Agriculture Committee on April 30th, 2014

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

We call them spent hens, just older birds really. Depending on the area of the country, there may be demand for them as food processing but it requires specialized equipment. In Atlantic Canada, there is a large market from the fur industry for spent hens.

We have also supported several projects on looking at methods to increase the value of the spent hens to the industry and the processors. We don't want to just see them destroyed; we have environmental issues with that, so we have supported projects looking at producing high-quality glue from spent-hen material. That's been a very successful project we expect to move from our research efforts to industry to the processors and developers within the next couple of years. That is a major issue we've put a fair bit of effort into dealing with.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Zimmer, for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you both for appearing before committee today. I have a couple of questions.

Rex, you said seed companies weren't necessarily risk-takers on innovation and also that research should be economically or commercially relevant. I couldn't agree with you more. Speaking of that and the relevance of that to our economy and the recent comprehensive and economic trade agreement, CETA, which we all know about, how is your organization leveraging innovation to address the potential of that huge European market?

It's a pretty broad theme, but can you speak to that?

[Dr. Rex Newkirk]

I think it's a great opportunity for us. One of the areas we are actively involved in is looking at food processing, looking at new uses for our ingredients. On our pulses side, we've primarily been selling most of our pulses to India. Now China has become a major buyer on the process side, to make vermicelli noodles and things. In Europe, there are greater opportunities as well, to move some of the more processed materials into Europe, and the free trade agreement should assist us with that process.

From an innovation perspective, it's really important to look at what stage it has to be at for a food company to take this on, for a processing company to come on. The point I was trying to make is that some of the early innovations where government, others, and we get involved is to introduce the idea, to get it to a stage where they can take it on, but it has to be directed towards what their needs are and then have them invest. I think Europe does offer a number of opportunities for us not only in pulses but in other ingredients as well.

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

Thank you, Rex.

I have a similar question to pose to Bruce.

Chicken producers have come to my office to speak to supply management and different concerns that they have on that side of things. Likewise, they have also asked us to help with the development of foreign markets.

I would ask you what I just asked Rex. In the development of that and the potential of that, and I think through innovation, we can address...or possibly into the market with Canadian poultry as well....

Do you have any comments that you would make on that?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

Most of what we're involved in would be to do with genetics. We work closely with Aviagen and Hybrid Turkeys on projects, developing new genetics, and that goes worldwide and has a benefit to Canada.

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

That's my question: do you see that potential with Canadian birds entering other markets around the world? It sounds like you do.

Targeting your answer to the innovation component, how can we innovate to target those markets?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

One of the things I don't think we've done enough of is to look at the genetics.

It's interesting. We've gone a long way. The genetics has been driven by the genetics companies, the companies that sell the genetic aspects, and their clients want more production, faster growth, that sort of thing. Now they're starting to run into problems with that, and we've started to look at other ways.

It's not just Canada or North America; it's worldwide. There are things that are as simple as whether there are genetic relationships between a layer in a conventional.... That goes into the non-conventional cages, the new types of housing. They're finding that they get really nasty in there. They fight. They pick on each other. They have to have different ways to handle those.

One of the things we're looking at through our clusters is whether there are genetic relationships there. If we can discover something like that, then we can work with our breeding to move this stuff worldwide. On that sort of thing, I think there's a lot that we can do.

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

Have you taken on the subject of CETA as a group directly. Is it more that maybe in the future we'll deal with that? Is it something that's being targeted as the potential that it really is?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

CPRC deals with the science base, not the economics. Part of the issue is that we have five member organizations, and four of them are producers and one is a processor. They all have different positions on various things. There's a lot of regionality to it, too. Markets in Ontario and Quebec are completely different from what you might find in the Maritimes or western Canada. We leave that more to the regional groupings of the provincial organizations to look at market aspects.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you, Mr. Zimmer.

We'll go to Mr. Eyking, for five minutes, please.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you, gentlemen, for coming.

My first few questions will be for the poultry expert, and then I'm going to try to save a question for the grains guy.

I think that many of the chicks for our poultry industry come from the United States. Should we be doing more research in Canada so we could maybe have more of a breeding stock here, and breeds that may be more adaptable to our climate and our consumer preferences?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

Yes, I think so. I think that's one of the aspects of genetics that we've drifted away from. We used to do a lot more of that in bygone times. As we get different priorities, the money goes there.

However, it is gaining some interest. It's a matter of how we make them more adaptable for Canada and regions within Canada. A bird that does well in British Columbia may not do all that well in Newfoundland. These are some of the regional aspects that we are taking more interest in, and there is potential there.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

It's very important that not only in Canada we have enough research, but in different regions as well, which brings me to the Atlantic research. We used to have quite a program in Atlantic Poultry Research Institute. I've heard that it's in jeopardy because of a lack of federal funding in that institution.

Can you expand on what's happening there?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

At the Atlantic poultry research centre there certainly were some staff changes. The timing was very bad, because it was at the time when Dalhousie University and Nova Scotia Agricultural College were amalgamating. There were hiring freezes. There was an empty poultry position which I think they weren't allowed to fill, which they've advertised now. The person who's really driven that centre over the last 25 years is retiring soon. Then we lost the AAFC researcher and two technicians.

It is the most modern research production facility in Canada. It's unique, and we do not want to lose that. It is in jeopardy.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I don't know how many years ago we had the major avian flu that especially hit the Fraser Valley region in British Columbia. We got through it. It was a really hard, hard thing to go through.

Are we doing more research on the flu, especially the flus that can go back and forth between humans and birds? Are we working with the World Health Organization? How does that fit with Agriculture and WHO and that whole mix of trying to make sure that these flus don't originate in the birds, or don't come to the birds? What are we doing as Canadians, I guess, or what is the Canadian government or your industry doing to try to prevent that from happening again?

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

A lot of our concentration on the research front is around vaccines. I think there's well over $1 million in our cluster for addressing that. Avian influenza is the one that terrifies the industry more than anything else, because the way you have to react to it is so extreme. We're doing a lot there.

In terms of the connections to international organizations, we do have some, but a lot of those are through the universities. For example, we have one cluster project, just one project, with I think seven different research organizations, including Agriculture Canada, involved. Three of them are from outside Canada. They're cooperating with us.

We draw on that knowledge as much as possible.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

My questions on grain kind of deal with GMOs. They are becoming more and more relevant in our grain industry, and it's good. We're getting better varieties.

Are there more GMO grains out there? Is it increasing, and if so, how fast is it increasing? As well, how much research are we putting into non-GMO varieties? Will that be important when we're dealing with the European agreement? There seems to be a sensitivity in the European Union about that.

[Dr. Rex Newkirk]

That's a good question. GMO is certainly a powerful tool. It's been very effective in some of our crops, namely, canola, soybeans and corn. I'd have to say that in those areas, it's well established. It's used broadly and that continues.

In the case of some of our other crops, cereals and pulses namely, there is no GMO. In Canada, as far as I know, there's no research in those areas. The primary reason for that is not that they're not a powerful tool, nor is there a feeling that they're not safe; it's the issue of consumer acceptance.

You're right. Going into Europe, one of the questions we ask informally as we meet with customers, and we do this quite routinely, is when the acceptance of GMOs will occur, and when that tool could become available. It will be a long time yet. For the people we meet with, they say that personally, they don't see an issue, but from a customer perspective, they just see all kinds of minefields on those. Certainly, canola faced a number of challenges going into Europe with having to have certain traits registered, and trying to get those approved. The seeds have been mainly processed elsewhere and the oil shipped into Europe.

In the case of wheat and pulses, I don't think you're going to see GMO in the near future as a tool in our tool box. However, in Australia and other parts of the world, they're certainly doing a fair bit of testing and seeing some improvements in yields and such things.

At this point, I don't expect to see any activity on the cereals and the pulses, and no research on that. All the research they're doing now is on non-GMO.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much for your time.

I'll go to Mr. Lemieux, please, for five minutes.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'm going to start by providing a counter-context to some of the things I'm hearing about woe in the research industry, because the government is shifting its emphasis back to industry.

I'll start with poultry. I'm reading here in the brief, “The poultry industry has reacted to changes in consumer expectations in several ways...”. I think the poultry industry is closer to the consumer in understanding what the consumer wants, and they're closer to their producers than the government is. I would think the science cluster would be advantageous to the poultry industry, because industry has the lead on the cluster.

For the longest time we've heard that they want the government to put in place a mechanism that brings together the different players, and to give industry the lead, because they're the experts. We do that, and we move some funding that way, and then they say we've taken funding away from government researchers, and we're crippling their industry, but they wanted the cluster format in the first place, and industry to have the lead. I'm wondering if you can comment on that.

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

First of all, we really like the clusters. This has nothing to do with the clusters.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

They're related, though.

[Dr. Bruce Roberts]

Yes, they are related, but the concern isn't with the cuts or the changes. It's with the way it was done.

Our cluster proposal was already in before we knew anything about it. Then we had very little time to adjust. It was the adjustment time. It's not the aspect that you don't have the right to do this. Government has every right to do this.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

It's not just you. It's other industry stakeholders, from the groups we heard from before. There's a narrative that runs counter to what the industry was asking for in the first place, which was greater industry control over research to ensure that the research targeted the priorities of the industry and wasn't just shooting off in some unknown direction, or developing something that wasn't necessarily marketable and usable by farmers or by consumers.

I'm putting these questions to you, because you're sitting right here today. It's something I've been hearing from other witnesses, and no one has really challenged that. I do want to challenge that, because they are related. The clusters and government lead on research are related. It's not zero 100%, meaning it's not as if there are no government researchers now, but there's a shift in emphasis, as asked for by industry, and the funding has gone up. The first clusters under Growing Forward 1 came about in 2008. The funding has gone up. Under poultry, I believe you got about $2 million under Growing Forward 1. Now you are getting $4 million. It has gone up. I'm just saying it's all related. There is twice the funding in that poultry cluster.

I would also point out that the total cluster funding is—I'm going to say “only”, and I'm going to qualify it—$5.6 million. The question I'm going to put back to you is, do you feel there should be more resources, money, and researchers involved in poultry research? You have a supply-managed sector. In a sense it's a top-down, hierarchical-type of structure where you have tremendous influence over where you get your revenues. Yet, we've put $4 million into the cluster, and industry and perhaps provincial governments put in $1.6 million. Why wouldn't the poultry sector also put in $4 million or $6 million or $8 million or $10 million, whatever they think they need to advance their own goals?