Agriculture Committee on May 6th, 2021

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you for continuing this discussion. It's very important work, Mr. Barlow.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Longfield and Mr. Barlow.

Mr. Perron, you may go head. You have two and a half minutes.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I had one question left for Mr. Barlow.

Mr. Barlow, I want to be sure I understand the bill. It will not be necessary to prove that a disease or side effect resulted from the trespassing incident, and the simple act of trespassing onto a farm could be punishable by the penalties set out in the bill. Is that correct?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

That's a great question, Mr. Perron. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify it.

Yes. This is not something that's only enforced if a disease is brought on to the farm. The whole focus of this is to ensure that it does not happen. The charges enforced by the CFIA would happen if a protester unlawfully comes onto that farm or a processing plant, regardless of whether there are unfortunate consequences where they did bring in an animal virus or spread something from one farm to another.

Back to Mr. MacGregor's question on that—

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you.

The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which is responsible for inspections in certain situations in Quebec, and CFIA have expressed concerns about the bill.

Those concerns make me wonder. Would the bill limit the inspection powers of either organization?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

There's nothing in this that would impede lawful inspections by other organizations, whether that's a provincial health authority.... In my riding I have a lot of Hutterite colonies that do commercial butchering, processing and cooking. They have Alberta Health Services come in on a regular basis to inspect facilities and animal health. This would not impede that in any way.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

We have the same read on the situation.

I'd like to give you an opportunity to finish what you were saying earlier in response to Mr. MacGregor's question.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

That does happen. Unfortunately, with the issue in my riding at Jumbo farms in Fort MacLeod, many of those protestors were on a hog farm in Abbotsford, B.C. the week before. They could very easily have been carrying a virus or a disease from one farm to another.

That's really what we're trying to avoid. If they were protesting at a farm in another province or another district and certainly with another breed, we want to ensure that they are caught the first time and consequences are laid there before they have the opportunity to spread that disease to a second operation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Barlow.

Thank you, Mr. Perron.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Now we have Mr. MacGregor for two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, Mr. MacGregor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Barlow, I'm going to load you up with two questions because there's not a lot of time. The first clause makes reference to entering “a building or other enclosed place” where animals are kept. My first question is, would this law miss out on protestors who maybe entered a farm, but stayed outside of the buildings and protested there? They're nowhere near the animals, but they're still on the property.

Secondly, when you were going back and forth with the drafters for this bill, I'm wondering about that part of the first clause referring to “knowing that or being reckless”. Did you ever consider leaving that out and just saying that if a person came on where animals were kept and if entering such a place could spread or expose the animals to disease. Did you consider just getting rid of that? I just wanted to know about your back and forth about why that specific language was used.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

I'll try and be as quick as I can. On your first question, if the farmyard is fenced, even though they may not be breaking into a barn, they would still be contravening the act. Whether they came in the barn door or the gate at the front of the driveway, they would still be contravening the act. There could be a bit of a loophole there if there's no fence around the farm, which I guess could happen, but is extremely rare. If you have livestock animals, you are going to have a barbed wire fence or an enclosure of some type. That would be still part of the act.

On your second question, in all honesty, we wanted to ensure there was that portion in there that ensured that we are highlighting the fact that this was specifically for unlawful behaviour. I'm not sure about the word “reckless”. I would have to go back in my memory. We really wanted to make sure that we highlighted the fact that this was focused on unlawful behaviour.

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

Okay.

I'm getting close to the end of my time, so thanks for that clarification.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Any time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

Now we will hear from Mr. Steinley for five minutes.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Barlow.

I very much appreciate this bill being brought forward. It does a lot for our producers when it comes to having clarity around who can and can't be on their farm. It also really gives producers some peace of mind.

You talked about the viruses and diseases that can be brought onto farms. Would I be right in saying that's one of the reasons there is a higher fee or bigger penalty for organizations and corporations? The example you gave was of someone protesting on a hog farm in B.C. and then coming to a turkey farm in your riding.

Can you give us your thoughts on that? Why are there higher penalties for corporations and organizations?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

As Canadians involved in the agriculture industry in one way or another, I think it's time that we understood the potential very real financial consequences if there were an outbreak of some sort of virus. The highest fine would be $500,000 for an organization that was planning this type of event.

I'll go back quickly to BSE. That cost our industry more than $30 billion. Tens of thousands of animals were lost. As I mentioned, 3,000 ranches were closed in Alberta. As you would know, we haven't got our cattle herd back to pre-BSE numbers.

What if we had an outbreak of African swine fever in Canada? That is a $45 billion industry in Canada. There are very real financial consequences to this that last decades. When we talk about doubling the fines as part of this proposal, that's still a drop in the bucket with respect to the potential financial implications of an outbreak on a farm or at a processing plant.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

I want to touch on another issue. It's close to my heart.

I grew up on a dairy farm. We had show cattle. We showed them from the World Agricultural Fair in Toronto to the World Dairy Expo in Madison, Wisconsin, to Agribition and to the fall fair in....I don't think people realize how well producers take care of their animals.

This goes to the comments Mr. Blois made about sometimes not knowing what happens on a farm or what could happen.

Could you give us some examples where strangers do actually enter farmyards, do shock the animals and do create a stimulus in the environment that the animals are not used to? If this happens, there could be dire consequences.

Animals are used to people coming into their pens and taking care of them, but having strangers on a farm or in a barn can have a devastating effect on animals and herds, as well as on the people who have taken great care of their animals. The animals just can't recover from that shock.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Steinley. It's an opportunity to talk about our farm families as the ultimate stewards of our land, our water and our soil.

No one cares for their livestock more than farmers do. It is their livelihood. In many cases—again, going back to BSE—we lost generations of genetics. They were building some of those herds for decades.

No one cares for their animals more than they do. I go back to the Tschetter family. They were devastated when they came into that barn because many of their turkeys were dead. As you said, when these strange people had come into the barns, the animals had been shocked. The animals trampled each other running away as quickly as possible in an open pen. They weren't in cages and they weren't being poorly treated in any way.

Another aspect that people don't understand—it's the reason this is so important to me and to many who are involved in the industry—is that, unfortunately, farm families are being depicted in a way that is far from the truth. We've talked about how passionate they are and how important their animals are to them. No one cares for them in a better way than they do. I think that's something we have to get out there.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Yes. I appreciate that very much, Mr. Barlow.

I know on our farm—I'm going home this weekend for branding—we treat our animals well because they are our livelihood. I'm looking forward to seeing some family back home and talking about this bill and how we can support our producers and our ranchers.

I'll just talk to my colleagues here. The mental health of our farm families is so important. This is a bill that can really give our farm producers a signal that we're listening to them and what they want.

As an agriculture committee and as legislators, I think it's incumbent upon us to send the right signal to our producers that we do have their backs, that we are there for them and want to make sure they can care for their mental health. We want them to have some security and some stability from knowing we have their backs.

Please, help me and help Mr. Barlow to pass this bill.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Steinley.

Now we will go to Ms. Bessette for five minutes.

[Lyne Bessette, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be splitting my time with Mr. Blois.

Mr. Barlow, I'm going to continue in the same vein as Mr. Longfield. Do you anticipate any legal challenges from the provinces, since Bill C-205 interacts with provincial trespassing legislation?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

It doesn't interact with provincial legislation. This is a federal animal health act. What you and maybe Mr. Perron are talking about is a Criminal Code issue. Yes, provincial police forces can lay a trespassing charge if there is a protester unlawfully on private property, but the CFIA could also press charges through the Health of Animals Act.

As I said, three provinces, maybe four, are working on similar legislation through the Criminal Code, specifically on trespassing when it comes to protecting biosecurity on farms, but only Alberta and Ontario now have that legislation. Saskatchewan is going through the process, as is Manitoba, but that still leaves a majority of provinces and territories without anything in place. I think it is important that we show some leadership at the federal level on this.

[Lyne Bessette, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

You said in your opening statement that farmers were being harassed on social media and that it was taking a serious toll on their mental health.

What can be done to help farmers who are subjected to that type of treatment online?