Agriculture Committee on May 30th, 2012

[John Masswohl]

I think right now the most significant ones are getting a good access agreement to Europe through the CETA, as well as concluding the Canada-Korea free trade agreement. That's a market that we've just regained as a result of a WTO case and negotiation. But the Americans now have a free trade agreement with Korea, so the tariff on U.S. beef is 2.7 points below the tariff on Canadian beef going into Korea. I would certainly put Japan very near the top of that list both for getting a free trade agreement with Japan either bilaterally, or as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as well as increasing the age. Right now, Canadian beef has to come from cattle under 21 months of age to go to Japan. We would like at least to get that raised to 30 months of age, as a step on the way to their fully applying the OIE standard.

So I would say those are the big three.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Thanks for that.

I have a similar question for Rick in terms of market access. We've just heard your concerns, too, about market access and the need to increase our exporting of Canadian pork. In terms of what you would see as priorities for the international trade minister, what are the markets that we should be looking at in terms of pork?

[Rick Bergmann]

I don't know if I can define it as “the market” but certainly advancement in Korea and TPP—all these different areas where maybe it's a challenge, but a good challenge. Our world population is growing. If you look at their needs, more and more people in those countries want to have protein in their diet. It's a tremendous opportunity, so to define it as one area would be very difficult to do.

We have challenges with our industry here. No industry is perfect, but we're attempting to work on those challenges with government, on the flip side, to prepare ourselves for this growing world of ours. So numerous areas across the world. Our industry is 140 countries strong in export now, and we anticipate that to grow.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You're out of time, Mr. Zimmer.

Mr. Valeriote, you have five minutes.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you all for coming and spending your time with us today and taking time from your schedules.

Deanna and Stephen, I read a briefing note from February 12 from your industry. It talks about livestock carriers “committed to the safe and secure transport of animals entrusted with their care”, and I have no doubt about that. “Drivers are responsible for the set up of trailer compartments, preparation of bedding, cleaning duties to address biosecurity [issues],” including numerous factors of weather, animal weight, species, safety of animals in transit, etc. The list goes on. It's a complicated thing.

You later talk in another document and tell us, “There currently exists no legislated standard of training for livestock haulers in Canada.” You spoke yourself, Deanna, of the shrinking pool of these drivers. You talk about reputable voluntary programs existing, but there being a lack of transparency and accessible mechanisms to verify driver training and nothing done nationally.

With respect to animal welfare, we know that it is first and foremost in the minds of farmers. They want to protect the quality of their stock, no question. It's in their best interest to do that. We also know that it's a question of the proper treatment of animals, and it's a question of food safety as well.

I wonder whether it's time to develop a national training standard that would be required to be met for what appears to me, from what I read, a rather complicated job requiring some very sophisticated skills. So that people—like myself, consumers, animal rights groups, everyone across Canada—could, at least at that level, be satisfied that something is being done to deal with the situation.

Can you talk to us about that?

[Stephen Laskowski]

Sure I can.

We're on the same page, and I think Deanna has been working with the same folks in this room, whether they're from the Cattlemen's Association and discussions with them, or with the pork producers, etc.

What we'd like to see as an industry is a database that includes—and this is a private sector database—drivers trained to a certain standard, a standard agreed to by both the trucking industry and their customers, and those standards being enforced by the supply chain. The consumers and the producers who demand these standards would enforce them by using only the individual companies and drivers who are trained to these types of standards.

We believe in the initial discussions that, down the road, we'll be able to see that creation. Right now, there is a series of different modules out there and created; however, it's not all under one roof. There's also, perhaps, a divergence of opinion as to what is and what is not training. So that is where we are heading.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Would you like to see, as a recommendation of this committee, that this kind of program be developed, in consultation with the industry?

[Stephen Laskowski]

Absolutely.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

All right. I have another question. I am reading now from another document I received from the National Cattle Feeders' Association.

We had, the other day, an opportunity to visit a feedlot near Erin, Ontario. We noticed all the tags on the ears of the cattle. This report says that 660,000 head, approximately 13,750 truckloads of fat cattle per year, or 35 loads per day, are destined for the United States to be inspected by CFIA-approved veterinarians. It says that “E-certification protocols would significantly improve the efficiency of this process without compromising integrity.”

I imagine that would help the trucking industry, and that would also help the cattle industry. I'm speaking to the Cattlemen's Association at the same time.

Yet it says, “There have been reports that implementation of E-certification protocols could take as long as five additional years to implement”, which is, in their words, “completely unacceptable. It is...our understanding that implementation of E-certification is not a new initiative and that CFIA has been working on these protocols for some time”.

They showed us the tools and equipment they use. It is very sophisticated. They are trying to encourage as many people to use them as possible.

Could you tell the committee what you would recommend as a recommendation from this committee to the minister with respect to the immediate introduction of e-certification and the expediting of that process? Do you see value in it?

[Stephen Laskowski]

That is probably better answered by the other participants here around the table.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I'd like to ask the Cattlemen's Association.

[Dennis Laycraft]

Yes, we do. There is excellent value in moving forward.

I also chair the Beef Value Chain Roundtable. We have actively been proposing this and discussing this since 2007. In fact, we were told at one stage that they thought they'd have it in place by 2011. Some pilots were already under way.

There are a number of benefits to this. You raised the importance of transportation in the handling of livestock. Every time you delay a shipment, every time you have a truck sitting there, inside of it there is livestock being delayed. Every time you delay a shipment, you have animals being stored some place waiting to be transported out. We can greatly improve the efficiency. It would also improve the accuracy and the timeliness of these documents.

In our view, we see livestock as the ideal pilot project for moving this forward. There is great interest in a number of jurisdictions in the U.S. and Canada to make livestock a pilot. We'd be grateful if that came forward as a recommendation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

Go ahead, Mr. Lobb.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Thank you very much.

My first question is for the Canadian Pork Council. We had a representative here a couple of weeks ago from Maple Leaf Foods who was outlining future best practices, in their words, in the way sows are dealt with in gestation crates, or sow crates, or whatever you want to use as a term. The Humane Society International is really pushing for this, and the fast food retailers are going along with this.

I went back to my riding, and I talked to some older pork producers about the history of gestation crates and why they came into being. They said that it was because of what was happening with the sows and their piglets. They were crushing them when it was time for them to feed.

I question why the industry is doing this. Where is the sense here? Give me the history.

[Jean-Guy Vincent]

Agriculture is changing and producers are adapting. However, a lot of information of all types is circulating today and producers get caught up in that. Agricultural producers, pork producers, are asking themselves questions. They raise their animals well, take care of them, and modernize over time, but they are facing a problem. Often they are the first ones to be subjected to demands, but these new requirements don't come with the necessary help to allow producers to meet them. Society must be aware of the fact that in order to make the changes that are being required of them, producers have to receive either better prices for their products or some type of other assistance.

Producers have always evolved. They have met consumers' expectations, as consumers are the ones who decide what products they want to buy. And producers always offer—increasingly so-— the best possible quality.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

I'd like to ask you something on that one point. I understand that you said you have to react and adapt to what the consumer demands. But I've been doing this job for nearly four years, and I've never had one constituent out of 110,000 constituents come into my office and say, “Ben, we have to doing something with these gestation crates; it's unjust to a sow”.

Do you think it's the consumer, or is it a radical group like the Humane Society International that has lobbied these groups? I've never heard any complaints, and I'm sure that if we went up and down these rows here, no one has ever heard any complaints about this.

[Jean-Guy Vincent]

We want to meet consumers' needs. They are the ones who have requirements. You were alluding to groups, but there are many in society. For all sorts of reasons, large companies indicate the direction they want us to go in.

For our part, we want our animals to be raised in good conditions, we want them to be protected, and we also want the suckling pigs to be protected as well. That is why, over the past few years, we have adapted equipment in order to protect our animals. Around the table, representatives from various walks of life meet in order to establish a code of practice for those cases where producers are asked to make changes or to adjust.

As agricultural producers, we are willing to do a lot of things to meet the requirements of consumers. However, to meet those requirements, we need an income, we need help. The whole chain, that is the processors, the retailers and the government, have to take part in bringing about the changes that society wants to see. We are ready to do that and to adapt.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

We're going to run out of time here, so I have to ask you one quick question. Obviously the proposed changes to the code of practice are going to cost pork producers from coast to coast probably close to half a billion dollars to implement, with no money from the consumer and no money from the fast food restaurants. Zero. It will all be done on the backs of the farmers.

The question I have is, how many more sows are we going to have to add into production, the supply chain—because we know we'll be less productive when we move to this new format of production—to meet the demands of the consumer?

[Jean-Guy Vincent]

This is a very delicate topic. You are asking the right questions. I will try to give you the right answers, insofar as producers are concerned.

I will not hide from you the fact that producers are concerned about this push for change. They are considering it and wondering how they are going to be able to adapt to the pressure they are feeling at this time.

The adoption of a code of practice represents the first step. Everyone has to sit down at the table to determine the best conditions to raise these animals. As producers, that is what we do every day. On our farms we have to find ways of raising animals that are productive and profitable if we are to honour our obligations. The consumer has to understand that the additional requirements he is placing on the producer will come at a cost. The retailers who are around this table must know that. When a large chain says what it wants, it should also suggest paying more and organizing itself to help the producers that are the pillars of the system. We are at the start point of this chain and we produce every day.

I raise 25,000 hogs a year. In order to raise them while respecting the requirements of the bank and those of society, I need an income. Like other Canadian producers, I am willing to meet the consumer's demands. By the same token, people have to realize that this responsibility of raising animals or demanding certain conditions is not the business of the producer alone. It is the responsibility of the entire chain, of all of the links that make it up. Producers will adapt to the demands of the consumer. However, they are also going to need some help.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

I now have Ms. Raynault.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here with us.

I would like to talk about the transport industry. Since I was once a producer, I had to deal with transport companies. In your document, which I have here, you say that a cattle carrier must both be a producer and a professional driver, as he must take care of the animals he transports in his truck.

Thirty years ago, there were a large number of small family farms and so there were more in any given sector. Currently, there are far fewer. There is a decrease in the number of workers as well. There are fewer producers. Consequently, there are fewer people with the skills needed to drive these trucks. You see, these people knew how to get the cows into the trucks to transport them to the slaughterhouse, they were used to it.

Where do you hire your workers? Who is interested in transporting the animals?

[Stephen Laskowski]

The type of workers we're getting is a challenge we've identified. It is becoming an increasing challenge in the general trucking sector, especially the animal sector. That is why we are emphasizing the need for more and more training—not just voluntary training or memorandums of understanding but required training.

Where are people coming from? In central and eastern Canada they're coming from the manufacturing community. As jobs have left that sector, people are looking for better paying jobs. They're leaving the manufacturing sector and learning to drive a truck. Learning to drive a truck safely is a critical criterion. But if you get into the animal sector you need to learn how a pig or a cow reacts in transit, how to load them, how to tend to their health needs. It's an individual, typically, who gravitates towards the animals. They have an interest in the animals and they move to the livestock area. It's an interesting challenge for our sector.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Fine.

In your document, one reads that the trucks have become travelling warehouses, because they deliver the cattle when the plant is ready to receive them.

How are the animals treated during their transportation? In Quebec, hogs from Abitibi-Témiscamingue are slaughtered in Saint-Esprit, which is a few kilometres from me, but that means they must travel approximately 700 kilometres.

How are the animals treated during transport? Do they get anything to eat, do they have water, do they get to go for a little walk, so that their legs do not become numb? What do you do?

[Stephen Laskowski]

I think part of the answer to this question has already been brought up both by the pork producers and by the cattlemen.

There is a lot of discussion between the trucking industry and our customers on how best to handle these animals in transit and in working with various other sectors that are related to animal welfare. Therefore, what we're saying as an industry, and what we do as an industry in working with our customers, is that we make sure we understand these animals' needs and how it's done.

But to your point, to say that this always happens isn't the case; hence, we're saying that is why you need more and more training out there and an idea of the supply chain using the resources that are handled. If the criteria here is to ensure that animals in transit are always dealt with correctly and therefore we must go back to.... It's a chicken-and-egg issue. You have to go back to the beginning to ensure the transporters are certified and their drivers are trained to handle these animals in transit.

There's a right way to do it and a wrong way, like everything in life. Our members do it the right way, and the people around the table here today try to ensure that those people they source from do it the right way. What we're trying to say now is that we know how to do it the right way, so now let's make sure that every truck in transit that is moving a live animal load is doing it the right way.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

We see news reports on television where they show certain animals in the transport trucks. When the consumers find out what they are going to eat, the news reports are not always favourable to the transporters.

The transporters should perhaps do some publicity to explain that the animals are well treated so that the meat does not have a bad reputation.