That's a small amount in comparison to total wine sales in Canada, which approach 500 million litres, but it would be extremely beneficial to the small and medium sized wineries, most of which can't access the liquor board system. It would encourage their ability to grow, it would keep more margin in their pockets, and it would give Canadian consumers an opportunity to taste the fantastic wines that we have, thereby encouraging the liquor boards to sell more 100% Canadian wines. As a result, when they're stocking more wines on their shelves, they're going to make more sales.
The wines we're talking about aren't currently sold in the liquor board system. If they were, you wouldn't want to purchase them and pay the $4 a bottle transportation charge. These wines are not available because liquor boards are not listing them.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
I just have a question for Kevin.
You mentioned that you had a mentorship program for young farmers for organic. What else would you specifically do to attract young farmers to organic farming, or just to farming in general? Being that you are a young farmer, I guess you're the best one to ask.
4:10 p.m.
Chair, Organic Farming Institute of British Columbia
Are you asking what we're doing to get more people into farming?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Chair, Organic Farming Institute of British Columbia
I guess I'd suggest getting people to talk about it. The biggest thing right now is land value. People are saying that they can't get into farming; we have probably 20 people coming to us every year who want to get into farming, but they feel the land is restrictive. So we say, “Well, come to our farm and we'll teach you how to make it work.” We do farmers' markets, so we have that direct contact all the time, but there's no actual program or anywhere for young people to go.
There are a couple of universities in B.C.—Kwantlen Polytechnic University and UBC—that are trying to start some programs to get people in, but they always get stuck at the land prices and how to handle that. So people are starting to look at co-ops and land sharing, and approaching farmers to say, “Hey, you're already farming, you're going into retirement—is there a way we can do succession planning with you?”
There are items out there, but there's just nothing to be spread to the people.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Annamarie Klippenstein Board Member, Organic Farming Institute of British Columbia
Yes, there's a huge disconnect there.
Basically, there are a lot of young people who are interested in getting into agriculture. With our program, we're taking 10 students on every year right now, and we're turning people away. They're going to other farms, where they're used more as a labour pool than anything, and they're not getting that connect. We definitely do a connect with our program, and we have a bank of accessible land from people who have said to us, “We have this land—if you find someone, they can farm it.”
I think some kind of program has to be put in place, where landowners can register if they want to lease their land, and where land can be searched by the type of land people are looking for. Right now, there's a huge disconnect. At between $75,000 and $125,000 per acre, young people can't get into farming in B.C. unless they have access to land. The cost of land prohibits that right now.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
Thank you all for coming up today.
Dr. Sparling, I appreciate the comments you made on Growing Forward 2, and some of the recommendations. Perhaps unlike the others here, I've had the benefit of listening to you speak on a couple of occasions now, typically on the need for a national food policy. I attended one of your events at the university in London about a year and a half ago.
For the benefit of others around the table, I would point out that New Zealand, Scotland and the United Kingdom all have a national food policy. To me, it's a meaningful, intentional document that pulls everything together, not just piecemeal things. I'm wondering if you could talk to us about the benefits of a national food policy for the farmers, the processors, and even down to the consumers, as well as its value for nutrition and health care, and all of those things that would be found in that policy.
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, As an Individual
First of all, there's a national food policy, but there's also a national food strategy. To me, the food strategy is the industry strategy for how we're going to be successful in the future, and the policy is the Growing Forward framework that actually can support that.
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, As an Individual
In regard to the strategy, there are a number of initiatives. The Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute has one; the Federation of Agriculture has one: and now the Conference Board of Canada is starting into this space. The common themes you see in a national food strategy are that somehow we have to make sure this industry remains competitive on an international scale, because we do compete. We sell a lot globally and we have to compete with imports. That's come up very clearly.
The second leg of that whole thing tends to focus on the issue of food and health. So what are we doing, first, to take the unhealthy ingredients out of food and, second, to add more healthy ingredients, and what are we doing to change the way people consume food and think about food as well?
Looking ahead, whatever we do needs to be sustainable, and farmers understand sustainability because they have to. But it's becoming much more significant, and it's going to be driven from a number of sources; for example, the Walmart initiative is going to change the way a lot of people have to deal with it. So there are those three elements.
In terms of the benefits to the country of having a national food strategy, first of all, a national food strategy has to be a pretty big picture and say these are the large targets. We want to increase our exports by so much. We want to expand organic local agriculture by so much. We need to have some specific targets, but at a very high level.
If you do that—and this is why I've been talking to industry leaders a lot—then it's easy for government to ask what policies would align with that strategy and make sense and what policies would actually impede that. Some of the regulatory issues are obvious impediments to achieving a healthy diet, for example, and the ability to even talk about a healthy diet.
So there's that interaction between the two. I've been encouraging the three main groups that are doing it to get together—and they have been slowly coming together, but not very quickly—and come up with a national food strategy to say here's what we're going to do. I think the CAPI one is probably the closest, but the Federation of Agriculture's aligns very nicely too.
Realistically, is that going to reshape Growing Forward? I've been involved with the national consultations on that, and I don't get a huge sense that the national food strategy is going to come into play fast enough to really influence the Growing Forward policy framework. But there are elements that are very clear: what can we do to support more innovation through the Growing Forward; what can we do to support more international market development; and what are the things we can do as programs that will support sustainability? It's those elements, and also, within the BRM programs, looking at those to see which ones make sense and which are probably not doing exactly what we want.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
In wrapping up, is the strategy something that...? Right now we've got silos: we've got the Ontario Federation of Agriculture developing one and you said the Conference Board—
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, As an Individual
There has to be one strategy.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
One strategy.
So should there be a leadership role of the federal government to pull this strategy in, pull it together, and the government adopts it in consultation with the provinces and deploys it through its policy?
4:20 p.m.
Professor, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, As an Individual
Yes.
I think the government can play a facilitating role in doing that, in helping bring those players together and in also helping to have a discussion around what the relationship is between the strategy and the Growing Forward framework, and which pieces would really support a strategy. I think there's a huge opportunity for that.
In a lot of these cases government has an incredibly important role as a facilitator and a connector.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
November 29th, 2011 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Thank you, Chair. I have a few questions for the witnesses through you, Chair.
First, I'd like to thank the witnesses for coming today. I know it's important for us to hear your questions. I want to follow up on some of the comments and questions by my colleague, Mr. Zimmer.
In terms of wine, currently you can ship that to any liquor outlet across the country without an issue, I presume, if they are ordering it from you?
4:20 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Vintners Association
Yes. The federal law requires that any alcohol entering a province has to go through first receipt, which means it has to go through the liquor board in that jurisdiction and that all taxes are paid. It's illegal to move alcohol without going through the liquor board system in accordance with federal law.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative