Evidence of meeting #39 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-18.
A recording is available from Parliament.
October 21st, 2014 / 11:45 a.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
If you look at UPOV 78, you do have that even though it didn't specifically call it farmers' privilege.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
As I said, in the scenario of Roundup Ready canola, from Monsanto, they created a contract that you had to sign in order to get access to the seed, and it was a technology use agreement. You paid so much an acre for that agreement, and in that agreement it said you could not save seed. It was in contract that you couldn't.
I think now under the new UPOV 91 they wouldn't actually be able to do that style of contract. Is that not true?
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
A common law of contracts in Canada would always give us freedom of contracts, in which case we can contract out of statute. It really depends. A contract is really a contract.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Okay, well, I'm not going to debate you on contracts because you're a lawyer and I'm not. But I guess you can see the dilemma that I'm looking at where I can see a cure with UPOV 91 where right now we don't have it.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I'm actually going to move on to Susan Antler.
I liked your comment about the use of the word “soil”. I had an agronomist friend who said “dirt blows, soil grows”. So it's very true about that, and I used to call it “dirt” and he used to correct me every time.
One thing you talked about was compost and organic matter. That's one thing I think the Prairies have been very successful on, actually increasing their organic matter through things like no-tillage, direct seeding. In the late eighties, early nineties, there were huge workshops all over the Prairies. I can remember being a part of field days. I went to workshops, the Manitoba-North Dakota Zero Tillage Farmers Association's workshops.
One thing about UPOV 91 that I think is going to be interesting is the new genetics that we're going to bring in that will actually do the same thing in reducing the amount of soil erosion and increase organic matter. Would you not agree with that?
Executive Director, Compost Council of Canada
I can't speak specifically about that, but I know that in terms of your focus on the priority of retaining organic matter and making sure that is as strong as possible is absolutely paramount to any success in any type of agriculture.
One of the issues for us is the fact that we need to take more proactive efforts. Through the Compost Quality Alliance, we have taken on the initiative, the vision of the government in terms of taking on a program where we are going to make sure that our products are efficacious and they are tested well, and they have consumer confidence so that those who are going to purchase different types of compost know they are coming from licensed facilities, certified through the CQA program. Again, it all gets into consumer trust, whether it's a farmer or an urban dweller. It gets into recognizing that there's a trust component. If that's going to be withdrawn from certain aspects and certain agencies, then industry and others have to step forward.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Going on to one part of Bill C-18 are the changes to the cash advance program, and, of course, the ability now to use any commodity or cash from any source to pay back your advance.
Plus, I think another advantage is also the fact that you can go to one single source now and get all your advances for all your crops or livestock. How's that going to affect the farmers? It used to be a hassle, and you had to go to different areas or different people to get different sign-offs to get your advances. Do you see that now changing and becoming more efficient?
Chief Executive Officer, Agricultural Credit Corporation
I think one of the things that will make it more efficient is exactly what you've just said, where you can administer the program for a number of different commodities.
At ACC, for example, we administer for different commodities in each province. It seems sometimes a duplication of the producer's efforts to have to get a portion of his loan from us and a portion of an advance from maybe another unit or another administrator in that area.
I believe that allowing administrators to advance on those products today.... As I said earlier, we cover about 4,500 products, so we are advancing on a lot of them. Again, there are areas where we can provide more of a specialized service, where that administrator may not be there today, which allows us to go in and do the administration with the experience that we have.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bev Shipley
Thank you, Mr. Hoback.
I'll now go to Madam Raynault. Five minutes, please.
NDP
Francine Raynault NDP Joliette, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Oguamanam, can you explain to us how UPOV 78 allows seeds to be saved and used?
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Under UPOV 78, we can keep and save seeds without necessarily asking permission from the breeder. The breeder could not have access to our harvests. He could not have surveillance over our harvests. We could actually save seeds to the extent the breeder could not.
UPOV 91 has to...even our harvests. The breeder can put surveillance on it.
But under UPOV 78, I don't think the breeder's right to encroach upon our harvest or exercise so much of a degree of surveillance and control is guaranteed.
NDP
Francine Raynault NDP Joliette, QC
Can you also talk to us about the farmer’s privilege under UPOV 91?
How would you like that provision to be enforced?
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
How to enforce farmers' privilege under UPOV 91? That's exactly what Canada has done to enact farmers' privilege under UPOV 91.
Enforcement is a matter of subsidiary regulation. A lot of power has been given to breeders in terms of licensing, in terms of surveillance, in terms of making claims over harvests, and in terms of the ability to collect end point royalties, and so on.
Enforcement, for me, is probably a matter of a subsidiary regulation and a normal framework through which laws are enforced in the country. The truth of the matter is that breeders have a lot of surveillance over what farmers do. We need to really understand that there are many farmers: who does what, and whose interests are activated, at what point in time? These are very convoluted and complicated.
I took an audit of all organizations that speak to and represent farmers. You need to look a little closer and begin to ask what kinds of farmers they are talking about. We have used farmers in generic terms, but we recognize that there are farmers and there are farmers. This is really a huge issue.
NDP
Francine Raynault NDP Joliette, QC
Thank you.
I was a farmer too. Our farm was not very big, but we were still thought of as farmers. That allowed us to sell our products at the market and at the house. We did not own thousands of acres, of course. The crops we grew were to feed people. So I fully understand how producers must be protected.
You are right to say that there are all kinds of producers. I have met people you might call weekend farmers. They had an interest in the area and wanted farms to be kept for farming, even though it was not a source of income for them. Our small agricultural producers have to be protected. They do not all have the means to buy up thousands of acres, especially in Quebec.
More and more, people are preferring local produce. They do not want fruit to be shipped from foreign sources thousands of kilometres away. If we can grow it ourselves, so much the better. The farms growing potatoes or apples are generally not the large ones. In the west, the situation is quite different. Quebec farms, for example, may not be as impressive as the ones in Alberta or Saskatchewan, but that is how we make our living at home.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bev Shipley
Thank you, Madame Raynault. We're well over.
I'll now go to Mr. Payne. Five minutes, please.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for coming.
It is a very interesting discussion on Bill C-18.
I want to go back to you, Mr. Atkins. You talked about the APP, and I believe you said that currently you're the only organization that has advanced money right across the 10 provinces.
Chief Executive Officer, Agricultural Credit Corporation
We are the only administrator that administers the advance payments program in each province. There are 50-plus administrators across Canada that do this, but we are the only ones in every province today.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
As I understand—and I caught only part of your comment—in terms of UPOV 91, you said something about assisting and updating common and acceptable practice. Could you talk a little bit more about that for me?
Chief Executive Officer, Agricultural Credit Corporation
I talked about the way that corporations—for example, under the advance payments program—provide guarantees through farm organizations that have become corporations, or registered partnerships, or limited liability companies.
Certainly, with Bill C-18, it does allow a more reflective ability, still taking into account the fact that each of the guarantors does have to provide a guarantee for the loan. But for areas such as signatures, and those specific areas, it does allow some flexibility to give those rights to the person who is the majority shareholder, who owns controlling interest of that organization.
Certainly today in most businesses that opportunity exists, and should exist under the advance payments program for individuals who do have the signing authority, have the majority shareholders, or have authority granted by the board in order to commit that company to an agreement.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Okay, thank you.
Ms. Burtnack, you talked a bit about protection of customers, options, strength and safety, and increasing trade. Perhaps you could just tell us a little bit more about your comments regarding that.
I also know you talked about Canadian seed—CFI and CropLife. Perhaps you could expand your comments on that for me.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Agri-Retailers
Sure, in terms of how we are supportive of the positions they're taking...? Is that what you're asking?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Agri-Retailers
Great. I'll start with the inputs because there are a few components there and I want to make sure I address them all.
In terms of the inputs and the empowerment that's been given to the CFIA, in particular, to ensure that those inputs are safe for use, that's obviously a significant focus for us, and certainly it's a significant focus for Canadians. As well, allowing the CFIA the opportunity to use data that is sourced externally to Canada, not having to be reproduced, and to use data that is from a country that is considered to be equivalent to the standards in Canada is, I think, a significant improvement in terms of allowing the CFIA the freedom to operate, and reducing that administrative burden of recreating data that would be already acceptable in terms of identifying the safety and the ability to use that product in Canada.
In terms of the protection of plant breeders' rights, the innovation that we would expect would grow from that by allowing innovators to come into Canada and know that the investment they make in the seed they produce is protected, and that they are able to continue innovation with the funds that are brought in from plant breeders' rights. I think that is going to be critical in terms of moving forward and meeting the goals of feeding 9 billion by 2050. It all starts with the seed.
I would also agree with Ms. Antler that it also all starts from the soil. Being an agronomist myself, I have great respect for the soil—it is not dirt—and that is making sure that the soil is as productive as possible, and that the seed planted in that soil has the highest possible potential for yield, and then that the inputs applied to that are as safe and effective as possible. That is the only way we're going to achieve the goal of doubling our production.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bev Shipley
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Payne.
I want to thank all of the witnesses for being with us in the first hour.
We need to bring in new witnesses and get the video set up, so we'll recess for a couple of minutes.