Evidence of meeting #28 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was food.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
We're now in the second round.
Go ahead, Monsieur Peschisolido, for six minutes.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Mr. Cherewyk and Mr. Lemaire, thank you for coming. I've been impressed not only with your outlining of the issues but also by the attention to detail.
Mr. Cherewyk, you discussed transportation. Why don't you talk about the two areas that you see are important issues on the transportation policy that perhaps Minister Garneau will be announcing in Montreal in a couple of days?
November 1st, 2016 / 9:30 a.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Pulse Canada
The agrifood industry has been pretty clear in its expectations about addressing two key things. One is to ensure that we create the right conditions within the legislative and regulatory framework to support effective service level agreements. With the introduction of Bill C-52, which gave shippers in this country a right to service level agreements, we made progress. With the introduction of the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act, we made additional progress by defining the rules of the game, by defining the operational terms that could be included in service level agreements.
The next piece that needs to be addressed, from the agriculture industry's perspective, is financial accountability. We're looking forward to seeing some move to include financial consequences in the framework that supports service level agreements. Both parties need to be held financially accountable for the commitments and obligations they make when they enter a service level agreement.
On the other hand, not every bit of traffic, not every shipper, not every location, will be covered by a service level agreement, so we need to ensure that the act in general, and the agency, create conditions whereby adequate and suitable service is provided to all in areas, even where service level agreements don't cover traffic. In that regard, we're looking to an enhancement of the Canadian Transportation Agency, with greater resources, a stronger mandate, the ability to act on their own motion, and the ability to introduce interim orders ex parte. These types of things are of critical importance to us. That agency has to be informed by enhanced public performance reporting, so we agree with the Emerson report recommendations that we need to enhance public performance reporting.
Things like interswitching have proven very successful in a short period of time, both as a means to actually access another carrier and as a tool in leverage in negotiations to access better capacity and better service. We'd like to see that made permanent.
There are a number of things we think need to be done to enhance that overall regulatory environment with respect to the act and the agency, and we're looking forward to seeing that addressed. We're also looking forward to seeing some of the commercial aspects of the interaction between railways and shippers enhanced through the regulations and legislation that pertain to service level agreements.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Mr. Lemaire, today we are discussing the next framework agreement. Are there any policies or a direction we can utilize with the framework agreement to help on the transportation side as it relates particularly to trade?
9:30 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
Within the science, research, and innovation side—the innovation side, definitely—we all laugh about autonomous vehicles, but in that last leg of delivery, going back to the labour and the issue around transportation and not having enough truck drivers, as an example, there are current tests under way in Europe that are looking at that final leg of delivery using autonomous trucks. Regulatory changes that would enable the delivery of some of these new technologies have the potential to help, but it's early in the game to understand how much support that could provide the industry within the narrow window of delivery of product.
9:30 a.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Pulse Canada
I think it's critical for the next policy framework to acknowledge the important role that transportation plays in making us successful domestically in North America and around the world.
The last time we applied for funding under GF2 to address transportation, we did it as a coalition. We did it as an agriculture industry that had come together to support a long-term strategy, and one of the challenges we faced in the early goings-on was the fact that the policy framework was established to promote trade and didn't exactly acknowledge the role that transportation plays in facilitating trade, so the department had to work very hard to make necessary adaptations to allow for such an innovative proposal to come forward. I know it required support politically as well to ensure these types of things could happen.
There is a recognition now that the next policy framework must accommodate innovative work that needs to be undertaken with respect to transportation, and continue to support that going forward.
9:35 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
And linking through at the provincial level as well. We can't forget the provinces.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Ocean Spray is based in my neck of the woods, in east Richmond. As you know, it's a co-operative approach. Some would argue that's a transformational approach to things. Could we take that model of the co-operative approach that Ocean Spray has used in cranberries and juices and apply it to other sectors?
9:35 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
We are very different industries, but so similar in some ways.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Pulse Canada
It's an interesting question that I don't have an answer to at the moment, but I would be happy to get back to you with our views later.
9:35 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
It does occur across the fruit and veg sector. I mentioned Peak of the Market in Winnipeg, and it's a co-operative. Ocean Spray is another one. There are numbers of them across the country.
Success comes in partnership. It doesn't necessarily need to be a co-operative per se, but the philosophical approach of that partnership delivery of consolidating many small growers and delivering product through consistent quality, the right food safety and assurance system, and a common dealer has potential to grow.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. Lemaire.
Thank you, Mr. Peschisolido.
Now we have Mr. Shipley for six minutes.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Thank you very much.
Thank you, witnesses, for coming on this significant topic of the agriculture policy framework. Clearly both of you and your organizations represent producers, but also represent.... How do we get and how do we supply a domestic market? As has been said, Canada is an export nation. As we continue to produce and provide funding to get the growth that we need to make it profitable for the producers—and hence the processors and the value chain that goes with it—we need to make sure that we have the market and can get them to it.
One of the things you talked about.... I want to make sure I got the numbers right. I think you mentioned this, Ron. In terms of the research, industry provides...?
9:35 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
Industry provides 25%, and government 75%. That's the ideal model.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Is there value in bringing the industry and all the players to the table under the cluster funding program? Does that have a relevance? Is it something that needs to be continued, or perhaps changed to make it better? Does either one of you have any comments on that?
9:35 a.m.
President, Canadian Produce Marketing Association
For the produce sector, I can say that the current cluster model seems to be working, as managed through the Canadian Horticultural Council. The direct question should be asked of Rebecca Lee, the CEO at CHC. I do feel that there has been success, but there is potential to continuously improve.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Pulse Canada
The industry is very supportive of the cluster model and looks forward to working with a similar model going forward.
I'd identify a few priorities here. We've consulted broadly on this, just to identify some key things they want to see going forward. Building on success will include the ability to accommodate short-term and somewhat emerging issues midstream throughout the program. For example, the pulse industry identified or discovered an issue with respect to Aphanomyces or root rot midstream through GF2. Having the ability to access funds mid-term is going to be a priority so that industry can adapt to issues as they emerge.
Ensuring that all researchers can access funding, whether it is provided federally through the cluster program or administered provincially, and limiting the barriers to that access are priorities. Provincial government employees and provincial government research are a priority and are important in many provinces across the country. There is a request that we do everything we can to ensure that we limit the constraints to accessing that funding by provincial growers. Continuity and a seamless transition between Growing Forward programs is seen as important.
The key thing here is getting the program up and running as quickly as possible in the spring of 2018. Seed has to go in the ground in April and May. If we miss that time frame, we lose an entire year of research.
As a last note, efficient processes would be absolutely key.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I want to trip into another topic around agriculture right through the system, in terms its effect on the environment. I'm wondering about agriculture's positive impact. Because of the land mass, the crops that we grow are actually carbon sinks.
I would like to get your thoughts. Is there a way of having something within the next APF that would help to recognize...rather than having to pay into some sort of a fund for agriculture, so that agriculture would receive the benefits it deserves for the positive aspect it puts into agriculture?
I might be thinking more about production, but I'm going to be honest with you. When you're on the road, or if you're travelling this country, you see the changes that have been made to the transportation system. You see trains of attached 53-foot trailers going down the road carrying produce. Instead of two trucks on the road, now there's one. Could I get your thoughts on transporting the products, using more rail, and shipping as much as we can internationally?
Is there any way, in the discussion around the APF, of getting some cost-benefit analysis on the benefits of agriculture?
9:40 a.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Pulse Canada
I'm going to present something a bit different for you to think about.
From the pulse industry's perspective, it's time to shift the focus away from the farm and onto food. I'm going to demonstrate this through an example.
Take a standard formulation for bread in this country, which uses a 100% wheat formulation. If you re-formulated that bread to use wheat that had been grown in rotation with pulses and replaced 20% of the flour with a pulse flour, you would increase the protein of that bread by 14%, increase the fibre level by 125%, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 23%, all associated with the production of that slice of bread.
Where on a farm, over a relatively short period of time, could you achieve the same type of reduction in greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously increasing the nutrition associated with a product? It's time that we all start shifting our focus away from what incremental improvements we can see on the farm and towards the massive, substantial, and material impacts we can achieve by focusing on food.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. Cherewyk. Thank you, Mr. Shipley.
Unfortunately, that's all the time we have. It has been a very interesting conversation. I want to thank both of you for being here today. In passing, after tomatoes, chickpeas and lentils are my favourite food, just to let you know.
We will take about three to five minutes to change the witnesses.
Thank you so much.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
We'll begin the second hour of our work on the APF.
With us for the second hour are
Ms. Corlena Patterson, executive director of the Canadian Sheep Federation, and Ms. Kristy House, national on-farm safety coordinator.
Also we have
Mr. Hans Kristensen, from the board of directors of the Canadian Pork Council, and Mr. Gary Stordy, public relations manager.
Welcome, everyone. We will have opening statements of up to 10 minutes, and I will ask Ms. Patterson to start. Thank you.
9:40 a.m.
Corlena Patterson Executive Director, Canadian Sheep Federation
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and esteemed committee members, and thank you for the invitation to appear here before you today to speak about the next agricultural policy framework.
On behalf of the Canadian sheep industry, I'd like to thank you for the invitation to speak about our sector's key requests for the next policy framework.
We've had the privilege of being part of the agricultural policy framework engagement strategy and working with operations levels on program design, so today's appearance provides our industry a chance to highlight our key priorities and we appreciate this opportunity.
In June of this year, the Canadian Sheep Federation joined Canada's livestock sectors in advocating for a national, sustainable model of animal health risk management within the next agricultural policy framework. This commitment to building resiliency within Canadian livestock production needs to go beyond ad hoc initiatives of the past and include legacy funding for priority areas such as surveillance, biosecurity planning, diagnostic capacity-building, regulatory modernization, research, vaccine development, emergency response, and financial risk mitigation.
Committed funding needs to be pan-Canadian and multisectoral in nature, breaking down jurisdictional barriers and bringing all industry groups into the decision-making process. Maintaining an effective infrastructure of facilities and trained professionals to conduct disease surveillance is the only way of detecting new incursions of important production-limiting diseases, and more importantly, preventing these incursions from spreading.
Federal support in terms of field sampling, diagnostic services, and epidemiologists must be available to continue and improve surveillance activities. Each sector can prioritize areas of risk, but all sectors require the necessary infrastructure in place to support these surveillance activities.
The Canadian sheep industry manages a list of important diseases for which surveillance is needed. This list includes the likes of bluetongue, Cache Valley virus, scrapie, vesicular diseases including foot and mouth disease, rabies, peste des petits ruminants, and the list continues.
In order to effectively manage disease surveillance, emergency response, and disease containment, Canada needs a functional traceability system. The recent announcement that TraceCanada funding was revoked because the organization failed to deliver a national multispecies database clearly demonstrates the risk involved with privately held repositories of traceability data. We often draw on international examples of livestock traceability systems as we move ahead with the design of our own program, but we all too often overlook the fact that, in these comparative jurisdictions, federal government supports key traceability activities such as data management.
Moreover, deferring the cost of supporting traceability solely to producers puts the program's compliance, engagement, and sustainability at risk. The next agricultural policy framework needs to establish dedicated funding for a national multispecies database that supports traceability in Canada if we're ever to have a program that sees everyone participating.
Likewise, industry funding must be available federally and provincially to support traceability implementation for a full range of stakeholders, including money to support reporting infrastructures for stakeholders, communications, engagement, and program improvements through the early years of its implementation as we learn through the growing pains.
In keeping with support for a strong national animal health policy, federal and provincial governments need to commit to sustainable funding for institutions that safeguard animal health by supporting responsible antimicrobial use and surveillance in Canada, such as the Canadian global food-animal residue avoidance databank and an expanded version of the Canadian integrated program for antimicrobial resistance surveillance, or CIPARS.
For minor-use species such as the sheep industry, the responsible use of veterinary drugs is supported by ensuring that producers and veterinarians alike have appropriate access to medically important pharmaceuticals. However, the Canadian sheep industry struggles with access to veterinary drugs, veterinary biologics, and pesticides. In the past year we've seen an adaptation of the Pest Management Centre's approval process that led to supplemental approvals for two new veterinary products for use in sheep in Canada. We also saw the first-ever trilateral joint review of a veterinary product, conducted by Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, that led to the approval of an important pain-relieving drug.
Critical to the sheep industry's competitiveness is funding for the expansion and ongoing support of these two particular initiatives.
Long-term predictable agricultural research funding is essential to strengthening the sector, as is a coordinated and collaborative approach to research that avoids duplication of efforts and eliminates research gaps. Increased funding of AAFC's internal capacity to meet basic research needs underpins the foundation of agricultural research in Canada, and we need to bring that back.
AAFC must in turn work with existing universities and provincial expertise centres such as our own CEPOQ to prioritize key research needs established by industry rather than competing for resources and projects. The sheep industry would like to see investments in research whose outcomes help optimize production and performance and improve flock health, manage market expansion and expectations, and improve the business performance and profitability of the Canadian flock.
Research funding, however, must not end with the conclusion of research projects. Research that can't be implemented in real time is of very little benefit if it can't be translated by stakeholders into profitability and productivity. Technology transfer that sees the interpretation and implementation of research findings must also be well funded.
Investments in market development will support industry growth and prosperity, but those investments should not focus solely on international markets. For some sectors like our own, there is tremendous potential to capture domestic market share and displace imports with Canadian products.
Funding for capacity-building is essential to kick-start market development for some sectors, and should be considered as part of a market development funding stream. Additionally, governments across Canada must commit to partnering with industry and working proactively in the development of an agreed-upon national food strategy that includes supporting producers as they continue to build upon existing food safety assurance programs to meet the needs of processors, retailers, regulators, and consumers.
Canadian agriculture, particularly the livestock sector, has faced increased scrutiny from the public eye, real or perceived. The next agricultural policy framework needs to provide support to the sector, not only by ensuring funding to stakeholders as they work to strengthen consumer confidence domestically and abroad but also in terms of validating and supporting scientifically sound production practices.
Funding needs to be available to industry to respond to public trust pressures, and federal agencies need to ensure that changes to policy related to food production are driven by the science of farming and not in response to a public opinion poll.
Along these lines, the sheep industry would like to see funding available federally and provincially to all stakeholders handling livestock, from the farm gate to the processing facilities, as they work to meet animal care standards set out in our codes of practice and implement other practices related to enhanced humane handling in terms of equipment, personnel training, proper restraining, and electrical stunning.
It's clear that we're in an era of climate and environmental change. The agricultural sector needs to manage its role in environmental sustainability and requires funding to help implement changes in production that will protect our environment for future generations of farmers. At the same time, the sector needs to learn to adapt to climate change that impacts animal health and disease incursions, changes feed and food production, and alters what we know about environmental stewardship.
Producers need funding that helps manage changing disease risks, parasites on farms, and plant diseases, while helping to manage carbon emissions in this new era of carbon fees and taxes.
Canadian farmers need to be able to mitigate financial risk if they're going to stay in business, but with fewer and fewer farms choosing to participate in the current suite of business risk management programs, the level of financial risk facing producers, industry, and governments continues to increase.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture recommended changes to the BRM program that we support, suggesting a list that includes restoring AgriStability's payment trigger to when program margins fall below 85% of a farmer's historical reference margins; eliminating AgriStability's reference margin limitation provisions, and exploring alternative approaches that limit payments for producers in profitable situations while ensuring coverage of allowable expenses for those facing negative margins; establishing mechanisms such as premium credits, kick-starts to AgriInvest, waived AgriStability fees, and enhanced access to capital for beginning farmers; establishing a supplementary program to the existing AgriStability program to address the lack of support currently available to diversified farm operations; enhancing and amending the outcome of the AgriInvest program to reflect its role in managing all financial risks, not limited to small risks as it currently stands; and amending AgriRecovery to cover multiple years of extraordinary costs or losses resulting from the short-term impact of a single event or recurring events that could not effectively be mitigated.
Aside from the funding eligibility, there's much within the agricultural framework, design, and delivery that could benefit from change. The current funding structure that requires industry matching funds needs to be re-examined. Twenty-five per cent is too high for some sectors and industry groups required to fund more than one project to help advance the industry. This practice makes it impossible for us to sponsor multiple projects. The same can be said of individual projects funded provincially.
Funding streams need to be designed with enough flexibility to allow smaller industry the opportunity to access funds and support projects needed to advance the industry.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
I'm sorry, Ms. Patterson; can you please conclude? We're past the time.
10 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Sheep Federation
We would like to see some changes as well in the approval standards and the process, speed, and flexibility of the programs so that they make them usable.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you so much, Ms. Patterson.
Mr. Hans Kristensen, with the Canadian Pork Council, is next.