Agriculture Committee on June 20th, 2018

[Fred Gorrell]

Very much so, and again, I'm going to repeat myself, not because I like to hear myself say the same thing—

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I didn't think so.

[Fred Gorrell]

No, but from the Japanese and the Koreans we anticipated this because of the way they look at it. At the same time, they're continuing to take the U.S. product. Obviously people have due diligence: they have the right to test it. With everything we've done—the report, our testing, and their being here—we are feeling very confident that we'll resume normal trade in due course.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

My colleague Mr. Barlow was talking about Indonesia, and we're doing everything we can as a government to ensure that we're dealing not only with the current markets that have now temporarily suspended imports, but also with other partners that might potentially temporarily suspend our imports. We're educating them on how we came about this situation.

[Fred Gorrell]

It's an interesting.... One of the things I want to say is that it's an isolated event, but it's a very serious event, for all of the reasons we're talking about. David just outlined how much work we've done and the system has taken. We're being proactive but at the same time not trying to be alarmist. It's that balance.

We're reaching out to all of our major grain importers. We want to make sure.... We're also working with our traders, because they're also a very good conduit. I understand the question that we received at the start regarding working with our associations and our traders. They're making sure.... If the importers are talking to their governments and they need information, we're there.

There are a lot of people working a lot of long hours to make sure this goes forward smoothly and that if things do escalate even further we're prepared and able. The Government of Canada and also all of the bureaucracy and our associations are very well situated to understand the seriousness of it.

I hope that answers your question.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Yes. I really want to commend you guys for the work you've done. It could have been a lot worse had the wheat found itself in the food supply, which it didn't, so obviously we have a system in Canada that works and we're transparent about it. We've communicated that. Thank you very much for highlighting that and for the report. Good luck in the future. I hope we can come to a positive solution.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Drouin.

Mrs. Nassif, the floor is yours.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Gorrell, thank you for your presentation.

You have just said that the CFIA was informed of the presence of this wheat of unknown origin. Can you comment on the three cases in the United States? Can you tell us about the similarities or differences in terms of the conclusion?

[Fred Gorrell]

Thank you for the question.

There were some similarities with the U.S., and one of the answers I want to give everybody is that in the 2013 Oregon case, the U.S. was never able to determine the origin. There's one example where it was. They were able to confirm that the product had not entered into the food system and that it did not represent food safety risks, but they were never able to understand or determine the origin. So there are many similarities there. This is not related to the U.S. wheat. We're quite confident there's no connection between this and the Oregon wheat or with another issue that was in, I believe, Montana. That is good. I want to reiterate as well that the GM wheat is not approved, registered, or grown in North America or anywhere in the world. That's another similarity: it's not registered and it's not reproduced, but the trait that is used, the herbicide-tolerant trait, is approved for use in soybeans, corn, and canola in Canada as well as in the United States.

The similarities with the United States are that they did an investigation; they found that it wasn't in the food supply; it wasn't a food safety risk. In one case they weren't able to determine the origin; in the other ones they were able to from the research. At the same time, the input, the trade, temporarily stopped. The testing was done; we confirmed with our trading partners that everything was okay, and trade recommenced.

I hope that answers your question.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

It is not too clear to me. I want to know about the differences.

You talked about the similarities. Is this wheat of unknown origin the same genetically modified wheat that was found in the state of Oregon in 2013?

[Fred Gorrell]

No.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

It is not the same wheat.

What is the difference between what was found here and what was found in Oregon in 2013?

[David Bailey]

No, what we found and what the U.S. found are not the same kinds of wheat. They are different varieties of wheat.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

So there is no connection.

[Fred Gorrell]

No.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

What is our government doing to make sure that this does not happen again?

[David Bailey]

As I said earlier, we have one of the most stringent regulatory regimes in the world around field trials and in terms of innovation related to biotechnology. One thing we will do as we move out of this period of looking and working through the trade issues is to take some lessons learned, and we'll see where we can strengthen and harden our system even further to ensure that we are taking all steps to minimize the occurrence of what we might call a “rogue” or “mongrel” wheat find such as this, which is related to a genetic modification that is not approved for use in commercial production in Canada.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Could the Canadian Grain Commission have played a role? If so, what role could it have played?

[David Bailey]

Yes. The Grain Commission has played a significant role with us from the very beginning. They have helped us in some of the scientific analysis. They have also been responsible for some of the significant testing that was done in the grain system to ensure that it was not in the system, that it isn't currently in the system. They can also continue to ensure that it is not in any exports going to our trading partners.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

You said that, if countries ask you for test results, you provide them.

How are we going to make sure that our trading partners are going to come back to us? How can we provide Japan and South Korea, for example, with an assurance so that they will come back to our market as quickly as possible?

[Fred Gorrell]

Exactly. There are many countries, as we mentioned, and the evidence—and again I can't preclude what the Japanese or the South Koreans were doing, but they have been very appreciative and positive about how we've responded and about the information we've given them. As Mr. Drouin said, in the report we've been open and transparent and we've shared the information. That is the way we've done it in Canada. Right now there is no indication—and again I can't speculate—that Japan or South Korea will not reopen their borders in due course.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Do we know about how long that will take?

[Fred Gorrell]

That is a good question. In the United States, it was more or less a month.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you.

[Fred Gorrell]

You are welcome.