Agriculture Committee on Nov. 1st, 2011

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

My next question is for Mr. Prouse and Mr. MacLeod.

In your comments you talked about, and I see there was some funding for, pesticides. I believe you said something about further research on pesticides.

I'm wondering if you could tell us what you believe CropLife...and how you see that interacting in terms of the pesticides and the funding and what research would actually be done.

[Peter MacLeod]

Historically, one of the major gaps in Canada in pest control has been developing products for what we call minor crops. These would be crops where the market size might not be sufficient to compel a company to invest the $200 million that's required. These are crops like cranberries, blueberries, or perhaps there's a minor disease in a major crop.

One of the things that the first Growing Forward policy provided was funding through Agriculture Canada to develop some of that basic research on these minor pests. Collaborating with the industry, who already had the knowledge for that product but needed that additional information on that minor crop....

The collaboration there, between Agriculture Canada and CropLife, to develop these tools and technologies for farmers...which are critical. As you may know, a small disease on a crop could completely take out the crop in a matter of days. So these products are very important.

That's one example of a real partnership that the funding from the government has provided to enable farmers to produce some of these minor crops.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

I was just checking, in terms of the horticultural...I understand there was almost $2.7 million of funding from the federal government.

In particular, Mr. Bell, I know you talk about the farmers' market, and we have a great farmers' market in Medicine Hat and throughout the riding. We also have a huge greenhouse industry in the riding and there are certainly some major changes. I'm not sure if you're aware of how they're growing cucumbers and tomatoes. Our particular area supplies all the major stores in the surrounding area and as far away as Calgary and so on.

Do you have any indications in terms of the research there and what effects that might have?

[Jon Bell]

I have been involved in the greenhouse industry for a number of years, and I'm aware of the production across all of western Canada. In my statement earlier, I was referring to things like leafy vegetables, which are not going to be energy-dependent. I think energy usage is one of the biggest issues that the greenhouse industry has, as well as greenhouse gases and all the rest.

So when farmers' markets...we're talking about low investment, if you will, in greenhouses and not the very heavily financed greenhouses for tomatoes and peppers and the like.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

We'll now move to Mr. Allen.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Lampron, you talked about a number of initiatives having to do with funding and research. In respect of the two pieces dealing with the funding mechanism, one has to do with the next Growing Forward piece, which we're investigating in light of that five-year piece. Madam Désilets talked about the need for some flexibility inside that. I want to ask you about the need to know that the funding is in place for the five-year period.

You also talked about core funding and what that would mean for the longer term. You're right about researchers at university—they're usually chasing the next grant, trying to stay in the business of continuing to do research. They'll research something else if the grant evaporates. They'll go to stream B or C or D, or whatever the case may be, depending on where the money flows.

You talked to those two issues, about how you see them as being either separate or linked together, if indeed they are; I'm not sure that they are linked. I leave that for you to explain to us. How do you see those two pieces as being integral, as you move forward, in the necessity to ensure that stable funding, and indeed the funding at all, in Growing Forward 2 for that five-year period?

[Pierre Lampron]

The idea behind the presentation is that we have to focus on clusters, but that we also have to remember funding for basic long-term research. There should still be core funding for basic research, because it is more difficult for us to find 25% in funding for this type of research. We feel that the government has a responsibility towards the basic component of research. The usefulness of clusters could then be applied more quickly to farms.

[Émie Désilets]

Yes, core funding is needed for basic research, but it has to be part of a continuum. I am referring to fundamental questions that require answers in the longer term. They include genetics, studies on mastitis or maintaining a pathogens bank from one year to the next. Those examples show us that restricting the program to five years poses a problem. We have no idea what will happen with all that work. That is why I am talking about a continuum.

In terms of money, there is less and less in the research centres at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. We have to see. Good researchers working there are also starting to be short of resources for their work.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

I appreciate the differentiation but also the understanding of why we need to do both.

I think you pointed out earlier that you've been doing research and innovation work in the dairy area for a long time and that you've had very good success in a lot of different areas. So the sense is that if we continue to do it, we can see profitability, sustainability, and environmental stewardship.

I mean, folks are looking at how good the environmental stewardship really is. From what I understand of some of the projects you've done, some of the results are about that environmental stewardship. I wonder if you could talk about that for a moment.

[Pierre Lampron]

In terms of food safety, the environment and life cycle, we see what is being done elsewhere, but though we may be familiar with our environment, we don't know where to focus our efforts in order to make environmental gains. This is about agricultural production; we live in this environment and we participate in economic activity. We now have to determine where we are efficient and where we are less efficient.

Studies on the environment make it possible to understand exactly what is happening on those farms and to determine which methods can be used to pollute less and to be more environmentally conscious. We factor in greenhouse gases, manure management and the nutrition of cows, meaning what cows need to produce milk. The cows are going to eliminate any excess food into the environment. If we were fully aware of their needs, they would only eat what they needed, produce the milk and generate less waste in the environment. Those are all things we have to understand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

We now move to Mr. Storseth for five minutes.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Just so that you're aware, I understand I'll be splitting my time with the parliamentary secretary.

Thank you very much to the committee members for coming.

One of the things that I feel we all too often get trapped into as a sign of success is the total dollar value in these programs. The government announces that this is how much money they've put into science and innovation this year, so it must be a success because it's more than last year or the year before.

As we've gone through this process, we've talked with several witnesses about the fact that you need more streamlined processes. It's not always about dollars and cents; sometimes you need a process that has less “bureaucratese” in it. You also need a process that has less paperwork, that's less burdensome on the smaller researchers and the smaller organizations.

Then everybody seems to get to the point--and I'd like to congratulate my colleagues like Mr. Lobb for such well-researched questions today--where you talk about the research needs in terms of how we get it from technology to commercialization, and that's the end goal.

My question is for you, Mr. MacLeod. How important is it that research is targeted at commercialization as an end goal? Is that what we should be focusing on?

[Peter MacLeod]

One of the key things in the whole discovery process is a vision of where you want to be before you even start the discovery phase and the collaboration. What end product do you want to have, and what are the attributes of that product?

One of the areas that CropLife, through its member companies, has is a strong linkage with farmers and the needs of farmers, and they start their discovery process right from that base. If there's a new disease that's threatening, whether it's an invasive pest or a new disease that's threatening a crop, that direct communication linkage on the farm is critical to help start that discovery process. That's communication within Canada.

On a global basis it's important to keep track of any innovations that are happening in parts of the world that grow similar crops--for example, wheat production in Australia--to look at the pests and weeds and things that are a problem there and make sure of that awareness so that we're ready if that pest ever makes its way to Canada, or from south of the border, in the United States.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

So you're talking about starting with a problem and working back to find a solution, or at least having knowledge of what the problem could be from a farmer's perspective.

[Peter MacLeod]

Yes.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. Lamprom.

[Pierre Lampron]

I think the connection with the market is essential. In terms of food safety, we have a product to sell and we want consumers to buy it as much as possible. So we do research to address those market needs. As for animal welfare, we also have to position our product on the market, which requires research. It is interesting to see that this improves the farm's efficiency at the same time.

I neglected to mention nutrition. For example, salt now has to be banned from or reduced in dairy products. There is a lot of pressure for this. However, it is used as a preservative in cheese. So we have to be careful. Salt has some benefits but it should not be added needlessly to food. Research has be done to be able to reduce the amount of salt or to inform consumers of why salt is used in specific products. Research is currently underway in this area, and it is being done precisely to allow producers to better respond to market needs. All this research is in fact closely related to market needs.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you.

In this conversation, I do note that the end dollar value isn't what we start with. The end dollar value on how much is being spent on science and innovation isn't what we start with—it's focusing on problems in the industry and how we solve those problems within the industry.

Mr. MacLeod, you mentioned international issues. With regard to science and innovation, how important is it that the Growing Forward program has the ability or funding to attract international scientists or international expertise into Canada, and what's the best way to go about doing that, in your mind?

[Peter MacLeod]

Well, certainly--I'm reaching that demographic quickly--there's becoming a big gap in the amount of research capacity in Canada, at the government level, from a scientist basis at the research institutions, at the universities, as well as within my own members. We're focusing on renewal and making sure that agriculture is an attractive place to be.

There are a lot of technology-based industries, and computer sciences, that are attractive to younger people. We need to have agriculture as an exciting place to be.

If you look at some of the solutions, I mean, we're all well aware of the problems that society has with a growing population, scarcity of water in certain cases—although, out in western Canada, we've had a bit of an issue on the other side of it—and in doing more with less.

So it's an attractive place to be from a technology standpoint. I think the more attractive we can make the agriculture business and the products needed for farming for young people to get into our industry, the better we're all going to be in the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Anderson, welcome back to the committee. You have the last five minutes.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

It's good to be here, thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up a little bit on what Mr. Storseth was talking about. I'm interested in the issue of human resources.

Natural resources is my home committee, and we had a discussion yesterday about the fact that even in Saskatchewan over the next seven years we're going to require something like 13,000 people in the mining sector alone.

You talked a little bit about the development of human resources in your area, because we need to encourage young people to get into agriculture. It may not often or always be their first thought or first choice. I wonder if you have any comments on that, and how we can do a better job in bringing young people into the research and innovation side of developing new agriculture.

[Peter MacLeod]

I think it's awareness and communication. I mentioned that in my presentation. The exciting technology going on right at the farm level, whether it's precision-based seeding, whether it's fertilizing exactly where the seed and the crop needs it, whether it's GPS-guided tractors, or whether it's all the science and technology in modern farming—I think that message needs to get out. It has to get to the universities. It has to get to the high schools to make agriculture a more attractive place for people.

I think if young people knew of the exciting opportunities there are in farming and the agriculture business, it would certainly be a more attractive place to be. So I think communication and, as Mr. Bell mentioned, that awareness right the fork level, that interface with farmers, would certainly help in that gap.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

What programs do the three of you then have to bring young people into the industry and to interest them in the innovative side of your industry?

[Peter MacLeod]

I'll start, since my red light is on.

One of the things that our member companies have is a very strong student program. They hire first-year students and second-year students out of agriculture programs—whether from Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba, or Ontario, through McGill or through eastern Canada—to get them interested in the business.

They see this as a training ground, even at a very early stage, to make them aware of the technology that our members are bringing, and perhaps trigger their interest in staying on, whether it's with the company or staying within the academic community, but to get them excited about agriculture.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Bell.