Agriculture Committee on Oct. 27th, 2016

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

Do you want to add anything?

[Brett Halstead]

No.

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

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Madam Scovil.

[Catherine Scovil, Director of Government Relations, Canadian Canola Growers Association]

I was just going to add to what Patti was saying. I think that at the farmer level they're absolutely prepared to adopt new technology to address climate change—it's good for them as well—but they also don't want to be put out of business. How do you find programs and policies that give incentives to adopt technologies in a way that protects that profitability? I think that's the challenge we're all facing: how do you do those two things together?

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

That's it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you.

Mr. Lukiwski, you have six minutes.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you very much.

In the spirit of complete transparency, I should let committee members know that Brett and I know each other well. Mr. Halstead and I have known each other for the last 12 years. He is a producer in my riding, and in spite of the fact that I've been his representative for 12 years, we're still on friendly terms.

Welcome to Ottawa once again, Brett.

I want to talk a bit about market access, trade and, more specifically, the TPP. I recall back when our government was negotiating the TPP that so many canola producers in my riding, producers like Brad Hanmer, Brett, who you obviously know very well, were constantly on me and saying that we had to get that deal signed. We signed the deal, but it hasn't been ratified yet.

For both Brett and Ms. Miller, what positive impact would the TPP have on your industry? Perhaps as important, what would happen if the TPP is not signed? What would the negative impact be?

[Patti Miller]

One of the very important aspects of the TPP for the canola industry was an agreement on the reduction of oil tariffs in Japan. Japan is one of our first customers for canola seed. We don't export any oil there. Our processing in Canada has grown significantly; Chinese consumers love canola. For us to be able to grow that market in our exports of oil would be a significant benefit to our industry. By not ratifying it when Australia already has an arrangement, day by day we lose the opportunity for that market.

The other aspects of TPP were discussions around terms on biotechnology. That's a very challenging subject in the international market. You have a strong group of people who pulled together and were making some progress on TPP, so again, that's another area that we really don't want to lose. The members that were in TPP represent a significant market opportunity for our industry.

[Brett Halstead]

Again, on a high level, we export over 90% of the canola we produce in our country, so it's very important. The TPP is not just about Japan. It's about potential new markets, about growing markets as well as keeping the markets we have, so any trade deals, but in particular the TPP, are critical to our industry.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thanks very much.

I know that there have been those who oppose the TPP and point to the fact that the U.S. has still not ratified it, and they say that if the U.S. doesn't come on board the whole deal goes down the toilet. This reminds me of a great statement by the former NFL coach of the Green Bay Packers. The late Vince Lombardi, when asked how he won so many football games, said that you control the controllables. Well, we can't control what the U.S. does or what Australia does, even though we have a separate agreement. We can control what we do, so what is your message to the federal government on whether or not it should ratify the TPP?

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Mr. Lukiwski, is that in relation to the APF? Can you frame that?

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

In terms of the APF, in the presentation Ms. Miller made she talks about market access and trade and how important it is. I'm just following up on that, Mr. Chair.

[Patti Miller]

I'm not sure what more we can say other than to point out that 90% of our crop is exported, so trade is everything to us. Making sure that we follow through on agreements that have been reached is critical.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Mr. Vander Ploeg, what is your view on the TPP? What impact might it have on your industry?

[Casey Vander Ploeg]

The impact would be huge. It's already been mentioned that in the TPP, of course, access to Japan is perhaps the crown jewel there. We believe the long-term future of our industry in terms of its future growth and sustainability rests very heavily on access to offshore markets, and the TPP is a key part of that.

We know, of course, that Japan and the U.S. have a veto on that. If they decide not to approve it, the deal doesn't go through. If it doesn't go through, that would be a huge loss of potential for our industry. In case that happens, the federal government should then aggressively pursue a bilateral agreement with Japan and at least keep working on efforts going forward. In that region, incomes are growing, and their desire for more high-quality protein is there. We need to be positioned to provide that for them.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you.

Now we have Mr. Longfield.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

The quality of presentations this morning is excellent. Thank you for this. It's going to help our report a lot.

I want to focus on innovation.

Mr. Vander Ploeg, you mentioned the Lethbridge cattle research centre. We have a similar centre in Elora that needs some upgrading. Through Lethbridge, do you work with the interprovincial research centres like the one in Ontario? How do you tie non-financial benefits, like research benefits, between the provinces?

[Casey Vander Ploeg]

We don't have a specific formal relationship with those research centres funded by Agriculture Canada, but through presentations and conversations that occur within industry, we most certainly have a strong relationship with the researchers doing the work there. Eighteen months ago, we took our entire board—I'm speaking about the Alberta Cattle Feeders board—to the Lethbridge research station. We took a tour through their on-site feedlot and saw what they were doing in terms of feed grains research, the methane reduction research and how that was being carried on, and all those sorts of things.

The idea, of course, is that then our board members are out within the industry and spreading the message to other producers. Typically, in terms of what happens, at least in the cattle-feeding sector, I once asked our members what their biggest concern was, and from a business point of view, they said there were things: conversion, conversion, and conversion. In other words, it was about taking that feed and converting it into beef and the rate at which that happens. There's always a tremendous interest in the cattle-feeding sector in any innovation or technology that can improve efficiency and productivity gains, because that's where cattle feeders make their money.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

At our research centre, I noticed a lot of equipment from the Netherlands and I was thinking, boy, Canadian equipment manufacturers should be all over this.

I want to pivot that over to you, Patti Miller. You were talking about working together and collaborating around oilseeds and getting value from them There's a grower just north of my riding of Guelph, a young farmer, who's pressing the oilseeds, soy in this case, taking the oil as biofuel, using biofuel to run diesel, and taking the heat from the diesel to heat the barn. I think there are some plus opportunities on climate change when you look at carbon credits and what could be done interprovincially.

Could you speak to how we could be investing in innovations like that? The use of lidar is another one for soil management. Have you been seeing lidar being used within your network?

[Patti Miller]

I can't comment on lidar, but maybe Brett can.

Certainly, the canola industry has been involved in biofuel and has promoted biofuel for many, many years. I referenced the international certification that we got many years ago. That was to access the EU biodiesel market. We've gone through another process to access the U.S. and get biofuel down there.

This area has been of critical importance to us in terms of investing not only in the science, but also in the regulations required to get access to those markets. There are a lot of innovative things that have been done and are being done on the farm.

Brett or Catherine, do you want to add any comments?

[Catherine Scovil]

Yes, since we're talking about biodiesel. It's certainly one of the solutions that we would like to put forward in terms of climate change, and that is to increase our federal mandate from 2% to 5%. When you look at canola, for example, and compare canola as a biofuel to a fossil fuel, it has 90% less greenhouse gas emissions.

We do need to look at policy solutions and that's certainly one that can be considered and is not costly. It's a product that's available, and it can have an immediate impact on the environment. It's something that we think is worth considering.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

It's high value.

[Catherine Scovil]

Yes, it's high value.