Agriculture Committee on April 16th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Gorrell and Mr. Poissant.

Mr. Dreeshen, you have five minutes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Thank you very much. I'm certainly happy to be here to speak to you about some of these issues.

Again, the trade part is something that I am quite concerned about. We have so many non-tariff trade barriers that we have seen, whether in China with our canola or some of the grains that we sell into Europe, and we understand the reasons that happens. We also have a lot of interprovincial barriers as well.

It was just mentioned earlier about the abattoirs and so on, as far as meat is concerned. I think that's one of the other barriers that we need to address, because we try to trade around the world, and then we have all of these other problems because we can't trade here within the country. Of course, there are more and more issues that are cropping up here about how Canadians are able to work with each other.

CFIA was really involved with the TB issue that had taken place in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, and we know how many animals were in trouble. We also know how many were destroyed. Are we working on possibilities with new technology to look at DNA, facial recognition of animals, and all these types of things that we know are out there, so that we can satisfy the consumer who has our product and we can also make sure that we are just attacking those animals that are causing a problem?

We've seen it with BSE. Everybody thinks mad cow is the one that was in Europe where they were flopping around, because that's what CBC showed all the time, but that is not what happened in Canada. Yet we made a special point of making sure that it was done properly. Is the technology keeping up with that?

[Fred Gorrell]

I would say that the technology is there, but it's also for us—and “us” being the food inspection agency, the industry, and our colleagues at Agriculture Canada—to make use of that.

One of the key areas—and you made reference to the TB—is traceability, but it also came up relative to the BSE incident back in 2003.

For example, right now in Canada we do not yet have full traceability, whether it's with the ear tags or not. Recently we had the Canadian Meat Council, the Canadian Pork Council, as well as the Canadian cattlemen, all in together to have a conversation on the next steps on traceability for cattle and other animals. The key thing is that we need to use technology to answer some of the questions you've just asked.

One of the questions that the industry puts on the table often is that there is a cost, and who is going to pay for it. Then you have producers and packers in the room as well, so there is a conversation.

The idea would be, though, that technology is allowing us to do more now than we've ever been able to do. I know that the food inspection agency very much wants to have an innovative agenda to look at new ways of doing things, and given that we export 50% of everything we produce in Canada, it's incumbent upon us to take on this technology.

We do have an innovation renewal group within the agency to look at that. I think it won't move at the pace that perhaps everybody would want it to, but definitely using technology like e-certification on certificates and finding different ways of doing traceability, yes, we are looking at that.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

With that, though, when you take a look at what the budgets look like in the next couple of years, there is a reduction to CFIA. We used to have around 3,200 full-time equivalents. That, in the projections, is down to 2,600 to 2,800. There is always this talk about having the manpower, having the money, but we can see that it is coming out of CFIA, yet here is a time when we have to be looking at new ways of identifying. Are you looking at partnerships, then, now that you realize that the manpower and the dollars are not going to be there?

[Fred Gorrell]

That's a good question. For the agency, definitely, how we prioritize and where we put our money is important as well. Money sunsets and comes and goes. We have enough assets right now to do our job, and I think we are able to do it well.

Having said that, how we prioritize the money and putting money into the innovation is definitely an area that we're looking at. We are working with the provinces—Monsieur Poissant made reference to working with the provinces—very much, with other countries, and on regulatory co-operation with the United States. We're working with the European Union as well as Australia and other countries. We have to work with other countries for intelligence, getting information to know where there are risks, as well as how to do things better.

I would say yes to all of the points you have identified.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

In the few seconds I might have, speaking then about some of the issues, especially with beef going across the border, there is a double inspection people look at there. The inspection that is done for the U.S. for meat products and animals coming into Canada is different from the one that we have going in the other direction.

[Fred Gorrell]

Yes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

We have enough problems in terms of being able to move product across. We want to make sure that we're competitive and that our regulatory system is working. Can you give us some advice on that?

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Dreeshen. I stretched it as long as I could.

Mr. MacGregor, you have three minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

We are in the middle of completing a study on soil and water conservation. We've heard from many farmers, and they've demonstrated that they are employing a lot of really beneficial farming practices to farm in a sustainable way.

However, I am concerned about farming practices abroad. I want to draw your attention to Brazil. I'm sorry to single out Brazil, but 2.3% of Canada's imports come from Brazil, and between 1993 and 2013 an area of forest the size of Italy was cleared there. I think they are the top beef producer in the world.

I want to know how the Government of Canada.... Looking not only at plant and animal health and safety, what kinds of measures are we taking to ensure the food we import is farmed in a sustainable manner so that Canadian consumers can be sure the beef they're eating is not directly impacting wide swaths of Amazonian rainforests being burned and cleared? I'd like to know what kinds of standards we're looking at for that.

[Fred Gorrell]

I'm glad you left the easy question for me. Obviously I won't speak on behalf of the Government of Canada relative to environmental activity.

As for how they produce it, whether they're clearing their forests or not, what I do know, and again, I'm going to be somewhat.... We don't cover that in our trade agreements.

Mr. Seppey, is there anything additional on that?

[Frédéric Seppey]

Yes, and it relates to a question one of your colleagues raised. It's that the methods of production that are used can easily be used as an excuse for otherwise protectionist measures.

The situation you raise is a very significant one, and that's why it's important to have intergovernmental discussions on, for example, our common interest in the environment. The question is whether it is through trade agreements or trade measures that we encourage others to adopt what we feel are the most appropriate practices. Canada, as a significant exporter of agricultural and agri-food products, usually is more the victim of such non-trade or non-economic factors being used against us to block our exports than the reverse.

That is why Canada has always tried to adopt, as much as possible, an approach based on science and facts when it comes to regulations in trade. If the product is considered to be safe and to meet our standards in terms of food safety and plant and animal health, that's the criteria to apply to trade measures. There are other venues for us to address these very legitimate concerns that you raise.

[Fred Gorrell]

My colleague from Global Affairs, Jay Allen, would like to give you a few comments as well.

[Jay Allen, Director, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Division, Global Affairs Canada]

To add to what my colleagues have said, there's also a new initiative that we're undertaking when we pursue our free trade agreements, and that's what we're calling the progressive trade agenda. It's to address a lot of these things that you're talking about in terms of ensuring that, to the extent possible, our free trade agreements pass on benefits so that they have benefits for all citizens but also for the environment, for gender parity, and for labour. We're building these things in, and it's through these commitments to these more progressive elements that we are looking to move our trade agreements into that next generation, that next era where we are considering things of that nature.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

We've completed our rounds, but I think we'll open it up.

I know that you probably have a question, T.J., or if you don't....

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Now...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

You can go ahead—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Chair, I feel that we should follow the order that we had. I do not see why we should continue without following that order. We established the speaking order and we should stick to it, so that everybody can have a turn in the round of questions. We still have time in front of us, because the meeting ends at 5 p.m. I do not understand why we would go from one speaker to another. We can continue with the order we have established.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Do I have the committee members' consent?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

You do not need the members' consent, because that is how we do it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

We can do it either way, if there is consent. It's up to you. It does not bother me.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Personally, I would continue the questions in the order we have established.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Okay.

T.J., you'll go second.

Go ahead, Mr. Berthold.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I really wanted to have some speaking time because I wanted to let Mr. Seppey and Mr. Gorrell have the chance to answer the very important question that my colleague Mr. Dreeshen asked.

[Frédéric Seppey]

In terms of the questions that you raise with respect to the double inspection in the United States, in the context of the current negotiations on the harmonization of the NAFTA, one of our key items for resolution is to try to convince our U.S. colleagues to adopt an approach that is more like the one that is adopted by Canada, of recognizing the equivalency and the fact that, in terms of outcome for food safety, when it comes to meat products, we are very similar. Therefore, to have requirements such as what exists in the United States where, when you cross the border you have to give a 100% visual inspection report to an inspection house before you can go and then have a significant portion of the shipment subjected to testing and being held before it can get to its final destination.... This is a requirement that is very much enshrined in the meat-specific regulations of the United States.

I can assure you that this is one of the main priorities for Canada when it comes to an outcome we would like to see in the context of the current NAFTA negotiations.