Agriculture Committee on Oct. 1st, 2024

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

You know, it seems there are so many steps here. We have to figure out the measurement protocols. Then we need to have agreements with the countries we're exporting and importing with. Will this necessitate further side letters, bilateral agreements or broad agreements on how we do this with something like the EU? It seems as if it's going to take something like that, where we get down into the nitty-gritty details, as you say. I'm not an expert in this.

How does that roll forward? Do you have any thoughts on that?

[Dr. Steven Webb]

They've started with the built industries that have defined work processes, and I think that's a good place to start. We need to embrace differences in agriculture.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lehoux now has the floor for five minutes.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to the witnesses for being here with us.

Ms. Lefebvre and Mr. Léger Bourgoin, during our meetings, you often talked about the PMRA, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency. I'm going to refrain from saying certain things about that agency, but you talked about its slowness in approving crop protection products that are used in many other countries and that could be used in Canada. Here, we're dragging our feet.

In your opinion, is this a lack of willpower? Why is the government unable to provide the PMRA with the resources it needs to properly respond to requests? After all, producers are being asked to produce very high-quality products.

First, there is the issue of the border, which we will come back to later. When it comes to the regulation and acceptance of products that are used in other countries, where do you think the problem lies?

[Catherine Lefebvre]

Of course, much of the problem stems from administrative red tape and the lack of reciprocity in standards. Those are two important parts of the answer to your question. PMRA's requirements are very different from those in U.S. regulations.

In the spring, for example, the PMRA asked us to consider adding environmental options for new registrations. In the United States, there is no need to do all this; in Canada, we want to add it.

The red tape surrounding the registration of crop protection products is certainly a major obstacle.

[Patrice Léger Bourgoin]

In the case of the beet example I gave earlier, where the product in question was ultimately rejected by the PMRA, the initial registration was requested in 2012 and the refusal came in 2024.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Of course, this is a major problem in terms of the reciprocity of standards.

I was surprised by the comments you made earlier. There's a lot of pressure on producers here during the summer, and the resources for that are plentiful. However, there isn't much production in Canada in January, as you said. At that point, where are all those resources deployed? That's the question you were asking. Do we have the same control over products coming into Canada during the winter, when we don't need to do the same for Canadian farmers' products?

[Patrice Léger Bourgoin]

That's why I think the whole issue of risk management, which was mentioned earlier, needs to be explored further. Risk management protocols have barely been touched on. However, I would like to know what risks are being put forward and what we want to control through risk management programs for products designed by Canadian farmers compared to risk management practices in countries where regulations are much less stringent than in Canada.

In Canada, since we already have strict regulations, I assume that risk management should be a little less stringent than for a product imported from a country that is known to have much broader standards regarding the environment, public health and crop protection products.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Earlier, representatives from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency seemed to want to reassure us about what is happening at the border. This is not the first time I have heard reassuring comments from that agency, but I am not convinced that standards at the border are being met as adequately.

We talked about carrots from China earlier. Do you have examples of products from the United States, Mexico or South America that show that the situation is problematic?

[Catherine Lefebvre]

Each holiday season, romaine lettuce from California is often recalled due to E. coli or other diseases that can be transmitted to humans.

We have standards for all those things here. We have to do water testing a number of times a year to ensure safety and so on. There are also standards governing what happens elsewhere. Salmonella or E. coli contamination problems are very rare in Canada. However, the standards are there.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

What you are telling us is very relevant.

What recommendations would you make to the committee? I would like you to give us one or two that we could include in our study report.

[Catherine Lefebvre]

First, there should be the same number of inspections for the vegetables we import as for those we export. Basically, all vegetables produced in Quebec and exported by Canada must be inspected by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

Second, when it comes to carbon pricing and the reciprocity of standards, applying the same principles is crucial, so that everyone can be on a level playing field.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. Lehoux.

We'll now go to Mr. MacDonald for up to five minutes, please.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Webb, I want to go back to you. I actually enjoyed your testimony. I agree with almost everything you're saying. I certainly believe we are moving toward cross-border tariffs, and eventually it will likely get to agriculture. There are a lot of bridges to cross prior to that.

I think that what you've talked about relative to crop rotation, precision farming, rotational grazing, nutrient management and other things our farmers are doing puts us in a very good position, and I think farmers should be rewarded for that.

It brings me back to my thoughts about carbon credits and how they are being measured or will be measured for farmers, because I think that's an opportunity as well. The opportunity, I think, lies in some of our imports and aligning ourselves with the U.S. Before Congress now are four bills, basically, that are skirting the issue of carbon credits. A couple of them are actually measuring inputs. They're also being applied by the Democrats and the Republicans, and they obviously don't agree on much.

Here is my question back to you. This may be repetitive, but I think it's worth it. How do we bring industry and government together to ensure that we're doing everything we can for...if it's not 2025 or 2026, the U.K., the EU and the U.S. are now moving in that direction. Also, we all know that if the U.S. starts seeing an advantage to their industries and sectors.... I think Ms. Taylor Roy talked about 73% of the Americans who were surveyed wanting cross-border tariffs. It also becomes a geopolitical issue if it gets to that point.

I'm wondering how we bring everybody together to ensure that we're doing everything we can for our farmers.

[Dr. Steven Webb]

One of the things I wonder about—and maybe even the testimony today is an example of it—is that there doesn't seem to be a clear Canadian strategy on ag. You have it spread across ECCC, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and Global Affairs Canada. You have agencies involved.

Again, as I said in my comments, this is a leadership opportunity for Canada, and it contributes a great deal to the gross domestic product. We need to grow our real GDP. I think it's an opportunity for us, and that's where, from an outsider's perspective, I think that is what's lacking.

It seems to be that if we're getting in trade where we're talking about agriculture, we need a national strategy on ag. We need to be able to execute against a national strategy on ag. That national strategy needs to be a framework that is regionally specific, because, again, what is right in Quebec and Ontario will not be right for western Canada or British Columbia and vice versa. It's not bad that there are differences. We need to embrace the differences, because we can compete and win.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

There's a national regional difference, but my thoughts go directly to the U.S., our biggest trading partner, in saying that we have to align ourselves with them to ensure that everything we do is going to be measured or adjusted relevant to what they're doing. If you take it one step further, I get it. I come from Prince Edward Island, so we may do things quite differently from in Western Canada, although I think things are relatively similar in some regards.

[Dr. Steven Webb]

One of the things that I think are really important is that we align ourselves with jurisdictions that embrace science-based, transparent and regulatory frameworks. It goes back to Mr. Barlow's question, and as long as we have transparency and we know what the rules of the game are, this creates an opportunity for Canada. Where it's not transparent and not science-based, I think it's a very dangerous situation for us.

Again, I think the U.S. has a framework that is more aligned with Canada than with the European Union.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I'm fine, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will go back to what was discussed with Mr. Lehoux.

With respect to risk management, you are asking that inspections be conducted as frequently and as rigorously for imported products as for yours, and that the same requirements apply. I understood you correctly. So it will be quite simple to draft recommendations on that.

In terms of the PMRA and the registration of products, we could talk about a lot of things, but I have the example of linuron that comes to mind. At one point, our producers could not use it, but we imported carrots from the United States whose cultivation was made possible thanks to this product.

Is this nonsense and inconsistency caused by the fact that different agencies regulate this? How do you see that?

Is it possible to establish international co‑operation, to share expertise, to ensure better fluidity without reducing our quality standards?

[Catherine Lefebvre]

There is just one thing I would like to bring to your attention. What also limits the number of crop protection products available in Canada are our labels. The labels are so onerous that manufacturers of crop protection products don't want to put them on the market in Canada. They decide to continue producing them for the United States and other countries, but they refuse to produce them for Canada. That's what happened in the case of Betamix, which is used for beets, for example.

So, yes, international co‑operation would be the ideal solution. However, is that possible? I don't think so, because some countries, such as China and Mexico, have very different requirements than we do in terms of the equipment they use to apply crop protection products. So the labels can't be the same.

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

I was thinking more of a collaboration between Canada, the United States and Europe. When there are products to be registered, we could even share the task of doing the tests. If countries recognized each other's competence in this area, we could be more effective.

[Catherine Lefebvre]

Again, competition for the reciprocity of standards is international. If we do not have the same products as Mexico because it is not part of our agreement, we will still be the most affected in all of this.

[Patrice Léger Bourgoin]

You were talking about linuron earlier, and that's a good example. Let's not forget that we were calling on the PMRA to authorize linuron and that we were in a race against time because, essentially, without approval from Canadian authorities, the manufacturer was saying, with good reason, that he could sell his products on the U.S. market. So it was one minute to midday and we didn't have the quantities we would have needed.

Furthermore, I would say that there is some form of protectionism. We chose to stop manufacturing this type of product in Canada. So we become terribly dependent on other countries.