Agriculture Committee on June 15th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 39 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, March 10, 2021, and the motion adopted by the committee on May 11, 2021, the committee is commencing the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-205, an act to amend the Health of Animals Act.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021, and therefore members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website, and the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants in this meeting that screenshots or taking a photo of the screen are not permitted.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute your mike. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as normal by the proceedings and verification officer.

Just a reminder that all comments by members and witnesses must be addressed through the chair. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute.

Kody, you have your hand up.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you know, last week we were unable to meet because of the resources available to the committees as the extension of sittings in the House has continued, so we had conversations. I sent an email to my colleagues on Friday, expressing that I thought it was important to finish all three of the panels we had agreed upon and move to clause-by-clause on Thursday. I've had conversations with Ms. Rood, Mr. MacGregor and Mr. Perron, and I'll now move:

That, notwithstanding the motions adopted by the committee on Tuesday, May 11, 2021, regarding Bill C-205, an act to amend the Health of Animals Act, the witnesses that were scheduled to appear on Thursday, June 10, 2021 be rescheduled to Tuesday, June 15, 2021; that clause-by-clause consideration of this bill commence on Thursday, June 17, 2021; and that amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee no later than 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on Wednesday, June 16, 2021.

That is the text of the motion. I believe it has been distributed to my colleagues.

Mr. Chair, I would also say to my colleagues as we go to vote on this, that given the conversations I've had with my colleagues, I understand the clerk has prepared for the adoption of this motion, and I would ask that we go forward with that at this time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Blois.

The committee has heard the motion. Are there any comments on the motion?

Go ahead, Ms. Rood.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also had conversations with Mr. Blois and Mr. MacGregor. While I appreciate that we wanted to hear all of the witnesses, I had suggested a friendly amendment that we hear from a full panel of witnesses for one hour today and then move into clause-by-clause to ensure that we can finish this bill and report it back to the House before the end of this sitting session.

In the spirit of goodwill, we will accept Mr. Blois's motion to have the witnesses appear here today, so we can finish this fulsome study on the bill, but I would like to add that I was not appreciative of how this came about, and I think we could have worked together a bit better. We usually work together great. In the spirit of goodwill, we will support your motion, Mr. Blois, and then we'll move forward with the witnesses today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Ms. Rood.

Are there any further comments on the motion, before we take a vote? I don't see any hands up.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

We're going to change to a witness panel. We'll let our witness in and do sound checks. I'll just suspend, and once it's ready, we'll come back.

Mr. Blois, do you have something to add? I see Mr. Steinley also.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I thank Ms. Rood. We want to focus on getting this bill back to the House, and my hope is that we'll be able to do that concretely once we finish up on Thursday.

I would note that Mr. Komal is here from the CFIA. My understanding, and the clerk can explain this, is that there were supposed to be two witnesses for the first panel. I think it was Ms. Lazare who was unable to be here today.

If it pleases the committee and the other members, perhaps if Mr. Komal is willing, he could sit and be available. I believe he has testified. If that goes against what the committee wants, it certainly will not proceed in that way, or if that's what Mr. Komal doesn't want either. However, given the fact that he was here on the basis that the motion might or might not have passed, he does have some expertise from CFIA. If not, I'm happy just to proceed with what the clerk has available.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you, Mr. Blois, for the suggestion.

Mr. Steinley, I assume that it's on the same topic.

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

Yes. I just want to make it clear that we'll do one witness and two full rounds. If we have to, we can suspend for a few minutes while the other witnesses do their sound check, and then we can start the second round of witnesses as soon as possible.

I appreciate Mr. Komal's expertise, but he has already been a witness. I was hoping the plan would be that we'd go with the one witness, do the two full rounds, and if the opportunity is there, maybe start the second round a bit sooner, as soon as possible.

That would be my suggestion, if that's okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

I don't see any other hands. We'll have to decide on Mr. Blois's suggestion.

Mr. Drouin.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I will side with Mr. Steinley on this one. With no disrespect to the gentleman from CFIA, we have heard his testimony and we should give priority to those who haven't had the opportunity to appear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

I don't see any other comments on that.

Is everybody agreed to continue as we had planned? You can raise your hand if you agree that we just go ahead with the original plan.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

It looks as though we have a majority on that.

Mr. Komal, I certainly thank you for taking the time to join us today. We'll see you probably on Thursday, with the clause-by-clause. It's no disrespect and it's not because we wouldn't want you here, but we'll just concentrate on the other guests. Thank you so much for joining us today.

[Dr. Jaspinder Komal, Vice-President, Science Branch, Chief Veterinary Officer and World Organisation for Animal Health Delegate for Canada, Canadian Food Inspection Agency]

It isn't a problem, sir. There are no hard feelings.

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you.

With that, we'll suspend. I don't know if the witness is ready or not.

We'll just suspend the meeting for now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

I call the meeting back to order.

With that, I welcome Dr. Jane Pritchard, who is the interim registrar of the College of Veterinarians of British Columbia.

Welcome to our panel, Ms. Pritchard.

We'll start with a five-minute opening statement, if you wish. The floor is yours.

[Dr. Jane Pritchard, Interim Registrar, College of Veterinarians of British Columbia, As an Individual]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for the invitation. It's definitely a very new experience for me, so I hope this all works out for everyone.

My name is Jane Pritchard. I am a veterinarian who has lived and worked in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, as well as the Netherlands and China. I've worked for both the Alberta and the British Columbia ministries of agriculture, in a number of positions.

I graduated from the Ontario college of veterinary medicine in Guelph, Ontario. I've taught at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Early in my career, I worked in traditional small animal practice and equine and mixed animal practice in British Columbia. I moved many times in my career. My CV looks like I couldn't hold a job. I've been a diagnostic pathologist in three different laboratories in Canada; a field veterinarian in southern Alberta; a beef specialist; a public health veterinarian; a director of veterinary diagnostic laboratories; a regulator of dairy farms, fur farms and game farms; the chief veterinary officer for British Columbia; and the chair of the Canadian Council of Chief Veterinary Officers. As well, I'm a member of the National Farmed Animal Health and Welfare Council and the executive director of the plant and animal health branch with the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture. I am currently the interim registrar for the College of Veterinarians in B.C. This was a post-retirement whim job.

Please understand, though, that today I do not speak for any of the organizations that I previously worked for or currently work for. I speak as someone who has worked for many years to ensure animal welfare and biosecurity.

In December 2014, I was the chief veterinary officer and the director of the provincial veterinary diagnostic lab in B.C. when the Fraser Valley experienced an outbreak of pathogenic avian influenza. The poultry industry had done a lot of work and survived to 2014, after the 2004 outbreak, because of the lessons they had learned during that outbreak. They had enhanced their biosecurity. They had developed strong traceability. They had learned to quarantine.

Biosecurity has remained a significant part of my work in British Columbia, with the constant threat of avian influenza within the Fraser Valley and the poultry industry, but also the swine industry as it met new challenges from new diseases such as porcine epidemic diarrhea and now African swine fever.

Throughout my pretty varied career, I have remained committed to animal welfare. I was directly involved in bringing in the national standards for slaughter without stunning in Canada and upgrading the B.C. mink farming regulations to enforce the national mink code of practice on farms. I am currently serving on the working group tasked with the review and revision of the national dairy code of practice. This is despite never having had animal welfare as part of my job description.

I support holding our livestock producers accountable for transparency in their actions and also for the humane treatment of all the animals raised on our farms. I have always endorsed the use of science to guide the industry in determining what is good welfare.

Equally, I take issue with the disregard for animal welfare by animal activists who trespass, occupy and threaten public safety while terrorizing livestock and breaching biosecurity on farms in Canada. I support anything that will prevent these vigilante acts that inflict trauma on the animals, the individuals and the farm families. To me, these acts are nothing short of cruel.

I am sharing this so you're aware of what has informed and influenced my remarks today. I hope I can be helpful.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Thank you so much, Dr. Pritchard.

Usually we have more than one witness here, but today all the attention will be on you. Our members are all collegial and respectful. Take your time. It will be good. Although I will be, don't feel that I'm interrupting if your time is up. I'll try to let you finish your sentence, but I might be cutting you off so that all our members have a chance to ask questions.

With that, we'll go to our first panel. Mr. Barlow, who is the sponsor of the bill, will lead off with six minutes of questions.

Go ahead, Mr. Barlow.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Pritchard. Don't feel any pressure whatsoever that you are literally in the spotlight for the next hour. Certainly, it's great to have somebody with your experience and knowledge in this field to provide us with some great insights.

I wanted to touch on some of the things we've heard so far and to get your opinion on what you feel is possible. We heard from CFIA officials that Bill C-205 would be difficult to implement and enforce due to current resources.

You talked about the avian flu that was in the Fraser Valley in 2014, and we've seen the impact of BSE and the concerns with African swine fever. I also kind of tie it back to COVID, where, if we've learned anything, it's that when you prioritize something from government officials and they're given the right direction and adequate resources, you can overcome some obstacles.

Do you feel that with the right resources, and understanding the potential risk that is there with the right priorities, Bill C-205 could be implemented and enforced?

[Dr. Jane Pritchard]

Certainly, I am not an expert in saying what resources the CFIA have or don't have available to them. In my personal interpretation, reading the bill through, as a person who has supported the development of regulation and continues in a career that regulates, I guess there are a couple of ways of looking at it.

If I was writing the guiding notes on this, and someone was putting together the regulation, I think it could be interpreted that as long as the person who has entered the premises, or the enclosed space or building, did not follow the required biosecurity processes for that building, then they have broached the biosecurity.

For all the industries I've worked with, every barn has a standard. If you don't follow that standard, then, essentially, to me, you are broaching it.

If there's also a trespass, an undocumented trespass, the CFIA wouldn't be documenting the trespass. The biosecurity issue could be addressed quite simply by whether protocols were followed or not followed.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you for that.

I want to go back to the last comment you made in your introduction about these acts being nothing short of cruel, and that you want to support anything that would address the stress, mental health and anxiety issues that this has on a farm family and processors, but also on the animals themselves.

How important is it, Dr. Pritchard, in your opinion and in your experience, that the federal government show some leadership here and have this type of legislation that would, if anything, act as a deterrent and show those activist groups that there are consequences when they do not follow biosecurity protocol and they cross that line, going onto private property and into enclosed spaces to do this unlawful activity? How important is it for the federal government to show leadership here and have those deterrents in place?

[Dr. Jane Pritchard]

I have two things, really. One, having the additional federal legislation always helps, because federal trumps provincial. Showing that there is clear support at the federal level always helps as a provincial enforcer. It's always helped to have that backup.

The other part of it, though, is that the federal legislation piles on, so there is an additional deterrent that's brought in. Also, my experience with developing national policy versus provincial policy is that it's always better to have something where it doesn't change from province to province, so there is no excuse that, “Oh, well, it was different in B.C., so I was unaware.”

That “I was unaware” excuse is something that provincial legislatures sometimes face, because people have crossed jurisdictions and there isn't a consistency between them. Certainly, with animal welfare and animal health, we really appreciate anything that develops consistency across the provinces.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Yes, I think that's something we've certainly spoken about at this committee. Some provinces, like B.C. for example, are in the process of putting in legislation to address trespassing, but in B.C. and Manitoba, it hasn't passed yet. Alberta and Ontario, from my understanding, are the only two, so you have no consistency across the country, which I think is why this is so important.

You've also touched on the fact that.... One of the instances we had was a group of protesters going from a hog farm in Abbotsford to a turkey farm in Alberta. From your experience, can you just explain what the risks are of these protesters going from one farm to another—this was within a couple of days—potentially harming animals but also spreading infectious diseases or other dangerous bacteria or viruses?

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

I will accept a very short answer because we're out of time, but go ahead.