Agriculture Committee on Nov. 21st, 2013

[Gord Kurbis]

Yes, sure. I think that how that issue was resolved could almost be a case study for how well things could work if this one outcome, where we sped along the development of that MRL on a sort of ad hoc relationship basis.... I think the potential is to take that ad hoc, speedy approach that was achieved, because as an industry we threw everything we had at it, and to formalize that into a committee structure. Rather than having a blow-up before you start talking to each other, you do it as a regular matter of course. On that case study, I would like to see the outcome that we ultimately had replicated through the committee.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

From what I hear, you would see using this case study as a way to formalize other processes when it comes to the regulatory regime. Is that a fair synopsis of what you're saying?

[Gord Kurbis]

Well, yes, in a way. The EU, for us, is a 110,000-tonne market for lentils, which is huge. It's our second largest. And because of that, when this problem hit, we pulled out all the stops in trying to resolve the technical issue that underpinned the issue that resulted in the rapid food safety alert problems and retail shelf recalls.

So my point is that it would be great if this committee structure could achieve the same technical outcome without having to have a blow-up on one of your largest markets first, and instead have those outcomes develop as a routine matter of course. That would be part of the objective.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

And then I'll get to the elephant in the room, which is the small “p” political, and I'm glad you used the small “p”, about GMO. It becomes the issue of, regardless of what we think and what we believe, if that customer says, “I don't care....” And I've said this before, it's like getting a red shirt or a blue shirt. They're both shirts. I don't want a blue one. I want a red one, or in my case, probably an orange one. So the issue becomes, “I don't want your blue shirt.” But you actually want to sell me the blue shirt because it's good for me. I keep saying, “I don't care, I don't like blue.”

How do we break that nut? How do you see yourselves breaking through—to use your term—the small “p” politics of a customer who's reluctant to buy? I don't buy everything that's on a store shelf. Some things I don't want. So if you don't get to a point where the customer finally says, “Okay, we agree with you. We'll just take whatever. We'll take your results. We'll just do exactly how you do it.” If they say no, how do we adjust to that?

Barry.

[Barry Senft]

I think you continue the discussion with them and try to answer the questions they have about the technology. Given the size of the market, I don't think anyone would suggest that we just walk away and say that the EU is never going to accept biotechnology, our GMs specifically, so let's not discuss it any further with them.

GM technologies have been around since 1996. We've had other markets that have changed their minds on this and have understood, after discussion, and accepted the technology. I think it's an ongoing dialogue with the EU that takes place. As you know, the EU is a patchwork of a number of different governments, which makes it very difficult, so I think we continue to have that dialogue, now through a more formal process, and continue to talk about the technology that we've had around for a long, long time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to go my last questioner, but for only two minutes.

Mr. Lemieux, I know you can do it.

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

I have listened patiently.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

You can do it. I'll let Mr. Allen take up a bit of your time.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

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

I'm going to follow up on the GM and non-GMO types of products, maybe with you, Barry.

For example, on the soybean, I would imagine that Europe will accept GM soybean, perhaps for feed, because they allow that now. That has been a change. I think it's a change that has been brought about by the realities of the marketplace. Maybe you can comment on that.

[Barry Senft]

Yes, absolutely. There is GM soybean moving into countries within Europe on the basis of the meal for the livestock, and they're all going into the biofuels market.

You're right. That didn't start in 1996. That was after significant discussion occurred over just the last few years, and it has opened up for that opportunity. There has been movement in the market—absolutely.

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

Yes.

Would you say that one of the competitors with Canada might be the U.S. selling into...?

[Barry Senft]

Yes.

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

Yesterday we heard one of our witnesses say that we have possibly a three-to-four-year window of opportunity before the U.S. locks in a deal with Europe. Do you see this three-to-four-year window being advantageous to our grain farmers?

[Barry Senft]

Yes, absolutely. I think that any time you introduce trade agreement technology, that's the issue: is your timing ahead of when somebody else adopts it? That's for any trade agreements, whether it's introducing a new cellphone or what have you. It's really the timing and how much out front you can get on that particular issue, so yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you, Mr. Lemieux.

I really want to thank our witnesses for being here.

Barry, and Gord from Winnipeg, thank you so much for joining us.

At this time, I'll declare the meeting adjourned. Thank you.