Agriculture Committee on March 12th, 2012

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Okay, so we let that one slip.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

However, I was not allowed to talk to officials on their own when I felt I was getting unsatisfactory answers from staff within your office.

You know, Minister, when I was president of the National Farmers Union, you could pick up the phone and call an official. As an MP, I can't get a call back from an official, and I think that's wrong. If that is the policy, I do think it has to be changed. It's nothing to do with partisanship. I think it hampers the ability of MPs to do their job for Canadians.

So what is the policy?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I have never said to either George or John not to return calls--never.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay.

John, you're well aware of the issue because I wrote a letter to the Clerk of the Privy Council. We'll see where we go from here, and we'll see if we get answers.

On the specifics, we're hearing mixed opinions and mixed information on the CFIA budget. As I understand it, after the listeriosis crisis—there were moneys that were put in, and that money is now sunsetting—the budget did go up considerably. But with the 10% cut in CFIA's budget that I understand is coming, that will actually put the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's budget considerably below where it was before the listeriosis crisis. Is that correct or incorrect?

And while you're at it, can you give us any numbers in terms of the people who are actually involved in the inspection field to keep food safe, versus where they were five years ago?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

In the last three to four years, we have 733 net new inspectors on the front lines. We have now a ratio of the 6,500 employees in total.... For roughly 7,500 employees, total, we have roughly one administrator, one inspection staff, like a one-to-one ratio, whereas it used to be as high as two to one at one point, with the administration side. We have a far better ratio of inspector and inspector staff than straight administration staff, so that's a good-news story.

There are a number of other issues. Last year $100 million was added into CFIA's budget. There are things like that. So there are always programs that were three-year programs, and they sunset in order to be assessed, adjudicated, and so on.

We've had great success with the moneys that were dedicated to listeria prevention. There has been a great partnership between industry and CFIA to make sure that those tests are done in a more fulsome way and the accounting is there for all to see. I think the money was well spent.

At this point, then, we reassess that, adjudicate that, and make our asks back into budget, and of course that budget will come down on March 29. I know that when food safety is at stake, you folks will all line up to support that budget, simply because of the food safety moneys that will be there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Easter, I have a comment on your first question. I can tell you that when I was in opposition, and I've even had it happen in government.... It seems to be dependent on some ministries, with some managers, that they don't allow the people under them to talk. What I do in that case, as I'm sure you have—I think you said it today—is go directly to the minister. It's nothing new. I'm not sure it's an official policy—

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It's a quite new policy, Mr. Chair, quite new.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Anyway, Mr. Hoback, for five minutes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister. As a member of the agriculture committee, I must say that the amount of time you've given to this committee, as far as showing up to give a consultation is concerned.... I remember that we actually had public officials in front of this committee for a meeting not even two weeks ago, to go through some of the new programming, so I know your officials are definitely available for answering questions. I guess Mr. Easter wasn't aware of the meeting or decided not to show.

But I must say that when I talk to farm groups.... I remember, Minister, that when I was the chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers we came down to Ottawa to meet with Andy Mitchell, who was then the minister. I flew down from Saskatoon, supposedly to have a meeting with him, and of course it got cancelled at the last minute. I know that there were many frustrations for farm groups at that time with that Liberal government and how they would not be accessible.

Yet I can honestly say, Minister—and I say this to your credit—that when I talk to the farm groups, they're so happy and impressed with how inclusive you are: when you go on trade missions abroad, you include them, and how you work with them, and how you're available to talk, and not only you but also your staff.... So I want to compliment you on that, and I hope you keep it up, because that's making our ag industry in Canada that much stronger.

Minister, that kind of ties into research, because a lot of the groups we're working with are talking about research and how important research is, and I think this committee gets it. If you talk to members around this committee...I think we understand that research is very important. I know that at the University of Saskatchewan we've seen some great agriculture sector research out of Innovation Place.

In the main estimates, you're indicating that basically there's going to be another $38.4 million spent on an agriculture innovation program. Maybe you could help to educate the committee about what that program is and about just how it's going to impact the agriculture sector.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Well, there's nobody better to decide on research than the end user. For so many years, a lot of research was done without consultation with industry as to the result they hoped to have or could make use of. We changed that around about two or three years ago when we started science clusters, working with industry, with academia, with the provinces and ourselves, and with the private sector as well, in making sure that for any amount of money there were not overlaps and gaps and that we were focused on a result. We've been having great success with that. We've been able to make a lot more use of our scarce dollars.

Having said that, I know that there has been a lot of talk of going back to 1994 levels of spending on research. I'm happy to tell you that when we do the comparison, even taking inflation into play and so on, we're actually spending about 15% more now than we were in 1994, even with inflated dollars and so on. So there's a little bit of miscommunication as to what all that research funding does. We've committed even more to that. As you rightly point out on the numbers you talked about in the main estimates, there are a lot of points where the innovative idea has been put to bed, and then how do you commercialize it? How do you put that into practice so that farmers, processors, and so on can actually make use of it? That's what we're trying to target: it's that next step.

Researchers are fantastic in Canada. They do tremendous research. They get it done. They crack the egg and then they put it on the shelf. Now, how do you make use of that? It takes an extra step in between for the commercialization of that innovative new process to make sure that it actually hits the field, or the farm, or the processing sector and is made use of. That's what we're targeting.

We've had some great ideas come forward already this year. There are some applications that we're just in the process of reviewing, so I won't get into them because we're still working on them. But there are some tremendous ideas that will actually return dollar value back to the farm gate.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Actually, we did a biotech study this last session before the election. We talked to a lot of the biotech sector, where there's a lot of research going on.

You mentioned funding from innovation to the marketplace, and kind of filling that hole. I know they identified in that study just how much was lacking and needed. I know there are millions of dollars we're putting in there.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Farmers have been excellent at doing that on the equipment side. A lot of innovations have come out of the farm shop and then turned into a small-town industry that has just gotten huge, such as Bourgault in Saskatchewan, and others, of course. They've gone global. It's tremendous what can be done when you can take that innovative idea and commercialize it.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Yes, that's exactly right.

When we look at research, is there anything you look at that you find particularly interesting? Is there anything new or earth-shattering that you'd like to share with this committee, or do you want to stay more general?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

A tremendous amount of work has been done on canola and special crops because farmers had control over them. Last year the average in canola was over 50% oil content, which is fantastic. It's the same amount of crush time and cost, but you ended up with 10% more oil last year over what we had the year before.

There's a tremendous new interest, I'll call it, in the coarse grains: wheat, durum, and barley, and new varieties that are going to be required. There's a lot of work being done on what I'll call feed-wheat varieties, which are millable, so it keeps the costs down and the return higher. The farmer is looking at 100 bushels an acre rather than the 40 or 50 we're used to with the hard red. In the end, those types of innovations are going to help drive the farm gate.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much.

Mr. Rousseau, you have five minutes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister Ritz, for attending.

It is a pleasure to see you and I am sure that all my colleagues are also pleased to welcome you. You should come more often. We often talk about serious matters and it would be interesting to have discussions with you more frequently.

Mr. Minister, today's Globe and Mail mentioned that your colleague Ed Fast is in New York to represent Canada in the negotiations for the trans-Pacific partnership. But it seems that he is ready to sacrifice the supply management system, which shapes agriculture in Quebec and in the entire east of the country. Any good agriculture minister would protect the supply management system, which requires no government support, and he would not let the Minister of International Trade dictate his politics.

If I understood your remarks correctly earlier, you are committed to protecting the supply management system unconditionally. Mr. Minister, could you tell us more about that?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I think we've done it by actions, not just by words. We were the only political party in last spring's election to actually have it in our campaign platform. We brought it forward into our throne speech, the direction the new government will take.

Certainly I am more than happy to meet with my supply-managed colleagues across the country at any time to talk about their issues. We've done a number of things for them, such as cheese compositional standards. The protein levels that were being brought in sort of under the wire, we've shut that down. We work with them every step of the way to make sure they retain the strength and the ability to give Canadians that top-quality product.

I know there are a lot of discussions. I look at my old friend Garth Whyte with the restaurant association complaining bitterly about dairy, the costs, and all that type of thing. Nothing could be further from the truth. I love to use the example of a glass of milk in a restaurant. It's going to cost you, as a customer, $2.50 to $3.00. A farmer is going to get less than 20¢ of that, and the waiter or waitress is going to want a 10% or 15% tip, which is double what the farmer got. Who's the problem? It's certainly not the farmer. And it's good quality milk. We've never had a melamine problem, and we've never had an issue where we've had to go back.

We understand the value and validity of Canada's supply-managed system. Mr. Fast, in talking about trade, starts off, as we always do, having everything on the table, and we negotiate our way through. At the end of the day, we now have a free trade deal with Switzerland—the dairy of Europe—and we did not hinder our supply-managed system at all in doing that.

We look forward to doing those trade deals. We are an exporting nation. In most commodities we export between 50% and 80% of what we produce, and people understand that Canadian quality is of the top.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

If I understand correctly, you are contradicting Minister Fast. If we go by what he has recently said, more specifically today in New York, he is ready to bring that to the table. In 2005, when you were in the opposition, you said you were in favour of a motion protecting supply management in international negotiations. And now you are saying that starting negotiations in this way is classic.

Who should producers listen to: Minister Fast or the Minister of Agriculture? I have met with dairy, egg and poultry farmers who told me that they are afraid of what will be on the table. They want some reassurance. Could you reassure them right now, yes or no?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I think I've done just that. I'm not saying anything different from what Minister Fast is saying. When you negotiate these international trade deals, everything is on the table from day one, and as you work your way though the negotiations you pull things off. They know what your defensive positions are and you know what theirs are. You know your offensive positions and you know theirs. You work your way though these systems.

We have never dropped the ball in supporting supply management. I said judge us by our deeds, not just our words, but we're not shy about saying the words either.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Does that mean that Minister Fast is going to take supply management off the table right away?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I didn't say that. I said as you work your way through the negotiations, you make it very well known what your defensive and offensive positions are, and you negotiate your way to an agreement that benefits both. We have not signed, nor do we intend to sign, an agreement that does not benefit Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Rousseau, your time has expired.

We now move to Mr. Payne for five minutes.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming today.

I'm going to touch on a couple of things. In particular, I want to start off talking about food safety, Minister, and if there's enough time I want to go back to some of your comments on the Wheat Board.

Minister, our government has made some record contributions to the food safety program, including—as you mentioned earlier—adding 733 net front-line inspectors and fulfilling the recommendations of the Weatherill report. In the supplementary estimates (C), on page 23, is a vote appropriation indicating that CFIA will spend almost $7 million to implement a plan to modernize Canada's food safety inspection.

Could you please explain to the committee how this initiative will build on our government's success in making food safer for Canadians?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Food safety is a priority for this government. We've never shied away from that. We continue to work with CFIA, and Health Canada, for that matter; again, there's a partnership between public health, federally and provincially, as well as CFIA.

We learned a number of things through the listeria issue: better communication, so we have checked off that box, making sure that CFIA has the ability to work with their provincial colleagues and their other federal colleagues in a more fulsome way. That's a tremendous opportunity to make sure that communication works well.

We continue to put money into the budget to make sure they can deliver on a new way of doing things, much more electronic, that is faster, that serves commerce better with speed and accuracy. We've made sure that our food safety action plan was well funded, with $223 million to make sure we can improve the controls on imported foods.

This fiscal year, to date, we've had 99 border blitzes and 480 enhanced inspections at the border. That means going beyond just the check that we do. We also use a system now where a lot more inspection is done at point of origin—that is, the plant in the U.S., and so on, as the product comes up.

We no longer run trucks off to the side and hold them. The speed of commerce was not well served with the best-before dates and fresh produce coming in, in that regard. We have a much better system that is doing the job in a much more efficient and effective way than it was ever done before--as I said, 480 enhanced inspections, as well as 99 border blitzes.

For years we used to phone the exporter and say we're going to check your truck—72 hours' notice, we're going to check your truck. That didn't work really well. We got rid of that, and now we're using a system whereby the U.S. and Canada are working much more hand in hand to make sure that food is safe on both sides of the border.