Agriculture Committee on Nov. 30th, 2017

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

That's great.

On your behalf, I've made a few announcements lately. Last week I was at Mirexus, which is making nanotechnology particles from corn. Probably neither one of us knows what the nanotechnology is that they're using, but in terms of a farmer, there are 4,500 tonnes per year of corn going into nanotechnology instead of into the commodities market, which gives the farmers a stable customer that is going to be using this on an ongoing basis to make skin creams and cancer treatments.

At the Arkell research station, we also announced $1.12 million for the Canadian Animal Health Coalition, a great group of people—farmers and industry people—who are looking at safe transportation of animals, which is something that we studied here at committee. It was so good to see your ministry stepping up and helping with the safe treatment of animals going forward.

I know that last time we talked about the estimates I said that there are innovation funds in agriculture and from the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development: which ones do we go to and in which cases? These are all agricultural innovations that help both sides of the farm gate. Could you talk about the collaboration that you're developing with the strategic innovation funds with ISED and with the Department of Health and other departments that were working on this?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Two agricultural programs are still eligible under Navdeep Bains's $1.2-billion budget. That will be reduced slightly, but hopefully they will end up there. There's a lot of money involved there: $1.2 billion.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Right.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

It's great to see, but of course previous to this agriculture could not apply, so it's pretty important they're able to do this. Innovation is so important. Having been a farmer, I picked potatoes on my knees, but the last potatoes I shipped never touched the human hand, and that's 25 years ago, so that will give you an idea of what's going on. We just signed a deal for $18 million on pork for Argentina. More pork needs to be produced.

The opportunities are coming. We have the farmers who can do it and, Lloyd, that's exactly why we're putting the dollars in there: to make sure.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

You mentioned potatoes. I had the Unitarian Service Committee in my office this morning talking about the new developments in the Yukon Gold potato that was developed in Guelph and is now being used in developing countries, and about the investments in that technology to help developing countries.

In the minute I have left, let me note the importance of us working on international programs, working through international relief organizations to provide Canadian solutions to drought-stricken areas or to provide lower-growing crops so hurricanes don't damage the crops. We work through organizations such as the USC and Global Affairs Canada to provide food to parts of the world that are struggling—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

You're talking about research in these areas and working with them.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I'm talking about the agriculture connections to Global Affairs Canada, in that we do have a responsibility on the international stage to assist areas of the world where droughts and other problems—wars—damage the food supply. Canada has some solutions there. It's important that we continue to invest in international programs and international agencies, as was talked about earlier in a more negative way; I'm putting the positive on this.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I couldn't agree more. You have to collaborate. I caught that you mentioned potatoes. Just as an example, so much research was required on the wireworm in potatoes. They did come up with a solution. It was not a costly solution, but it took a lot of research to come to that point. That's why it's so important that research dollars are there. It can cost potato farmers an enormous amount, and on the world stage, yes, we have to be there.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

People's lives depend on it.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

That's right.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Longfield.

Thank you, Minister MacAulay, for being here. I think it's the third or fourth time that you've been here at our committee. We're certainly always happy to have you here.

We'll break for a minute and come back with the deputy minister and the assistant deputy minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

We're going to get back to business.

Do you want to make an opening statement, Deputy Minister Forbes?

[Chris Forbes]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Pierre and I appreciate the chance to be here.

We wanted to update you a bit more on the Canadian agricultural partnership, which I think is the purpose of the second hour here.

First of all, I would like to thank everyone for the excellent work you've done and the consultations you have conducted to produce your report on the next agricultural policy framework. Your work and your consultations will continue to inform our discussions and our decisions when we put in place the new Canadian agricultural partnership over the next few months.

I would like to clarify the Minister's comments about the partnership.

As you know, much progress has been made since your report was submitted in March.

As the minister said, we're working closely with our provincial and territorial partners and with industry, and we expect a smooth transition between Growing Forward 2 and the Canadian agricultural partnership on April 1.

We are sitting down with the provinces and territories to finalize the bilateral agreements that will clearly define cost-share program arrangements, reporting, and performance criteria for each province and territory. We'll have total federal, provincial, and territorial investments of $3 billion to help support the growth of Canada's agriculture and agrifood sector over the next five years.

Since agriculture is a shared jurisdiction, funding will also be split between the federal government, which will provide 60%, and the provincial and territorial governments, which will provide 40%.

In addition to focusing on trade and innovation, the partnership will stimulate investment in priority areas such as environmental sustainability, climate change and public trust.

The partnership will also have a new focus on diversity. It will recognize and engage those who have been under-represented in agriculture in the past: women, youth, indigenous peoples, and people with disabilities.

As well, the partnership will give provinces and territories the flexibility to meet the diverse needs of their regions and industries. Also, under the partnership, producers will continue to have access to robust business risk management programs.

The ministers agreed to make key improvements to the suite of business risk management programs. These include better protection against severe market volatility and disasters. For example, the governments have responded to industry concerns about participation rates and the reference margin of the AgriInvest program.

Ministers have also agreed to a review of BRM programs to assess program effectiveness and the impact on growth and innovation. The review will include an external expert panel consisting of producers, academics, and other industry stakeholders, as well as broader stakeholder engagement.

Mr. Chair, the federally funded programs announced by the minister last week addressed the priorities outlined for the Canadian agricultural partnership. I'll just touch on a few specific examples.

On markets and trade, there will be the AgriMarketing program, which will help small and medium-sized agribusinesses compete on world markets. On science and innovation, the AgriInnovation program will help agricultural businesses innovate and commercialize their innovations.

Under the AgriScience program, science clusters will be strengthened to meet the needs of the industry.

On the environmental front, science will be used to help producers adapt to climate change.

With respect to public trust, the AgriMarketing program will help the industry demonstrate the quality, safety and sustainability of its products to buyers.

In closing, Mr. Chair, we are on track to launch the agricultural partnership on April 1.

My colleague Mr. Corriveau and I will be happy to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Deputy Minister.

Mr. Corriveau, you didn't have a statement? Okay.

We will move on to questions and comments.

Mrs. Boucher, you have six minutes.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Good afternoon. Thank you for being here with us.

I have a lot of questions for you, but the first one will be about the Canadian agricultural partnership.

I would like you to explain something to me. In the summary provided to us by the Library of Parliament, the total voted appropriations are higher because they include $6.8 million to be transferred to other organizations, such as the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, to support Growing Forward 2, or GF2, initiatives.

In the supplementary estimates (B), you note that you have doubled the programs but have kept exactly the same amount. What are the cost-shared programs under GF2?

If you double the programs while keeping the same funding, it means that the amounts allocated to certain programs will be reduced. Do you already know which programs will see their funds reduced? If so, why?

[Chris Forbes]

I'll answer first, and perhaps Mr. Corriveau would like to add something.

The funding is the same, namely, $3 billion over five years, for Growing Forward 2, to develop the Canadian agricultural partnership.

But I don't understand what you mean when you say that we've doubled the programs.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

You have doubled the programs.

You said that, under GF2, the same amount was invested in federal initiatives, but the new partnership will administer twice the number of programs, so six instead of three.

So you've doubled the programs.

[Chris Forbes]

You're talking about the number of programs.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes.

So you've doubled the number of programs but kept the same $3 billion in funding. If you double the number of programs but keep the same funding, something's not working, in my mind.

Could you explain what you mean by “cost-shared programs”?

Personally, I'm a newcomer to this committee, and I would like to fully understand what you mean by “cost-shared programs”.

My second question is this: If you keep the same funding and double the programs, there have to be cuts somewhere. Do you have to cut some programs and, in that case, which ones?

[Chris Forbes]

I'll try to answer clearly.

Indeed, we have six programs under the partnership, but that doesn't mean that we've doubled what we do within each program. We have, in fact, split a program into two new programs, for instance. So there aren't any cuts. There are now two programs instead of one in GF2. We haven't yet mentioned the amounts allocated to each program over the next five years, but that will be announced within a few months.

For the moment, there are no major cuts to any programs. However, there may be changes from the point of view of what we want to focus on. For example, more effort will be invested in environmental and climate change issues, but we don't anticipate much change in funds to marketing or export promotion.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

So you've split one program into two, is that right?

[Chris Forbes]

It's one way to explain why there are six. I don't have exact numbers in front of me—

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

But you've kept the same initial amount of funding.

[Chris Forbes]

Yes, in total, it's the same amount.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Logically, if there are more programs to administer, but with the same amount, programs will be reduced. If we didn't put money back into the programs, but split them in two and kept the same funding, one of the two programs would suffer.