Agriculture Committee on May 25th, 2021

[Dr. Deb Stark]

I would start by saying that I agree with Dr. Komal. I am not up to date on the science, but I certainly respect him and his position, and I don't think he would make that comment to this committee without making sure of his facts. His point about the exposure is kind of the point I was trying to make, that in order to transmit a disease, you have to be near a sick animal to pick up that virus, and then move it.

Mr. Currie is right. Some of them move through the air and some of them can transfer really easily. I do not want to discount that there are some viruses that move like that, but certainly not all of them do. Generally you have to be pretty close and then move it through.

On the difference between an employee versus someone who comes onto the farm, the only thing I would say is that, generally, we expect employers to deal with their employees so that if there is a breach in following farm protocol, I would expect that it would be the farm manager or owner dealing with that, as opposed to using any kind of a tool such as this.

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

Thank you.

Maybe as just my final question, in terms of agricultural laws, some fall under the stick category and some fall under the carrot category.

Going back to an earlier exchange between Mr. Drouin and Mr. Currie on building that trust between the agricultural community and the public at large, do you have any suggestions about how we can use more of a carrot approach to build that trust with the public, because you did mention in your testimony that about one-third of Canadians are concerned? Do you have any ideas you can share with the committee?

[Dr. Deb Stark]

First, I would like to highlight the incredible investments that the food and agriculture sector in this country has already made in building that trust. The organization I referenced, the Canadian Centre for Food Integrity, is a not-for-profit organization that began in the hands of farmers who said, “We have to make sure that we stay in touch with our customers, so that they understand what we're doing, and we understand when they have some concerns about that and we sit around a talk about it”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Dr. Stark. Sorry to cut you off.

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

Committee members, we looked at the time frame we have. If we extend between 10 and 15 minutes we can get the full....

Do I have the consent of the committee to finish the second round, which would be roughly 15 minutes, and then it will probably push our next one to maybe 10 extra minutes? Are we all good with that?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Let's start the second round.

Mr. Epp, you have five minutes.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses, Dr. Stark, and it should be “Dr. Currie”, for your excellent testimony.

I'd like to start with you, Dr. Stark. It's good to see you again.

As has been mentioned, we heard from the officials that this legislation is not particularly necessary, as all of this is covered under provincial trespassing laws and that this could potentially muddle provincial-federal relations or federal-provincial jurisdiction.

You mentioned in your testimony some core tensions. I know that with some of hour “hats” in the past, you've had to deal with some of these core tensions.

How do provincial officials presently work with the CFIA when they're investigating offences? Would that relationship change and be strengthened with the passage of this act?

[Dr. Deb Stark]

Thank you very much.

I guess I'm supposed to address the chair, but it is nice to see you again, Dave.

I can mostly speak from Ontario, but certainly provinces talk. The federal-provincial ag departments talk frequently enough, so I think I can represent most of the provincial colleagues when I say that the working relationship on the ground is very good.

Agriculture is a shared jurisdiction, and areas like food safety and animal health don't respect provincial and federal boundaries. The diseases don't care whose jurisdiction it is, and so officials need to work hand in hand to make sure the system works well.

On what would change if this bill were in place, I think I'd go back to it depending on what kind of resources the CFIA is given. If the CFIA is fully resourced and given the mandate to take control and enforce it all themselves, it may make very little difference.

History would suggest that there would probably be some kind of a outreach to the provincial officials, trying to figure out who was on the ground and closer to the farms. Certainly provincial officials are usually more close on the farm, and more on the ground, quite frankly, so we probably would try to work with them.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

Picking up on MP Alistair MacGregor's question, I would note here that Dr. Komol testified that it takes time for disease to be transmitted, yet we also know that protesters are moving from farm to farm. We had that happen when protesters from B.C. entered a farm in Alberta, and we had a virus transmitted to a Quebec hog farm. You talked about exactly that concern.

We also have an issue with perception. I know how the addition of perception of conflict of interest changed the legislation. I think we have an issue of perception here as well, with people entering the farm.

Could you comment on that, please?

[Dr. Deb Stark]

I'm sorry. Do you mean about the perception of people and the risk?

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Exactly. I mean the perception of risk, when protesters are moving from farm to farm, for the mental health of the farmer and for the safety of our food system.

[Dr. Deb Stark]

I think the risk to an individual farmer who has someone come into their barn with their animals, and where they have their family, can be significant.

You already identified the risk of bringing in the disease. That depends a lot on where those individuals have been in the past 24 or 48 hours, what they've been exposed to and how close they can get to the animals in the barn, whether they touch them or they're just at the door taking pictures. That one is much more murky to me.

However, I would not want to leave, for a minute, the impression that I don't think there are risks.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to direct a question to Mr. Currie.

We received committee testimony from a veterinarian, Jean-Jacques Kona-Boun, and I'm going to read a quote to you. He wrote to us:

Animal abuse is a staple of the agri-food industry and is not always the result of an intent to do harm.

Most of the time, the abuse and subsequent suffering is the result of either following the standard practices in the industry—in Canada, these practices are listed in the National Farm Animal Care Council's codes of practice for the care and handling of farm animals—or disregarding these standard practices....

Can you comment on that statement, please?

[Keith Currie]

Well, I'm a little disappointed in hearing those words. That said, veterinarians are certainly people who have a close relationship with our livestock producers. They, along with nutritionists, are a vital part of any operation.

I really have a hard time buying into a blank statement saying that farmers abuse their animals, even though it may be unintentional. As I look at all of our different codes of practice that our commodity organizations enforce.... These organizations themselves, especially supply management, have the authority to shut you down if you're not abiding by the proper codes of conduct, so—

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Currie. We have to move on.

Mr. Louis is next for five minutes.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank both of our witnesses for being here for this great discussion. It's very welcome, and I appreciate that.

I would like to begin my questioning with Dr. Stark.

As we mentioned before, laws are usually meant to change things, and I'm not exactly clear what gap we're trying to fix. As mentioned a number of times, a number of provinces, including mine in Ontario—and Dr. Stark, you mentioned that—already have existing provincial laws.

I know that laws like this in the U.S., and bills like these, have been struck down in six states, and they're being challenged in Ontario right now. We have local trespassing and private property laws, which already address the break-ins or illegal entries on a farm.

We've heard in some testimony, and after questioning witnesses, that we see cases of intrusion on farms where producers do not address the complaints to the proper local authorities.

In your opinion, Dr. Stark, what are the barriers to using the means that are already available to farmers to ensure safety? What makes them not call the local authorities?

[Dr. Deb Stark]

That's a very interesting question. To be honest, I was not aware of situations where farmers did not call local authorities. I'm more familiar with situations where farmers do call local authorities and in the end nothing happens. I do think that, at least in Ontario, from the experiences I've seen and what I've heard, people are discouraged. Farmers are discouraged. It would seem that people can walk onto their farms and into their barns. They feel they can be doing all the right things and it's allowed to happen, and charges are not laid or they're not successful. I'm afraid I can't add much more than that.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Maybe I'll ask Mr. Currie, then.

If the issue isn't about their not calling the authorities, would it be in the laying of charges? Farmers might call the local authorities but then choose not to press charges. If that is the case, what kind of solutions could help enforce the local laws, or even provincial laws, that already exist?

[Keith Currie]

In some cases people are in and out quickly and we don't have a chance to apprehend them. Dr. Stark is right that in many cases the authorities simply don't make it a priority to come to the farm, and farmers get frustrated. They get to the point that they throw their hands up and say, “Why bother if nobody is going to come and help protect me?” Unless there's a direct threat to human safety that's noted in a phone call to police, they typically put it way down on the list of priorities. I understand that our local police forces are stressed as far as manpower goes, but we aren't getting any action from authorities. They aren't coming out to investigate these on-farm break-ins and the trespassing.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I'll go back to Dr. Stark.

We've heard in testimony how essential it is to have strong biosecurity measures to protect animal health and well-being against outbreaks and infectious organisms and to protect the mental health of farmers and the marketability of products. The CFIA provides a list of possible sources of infectious organisms, which includes live, dead or sick animals; animal products; family or staff; clothing; equipment; vehicle transportation; and even birds and wildlife.

Can you talk about protecting biosecurity and the major issues, because I do not find that any kind of animal advocacy or protests fit the mould of causing disease outbreak. Can you rank some of the top ones for biosecurity so that we know how to continue to protect our animals and the farmers?

[Dr. Deb Stark]

It's a challenge to do that because birds are not the same as cattle; cattle are not the same as pigs; pigs are not the same as horses. It depends a lot on the species and depends a lot on the organisms. However, generally the principle is to try to keep the animal—a bird, say— from being exposed to the organism by using multiple barriers. That means making sure that everything they're being fed and the bedding and everything are clean, things like that. We know that humans can bring viruses and bacteria into barns, so it means making sure that the risk from humans is minimized. It means keeping buildings built far enough, as there are airborne kinds of viruses. Those happen.

I'm sorry. I know I'm not really answering your question, but those multiple barriers and trying to make sure that the animal is not exposed is the fundamental principle of biosecurity.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I appreciate that. At the end of the day, what we're looking for is to protect animals and the farmers. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Louis, and thank you, Dr. Stark.

Mr. Perron, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Currie, I will address you again.

We talked earlier about the people who say this bill would stifle whistleblowers, and I asked you what you would say to them.

Currently, what are the existing regulatory mechanisms that your members can use? For example, if someone suspects that animals are being abused on a farm, do they necessarily have to wait until an offence is committed to report that? Is there another way to do this?

[Keith Currie]

There are a number of different ways, certainly. We've talked about the animal codes of practice that are in place, and in a lot of cases, the commodity organizations themselves do inspections and find this, find any wrongdoings. Also, as I mentioned, both nutritionists and veterinarians are frequent on the farm, dealing with livestock, so they have an obligation to deal with these kinds of situations as well.

Typically, the majority of people are good keepers of animals by human nature. Are there bad people out there? Yes. If you're driving down the road and you see an animal in distress for reasons that are out of the animal's control, most provinces have some type of legislation in place, whether it's a prevention of cruelty to animals act or a specific piece of legislation that deals with animal husbandry, and there are lines to call. If you're just the general public, there are numbers you can call, authorities you can call to investigate, and they have a duty to investigate those operations if there is suspicion of poor animal husbandry. There are a number of ways. Breaking into a barn is not the right way to do it.