Agriculture Committee on Feb. 27th, 2012

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Maybe I'll help Mr. Storseth complete the ongoing monologue or soliloquy he was on.

Ms. Thurston, I think where you were headed was that there's no cotton wool wrapped around the production systems, in the sense that these aren't pets. It's not like those two great big behemoth dogs that are in my house with the two cats, who think they can sleep on the bed all the time and that we should sleep on the floor instead.

I don't think that's what you're saying. Is that right? This is still a farm production methodology. The issue is about the type we're using. Is that fair to say?

[Sayara Thurston]

Yes, exactly. One of the problems sometimes cited with regard to free-run systems is that the welfare isn't necessarily perfect for an egg-laying hen raised in a free-run system. The fact of the matter is that welfare for a hen raised in a free-run system is better than that for a hen raised in a caged system.

Welfare challenges that arise in free-run systems can for the most part be handled with good management. It's a different production system, and it requires different techniques. It basically requires a little bit more input from a producer, but I think producers are very able to meet that with some additional training and some additional knowledge.

At the end of the day, a cage system will always be a cage system, and that can't be changed, but there may be welfare concerns in a free-run that can be dealt with, can be met, and can allow free-run hens to enjoy a much higher level of welfare.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

To my friends, Mr. Taylor and Ms. Moore, let me make one statement. I did talk to the dairy folks about your cheese issue, because I met with some of your folks last fall. I put that very issue in front of them. Like Mr. Storseth, I think that's a reasonable issue to put in front of them, the difference between whether you want the cardboard box with the cardboard thing in it with cheese on top, or you want to go down to the local pizzeria, where you're supporting a local business and you get it freshly made. Just so you know, it is in front of them at their highest level.

Ms. Moore, Mr. Lemieux raised the issue about beef and Taco Bell. I understand part of the comment is going to be that it's competitive forces, it might be cheaper, and there may be some quality to it. Let me ask how much of that is corporate driven, in the sense that it becomes what I like to call homogenized food, which means it has to be exactly like everyone else's? In other words, the same taco from a Taco Bell in Mr. Storseth's riding and a Taco Bell in my riding would have to be the same; the quality should be the same. In other words, it's standardized. When I say homogenized food, no matter where I buy it in North America it's going to look and taste the same, and basically it will probably be within 15¢ price-wise going across the country, or going up and down North America. It'll be more expensive in Alberta—they make more money out there. They've got the oil rig out there; they've got the oil sands stuff.

So how much of it is that?

Let me tell you, the U.S. Farm Bill does things for beef that we don't do here when it comes to price. So if you want a level playing field in the agriculture sector, you're going to have to take your group back to Doha, and everybody else with them, to try to figure out how to make it equal. Quite frankly, everybody cheats. I don't think there's a country in the world that doesn't cheat at agriculture. They don't tell you they're cheating; they all tell you they play on a level playing field, but the reality is there isn't anybody....

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

A point of order. We don't cheat.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Oh yeah. No, of course we don't. We play fair and everybody else cheats.

[An hon. member]

You've got it.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

That's the reality. How do you square that? Clearly, we want to give you Canadian beef, and we'd like to see you buy Canadian chicken. The problem is that you want to buy it at the kilo price to sell it at the piece price, whereas the farmer would probably tell you that he would sell it to you at the piece price so he can offset the fact that he didn't grow the kilos he needed to make any money.

So how do we square those circles? I asked one of your folks who sells ribs where he bought them. He buys them from Europe. The reason he buys them from Europe is we grow our pigs too big and the ribs are too large, so he buys them from elsewhere. That's not a supply managed program, so he can do that.

How do we work inside of those things to try to help you and keep farmers off the dole cheque that everyone else enters into?

[Justin Taylor]

I think for a number of brands they've chosen to go with the Canadian produce, Canadian meats, Canadian products. They have communicated that very well to consumers, and consumers are willing to pay an appropriate price for that. In lots of situations that's worked very, very well.

The reason we raised some of the issues we did today with government instead of raising them directly is because there's a government program in place that ensures that we can't necessarily negotiate to get the products we need.

I definitely think there is a place for more promotion of Canadian food, and restaurants can play a role in delivering that to consumers. We're leaders in setting those trends. The innovative products that you now see in grocery stores started off as restaurant meals, which were then adapted later on. We work within the supply chain to try to bring Canadian products to Canadian consumers.

It's difficult to say. I don't know exactly what the details are for Taco Bell, but, yes, chains do have to ensure they have consistent product across the board. If you go into a restaurant here in Ottawa and you go into the same branded restaurant in another province, the product is supposed to be the same, at the same quality level and the same standard. There are logistical challenges to being able to do that. A lot of restaurants have run their models based on the local food movement and are doing extremely well.

I think there's a role for the government to play to facilitate some of that promotion, and to raise awareness with consumers about the impact of where they're choosing to buy their food.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

I don't disagree.

The last question is for Mr. Cran.

I'm going to do a Mr. Storseth and pretend I didn't see that. I know you're going to cut me off.

For the fish you see in grocery stores that they can trace back to the actual trawler and the captain who caught it, do you see that as something consumers are driving or is that a marketing thing that has driven consumers?

[Bruce Cran]

I'm not sure I can answer that. We've been involved in setting up those programs over the years. I'd say it would have much more value to someone who was eating beef because of the very severe problems with mad cow disease than it would with fish or something of that type.

We get fruits these days and the orchard sticker is right there, and it can be traced back. The only time it didn't seem to work was when we had the big problem with the E. coli coming out in carrot juice some years ago. When we went to check the progeny structure, it just couldn't have been real. It may be by now, but they did have problems with it.

I don't know that that's something consumers look at these days. As far as I know, it's probably not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I'll move to Mr. Payne. You have five minutes.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming. Those were some interesting comments, and I'm going to have some questions around supply management.

Mr. Cran, you talked about safety, and you talked about radiation to kill bugs. You said that was a Canadian invention and nothing is happening with it. What was its intended purpose, for what kinds of products, and why aren't we using that?

[Bruce Cran]

With your last question first, I have no idea why we're not using it. We've just conducted a large survey, which we'll probably release in the next few weeks, about whether Canadians would like to see irradiation. There was enough response. I think there were well over 50% of people who believe we should have that as an available item. It gives almost 100% protection—maybe it is 100%—on practically any food you'd like to name. We were mainly interested in chicken and hamburger, but we're also interested in things like sprouts, where all those problems have been in Europe and America.

On the one I'm speaking of, I just know what I hear. It actually is a true story. The name of the company is Iotron. Some 20 years ago, it bought this system that was developed in Canada and was unwanted, I think, at the time. It's been using that for the last 20 to 25 years on medical devices, everything but food. We feel at the moment there's a big demand for this on food.

I can tell you my own thoughts on it. Thirty years ago I probably would never have wanted to buy something that had been irradiated, but with all the problems—every week there's a new one, with E. coli and listeria, and whatever you have coming up behind—I believe I'd find it an acceptable practice at the moment for my family, and we know a lot of other people do too, to have that protection available to you if you want it. We're not suggesting that everything be irradiated, but we feel it is a process that should be available. I think it would be something the consumers of Canada would take up very quickly.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Are there countries using it?

[Bruce Cran]

Yes. The States uses it on chicken and I think hamburger as well. It's been used on things like mangoes and herbs and what have you for the last 30 or 40 years. I can remember—it would have to be 30 years ago—my organization was against irradiation because in those days they used X-ray machines and, I don't know, pieces of the Hiroshima bomb, whatever they could get hold of, but now it's an electrical process.

This company, Iotron, I believe, has just opened a new branch in Minnesota or somewhere like that, and they're going ahead down there with another huge plant, whereas we don't seem to have taken it up at all.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I find that quite interesting.

Our friends from supply management or anti-supply management—I'm not sure how we should phrase that, but certainly we're supporting that supply management process....

I have a couple of things. I think one of our colleagues, Mr. Atamanenko, talked about the subsidization. What information do you have on what the U.S. is doing in terms of subsidization for...? We did hear about chickens, but what about milk, what about eggs, and any other countries, such as New Zealand, who want to get rid of it totally here in Canada?

[Justin Taylor]

We're not specialists on international agricultural policy, but what I can tell you is that in Canada, while we don't have the figures of how many cheques the government is cutting to dairy producers, the OECD has calculated that on average it costs each Canadian consumer $70 per year more in dairy costs because of supply management than if we didn't have it. In total that works out to be about $2.2 billion. And that's calculated by the OECD. Again, these aren't numbers the CRFA is coming up with on our own.

I don't know exactly what the cost is of the programs in these other countries, but the costs in Canada are very much hidden within the prices consumers pay.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Okay. I just want to go back to the chickens. You talked about KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, and the size of the bird. If the producers are growing these larger chickens, isn't that their consumer demand, or are we just looking at a very narrow piece here?

[Justin Taylor]

There definitely is a consumer demand for some pieces being grown larger. We see that in grocery stores. We also know that the very system that sets the prices drives production in that direction.

To give you a bit of an example—and it's not just Kentucky Fried Chicken—most of the national chains that have chicken as their primary ingredient, and I'm sure you can list a few off the top of your head, have spec. Spec means standardized cooking to ensure the chicken is cooked properly using the ovens and the friers and those types of things that are in the kitchen. If the chicken you're receiving is 10% to 15% larger than what your specs allow, that means you have to adjust the cooking time to ensure the food remains safe and well cooked. You have to retrain all of your staff. It's not something you can do on the fly. When we're not able to get product that meets the spec we need for our kitchens, which have been designed across the country, it creates huge problems. You can't just adjust it as you go; you risk selling chicken that is only partially cooked.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Mr. Hoback, you get the last five minutes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for being here today and providing the information. It's been great.

Chair, I was just thinking that if pizzas are cheaper, and we're eating meals and we're going to order a pizza, maybe we'd be better off with a frozen boxed pizza, because it sounds like they're 30% cheaper. If we're going to save funding, we might want to go down that road. As Mr. Lemieux said, I'm not sure I want to eat frozen boxed pizzas all the time, but we might put that into consideration.

Actually, I have a lot of questions for all of you, so I'm hoping the chair shows me the same liberties that he's shown the other witnesses and other people. I'm going to start off with my friend, Mr. Newkirk.

I'm actually a CIGI alumnus, but I think I was pulled off your alumnus list when I didn't approve of the single-desk selling of wheat and barley. I'm hoping you'll put me back on your alumnus list and blow the dust off some of your old lists, because there are a lot of farmers who went to the CIGI course who are not single-desk supporters who really enjoyed the CIGI combined customer groups and some of the training you've done. I'd really like to encourage you to keep doing that.

I'd really like to encourage you to keep doing what you're doing as far as the value-added for our processors—the customers we have around the globe. I just view you as an asset for both the new Canadian Wheat Board and for the grain industry as a total, to go out and promote our product. You're something that no other country has, and I guess we're going to figure out how we're going to fund you and keep you going, because I think the value-adding selling that you're doing is adding value to Canadian farmers in the markets. Please put me back on your list, if you can do that.

I have one comment. Mr. Geddes made a comment in front of the Senate committee, about innovation in agriculture, which we're lacking. I don't want to answer his question, but if you could just provide the committee with what he was talking about as far as lacking in improvements, I think that will fill in some of the areas of the report. Just quickly touch on that.

[Dr. Rex Newkirk]

I think—

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I actually won't get you to touch on it today, because we only have five minutes. I didn't see the report or where he was going from.... If you can just get that for us, it would be great.

[Dr. Rex Newkirk]

Sure. Yes.