Agriculture Committee on June 3rd, 2021

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Groleau, for that.

That is included in the legislation. There are two different sets of fines. There is one for the individuals who are protesting, but the stronger one is for that organization or that group. Whether it's PETA or Extinction Rebellion or those types of groups, there is a stronger fine for them. Those two different tiers exist in the legislation, but I appreciate your addressing that aspect as well.

I wanted to turn to Mr. Correa. I think talking about the processing side is also important. We've seen what's happened with the cyber-attack on JBS recently and the shutdowns within the processing supply chain with COVID. Cargill, here in my riding, was shut down for 14 days. There was a backlog of 130,000 animals.

I want to ask you two quick questions, and do your best to answer them. We've seen blockades, or people feeding animals when they're in transport. Would a processing facility turn away an entire load if they aren't sure what's been tampered with on that load? Also, what are the security or safety concerns about protesters around the machinery and the trucks, which certainly impacts the processing plants as well?

[Jorge Correa]

Thank you for the question. I'll just respond to the first question.

For any contaminant that can be provided to those food animals that is unknown, the CFIA inspector would be in the capacity to refuse the entry of those animals into our slaughterhouses. It's under regulation. For example, there could be chemicals taken by those animals, or even antibiotics or something that we suspect those animals had as a contaminant, and they can be refused entry to the slaughterhouse.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Right, so if it looks like someone's trying to water pigs, for example, you don't know what they are giving them, so that entire truckload of animals could be refused, costing the producer significantly by having that load turned away.

Mr. Correa, what are some of the concerns the processors would have in terms of the public unlawfully entering the facility grounds or operating or protesting around these trucks and heavy machinery?

I have been inside Cargill. I know what that looks like and the biosecurity concerns that are there. What are some of the security concerns that the processors would have on that element?

[Jorge Correa]

All the people around animals and around vehicles or equipment are professionals. All are fully trained to manipulate or handle animals or equipment.

This equipment and these vehicles are extremely dangerous for people and dangerous also for animals if they are not manipulated well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Correa. I'm sorry. We're out of time.

Mr. Ellis, you have six minutes.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

I guess my first question would be to Marcel. He spoke about the trespassing court case that happened two years ago. He touched on the court case, but he didn't go into any details of what the outcome of the case was.

If he knows, I would like to know if any of the charges did stick, and which ones.

[Marcel Groleau]

The owners of the farm decided not to pursue legal proceedings because they did not want to continue with a presence on social media and to be the object of threats, as had been the case beforehand. These groups, which I call terrorist groups, operate so as to frighten their victims. It would have been very difficult for the owners to prove beyond any doubt that they had suffered damages. What it would have cost them may well have been in addition to the losses they were already incurring.

However, the Union des producteurs agricoles, the UPA, sought an injunction so that the people who had taken part in that incursion would not be able to perpetrate others. We obtained a temporary injunction to start with. It became permanent as we waited for the judge to subsequently hear the UPA's application. That application was for demonstrations to be prohibited less than 250m from a farm. However, the injunction applies only to the demonstrators who were on the Porgreg farm.

I wanted you to see that it is basically impossible to to prove damages to the people who are the victims of these incursions.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Do you know of any other cases in which charges have been laid successfully?

[Marcel Groleau]

No, none to my knowledge.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Darren, you touched on a few things, but I want you to walk me through what type of protocol you have now for farm protester unlawful entry. Is there a standard protocol that Turkey Farmers of Canada has?

[Darren Ference]

We went over the protocol. I know that B.C. and Alberta went over the protocol with all their farmers to push forward on how to deal with it. TFC was working with all of our provincial boards to make sure we had a protocol that was consistent across the country on how to handle it.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Would current trespassing laws apply for any of the trespassing that happens now?

As another question, what are the recourses now if someone intentionally makes a farm animal sick? Are there any recourses now that you guys have in your tool box?

[Darren Ference]

I don't believe that any of the current trespassing laws in the national.... I know Alberta has brought in a new trespassing law that very much mirrors or is very similar to this bill, but this bill protects us right across the country and doesn't expose certain farmers and protect other farmers.

I think it's important to have a national one that covers nationally, which Bill C-205 will do.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

I'll just touch on that. I think Ontario also has an act in place.

Do you know if there have been any charges on those acts? I know the Ontario act was 2020. I'm not sure when the B.C. act went into place. I believe Alberta has one also. Do you know if they've been successful?

[Darren Ference]

I don't know if there are any charges on the acts. I know there was a charge from the trespass that occurred prior to the act, and that's what drove the act in Alberta, but I don't know the progress of where that is.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

I have one last question, and I'll give it to you, Darren. Don't feel that I'm picking on you here, but this question was asked already of Marcel. Mr. Barlow explained in his testimony to the committee on May 6, 2021, that protecting the mental health of farmers was a key motivation for introducing Bill C-205. I wanted you to touch on this. If enacted, would this bill improve the mental health of farmers? If so, how?

[Darren Ference]

This act would improve the mental health of farmers. Having all these people come in is stressful for the farmer. It's like invading your home or your place of business. Your home is your private place. Our farms are our private place, no different than our homes. If we have 30 people sitting there demanding things, it is very stressful to deal with. Our animals are actually a part of us. When the animals become stressed, we're also stressed. This would help improve mental health.

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Thank you for your testimony.

Chair, it's over to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Mr. Perron, the floor is yours for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to the witnesses for joining us.

I am particularly glad to see Mr. Ference and Mr. Groleau. We have not seen each other for a long time.

Mr. Groleau, I have asked various witnesses a number of questions about the shortcomings in the current legislation. I was quite pleased to hear you deal with the subject at length in your introduction.

Was it complicated to obtain the permanent injunction that you did obtain? Pursuant to that injunction,what will be the consequences if one of the demonstrators is not in compliance?

[Marcel Groleau]

There will be severe penalties. If I recall correctly, if demonstrators do not abide by the injunction, they will be in breach of a court injunction and could even be imprisoned as a result. That is the legislation that applies when an injunction prohibits someone from carrying out certain actions or limits those actions. It could even lead to imprisonment.

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

The UPA launched that process and you are a large organization. But is it realistic to think that individuals can protect themselves by applying for the same thing? I don't think so.

[Marcel Groleau]

No.

But, as I mentioned, we were ready to help the Porgreg farm. The Union des producteurs agricoles has a professional defence fund to support measures that producers might initiate. We can then create a body of case law that will allow us to better protect producers in general. Now, the owners of the Porgreg farm did not want to keep fighting. They wanted to look after their wounds rather than to seek vengeance or try to settle scores. Above all, they wanted to disappear from social media, given all the threats that they had received.

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

Could you talk to us about the processes in place? I am trying to get that clear. Some have told us that, if the bill is passed, people who are concerned about mistreatment on a particular farm will no longer be able to report it. However, there are ways. Can you tell us about them?

[Marcel Groleau]

Of course.

First, I would say that most cases of the mistreatment of animals in Quebec happen with people who are not farmers. They are dog breeders, kennel owners or horse owners who do not have the means to look after their horses properly. The Quebec Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the MAPAQ, which is responsible for those matters in Quebec, records cases of animal mistreatment principally among owners of that kind.

There is no way that agricultural producers are going to mistreat their animals because they bear the direct costs of doing so. Our income comes from the proper treatment we provide to our animals, not from mistreatment. The people who say that they have to be able to report such situations have to understand that.

The activists who complain about the meat industry are against the meat industry, period.

Under current legislation, veterinarians are required to report producers if they observe mistreatment on any farm. All producers use the services of veterinarians. If agronomists go onto a farm and see mistreatment, they are required to report it. We already have oversight in this area and the legislation already allows for action in such cases.