Agriculture Committee on May 2nd, 2024

[Gillian Flies]

Oh, go ahead, Tia. I'm sorry.

[Tia Loftsgard]

Go ahead, Gillian.

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

It's a Canadian standoff.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Tia Loftsgard]

Okay, I'll go first.

I would say there is a major opportunity. We import carrots and potatoes. We can be growing these things on our own. There's such an opportunity. We need to look at the areas where we're bringing in non-climate-friendly foods, because an organic demand is there. We should be looking at the products we can produce on our own and putting the supports in place so there's a financial return not only for the farmers but also for soil and soil health.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

That's perfect. We're going to leave it at Sukhpaul Bal (President, Bristish Columbiathat.

Mr. Perron, the floor is yours.

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

Thanks to the witnesses for being with us, both those taking part online and those taking part in person.

I am going to ask a series of questions and I invite all of the witnesses who may want to answer my questions but who may not have time to speak during my turn to send us their answers in writing.

First, Ms. Gaboury-Bonhomme, I see that you have done a lot of study and you are still studying the issue of enterprise risk management. Like Mr. Currie, some witnesses have told us about the importance of reviewing the Sustainable Canadian Agriculture Partnership before 2028. They believe it makes no sense to wait that long. Climate change is happening now and our producers need help.

Other witnesses have proposed a sort of "agri-disaster" emergency program that would be temporary, in order to sit down with the people who work in agriculture and do a speedy review of all of the programs. I would like to know what you think of that.

With respect to environmental practices, several of the witnesses, again today, are telling us that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and soil resilience has to be increased. I quite liked what Ms. Flies had to say on that aspect.

For our part, we advocate decentralized funding that would encourage good agricultural practices and make funds available to producers in a sort of "agri-investment" program. These producers are entrepreneurs and they should not have to wait for a big Canadian policy to be adopted. We recognize the importance of environmental innovation, and this money would be paid beyond the control of the government. These people could use the money to undertake innovations, whether in two years or five years. These innovations could also be recognized and rewarded. I would like to hear your opinion on that.

I would also like to talk about funding relating to the organic standard. Every time the standard has to be revised, we have to fight and argue with the federal government for it to fund that exercise, even though it is a government standard. That makes no sense. People have to pay to practise organic farming, when we should be encouraging them to do it, paying them to do it. I would like to hear your opinion on that as well.

I am also thinking about access to the various programs. Ms. Loftsgard, or Ms. Flies, said good practices on the farm need to be encouraged. Organic producers, however, do not have access to certain programs because they are already practising organic farming. That makes no sense. We also have to recognize what these people are already doing. Earlier, I suggested decentralizing the funds, and I would add to that the need to recognize people who have already been doing organic farming for many years. Some have been doing it for 20 or 25 years.

There is also the problem relating to reciprocity in the standards, not just environmental standards, but also labour standards. How can we improve our system to make it fair and equitable for our local producers?

Another problem arises from the standards: product certification. When a manufacturer changes the recipe for a pesticide or any other product, that presents a major problem. The timelines for obtaining certification in Canada are very long. Can we consider a sort of certification principle that could eventually be harmonized with the one in the United States and in Europe?

Obviously, we also have to address the workforce problems and the sustainability of the system we are currently using for relying on temporary foreign workers. What are your thoughts on that?

I know these are a lot of questions, but it is important that we talk about them. Earlier, I mentioned an "agri-disaster" program. Obviously, it would have to be much more flexible and much faster than the current AgriRecovery initiative. The Government of Quebec has been calling for this since November 2023, I would remind everyone. Today is May 2, 2024, and the federal government has still not provided an answer. Producers are waiting to know what is going on in order to respond. This makes no sense.

I cannot speak to each of you, and you cannot answer all my questions. As I said, I invite all of the witnesses to submit their comments in writing, if they wish.

Hello, Mr. Currie. I am glad to see you.

I would like to hear your comments on what I have been saying.

[Keith Currie]

I'll start off with a shameless plug. There's a certain bill known as Bill C-359 that, if it went through the House, would certainly expedite access to a lot of inputs and tools. The government can take a holistic view of that and how we expedite access to the tools we need going forward to get them into the farmers' hands more quickly.

Certainly, one of the biggest things we're dealing with is the lack of flexibility within our BRM programming. The way it's set up now is more about broad acre cropping and more predictable climate cropping. Realistically, can we give our provinces, for example, more say in how those programs look on a more regional basis? If you're dealing with different aspects of climate, soils and weather right across the country, then a one-size-fits-all program just can't work. How do we improve the programs so that more people can get access? Certainly, more people can get access, including in the horticulture sector, which really has been left out of the whole BRM discussion, more or less, as far as accessibility goes.

There's another aspect to a lot of this that a few people have touched on. I live very close to where Ms. Flies lives and her farming operation. They're doing a wonderful job in their operation. Really, what we need to do is start with the soil. Everything that we do starts with the soil and how we make sure the soil is as good as it can possibly be.

As farmers, we grow plants. That's what we do. It doesn't matter whether you're a livestock farmer, a crop farmer or a horticulture producer; you grow plants. We need the proper, correct, right soil all of the time. What tools can we make going forward? It can be a sustainable agricultural strategy, with the tools within that potential option, or the government can come up with ways to award early adopters. You just heard people talking about not being awarded for being early adopters. Let's continue to award people who switch to a better practice or a different practice. I don't want to make the assumption that people aren't farming smartly.

As for my operation at home, part of it is certified organic and part of it is not. That doesn't mean that I don't farm sustainably in both pieces of my operation. It's just different. I think we need to make sure that we recognize that. We can then put tools in the farmers' hands going forward and make sure that everyone has access to those tools, especially in the business risk management aspect of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. Currie.

Thank you, Mr. Perron.

Colleagues, I have a couple of things. First of all, you noticed Mr. Perron asking questions of Ms. Gaboury-Bonhomme. I just need majority agreement that her written answers, when she provides them, can be appended to today's written evidence. I know that's not going to be an issue for you folks.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

You will also notice that we're going to go a bit past one o'clock. Some of you have to go, and I know you worry about procedural elements, so I'm asking for your permission that we continue with whomever can stay beyond one o'clock. As your chair, I'll make sure that nothing goes out of sorts. To those who can stay beyond one, that's great. Those who have to go will go. I'm happy to continue.

I have a few questions. Maybe I would like to, as the chair, ask some questions too.

Mr. Drouin.

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

Just to make sure, if all members agree and are bowing their heads saying there's not going to be funny business when we're gone, then....

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

It's impossible, anyway, if we don't have quorum. Basically, it's a minimum of four members, but I'm asking for consent. Then, even if we have only two or three here, we'll still be allowed to ask questions so that our witnesses can have the best utilization of their time.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I'm seeing no issue with that. I'll make sure that I handle it accordingly.

Go ahead, Mr. MacGregor. You're up for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all of our witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Loftsgard, I'd like to start with you. I've worked with your organization on a motion, and you have a petition for the Government of Canada. You've recognized all of the beneficial practices that organic farmers practice.

I'm just wondering if you could expand on that a bit, if you want. Two of the calls in the petition are for “bold policies and programs” and to “recognize and incentivize sustainable resilient food systems”. Is there anything else that you want to add to those two calls to action?

[Tia Loftsgard]

What I want to point out is that organic lives nowhere. There's no policy. There is no directive for organic. We are in part 13 of the safe food for Canadians regulations, whereas the U.S., the EU, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea and all of our trading partners have a specific act for organic. That is what provides the policy directive.

This is where we're really speaking to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and our supportive MPs. Canada needs to get to the place where we have our own act so that we remove the barriers that currently exist. We are consistently running up to roadblocks when we're asking for a move in this or a move in that. There are too many legal barriers because organic doesn't have a carve-out policy directive.

It needs to live in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Because enforcement is done by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, we used to have an organic office there, but we no longer have an organic office specifically within the CFIA, and there's no organic office anywhere within the Government of Canada.

That is really our ask: to get us acknowledging that we're losing ground. We are the fifth-largest organic nation right now. Combined with the United States, we're 50% of market demand, but we need to get the policy directive in place for us to continue to be a leader.

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

Thank you for that.

Mr. Currie, welcome back to the committee.

There's been a lot of talk today about BRMs and the current SCAP going to 2028. I've been very curious about some of the programs, and AgriInsurance in particular. I think that insurance program is going to be drawn on quite heavily in the coming decades.

I'm just wondering if you want to add anything further to this discussion on BRM programs, and AgriInsurance in particular. How does a program like that need to be tailored? I think it's going to be drawn on a lot. As with other insurance policies, will we have to require farmers to have certain practices in place before they're eligible? Do you have thoughts on how that program is going to evolve with the challenges we already see coming our way?

[Keith Currie]

I believe the government needs to take a much more holistic look at how we react to the need for business risk management programs. We were happy to see the increase in funding last year in the SCAP program, but it's a decimal point on a rounding error. To actually have an effect, really what we need is a different program, a stand-alone program.

A prime example of that was in 2021. With the drought in the Prairies in western Canada, the CFA initiated the hay west program. We sourced hay to get to our livestock producers in western Canada to help them through the troubled times. When we sourced hay, we could not find any in western Canada at all. Yes, the production was down, but any extra production there had already been gobbled up by U.S. farmers.

Why? The USDA has a program on the shelf, and whenever there is an issue, they pull it off the shelf, insert money and get it out to the producers quickly. It's timely. It's effective. I can't put a number on what the dollar value would be, but it's certainly not the dollar value within the SCAP program now, which wouldn't suffice long term. Part of those dollars, as we've talked about around the table today, are about putting preventative measures in place to offset the tremendous cost that happens when an event occurs. If we can mitigate those costs, then the cleanup is a lot less.

There has to be a long-term vision to how we do this. It can't just be a one-off program or a short-term program. There have to be conversations with the people on the ground—the farmers, the farm community and the governments across the country—about how we get that done.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Brekveld, I really appreciate how you wove in labour, sustainability and horticulture. There are definitely some important links.

I've had conversations with organizations like the UFCW and the Deans Council, which is trying to churn out graduates with technical skills and innovation. Is there anything you want to expand on from your talks with those groups? What I'm trying to look for is how we can encourage more homegrown talent in Canada and make agriculture a more enticing career to someone who's just coming out of high school.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Answer in about 45 seconds.

It's over to you.

[Peggy Brekveld]

The national workforce strategic plan looks at the perceptions and awareness of agriculture and the jobs that are available through it. Part of this is about supporting that work through the strategic plan. Beyond that is work that the CAHRC and its partners could do for you. We know there are four jobs for every graduate from a degree or program, so let's continue to build the knowledge of where jobs are available.

Also, the stopgap measure with temporary foreign workers, which will help fill the gap and continue to bring food to the table, is so important now and will be until you have that gap lessened. Maybe that will be in a long time, but we need those workers to continue to help fill the space. Otherwise, food sits on the ground or on the trees and fails to get to your plate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

I will go to Mr. Barlow, but just before that, Mr. Carr asked for 45 seconds to a minute.

I'm going to you quickly, Mr. Carr.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair. That's quite courteous of you.

Thank you to my colleagues across the way for agreeing.

Colleagues, I simply want to share something. I know it's unconventional at this stage of the process, but this will be my last meeting as a permanent member on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Thank you, John, for the applause. I'm sure that was about my participation, not my departure.

I will be moving on to the committee on procedure and House affairs.

I have genuinely enjoyed a deep degree of collaboration. Seeing as I was elected relatively recently, it was a very nice opportunity to sit on this committee with all of you and work in such a collegial and collaborative manner, so truly, on a personal level, I am appreciative of the relationships that have been built on the goodwill that I hope will carry forward to PROC—or perhaps not.

Nonetheless, thank you, Mr. Chair, for your service here and for your time.

I look forward, of course, to crossing paths with everybody in the chamber and beyond, but I wanted to take the opportunity, while we are here, to express my gratitude on the record.

Thank you.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!