Agriculture Committee on March 21st, 2018

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you very much.

I was glad to see in your comments that you're talking about innovation technology and the things that farmers have done. I think that farmers today are amongst the best conservationists and the best stewards of the land. That was probably not always the case. I certainly remember as a kid that we weren't on the cutting edge as much as we are today. To use an example, this past summer we had record low rainfall in southern Alberta, but we didn't have any catastrophic crop failures, because of modern technology, conservation, and tillage. Our soil health over the last four years has improved profoundly because of the practices that are now being put in place.

However, when you talk about the $75-billion target, certainly the feeling we're getting from our stakeholders is that we are eliminating a lot of the tools they have to try to achieve those goals. My colleague talked about transportation, but the other ones would be modern fertilizers, pesticides, and precision agriculture. A lot of those things are being removed because of what does not look to be be science-based research and decision-making practices, a lot of it at the PMRA, for sure, and maybe not Agriculture Canada. I would encourage discussions between the two on decisions that are being made at the PMRA. Are there conversations between Agriculture Canada and PMRA on the implications of that?

I want to quickly read into the record a letter that was signed by several ministers at the G7, including our Minister Champagne, who was obviously there for our agriculture minister. It says:

In order to face the challenge of producing more food in a safer and sustainable way, farmers must be able to access the full range of tools and technologies available for agricultural production. Yet, our farmers' choice of safe foods is increasingly undermined by regulatory barriers that lack a sufficient scientific justification, and this is having substantial negative impact on the production of, and trade in, safe food and agricultural products.

This was signed by our minister. Has that message been shared through a whole-of-government approach? I'd like your response on that.

[Tom Rosser]

Mr. Chair, I'll respond briefly. I think my colleague Dr. Gray can address our relationship with PMRA.

The member is quite correct. There was of course some drought in southern Alberta. In fact, as I understand it, precipitation levels on the prairies this past summer were comparable to those experienced in years of severe drought in the late 1980s. The fact that we had the third-largest grain harvest on record speaks to decades of success in innovation and in more drought-resistant breeds of grain.

On regulation, I'd say a couple things. One is that budget 2018 announced that the government would be undertaking a review of regulation to make sure it doesn't inhibit innovation and that agriculture and agrifood would be one of the first sectors on which the focus would be placed. Exactly what the scope of that will be I think remains to be seen, but there will be an opportunity to consult with the industry, understand what their priorities are, what regulatory barriers they see, and have a look to see if we can't improve the efficiency of those processes and ensure they don't inadvertently undermine innovation.

With respect to PMRA, we do in fact have a partnership, the intent of which is to try to enable the availability of products that can help improve the competitiveness of the industry in Canada. It's part of Brian's—

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you. I'm going to have to end it here.

We have Mr. Longfield for six minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Barlow.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair. There's so much to say and so little time, especially with this file.

Thank you for the very detailed briefing as we're starting a new study here.

I was talking with a company out of Tavistock, Ontario, that's doing precision agriculture machine manufacturing. They're going from one data point per acre up to 350 data points. They're looking at the composition of the soil, gamma radiation, and passive decay and giving that information to big data to do some analysis work. I sit on the industry committee, and sometimes I feel like that's another committee's discussion, but as we're looking at the $75-billion target, how much of that target is for precision agriculture machine development? We have a great machine manufacturing business network across Canada. Is that part of the $75 billion that we should be studying?

[Tom Rosser]

The $75-billion target, I think, is itself derived from food exports. Of course, one of the benefits of growing our agrifood exports is that we strengthen the upstream and downstream value chain, so that by becoming a technological leader not only do we export more food products, but we create export opportunities for new technologies.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Yes. When we're looking at that, I'm trying to get my head around the $75-billion target and how detailed we have gotten by types of products, let's say, such as grains versus meats versus.... How granular is that target? When we set up our study and are calling for witnesses, do we know where the bulk of the growth needs to be? Do we have a detailed plan on that?

[Tom Rosser]

I think the short answer is no. The longer answer is that we know what the historic growth patterns have been and what the relative contribution of different commodity groups is to current exports. Some industry groups themselves—I believe canola and others—have said, “Here's the contribution we think we can make.” There is also the economic strategy table that flows out of budget 2017, which has been looking at this and formulating advice on how to attain the $75-billion target and may have further insight on that, but no, as a department we haven't said that we need so much from beef, so much from pork, and so much from grains and oilseeds.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Okay.

We just spoke with a couple of witnesses from the EU about the food inspection agency in Europe versus Canada's, and some of the processes in Europe versus Canada. I asked a question about blockchain. They gave us much the same answer that I'm hearing in Canada, which is that it's still pretty new and they're not quite sure about traceability. I'm very interested in seeing the opportunity, especially for young farmers who are looking for new technologies to adopt. It's interesting that you have it in this section here: where would you see us on that continuum? Is it something that we should really pay attention to? Or is it something for the industry committee?

[Tom Rosser]

I think blockchain has applications across the economy, but we are quite excited about the potential in agriculture. I think we're in the very early days of realizing that, but I know there is involvement with soybeans and other products. In fact, I know that the University of Guelph has been involved in some early projects.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Yes.

[Tom Rosser]

It's something that we see having very significant potential. It's certainly not unique to agriculture, but we see it being very important in agriculture.

Marco, do you have anything to add?

[Marco Valicenti, Director General, Sector Development and Analysis Directorate, Market and Industry Services Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

I was going to give you the same example with soybeans to China. In the context of blockchain, certainly retailers are using it through the supply chain as a means in the context of traceability. We are seeing that with some of our competitors as well. I think we're moving certainly in the direction of engaging that technology within the full value chain.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Valicenti. That's where I heard the comments: from the soy sector in Guelph in talking about China. There are specific countries where we have some specific opportunities and some new trade agreements.

I heard the EU today, and I said to myself that it doesn't sound like it's a big GMO opportunity, but maybe Japan is. Do we have opportunities by region as we develop out something that we might want to study—blockchain in China, let's say—to ask if that's something if we're tying in with China or Japan...? As we develop our witness list, I'd like to see us talking to some of our potential customers.

[Tom Rosser]

Again, Marco may have something to add, but in addition to China, Japan is the other market where often products can command a high premium if they're certified. Blockchain offers a potential to do that much more efficiently, credibly, and securely than traditional technologies. Of course, it being one of the CPTPP economies, it's one where I think a closer look at that opportunity may well be warranted.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

GMOs are another one that I'm thinking has to be on our radar, and Guelph has a lot of development in that area. Again, in trying to align our study with the opportunities that are out there, in the last few seconds we have, is there another opportunity out there that we should make sure we don't forget?

[Dr. Brian Gray, Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

On the GMOs, the last time I was here we talked a bit about that. Definitely, on the genetic engineering side of GMOs, we're doing a lot of research in that area, as is industry.

Getting back to the other point from Mr. Barlow about pesticides and the right use, even if we develop the perfect pesticide that is matched with a resistant crop that we have used genetic engineering on to make resistant, eventually the threat to that will evolve and you'll have to develop a new molecule. We're never going to have a silver bullet on anything, so we'll always need genetic engineering. We'll need to match that with whatever the pest is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Gray, and thank you, Mr. Longfield.

Mr. MacGregor, you have six minutes.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I thank each of you for being here today and giving us some of the department's perspectives on these issues.

In other committee studies, the organic farming sector has repeatedly pointed out that the federal government invests less in their sector than in other agricultural sectors, and very much in the research and development part of it. There's some amazing literature coming out these days about lowering the inputs into farms using different planting techniques, whereby plants are working in harmony with each other, creating different microclimates and so on and so forth.

How much funding has the federal government invested in research and development for the organic farming sector? Is there interest in that in the years ahead?

[Tom Rosser]

I'll just say that we certainly do have a robust partnership with the organics industry, but I can't speak to precise figures. Perhaps my colleagues can, but if not, we can certainly get back to you with a more quantitative answer. It is an industry where we see there being some growth opportunities.

Marco or Brian, do you have anything?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

Again, we can get back with the numbers, but I'd say that it's fairly proportionate to what is out there now as far as the industry goes, and we've been robust and we are growing with it. Off the top of my mind, out of our 20 research and development centres, I'm aware that we're doing organic farming research on three of them.

One is the Harrington farm, which is associated with our Charlottetown, P.E.I. centre. We have a plot there—I don't know how many acres it is, but it's a substantive plot—that is now organic certified, so we can now do organic research in the field.

Where we don't have that—an example would be at the Harrow research and development centre—we have greenhouse systems, where we're developing organic varieties of soybeans, for example. For that, you need to have soil, so it's an odd-looking greenhouse. You go in and there's soil, rather than elevated things. We're doing that there.

Swift Current is a big one where we're doing a fair bit. We have two scientists dedicated to organic research. Pulses are one of the growing areas. Southwest Saskatchewan is an area that seems to have quite a bit of acreage in organics.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Earlier this week I had a phone conversation with Glyn Chancey, who's with the Canadian Seed Growers' Association. We were talking about seed technology and genome mapping. He really underlined that because Canada has such a high dependence on export markets, it really needs to take the lead on this issue. I think he cited France and Portugal, as two countries that are really forward-looking in this particular issue and are really seizing the opportunities. He was concerned that because we're so reliant on export markets we might be losing out on that.

I'm wondering if your department has looked at what France and Portugal are doing. Is there any comparison you're doing of that with what Canada is doing? Do you maybe have some designs to implement those kinds of policies?

[Tom Rosser]

The short answer from me would be no, it's not. Although we certainly have a relationship with the seed growers, it's not a perspective that they've shared with me before. Maybe Brian or Marco—

[Dr. Brian Gray]

I'm sorry. I don't completely understand your question.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

He said that when it comes to looking at non-GMO breeding techniques, increasing the diversity of our seed supply, and looking at different types of species, we could be developing really strong seeds in looking to the future, because we're so reliant on export markets. He cited that France and Portugal are really taking the lead on that. What is Canada doing to take care of those future opportunities?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

Of course, I have a bias, but I certainly think that Canada fights above its weight in developing seed varieties. I think we're one of the leaders in the world, certainly proportionate to our size.

One of the biggest areas in our research and development branch is developing varieties. It's an area of public good, and if industry is not in that space, we are developing the varieties—for example, in wheat right now—and those varieties are very successful. That's why we're having record yields in the prairies, for example. Most of those varieties of wheat or barley are varieties that we've developed at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

It's the same thing with potato development. We're developing varieties of potatoes that Canadian growers are growing and exporting.