Agriculture Committee on Sept. 26th, 2017

[Shannon Benner]

I'll give you a great example. I think that public-private partnerships play a great role. When you look at Vancouver, for example, you'll see that UBC did the exact same thing. They donated a plot of land. Leaders came in, and they have intercity kids working in community gardens.

That serves a number of purposes. It's about making healthy choices, food education, and some of that sort of farm-to-plate education. It's also about growing food efficiently and effectively. Then there's also the marketability and the entrepreneurial skills. They're learning to either put it into a school system or a healthy eating program, or to market and sell the goods. I think there's an immense opportunity. From a 4-H perspective, we are working to bring those programs into urban areas. For a year now, we've piloted a program within Ottawa, and have programs in most urban centres.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Benner.

Now, we have Mr. Peschisolido, for six minutes.

[Joe Peschisolido, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Mr. Chair, thank you so much.

I would like to follow up with Madame Bérubé.

I was intrigued by your use of the language “une menace”. Those are fighting words. Those are words you usually don't hear in the agriculture committee. My riding is 80% urban and suburban, and 20% rural. Eastern Richmond and southern Steveston are farms.

Can you follow up a little bit on what you mean when you say that pesticides are a threat to the sustainability of the farming system? I just want to preface that by saying say that I hear that debate in my riding. The west end is like that. The east end says, “No, there's nothing wrong with pesticides.”

[Annie Bérubé]

I wouldn't say that pesticides are a threat to Canadian agriculture. I said that overuse, extensive use, and over-dependence on synthetic pesticides, as the first tool to combat pests, are the problem when we know that we have beneficial management practices, integrated pest management, and organic practices that should be our first weapons in managing pests.

They are a threat, because when we register new synthetic pesticides in Canada, the industry is required to demonstrate the efficacy of the product. The requirement under the act is that the new product need only increase yield by an incremental fraction. Years later—10, 20, 30 years down the road—when those pesticides are used in the real world, what we see is that in fact the promise of increased yield is not delivered; it is marginal, as I've said, in the case of atrazine in corn, for example, or non-existent.

There are also many non-essential uses of pesticides in Canadian agriculture. I would cite, for example, the use of glyphosate pre-harvest in wheat and grains, which is meant only as a desiccant to the crop, and is most responsible for glyphosate in food contamination.

Basically what we are saying is that if we look at the long-term sustainability of agriculture, if we want to maintain healthy soils, healthy ecosystems, healthy pollinator populations, and healthy watersheds that are really the foundation of long-term agriculture, we need to rethink using synthetic pesticides as the tool of choice, every single time we need to prevent or manage a pest problem.

[Joe Peschisolido, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madame Bérubé, if we're transitioning out of synthetic use of pesticides into something else, an organic system, what would be the role of a national food policy, the role of the federal government, in being helpful in that process?

[Annie Bérubé]

We make lots of specific recommendations to that effect in our document. We need to rethink many of the agricultural support programs that are currently in place that incentivize synthetic pesticide use in agriculture. I'll give you one example: crop insurance programs. You can only qualify for crop insurance if you demonstrate a certain level of agricultural inputs and if you grow a large-scale monoculture. If you want to switch to more diversified agriculture, crop rotations, for example, you would not qualify for certain crop insurance programs. We know, and the importance of France has demonstrated, that insurance-wise it costs less in the long term if you have diverse crops, and crop rotation as well, to ensure that production. Crop insurance is a very easy tool.

The other thing that we hear routinely, and I'm sure you've heard it in your committee, is that a lot of the innovation and the tools that are developed to reduce pesticide use are developed by agricultural producers. There is an innovation market failure in that agricultural producers often cannot reap the benefits of that innovation because they can't patent their practices, they can't apply for intellectual property rights. We need the financing, the research and development funding, to go to the producers to innovate and to share peer-to-peer best practices for reducing pesticide use.

[Joe Peschisolido, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Ms. Latulippe, you talked about the various orders of government, the role of the municipalities, the provinces and the federal government.

Could you now tell us how we, the federal government, can help eliminate hunger?

You talked about the burden of cost for certain people.

[Sonia Latulippe]

I said primarily that this policy should include a poverty reduction strategy. It goes without saying that addressing poverty will reduce food insecurity. All three orders of government must be involved because they act in different areas of jurisdiction. The municipalities, for example, are very close to members of the public. Quality of life is particularly important where people live, that is, in the municipalities.

As to the federal government, there are certainly economic benefits. A collaborative approach is needed. Funding is important, of course, but in this case a collaborative approach is needed. The food policy must be adopted by all orders of government, they must all embrace it, and they must pursue common goals and work together.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Ms. Latulippe.

Unfortunately, Mr. Peschisolido, that's all the time we have.

Ms. Brosseau, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In my riding of Mauricie, Moisson Mauricie has been dealing with food banks for some time. This agency collects unsold food. In Maskinongé, it works with various local groups and agencies. More recently, Moisson Lanaudière announced that it is working with local IGA, Metro, and Sobeys stores. Recovering unsold food to help people in need is a wonderful initiative.

Ms. Latulippe, can you tell us about the needs of food banks and how a poverty reduction policy and strategy could help them?

[Sonia Latulippe]

Even reducing poverty will not mean the end of food banks. There are always poor, very vulnerable, and sick people dealing with mental health problems or addictions who will need food banks.

I mentioned the program to collect unsold products, which we also belong to. It is an outstanding program because we have agreements right across the province with the major food chains such as Loblaws, Metro, and Sobeys, which provide a tremendous supply by recovering unsold products.

As to reducing food waste, there is the whole issue of best before dates. Best before dates are under federal jurisdiction, so it is a question of labelling. In a way, they contribute to food waste because we throw out a lot of products that are still good. Right now, this helps food banks because we recover a lot of products as a result of that waste. Nevertheless, as I said earlier, there are gaps in the food we offer. That is very important to remember.

A study by the Banques alimentaires du Québec showed that 12% to 15% of food users' food was from those food banks. That is a significant contribution; it is a lot. So we have to provide a food basket that is healthy and nutritious. It is hard for us to offer high-quality baskets because, as I said, we are constantly running out of milk, we have no eggs—we have to buy them—and we never have fresh fruit, especially in the Outaouais region, which is not agricultural.

No doubt there are tax incentives that could be established to encourage farmers to donate food. With regard to food waste, In France, Belgium, and Italy, there are measures requiring supermarkets to donate their unsold food products to food banks. I think similar measures are starting to be introduced here, but we have to keep pushing.

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

May I ask a question, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Yes, go ahead.

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

That's great, I'm afraid I will not have enough time. I have a lot of questions.

Ms. Bérubé, please explain the situation in Quebec. A strategy to reduce the use of pesticides has been in place since 2015 and will continue until 2018. Can you explain the situation in Quebec and what we can learn from it?

[Annie Bérubé]

Quebec has had agricultural pesticide use reduction targets for decades. That is part of Quebec's phytosanitary strategy for agriculture for 2011-2021.

The lesson learned in Quebec is that, without a bill, without funding and support programs, it is not possible to miraculously achieve the pesticide use reduction targets.

The good news is that Quebec's Ministry of Sustainable Development, the Environment and Action Against Climate Change finally introduced a bill to establish support measures to help farmers meet the agricultural pesticide use reduction targets. The Quebec government is focusing on 10 pesticides that it considers highly toxic in Quebec, including atrazine and the three neonicotinoids registered in Canada.

Among other things, the bill includes financial support for farmers to consult and implement integrated pest control practices. It would also prohibit the use of these 10 dangerous pesticides unless prescribed by an agronomist. These are the main measures the Quebec government wants to establish.

We are concerned about this recommendation, primarily as regards the professional independence of many agronomists. We would rather rely on independent consultants to help farmers reduce pesticide use.

That is where the debate is at in Quebec, and the bill was just introduced.

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

Ms. Benner—

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you. Your time is up. We have extended it as much as possible.

Mr. Drouin now has the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Latulippe, I am curious. Statistics show that about 50% of food is wasted in homes. Regardless of the programs we might implement, food will still be wasted in homes, for whatever reason.

[Sonia Latulippe]

There are best before dates!

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

For example, I might expect to be at home on a Tuesday evening, but end up not being there for some reason. Also, households are short on time. According to some studies I have consulted, people hardly prepare food any more simply because they do not have the time.

How can we promote healthy eating when families do not have the time? Have you established any programs to address this issue? I am curious to know if you have found solutions that I am not aware of.

[Sonia Latulippe]

Not at Moisson Outaouais specifically, but a number of agencies in our network are looking at alternatives. They are focusing in particular on low-income families. For this segment of the population, that primarily means cooking together in community kitchens or taking workshops on cooking inexpensively. This is effective, but there is not a lot of funding to create those programs. Those groups also need facilitators. It does require a time investment, to be sure, but the large quantities produced there can be enough to prepare meals for a week.

It is a win-win situation. Families save time and it costs them much less. In addition, it is a way for people to help each other and learn to cook again. Cooking is a skill that has been lost to a large extent, unfortunately. People do not cook any more, they do not know how to cook any more, and that is a problem. People opt for prepared meals, unfortunately, because the more highly processed the food, the less nutritious it is.

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

From what you have seen, do any young people take part in those community kitchens?

[Sonia Latulippe]

Yes, there are groups that do at youth centres and community centres, for example. There are also intergenerational groups.

All the agencies I know of in the Outaouais have difficulty because those programs are not subsidized. The fact is, however, that individual food independence is the future, since that independence is primarily an individual thing. That power must not be taken away from the individual. There are many success stories.

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

Thank you very much.

Ms. Benner, my colleague and I were in Woodstock two weeks ago at the farm show. One thing we were looking at was precision farming. We were talking with a few folks about the barriers for farmers to adopt new tools.

There are technologies that would reduce spraying when deciding whether you'd spray a whole field. One guy was telling us that he had put fertilizer on for three years in a row, even though he didn't need to, until his partner finally convinced him not to.

It was his partner who convinced him, but he would never admit it. One thing that became apparent is that youth are ready to adopt those technologies much more quickly than perhaps the other generation. I'm wondering how you're working with youth and whether you're bringing them on with precision farming as perhaps an attraction for providing farms with their next generations.

[Shannon Benner]

Science and technology is a new pillar of ours. We're in our third year, and to have relevant programming with young people and bring it back into agriculture was very intentional. We have a direct track to the Canada-wide science fair, and there is a strong partnership there now to bring young people coming from agriculture and traditional agricultural settings into the science and technology conversation.

For example, this afternoon we have a young person on the Hill who is a national recipient in the Prime Minister's science fair. She's from P.E.I., and she was frustrated by seeing the amount of lobster shell wasted. She has developed a more advanced way of extracting polymers from lobster shells. We see every single day through a lot of our programming, and specifically through our science and technology programming, that young people are strongly coming out and wanting to be engaged in these areas, in particular precision farming.

For our part, my response would be that we need to make sure young people are engaging and participating and having the influence to be at the table in those conversations in order to challenge some of the mindsets.