Agriculture Committee on Sept. 21st, 2017

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you very much to our witnesses for being here today. I want to touch on a couple of the main themes that our witnesses have talked about.

Mr. Carey, I'm going to start with you. You talked about some of the policies that we have in place and the focus to ensure that we have affordable food and affordable opportunities out there. I'm concerned that some of the policies our current government is enacting or repealing are going to cause our food to be significantly more expensive. I'd like your opinion.

We can look at the carbon tax, eliminating the deferral on cash grain tickets, these potential tax changes that they're talking about now, and also the potential to ban neonicotinoids for pesticides. Are there concerns among your members about some of these changes and this direction in terms of the sustainability of the family farm and the ability to provide affordable food?

[Dave Carey]

It's a big question, so I'll do my best.

I think, writ large, the concern we have is that you have policies, like those outlined in the budget, about increasing agriculture and agrifood exports that would come from, say, the second-largest net exporter, but then you have a similar policy that makes it more difficult to do business in Canada. It's not a concern government to government, but overall, when we have so many consultations going on, what we've seen is that departments still act in silos. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is going in this direction, implementing some really great things, then perhaps Finance Canada is going in a different direction that may hurt some of what's happening. I think it's a concern across our membership, for sure.

Specifically about access to crop protection products, neonics or others, that's a huge concern, because these are still.... An example of one that is not a neonic is called Thiram. It's the most registered fungicide in the world. If my horticulture colleagues were here they would go into greater detail, but it's the most widely registered fungicide in the air. The PMRA is currently proposing to cancel its registration for all uses. If you want to increase us as an exporter, for us to get agriculture products into Mexico they have to be treated with Thiram. Again, we're going in two different directions. Without getting into too many specifics, the concern is that we want to move in one direction here, but then a new policy is limiting our ability to do that.

A lot of our members would be impacted by the proposed tax changes. We haven't had a chance to consult our members yet, but we're hearing from the grain growers and those who have been very vocal about it, so there's definitely concern about that. They ask, “How can I continue to innovate when I don't have access to crop protection products? The cost of my business is going up.” Then we get into this food policy that's about producing more affordable food, but we're making it more difficult for producers to do that.

Again, it's about a misalignment. Maybe we're not all talking to each other.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

You bring up issues like neonics, which have improved yield to such an extent —15% to 20% sometimes—that when you remove some of those opportunities it certainly makes things more expensive.

The one comment that you made that I thought was really interesting is the fact that you haven't had a chance to consult with your members on some of these tax changes, which is exactly our point. There simply has not been enough time for our agricultural producers to have a chance to really dissect what these changes will mean, and I think it's really imperative that—

[Dave Carey]

Seed companies are in the middle of harvest, too.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Exactly. It's really frustrating.

To the Egg Farmers of Canada, are some of these potential changes a concern that most of your producers have seen? I have some egg farmers in my constituency. They are certainly concerned about some of these potential tax changes and what it's going to do to their long-term stability. Have you had a chance to speak to your members on these issues?

[Roger Pelissero]

It is a concern. We are currently undertaking some analysis and assessing the potential impact to our farmers. We will make sure we will communicate them through the proper channels. It's really early in the game, and we want to make sure that we evaluate everything properly before we make some comments.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

I know it's early, but the deadline is October 2. We're really hoping that will get extended, but it shows the short timeline we have here.

In terms of affordable food, the CFIA is now going through some potential transportation changes. When we add bureaucracy to some of these changes, it makes things more expensive. Have you had an opportunity to provide feedback and input on these potential CFIA transportation changes?

[Tim Lambert]

With that particular one we've been quite actively engaged and have had a lot of concerns because, simply put, the way it was being.... I don't want to be critical, but some of the changes are tough to deal with. We have been very actively engaged, as all of the poultry sectors have, with that particular issue. It is a concern to us.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

On the concerns we've heard from both witnesses about science-based, evidence-based decision-making, it seems to me a lot of these transportation changes aren't based on science, even the neonics. Is that a concern?

[Tim Lambert]

It is. You see the pattern. We're quite involved internationally as well. We have an international trade association. Both Roger and I are involved very much in that. We see the same patterns, where you get a certain amount of science and then...now the term is social science. You get a lot of tinkering around the edges where certain other pressures are brought to bear that really aren't supported by science.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Lambert.

Thank you, Mr. Barlow.

Mr. Breton, you have six minutes.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Good afternoon, gentlemen.

Mr. Chair, I will share my time with my colleague Jean-Claude Poissant. Please let me know when three minutes have gone by, so that I can leave some time for my colleague.

I put this question to witnesses at our last meeting, and I will now put it to the three of you.

It is clear that consumption of healthy and safe food contributes to better health and that consumer education is key to good eating habits.

What do you suggest we include in the policy we are now studying in order to help consumers learn about healthy eating habits?

Mr. Carey, you can answer first.

[Dave Carey]

When you're talking about educating, it's obviously jointly federal and provincial, but throughout, courses such as food nutrition, which is something that was still around when I was in high school, are not around anymore. If you want to get it into education, you have to do so early. I would love to see a modern agriculture course in high school so that people who grew up in the suburbs, such as me, get a real appreciation for it.

It starts in the classroom. You're starting to form lifelong habits in your mid-teens, so that would be the first place, the actual education system.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Monsieur Lambert.

[Tim Lambert]

Actually, nutritional education around eggs has been a priority for us for a long time. One of our most successful programs was a physician education program we launched quite a few years ago similar to what pharmaceutical companies will do. They'll send a rep out to meet individually with doctors and talk about a product. We developed an information kit, and we met with over 30,000 family physicians across Canada over a number of years to talk directly about the myths around things such as cholesterol and eggs. It was a phenomenally successful program. It's part of the reason we've grown 30%.

We have a partnership as well with Agriculture in the Classroom Canada, so likewise we place value on that. School breakfast programs that we've been involved in for a number of years likewise provide an opportunity to provide education and knowledge to children around healthy eating habits. I agree 100%; it's a huge priority and something we've been investing in for a lot of years.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

I think that you, egg producers, are an example to follow when it comes to education. We really follow what you are doing in advertising and what you produce over the course of a year. I think that Canadians are very aware of what you are accomplishing. We should be inspired by that in the food policy and use themes, like you do. Congratulations!

I will now yield the floor to Mr. Poissant.

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

I want to thank the witnesses for coming to talk to us about food policy.

Before I became a member of Parliament, I was a dairy and grain farmer for over 40 years. Some of the things I produced are seed barley and IP soybeans. We know how much crop yields have changed over the years, at least over the past 30 years. Yes, we want to protect bees and we know that the use of neonicotinoid pesticides is partially to blame for their deaths, but our government is investing a lot in research.

Mr. Carey, could you tell us about the importance of research in the seed industry?

[Dave Carey]

It's absolutely critical. Basically where the innovation is in agriculture, at least on the plants side, is all delivered in that tiny seed. The way I like to describe it, the seed is basically the microchip that makes your computer work. It's the Intel processor. When you put it in perspective, a bag of canola seeds sitting on this table is more than an acre's worth of production. That gives you a sense that the innovations delivered there really go far forward.

In Canada alone, our members do about $100 million a year in private sector research. Canada is coming into compliance with what's called UPOV 91, with plant breeders' rights legislation that came into effect in 2015, so I think we're going to see that increase exponentially by.... I couldn't guess. We'll do our survey this fall.

We're doing the research on our side. Where the concerns come is that it's very easy to throw around, “We need to use science,” but it's really important that we continue in the Canadian and U.S. tradition to use risk-based science and not hazard-based science. Risk-based science is a much more fulsome discussion. Hazard-based science identifies the hazard, “Is there a hazard? We should stop.” Risk-based science says, “There's a hazard. How do we mitigate it? What are the potential ways you interact with that hazard?”

What we've seen is a bit of a creep towards more of a hazard-based, precautionary approach. We need to continue doing the research, but there is such a thing as good and bad science. I think we see a lot of mistruths. Documentaries such as Food Evolution are coming out to combat some of those. We're doing the research, but our governments are the ones that regulate us, so we really need to make sure that risk-based decision-making is the science that's used.

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

Supply management has a proven track record here, in the country. Could you tell us what you think it represents for our next generation? With supply management, that generation may consist of more people.

[Roger Pelissero]

I can speak directly to that. Actually, just recently there was an interview that I did with my son for The Globe and Mail. He committed to come back to the farm full time because of the security that supply management has brought. He knows he'll be able to provide a living for his wife, and although they're not expecting any children now, in the future, for their family also. I've seen those benefits my whole life.

My father was in the egg business in 1950, before supply management. When supply management came in, it dramatically changed how we were able to cover our costs all the time and make a fair return, to produce a product for consumers that was safe and high quality.

There are many next generations coming back to the farm. In fact, about 30% of our egg farmers in Canada are under the age of 45.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Pelissero.

Ms. Brosseau, you have six minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Speaking of family farms and transferring family farms, there was an important bill that was before the House that didn't even get to committee stage because it is now more advantageous to sell your farm or small business to somebody you don't know than it is to transfer it to your son or daughter. This is something that had broad support across Canada, and it's unfortunate the Minister of Finance himself spread disinformation and it didn't even get to committee. I would say that most members on the other side voted for it, but we did not give tools or extra help to farmers looking to transfer their farms, and small business owners, and even people who have fishing businesses. It's sad that we didn't get to have that, because I think it would have been very helpful.

On the topic of the national food strategy, I consulted my constituents throughout the summer. You could go on and on and talk about everything, and I know that the government has narrowed it down to four subjects. Public trust came up when we were doing a study at committee on the next agricultural framework. How do you think this food strategy could help increase public trust?

[Roger Pelissero]

At Egg Farmers of Canada, public trust is one of our top priorities. To have our consumers trust us to produce a safe product for them is a top priority. In fact, we have hosted many tours on our farm, opening our doors wide up, showing consumers today how we produce food. They are just astonished when they walk in the door at how well we care for our hens, how the barn is, the cleanliness. We're producing a food product, and it's not at all what they expect. They go on the Internet, they hit “Pictures”, and they see a description of how we produce food. That's why it's so important for us to tell our story to one person at a time. We want to build and maintain that public trust, because it's our top priority.

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

Mr. Lambert.

[Tim Lambert]

To build on that point, we sponsor and support a network of research chairs at Canadian universities. For example, we sponsor a research chair in sustainable production at the University of British Columbia. We've also started a national round table for sustainable egg production. We're doing a project evaluating the environmental impact of our productions systems with the World Wildlife Fund. We've done our own 50-year study, and we've reduced our environmental impact by 50% over the past 50 years while producing 50% more product. We've also helped found a Global Roundtable for Sustainable Egg Production. To echo what Roger is saying, it's a huge priority for us.