Agriculture Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2017

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

Just speaking on that, you know beforehand that this issue might be a problem for us, so you want to start working—

[Brett Halstead]

It's just open dialogue where there's a continuous communication and a relationship built up with them over many decades. That's not to say it's perfect, but I think the communication has helped there. They really want the product, and we really want to sell it to them.

[Brian Innes]

One example of that would be where we talked about how the supply and demand situation is evolving. Also, we talk about how regulatory requirements are changing, whether it's in Japan or Canada.

In the past, for example, Japan has flagged where they see in our transparent regulatory system that we have a new crop protection product approved in Canada for canola, but they notice that they don't have a tolerance established in Japan, so they ask us about that.

That type of ongoing conversation is very helpful to be able to identify concerns beforehand.

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

The experience with Japan has been that they're focused on evidence-based policy. Has it been a good experience with Japan?

[Brian Innes]

Yes. Japan is very transparent and has a very similar regulatory system to what we have.

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

Just quickly, is there an impact analysis of those non-trade barriers, where you say, for instance, Europe banned GMO products a long time ago, not based on science. How realistic is it for us to come and say, well, you should start accepting this and you should look at the science behind it? Do you guys do an impact analysis of that, to see what our chances are, or do you just say, well, let's try, because if we don't try, we'll never get it?

[Brian Innes]

I'd just reflect that, when we do our prioritization, we look at both what's important and what's possible. I think we, like the government, are looking at using our efforts in the best way possible to get results.

In the case of Europe, for example, they do approve biotech varieties. We have concerns about their system, but they do import a lot of biotech crops into Europe. It's really about improving the transparency and functioning of the system for things that are important to us.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Now we have Mr. Longfield for six minutes.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

It's a great discussion. Thanks for coming here. It's really helpful to get these details.

There are two areas that I want to explore. One is with the provinces or territories and whether there's some work that needs to be done. I'm thinking of land use policy or things that get in the way of introducing new crops.

We had a discussion in Guelph not too long ago where that was brought up by the soy people, that getting permits for new products was an issue. In my head, I think what applies to soy might apply to canola. Do you have any comments on that? Is that too far out in left field?

[Brett Halstead]

As a producer, I'm always a little concerned about any regulations that might be placed on me. I take great pride in improving the productivity and the longevity of my soil, because it needs to be there for many generations to come.

I don't typically want to do something that's going to damage it, but at the same time, I don't like being told I can or can't do certain things, or have to do something a certain way.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

So there may be some work that the federal government could do with the provinces, or is that something that we should just leave in the provincial realm?

[Brett Halstead]

I don't have a good answer to that.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Okay. Maybe that wasn't a fair question.

I'm wondering about the non-tariff barriers as they might relate to Mexico and the United States. We've talked about overseas. We had a Mexican delegation here earlier this year, and they were talking about the opportunities around canola and the barriers that might exist between Canada and Mexico. I'll just put that out there. Also, with the change in regime in the States, there may be something that we should be aware of as we're doing this study.

[Brian Innes]

Certainly they're not necessarily the right sorts of things to address in a trade agreement or a renegotiation of a trade agreement, but there are barriers and impediments when it comes to trade with the United States, even though we have no tariffs and we're very similar in our economies. I'll give you an example that I mentioned earlier.

Both Canada and the U.S. are modernizing their food and feed safety frameworks. Both governments are going along, but they don't always come up with the same answers or the same requirements. What that means practically is that when we're producing in Canada, our processing plants need to meet the requirements of Canadian regulators, but then they also need to meet the requirements of U.S. regulators and they need to be inspected by U.S. regulators. Right now, for example, there is a project through the Regulatory Cooperation Council that's looking at harmonizing our food safety systems.

Those types of efforts are really important. I don't think any of us would go for a meal in the United States and feel that we were not eating safe food in the same way that we're eating safe food perhaps later today, so a regulator-to-regulator dialogue is important so that our regulators are in conversation with other countries.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Are they asynchronous approvals?

[Brian Innes]

When it comes to our regulatory systems for crop protection products and biotechnology, those are quite coordinated. Where we see more risk in North America is on the food and feed safety elements.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

If I can flip back over to Europe and CETA, at our last meeting we just touched on the differences with public trust issues in Europe, how public trust is a new requirement that we would have under CETA, and that we can get science-based approval, but then you have to go an additional step. What has your experience been with that? Where are we at, and do we need to consider something here in terms of our study?

[Brian Innes]

Certainly, this is a broad concern with the way the European regulatory system is moving. From the context of your study, I think, from our industry's point of view, it's really important that the Government of Canada remain engaged with European regulators and other countries that have similar concerns in Europe because movement of that system toward something that's less science-based and more political would disadvantage our ability to continue to export there.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

In terms of organics and organic trade, there are a lot of public trust issues that come around that. Maybe we don't have enough time in the last minute or so, but is that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

In the last 45 seconds.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Yes, in 45 seconds, could you maybe touch on that? I think we'll be having a presentation from the Organic Trade Association in a little while, but maybe before that, you could weigh in on it.

[Brett Halstead]

Yes, I can comment there.

I don't want to bash what somebody else does. Everybody makes their own decisions based on their way of marketing things, but I feel what I've done with my farm, by going to reduced tillage, burning less fuel, and increasing my production, producing more on the same acres, is very environmentally sustainable. I want to get out there and tell that story. Farm groups are talking more about telling that story to our consumers, both in Canada and abroad.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Halstead.

Thank you, Mr. Longfield.

Now we have Mr. Shipley for six minutes.