Agriculture Committee on March 26th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food, meeting number 72. The orders of the day are, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), a study of the agriculture and agri-food products supply chain in the beverage sector.

Joining us today from the Canadian Beverage Association is Jim Goetz. Welcome.

From the Winery and Grower Alliance of Ontario, we have Patrick Gedge, president and chief executive officer; and Murray Marshall, director.

I think you've all been informed of the process. I would suggest that if your other colleagues are coming in for future meetings we always like to be able to test and sample product.

I don't know if you've decided who is going to present first.

I'll ask Mr. Goetz to start, and we'll go from there.

[Jim Goetz, President, Canadian Beverage Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude for the invitation to appear today. We have tremendous respect for the work of your committee and, in particular, we are excited to contribute to your examination of the supply chain. I would like to use this time to tell you a bit more about our industry, the contribution we make in terms of jobs and growth, the valued products we deliver to consumers, and the broader opportunities we create for farming families among others.

I also want to share some information about the investments our members make in the communities in which we live, work, and raise our own families. And finally, I want to touch on measures our members are taking, often working closely with Parliament, to ensure Canadians enjoy a balanced range of beverage choices that are healthy, safe, and responsive to the preferences of consumers.

The obligation to serve the best interests of consumers and Canadians is one that we take extremely seriously. We look forward to exploring ways in which we can work collaboratively to build on that current success.

Let me start with our business.

Our economic footprint in Canada is substantial. Fuelled by more than 60 brands, the refreshment beverage industry generates approximately $5 billion in annual sales from coast to coast to coast. Moreover, our members are responsible for more than 120 manufacturing, distribution, and sales facilities that can be found in every corner of the country. In total, CBA members directly employ 12,000 Canadians in steady, well-paying jobs, the vast majority of which are unionized with good benefits and solid pensions. That amounts to an annual payroll of approximately $500 million.

Our involvement is realized in not only commercial but community terms as well. CBA members dedicate substantially to the places we live through a variety of charitable and local causes. Financially, this engagement can be measured in the millions of dollars each year, from the United Way to Special Olympics, from ParticipACTION to building local playgrounds. It's money, time, and leadership given to support local sports programs, youth development, health and wellness, and the promotion of literacy.

This local ethic also highlights a key point to the committee's work. Our members and their facilities can be found everywhere in Canada, from Newfoundland to the Lower Mainland and all parts in between.

The reality of the beverage business is that you must build plants and facilities where you find people who want your product. Pop, fruit juices, and other beverages are made relatively close to market and then shipped quickly to consumers. Ours is a manufacturing business that still places a premium on local presence and with very few exceptions, the products we sell in Canada are made in Canada.

This simple fact has significant implications for the committee's study on the supply chain.

For example, our members are one of the largest, if not the largest, block of customers for corn producers and corn growers, creating vital demand for that agricultural product. We are also the country's largest buyers of packaged aluminum and PET plastic.

Finally, our members oversee extensive vehicle fleets that create demand for steel, manufacturing parts, and of course, vehicle production and assembly in North America, and specifically in Canada.

In summary, our effect on agriculture and the wider supply chain is enormous. And let me be clear. We're committed to working together to foster this role further and as commercial conditions permit, generate still additional opportunity.

In turn, we ask little of government. We do not seek grants or financial aid. In fact, our only real request is that we work together to avoid unnecessary barriers to current and future success. Regulation is inherent to our industry. We accept that. In fact, we embrace it. Certainly, as the producers of consumed beverages, health and safety is absolutely our highest priority. In that respect, government, through agencies such as the CFIA and Health Canada, is one of our most vital partners. Together we ensure the highest standards of regulatory stewardship while also procuring the best possible conditions for growth.

We applaud, for instance, sustainable regulatory measures such as the new marketing authorization and incorporation by reference, IbR, tools adopted by Health Canada. These and other moves recognize the importance of leveraging analysis completed in comparable jurisdictions when it comes to our own safety approval process.

It was thanks to IbR, for example, that our industry finally received approval for stevia, the natural sweetener that has long since been cleared for safe use as an additive in other countries. In fact, stevia is a perfect example where unnecessary delay achieved no objective other than making Canadian consumers wait unnecessarily. Our proposal is this: where health and safety are not at issue, let’s work together to move more effectively. That will benefit consumers, reduce costs, and ultimately permit our industry to dedicate valuable resources toward other priorities that produce growth.

Before concluding, I want to make two additional points.

First, we know there will be issues where we must work together. Establishing the appropriate levels of caffeine and calories that people consume is an important issue for public health. Our members have been voluntarily pursuing strategies that have had a demonstrated impact, and we want to indicate our willingness to continue to work to achieve progress in this field. If we sometimes bristle at suggestions that too little is being done, it is because we frequently feel that too little attention is paid to the specific efforts that the industry has made, particularly in comparison to others that must also take full part in the solution. To combat obesity will require a combined effort with balanced policies across a range of sectors.

Second, we want this committee to know that our industry does not wait for government to take action. We have voluntarily adopted guidelines that prohibit the marketing of any beverages but for those that are 100% fruit, vegetable, milk, or water to children age 12 or under. In addition, we have removed all full-calorie soft drinks from primary, middle, and secondary schools prior to government regulation that asked us to do so. Finally, we've implemented our “clear on calories” campaign, which greatly increases the front-facing, on-label nutrition information for consumers, giving them greater insight into their beverage choices.

In summary, our recipe for progress is simple: good science, collaborative action, sustainable change, fair application, and information for consumers. Working together, we believe such an approach will yield results in terms of both public wellness and economic benefit.

In closing, I would simply thank the committee once again for the invitation, and I welcome your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Marshall, are you presenting, or is Mr. Gedge?

[Patrick Gedge, President and Chief Executive Officer, Winery and Grower Alliance of Ontario]

We both are. We'll start with me.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The Winery and Grower Alliance of Ontario would like to thank the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food for the opportunity today to speak about the wine and grape industry in Canada and specifically in Ontario.

My name is Patrick Gedge, and I am the president and CEO of the Winery & Grower Alliance of Ontario, or WGAO. I am accompanied by Murray Marshall, who is the president and CEO of Diamond Estates Wines & Spirits Ltd. and a director of the WGAO.

As a background to our organization, the WGAO is the leading industry trade association in Ontario, with its members representing over 85% of the wine produced in the province. You may know us more by brand names such as Jackson-Triggs, Trius, Inniskillin, Peller Estates, Colio Estate Wines, Magnotta Winery, Lakeview Cellars, and others.

Our members include both wineries and grape growers in the province, as we believe the continued success of the industry is best guaranteed by both groups working seamlessly together. In fact, to demonstrate that interdependence, our wineries purchase over 85% of the wine grape crop produced each year by independent growers in Ontario.

This presentation is extremely timely. An independent study has just been unveiled that sums up the economic impact of the industry in Canada, and in the provinces of Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec, and Nova Scotia, the major domestic wine-producing regions. The study was carried out by Frank, Rimerman and Company, which has conducted similar research studies for the U.S. industry as a whole, and some 20 individual states.

Highlights of the analysis include:

Canadian wine production has an annual national economic impact of $6.8 billion. Specifically, for every bottle of wine produced in Canada, there is $31 of domestic economic impact generated in the country. For Ontario, the total impact is $3.3 billion, and $40 per bottle.

The wine and grape industry is responsible for more than 31,000 jobs in Canada, and in Ontario, 14,000 jobs.

Wine-related tourism welcomes more than three million visitors each year, generating more than $1.2 billion annually in tourism revenue and employment. In Ontario, that represents 1.9 million visitors and some $644 million.

Finally, and not least, the wine industry generates some $1.2 billion in federal and provincial tax revenue and liquor board markups. In Ontario, that represents some $602 million.

In the past, quite naturally, we've often been thought of as a fairly small, quaint, and local industry. Today the industry is a significant and growing economic contributor—nationally, regionally, and locally—as evidenced by the results of this study. The value chain in our industry is one of the most interdependent of any sector. The foundation of our industry rests with highly productive and market-driven grape growers who produce high-quality grapes for all price points in the market. They work very closely with the wineries and winemakers who purchase the grapes and ensure that we produce bottles of quality wine capable of competing successfully against imports. We have, for example, premium Vintners Quality Alliance, VQA, wines over $10.00 and value-based International Canadian Blend, ICB, wines under $10.00.

In addition to being highly integrated, our industry has a significant impact in multiple sectors: agriculture, food processing, manufacturing—wineries are in fact in the manufacturing category—services, and, not least, tourism. Our economic reach supports educational and commercial research institutions like Brock University in St. Catharines, the Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute, and Niagara College Canada. The tourism component is significant, complementing world famous Niagara Falls, and it creates local employment through accommodations, restaurants, and services.

During the past number of years we have seen many sectors in the economy suffer. We should recognize and celebrate the fact that the Canadian wine and grape industry continues to be more and more successful each year in terms of farm gate value, manufacturing productivity, product innovation, and sales growth.

We are helping grow the wine category in Canada. In 1995, wine represented 18.8% of all alcoholic sales in Canada, and this grew to 30.2% in 2011, an increase of 11.4%. During the same time, beer and spirits dropped 8.1% and 3.4% respectively. The growth potential of Canadian wine products and their economic impact continues to be enormous.

In spite of this success, the wine and grape industry operates on very thin margins and is highly capital intensive at both the farm and winery level. We need to ensure that the industry is sustainable and fully competitive over the long term.

With that, let me pass it over to Murray Marshall.

[Murray Marshall, Director, Winery and Grower Alliance of Ontario]

Thank you, Patrick.

Good morning, everyone.

I'd like to address three specific opportunities that we feel the federal government could consider.

First of all, the Government of Canada has been extremely supportive of our industry and should receive credit where credit is due. It has benefited our collective success. In this highly regulated industry, governments and the private sector have to work closely together in order for both to succeed in their objectives.

As Growing Forward 2 and related programs move forward, we would recommend a specific initiative or allocation that supports the domestic marketing and new product development of Canadian wines. We need to increase the pride and the awareness that Canadians have for domestic wine and ultimately create more demand over imports. Canadians are very keen to keep and grow jobs in this country. We can now quantify the impact of our industry in national support and local community and economic development.

As one specific example of building pride in our national products, we would encourage Air Canada, for instance, one of the world’s great airlines, to follow the lead of VIA Rail and serve only Canadian wines on their flights.

We also know through LCBO research that new wine products generate some 60% to 70% of the growth in sales of premium products. Wineries make significant investments in the development and launching of new products each year in order to be competitive. This should be encouraged through government programming so that constant private sector innovation is recognized. Together we can leverage the economic ability of our industry to produce new jobs and new revenue to government.

While domestic product wine sales keep increasing, today we still have only 30% of all wine sales in Canada, while imports continue to represent and dominate at 70%. By comparison, other countries own their domestic markets and therefore achieve economies of scale that enable successful exportation of product. For example, just to give you a couple of countries for comparison, in Chile, 100% of the wine consumed in that marketplace is Chilean; 84% of the wine in Australia is Australian; and in the United States, 66% is from the U.S.

With the results of the economic impact analysis, we can set quantifiable metrics that will measure the success and the return on investment for any new and updated industry programs that support domestic marketing and new product development.

Second, it is important for us to support market demand for Canadian, and Ontario, grapes. This needs to be done in a way that makes domestic wines more competitive and not less competitive. As a result, we would strongly support the excise tax exemption be applied to the Canadian grape content in international and Canadian blended wines, or some equivalent action.

This is a large segment of wine sales that take place in the market, representing 73% of all Ontario wine sales in this province. In fact, the majority of the wine grapes grown in Ontario are used for ICB wines. This proposed change would make the industry more competitive while sustaining and growing domestic wine grape production.

Third, we need to be cautious about any fundamental policy changes that may negatively affect Canadian wine sales and empower importer competitors to gain even more than their existing 70% market share.

We have been very pleased with our discussions with the Minister of Agriculture concerning the potential deregulation of container sizes through the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act. We believe the government fully understands our concerns about such a change and the potential unintended consequences that could allow imports to flood the market and stimulate a race to the bottom. Our biggest vulnerability with such change is in the bag-in-the-box products. Today, they represent 31 million litres of sales each year. The economic impact of these sales is some $688 million to the Canadian economy.

In summary, the grape and wine industry serves as a great success story today in Canada. Its economic impact of $6.8 billion, 31,000 jobs, and $1.2 billion of government taxes and markups represents a significant opportunity for us to grow in the future.

We would like to thank you, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, for the time to share these new opportunities to grow our Canadian wines sector.

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Allen.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our guests.

Perhaps I'll start with Patrick, the folks in my home area, the wine industry. I guess we have to apologize. Patrick said to me earlier that it wasn't noon in Ottawa. I told him it was 12:30 in Newfoundland when we started, so it was actually afternoon, so we could have had samplers.

[Patrick Gedge]

We look forward to coming back at the appropriate time.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Perhaps we should just bring the committee to Niagara; we could actually do the sampling.

Nonetheless, Mr. Marshall you finished the last statement. I want to use the last statement and work backwards from there, if I can, around the economic impact.

For those of us who are from Niagara like I am, we've seen this industry grow up, if you will, working through its early adolescent stage, and now becoming a mature industry with a mature product that on the international stage is actually doing remarkably well, and has won numerous awards throughout the world. Icewine is being recognized as a premier brand for us across the entire world—unlike in the days when we made Baby Duck. I recognize that may have some youthful memories for some of us, nonetheless, we're not there anymore.

But there's the economic impact: $6.8 billion, 31,000 jobs, $1.2 billion in government taxes and markups. And it's only 30% of the Canadian market that we actually capture. If we were to double that to 60% of the Canadian market—we'd still be below the U.S.'s 66%—what's your sense of what that would look like economically for the Canadian market? Quite clearly, we're looking at a true value-added industry, from grape in the field to product in the bottle retailing—the whole value chain all in one simple go-round.

Because this study was done, do you have any sense for projecting what that would look like if we simply went to the average that international competitors have in their home markets?

[Murray Marshall]

Thanks very much. I'll do my best to answer that because there are a few unknowns in this.

One of the strengths of our industry has been the ability to work hand in hand with our agricultural products. Every winery today in Ontario is de facto a grape grower. Today we all produce our own grapes, but there is a very healthy and evolved independent farmer whose specific business is to grow tender fruit, grapes being a big part of that. Part of our goal is to work with our stakeholders to make sure that the raw material, the grapes in the vine that are planted in the vineyards today, can work with us. We have a very collaborative relationship in terms of doing that.

To be able to achieve the 66% market share in both the combination of ICB wines and our wines of appellation, VQA wines, we would require significant investment in agriculture, in conversion of existing farmland today, to be able to meet that demand. The opportunity from a microclimate and vinification standpoint exists specifically in Ontario, to a great degree in British Columbia, and in new burgeoning markets—we've heard now of Quebec and Nova Scotia—where new plantings and pioneer work and experimentation are taking place. There's also conversion of crop, specifically in Ontario. Some lands that were previously used to grow tobacco are today being planted with vinifera, world-class grapes for winemaking. That's where the twinning needs to take place.

It's about building momentum, and it's about establishing attainable growth metrics that provide the economic stimulus for us to do this. That stimulus works right through the supply chain, right from the vineyard through the processing piece of it, through the agri-tourism component of it, which is so vital, and throughout the rest of the supply chain. The capacity for us to do it is in front of us. The market opportunity is there. The projections for per capita consumption are to take the existing national per capita consumption of wine from 13.8 litres annually to just over 15 litres, through responsible and informed usage—people converting from different alcoholic beverages to wine under the consideration that it's a food product. We see that opportunity, as people drink more responsibly, for us to be able to provide greater value and greater wines to them. It's linked and it's attainable, and it requires an aggressive plan, but one that we aren't afraid of.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Sorry, your time's up.

Mr. Zimmer.

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

Thank you for coming to committee today and presenting. I appreciate it.

We definitely understand the impacts economically—$500 million in payroll alone, Mr. Goetz, you had stated, and then you had stated also $5 billion in annual sales, and $6.8 billion in sales for the wine industry—they are massive. We appreciate what you do.

As a government, we really want to cut down regulations where necessary. We realize that to have a role, we have to regulate what needs to be regulated, to operate in a parameter that works for Canadians, but we also want to streamline what we think is too onerous or just doesn't need to be there.

Would you have any recommendations for the committee in terms of regulation? What you think we could do? Is there anything we can do that would answer that question?

[Jim Goetz]

My answer to that would be, again, to bring up the stevia example, as a low-calorie sweetener that our members have been wanting to introduce into Canada. It's continuing down the path of fast-tracking ingredients and safety assessments where we know other parts of the world have already approved these ingredients.

Stevia is a perfect example. To the best of my knowledge, it was approved in all western countries, Europe, the United States, years before it was in Canada, and that creates a bottleneck, both on our members' ability to bring new products to the market—particularly stevia, as an example, a low-calorie sweetener—and to bring more options to the table for consumers. We were happy to work with Health Canada to eventually get it approved. It is now.

Perhaps the committee can come forward with some recommendations particularly geared towards Health Canada. We understand that food and beverages are very personal, and that there obviously has to be a significant health assessment before new products or ingredients are introduced into the market, absolutely. We work with Health Canada on a daily basis on that. But continuing to look around the world when ingredients are already approved, piggybacking on some of that expertise that is already in front of various governments, and using that to streamline a process would be extremely helpful.

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

How about you, Mr. Gedge?

[Patrick Gedge]

Interestingly enough, much of the regulation in our industry comes at the provincial level. The federal government has actually addressed a number of issues over the past number of years that have helped us, including Bill C-311 recently, which was quite special.

From our standpoint, our focus is very much in terms of trying to incentivize the industry, to be able to compete with all countries in the world. That's why one of our focuses in terms of our presentation is related to the excise tax exemption on the Canadian content in International Canadian Blend wines. That is important for two reasons. One reason is that it will continue to increase demand for Canadian grapes, and as we were talking earlier, that is the fundamental of our industry growing into the future—it's pretty hard to make wine without grapes. Anything that incentivizes us to purchase more Canadian grapes will, in turn, help stimulate the entire value chain for our industry.

Then the second part is that an excise tax exemption for the Canadian portion of ICB wines will allow the wineries to be more competitive against foreign imports, and then hopefully, over time, we would increase our 30% market share to 31% market share, to 32% market share, to 33% market share, and trust me, even a 1% or 2% change in market share has real significance in terms of the growth of our industry and the types of dollars that we talked about earlier.

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

Mr. Marshall and Mr. Gedge, you spoke basically about your wish list, but I'd like to give Mr. Goetz some time to do that. You did speak about what you wanted, the top five.

Mr. Goetz, if you were to give me your top five things that you want for your industry, because you have the opportunity to put it on record, you have the time before committee, what would those top five things be, other than what you've mentioned. Because there are obviously some big issues out there. What would you bring before a committee, if you could? Here's your opportunity to do that.

[Jim Goetz]

Other than the regulatory process, I don't know if I have five asks of the government.

One issue, though, that's obviously been coming up quite a bit is the issue of childhood obesity and obesity in general. We spend a considerable amount of time talking to both provincial and federal governments about that issue and putting in the window everything that our industry is doing to address consumer needs and to address the issue of obesity.

There is not another industry in the food and beverage sector that has done so much to try to address that issue as our sector has, mainly through, as I mentioned before, our “clear on calories” campaign. We were the first industry across all of our producers, not just individual companies but across the entire industry, to decide on a front-of-pack calorie labelling program, which very quickly lets consumers know exactly how many calories are in that beverage they consume. In addition, our industry has approximately 30% of our sales in either low-cal or no-cal beverages. We like to say, with reason, that there is a beverage out there for every lifestyle. If you enjoy a full-calorie beverage, they're there, or if you enjoy zero-calorie or sugar-free or different sweeteners, they are there too.

Certainly recently there has been an increased focus on our industry. Some advocates out there like to try to communicate to government that our industry is the sole cause of obesity. We know that is not true. There is a mountain of science out there that says that is not true, that obesity issues are very complex and are about the calories you take in and the calories you burn. One thing we would look for this committee and particularly the Department of Agriculture to do is to try to bring some balance to that debate. Singling out one product as a sole reason that obesity rates are increasing is short-sighted and, quite frankly, is the easy way out on this file.

Statistics Canada shows that over the last 10 years there has been a 31% decrease in the consumption of full-calorie beverages and yet at the same time obesity rates have continued to rise. You can chart those, and they go in different directions. If our industry's products were the sole cause of this problem, it would not be a problem anymore, simply based on those declining consumption rates. The reason those consumption rates are dropping is that our members are bringing different products to the market—bottled water, flavoured water, sports drinks, and a variety of juices. That's why those consumption rates are dropping.

I don't have a list of five, but certainly the agriculture committee assisting us in bringing some balance to these conversations would be extremely helpful.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Valeriote.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, gentlemen, for appearing before the committee.

We generally hope that we don't have any questions that lead to any discomfort, but I have to ask you this, Mr. Goetz. You say this, “If we sometimes bristle at suggestions that too little is being done, it's because we frequently feel that too little attention is paid to the specific efforts our industry have made, particularly in comparison to others.”

You were referring to a phrase you said earlier, “sustainable progress”.

On water, the use of water, we know or we're led to believe that there's an incredible problem in India because of irregular water extraction for the beverage industry. We know it's an issue in every country: sustainability with respect to the availability of fresh water. Wars were fought between tribes in the Old Testament over wells. We no doubt know that wars will be fought in the future over fresh water—trade wars and other more catastrophic wars.

One of the questions recommended to ask by the library on this was the fact that a number of Canadian universities moved to ban the sale of bottled water in vending machines. You know, I haven't drunk bottled water for years and years, but I'm conflicted because I also drink pop. I drink Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi, to name a couple of brands, and there's still water in those drinks.

One of the reasons this ban on water is embraced in Guelph is, one, the use of plastic and, two, the price that's paid for the water that's being extracted outside of the city. I think I did a calculation once. It's .003¢ per litre, and water is a public resource; it's owned by all of us.

I'm just wondering if you've done any calculations on what it costs your industry in its use of water, whether in your opinion it's paying fairly back to the public for its use of water. I can't imagine there's any innovation that can be undertaken to reduce the consumption of water except maybe in the making of the packaging of the product, recycling that water. Can you talk to us more about water?

Second, you mentioned stevia, a wonderful discovery. Are there any other products on the horizon that your industry is looking at using for health purposes that you could use some specific help on?

[Jim Goetz]

Let me address the water question first, specifically your question about water consumption. If water is drunk out of a bottle of water or out of your tap, you're still consuming water. We need to hydrate on a daily basis or bad things happen to you health-wise. That water is going to be consumed, regardless.

We do not view the selling of bottled water products as an either/or situation: a municipal water source versus bottled water. In fact, the majority of Canadians who do consume bottled water consume municipal water while they're at home and will occasionally buy bottled water when they are on the go as a convenient and healthy way to hydrate.

Specifically to your question about cost, many of the provinces have enacted water-taking fees for food and beverage manufacturers, which our members pay in the jurisdictions where those are in place. I don't know off the top of my head how many provinces have done that, but it is a majority of them.

Our members also pay municipal taxes, which help pay for water infrastructure, as do any other retail outlet or manufacturer. With regard to your comment, the water that we use, be it bottled water or in juice or pop production, I feel we are, absolutely....

Our industry is at the forefront—because water is so essential to our products, obviously—of continuing to drive down the amount of water that is used in the production of our products. All food and beverage manufacturing uses water, some considerably more than ours does. A lot of that is due to the safety protocols that are put in place for the production of any kind of food and beverage.

Specifically to your comment, and particularly coming from Guelph, in the manufacturing of bottled water, only 1/100 of 1% of all water withdrawals in Canada is for the production and manufacturing of bottled water. Putting that into the perspective of the amount of water that is wasted in municipal water systems through leakage every year—the amount that goes back into the ground and obviously takes thousands of years to surface again—it's not even comparable. The amount of water that is taken for beverage production compared to that which is wasted in infrastructure leaks throughout all municipalities across Canada is not comparable.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Stevia?

[Jim Goetz]

Stevia is certainly a sweetener that our industry is very excited about, to bring more products to market. We have products in the United States, for example, and in Europe, that have been very popular for years. We are very pleased that's been passed and we can now bring those products to market.

As far as what else is on the horizon, I'm unaware of any other sweeteners that are coming down the pipeline. Stevia was the big one and it's a kind of breakthrough.

There are issues with stevia as far as its shelf life is concerned and its use in food and beverages. It's not as stable as other sweeteners. That being said, our industry is working diligently to address those issues and to bring more variety of choice to consumers in Canada so they can pick and choose the beverage that best suits their lifestyle.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Richards.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you.

I have some questions for each organization today if we can find the time, hopefully we'll get to both. I'll start with the Winery and Grower Alliance of Ontario, so whichever of you would like to answer my questions.

I noted that you mentioned tourism and the impact of tourism in your remarks. I also happen to chair the parliamentary tourism caucus, so that piqued my interest, obviously. I want to go down that path a little bit. I do have some other questions that are more directly related to, of course, our agriculture committee as well.

You mentioned that we need to do better at getting a bigger share of our domestic market with our Canadian wines, and I certainly would agree. I'm a big fan of Niagara wines and Prince Edward County wines as well. I'm a lover of Burgundy varieties. I would take—I'm not sure if he's a member of your alliance or not—a Norman Hardie Pinot or a Chardonnay from somewhere like Malivoire over just about any other Chardonnay or Pinot anywhere in the world. So I just wanted to let you know that I'm definitely a part of trying to increase that Canadian share.

[Patrick Gedge]

Keep at it.