Agriculture Committee on Nov. 29th, 2016

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

You spoke about the opportunity that lies with the 700 million consumers in Europe. What are we doing here at home and abroad to ensure that our agriculture products are in those markets and are well received?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Number one, as you're aware, with the government today, innovation is a big issue. In my letter from the Prime Minister, innovation is certainly mentioned strongly, as it is in other letters. If you look at Navdeep Bains' department, you see that there are billions of dollars there. Some of it will be available to the agricultural sector.

It's so important that we be able to innovate and be ready for the opportunity that comes from the CETA deal. It looked at...we could end up sending $600 million more in beef to the European Union and $400 million worth of pork, and that's certainly a great asset to the pork industry; and there are the grains and oilseeds and many other products that will be produced by the agricultural sector.

It just opens up a wide market. As you're fully aware and everybody at this table is fully aware, Canada exports half of what it produces. We want to produce more and export more. We are an exporting nation and will continue to be an exporting nation.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

I have just a short amount of time, but some of the feedback I've heard from farmers in my area and that we've heard here from stakeholders concerns the difficulty of recruiting new farmers to agriculture, new participants.

I think there is a program called career focus in the estimates; there is about $2.5 million there. Can you talk about any other programs that are there to encourage new farmers?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

It's not in today's estimates, but we announced a youth in agriculture program that employed 175 people. We're putting a number of programs in place over the next year that will help employ and encourage people to come into agriculture.

I just had meetings in Truro at the Truro Agricultural College, and it was streamlined out; there was a lot of interest in it. What we're trying to do is make sure that people understand the importance of agriculture; make sure they know where food comes from, and particularly in the urban areas. If you look at what's taken taken place over the last 100 years, it's shifted totally. It used to be 80% rural, and now it's over 80% urban.

What's important is that we have programs such as 4-H and Agriculture in the Classroom. These types of programs are important so that urban people truly understand the importance of and what is involved in producing the product, and understand how the products are produced, whether it's animals or plants, and the humane effort put into it; also to indicate how the environment is dealt with—how we deal with and how we put fertilizers on the property, and how we want to make sure that the fertilizers are absorbed by the plants and not just wasted. That is great for the environment and is also very important for the bottom line for the farmer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Minister and Ms. Lockhart.

Ms. Brosseau, you may go ahead for six minutes.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the minister for being here today and for answering the committee's questions. I'd also like to thank the CFIA official and the others who are joining us today.

Minister, I'd like to discuss the Liberal government's transition and compensation plan for farmers.

You promised to invest $350 million to compensate farmers. That investment is in the form of a fund and the support is conditional. That's a long way from covering the losses of our farmers. They are going to lose huge amounts of money, particularly farmers in Quebec.

Quebec's dairy farmers are asking for $750 million in additional assistance. Earlier today, you said that, further to your consultations, you had determined that $250 million for producers and $100 million for processors over a period of four years were sufficient investments. The industry, particularly in Quebec, is not satisfied with those measures and sees them as nothing more than smoke and mirrors. Producers in my riding are extremely frustrated at the massive losses this agreement is going to cause them in the long run.

Can you tell us why Quebec dairy producers are asking you for $750 million more in assistance?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much for the question, and I'm not surprised. To be fair, I have travelled right across the country, and I have met, for example, the young farmers in your province who are very concerned about the future of supply management. What I heard right across the country was for the future, the next generation, to make sure that supply management remains strong in this country. That's what we heard.

When I started this, I indicated we would have a transition fund in place in order to make sure that it would be easier for the supply management sector—in particular the dairy sector, in this instance—to adjust to CETA when it comes into play.

It's important to note on this, when you hear from farmers right across the country and they ask you for a program, that it's pretty important that you put this type of program in place. As I explained previously, what farmers felt needed to happen was that their farms needed innovation. They need more innovation dollars. They need to be able to compete with CETA when it comes into play. In that instance, that's exactly what we did. Of the $350 million we put in place, $250 million was put in place for the farming sector, for the farmer right across the country, and this program, with the farmers, will do nothing but innovate the dairy farmers, and that's what was asked for across the country.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I'm sorry, Minister, I don't have much time.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Ruth Ellen, just on the process—

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I know you're going to talk it out—I'm sorry—but I can tell you that farmers I represent are not happy. They're not satisfied. They don't feel they are listened to.

Just a few weeks ago I went to a fromagerie. They've celebrated 15 years. They've invested $1 million to remain competitive. It's an amazing business. They win international prizes, and they beat out cheeses in Europe regularly. They've invested, because they knew this was coming, but with this $100 million over four years, they're not going to have access to this aid for value-added transformation, and they're frustrated. Farmers that I represent are not happy with the compensation or the investments you have put forward.

I have to bring up diafiltered milk, because you didn't bring it up in your speech earlier today. This is an issue that I know you're going to say you've inherited from the Conservatives, but it's been going on for a long time, and it is just federal jurisdiction. When a diafiltered product come over the border, it is considered an ingredient. When it goes into cheese making, it's considered a milk. Why hasn't this issue been dealt with? It's been over a year since you've been the government, and this issue is causing $231 million in losses. It is huge. I'm wondering why you haven't acted. This is putting our farmers in a terrible position, and it is your responsibility to deal with it.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much. I appreciate your question, and I'm again not overly surprised.

I think in the first part of your question, you basically answered the question when you indicated that farmers have already invested millions of dollars. I have to say that in my area...not two or three miles, as we say, as the crow flies, there was a barn built that's probably the most modern dairy farm in the world. The fact is that people do believe that their government is going to make sure that supply management remains strong. If farmers in your province have invested millions of dollars, business people normally do not invest unless they have faith in their country, their government, and their system. I can assure you that when you have people investing this kind of money, they certainly have faith in the supply management program. I have dealt with it and worked under it, and I really think it's a great program.

You mentioned, too, who will be eligible and who will not be eligible. We'll be sitting down with farmers to see. Normally programs are not retroactive, but we will be sitting down with farmers across the country, or the farm organizations, to decide. With them, as we have done in order to put this package together, this will be put together the way that most people....

It's pretty near impossible to put a program in place that every last human being will agree is absolutely right and has absolutely enough money. I've been in politics a long time, and I've never heard them say, “No, that's a little bit too much.”

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I'm sorry, I want to talk about diafiltered milk—

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Madam Brosseau.

Thank you, Ms. Brosseau.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

The fact is that the program is what the farmers have asked for. And I have to admit that I appreciated your question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Minister MacAulay.

Mr. Breton, you may go ahead for six minutes.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for appearing before the committee today. I'd also like to thank the department officials for being here.

There is no doubt that CETA is excellent news for Canada's agricultural sector, giving us access to a market of some 700 million potential customers. It's probably one of the world's biggest markets.

I would like the minister to explain how the government plans to advocate on behalf of all Canadian producers in order to promote overseas exports.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much for the question. It's truly a good question, and having just come back from China, having been in this business for a while, and having been at a number of trade shows around the world, I know it's vitally important that people understand what we have. It's so important that the world understands what we produce. I truly like your question.

What they need to understand is that it's the regulatory process that we work under. We work on a science-based regulatory system, and in the end the buyer is the one who's in charge and becoming more in charge. They decide even more than government sometimes what will be used, how a product will be produced, and this type of thing.

What we need to do as a country is make sure that the EU in particular, in this instance, understands exactly what we have. The government is important, but it's also important that the consumer understands what we have in Canada, how our crops are produced, what's put in place in order to produce seeds that are better for the environment, and what's put in place in order to make sure that they use less fertilizer.

On the animal side of the issue, consumers should know how they're produced under humane conditions to make sure they're slaughtered properly, to make sure all the regulatory process is followed, and they understand what our regulatory process is.

When they come to see, let's say the piece of beef or fish or whatever it is in the cooler, and they see the Canada brand, what we need to do is to make sure that's the brand they want. They want the Canada brand because we have the best farmers, ranchers, and fishermen in the country, and a lot of changes have taken place in the fishing industry. Not that they weren't before, but a lot of regulatory processes have come in to make sure that it's top-quality product.

What the European Union needs to know is what a quality product they have. What we need to have happen is to have more demand than we have supply. Then we will be doing our job, because the demand for protein worldwide is expanding year by year. When you look at what's taking place in China and in the Asian community around the world, we have more people entering the middle class, and more people want to eat like you do. They want to eat well.

My job as Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is to make sure that the European Union understands exactly what we have, and to make sure that they want it. That's part of my job and your job, too, in order to make sure that everybody understands what we have. Then it would be better for our farmers and it would be better for the economy of this country.

Thank you.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

If I still have some time left, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask a question about spent fowl.

Last week, I was speaking with poultry farmers in my riding, and there's clearly something that doesn't add up as far as spent fowl imports go. Minister, you touched on it at the beginning of your remarks, and you indicated that additional border controls were being conducted.

Can you explain what exactly doesn't add up and what the government is doing right now to address the problem?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much, and yes, there is a problem. When you import more spent fowl than there is in the U.S., from the U.S., there's a problem. That's a problem that's been going on for a number of years. I've made an announcement on this, and as you're no doubt aware, there have been five producers in the U.S., or suppliers, that have been charged or taken up at the border on issues of importing. When you're importing more spent fowl than there is in the U.S., there's something wrong with what's going on. What we have to do is address this issue, and that's what we're trying to do. We have to put a process in place. It could be the DNA testing, if that can be done quickly enough, if you can get it to the lab and get it back, but things at the border must move quickly. There have to be ways to ensure that we're able to do it in a timely fashion at the border.

I might add that the producer of the spent fowl in the U.S. is also keen that we deal with this issue in a timely manner, so I have to say that everybody's onside. We just have to deal with it. We've indicated we're going to, and the best way that we can deal with it, we will.

I don't know if anybody else wishes to give any information on that, if they have any, but that's what we plan to do as a government. It's just somewhat annoying to find out there's more coming in than really exists from somewhere. That was certainly a point that hit my radar quickly when I became minister.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Breton.

Mr. Longfield.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the minister for being here, and to the department for its support.

Thanks for your rapid response to the crisis out west. It was great to see in real time how quickly you responded to a great need, and will continue to respond to the people who really need your help. It's good you're doing so much to move that forward. I know you're doing everything you can. That was last week's topic, and by the end of the week you were on it and had some solutions, so thank you for that.

Minister, in the last little while we had a report from Dominic Barton, and he singled out agriculture as one of the key sectors that Canada should be able to lead the world in. Innovation is going to be the key to that. I see in the estimates that there's $8.16 million allocated for innovation. We've had questions from some of our witnesses on how you interact with ISED, with Navdeep Bains' department. You mentioned him a little bit earlier. How does the innovation coming from the innovation, science, and economic development department relate to the innovation happening in the agriculture department?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much.

First of all, on the issue of bovine TB, being a farmer, I understand. It has to be done as quickly as possible and as efficiently as possible. The issue is that you have to try to get a solution in place, and to make sure the farmers and ranchers aren't hurt very much financially. I didn't have to go through much of a learning curve to know that. Having experienced some ups and some downs in the agricultural sector, I knew that it had to happen in a hurry.

I think I'll turn it over to Pierre on the estimates issue.

[Pierre Corriveau, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Management Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

I'll just point members to page 223 of the estimates. As part of our five-year multi-agreement with the provinces, up to 25% of the funds lapsed in one fiscal year can be brought back in the current fiscal year, so that is what you are seeing here. Each province has to invest a minimum of 25% in various areas, so this is the most up to date. Basically, you voted earlier in the main estimates $100 million in innovation. On top of that, we have $8.1 million from funds that had lapsed from the last fiscal year.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Very good.