Evidence of meeting #112 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was organic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Vice-President, Markets and Trade, Cereals Canada
I apologize for the confusion, Mr. Chair.
In my remarks, I highlighted that they not move forward until the administrative and economic impacts have been properly and comprehensively studied. Those would be my two asks.
Thank you.
Liberal
Bloc
Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Petelle and Ms. Bergeron, I'd like to ask you a question, and then I'll have another question for the three organizations. I would ask you to be brief in answering.
The question I was going to ask earlier concerns product registration. The lack of equivalency bothers me, as I said.
Do you think it's possible to collaborate with countries like the European countries and the United States to pool our expertise? For example, we could do part of the evaluation here and another part in the United States to have a common perspective.
Would that make sense?
President and Chief Executive Officer, CropLife Canada
We've actually done a lot in regulatory harmonization globally on pesticides through the OECD. There's an OECD working group on pesticides, where the data requirements and the standards of risk have all been pretty well harmonized across the OECD countries. There's been tremendous work.
There's also been direct joint-review work done with the U.S. and Canada in particular, where they're sharing the review so that the standards and the approaches are the same. We'd like to see that continued and amplified, but there has been a lot of work done in those areas already, more so in pesticides than probably any other regulated sector.
Bloc
Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Thank you. So it is possible.
My other question is about Bill C‑59, and it's for the representatives of the three organizations.
You've all raised concerns about the bill. I haven't analyzed your concerns in detail, but, as I understand it, it's a matter of avoiding greenwashing, if I may put it that way, that is to say preventing unsubstantiated claims.
I, for one, have confidence in you. I think you will be able to prove your claims about your products. Why shy away from talking about the improved environmental stewardship of your products, when those claims are based on facts and you spend your time talking about the importance of relying on science?
Please be brief in your answers, as I only have 40 seconds left.
President and Chief Executive Officer, CropLife Canada
As you know, groups are protesting against our products, even though they are well regulated.
Our concern is that these groups will use this as a way to put pressure on people to talk about it in the media and to maintain the controversy, not to have any real success.
Senior Director, Government Relations and Public Affairs, Canadian Cattle Association
I'd go with what Pierre said.
Additionally, how the standards are chosen is really important, and how countries choose to measure. For our goals that we've set and our claims that we have within the Canadian beef sector, we stand 100% behind that. They are based in science. There are different measurements internationally on how to track these measurements, from emissions to carbon sequestration, etc. We need to ensure there's some alignment there.
Vice-President, Markets and Trade, Cereals Canada
Thank you.
In response to your question, there are two parts.
First, there's a reverse onus placed on the organization making the claim when the claim is questioned by an external group.
Second, as my colleague Ms. Babcock mentioned, there is a lack of clarity from the Competition Bureau right now as to what a benchmark to an international standard actually means. We're requesting that clarity, but absent that clarity, we simply can't move forward.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Walker, maybe I'll pick up right where you left off.
I've been at this committee long enough to know and to have witnessed the data that agriculture in Canada uses to back up its claims. We've seen it, and I think there is a very high degree of confidence around this table that, in Canadian agriculture, you are indeed leaders in sustainability. You have done the work.
I understand the unintended consequences. I do think that Canadian consumers want industrial and agricultural sectors largely to have their claims backed up, and I understand that you have some concerns about that. I think that, in the United States, the Federal Trade Commission also has a few rules.
Does any of that apply to agriculture? When you are making claims to United States consumers about the sustainability of Canadian cereals, are there any things that you have to pay attention to in the United States marketplace? Also, is there anything else that you want to add about what you'd like to see this committee recommend in terms of how the Competition Bureau is handling this?
Vice-President, Markets and Trade, Cereals Canada
That's quite the question.
There are already provisions within the Competition Act addressing components of what you just noted. Beyond the general redundancies that exist with the passage of Bill C-59, I would simply reiterate our existing concerns in addition to its redundancies.
However, when it comes to the U.S., of course there are regulations regarding claims there that must be appropriately measured. We do see a number of countries globally regulating front-of-package labelling and different claims that are made, and those are benchmarked to international standards.
Again, it's not that anyone at this committee is concerned about the attestation or verifiability. It's simply the lack of clarity within the proposed legislation and within past legislation. We're simply requesting that clarity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kody Blois
Just quickly, for the CCA and Cereals Canada, you talked glowingly—and I think we all agree we're proud—of the work you've done on environmental sustainability or the carbon intensity on a product basis.
I fully agree, actually, that CBAM and those types of mechanisms are going to be too complex to ever be able to move in that direction. We do want to have open trading markets, but my open question to you is this: Is there any mechanism that we can eventually reward Canadian environmental stewardship with and build that into the trading economy?
Radio silence, Mr. Walker...?
Vice-President, Markets and Trade, Cereals Canada
You have my apologies, Mr. Chair. I was unclear as to whom the question was being posed.
I think the more that regulations can help pave the way for exports, the happier we are. I'm really looking to government as a partner in that exercise and, as I mentioned, in just making sure that any proposals here are properly studied from an economic and administrative standpoint.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kody Blois
I think it's the actual heart of the study right now, and it's complex because we want to have open trading markets. We're expecting industry to be part of the solution and to work with them, but there's a balance to how long you can do that without having it accounted for at some point. I think that's actually the core of what we're looking at.
Is there anything just quickly or...?
Officer at Large, Canadian Cattle Association
The only thing I would add is that with provinces on different.... Some provinces have a carbon tax. Some don't. Some have exemptions or carbon credits. It's really going to be difficult to bring the whole nation under one umbrella to develop something. It's going to be really complex unless everybody's on the same page.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kody Blois
That might be the title of the study. It's complex.
Mr. Petelle, you know where I stand on opening up and allowing for more information to be shared on the expansion of farm tools, but you wanted to weigh in quickly.
You have 30 seconds.
President and Chief Executive Officer, CropLife Canada
I think the customer will always have a say. Canadian quality is second to none, so even if you don't have the other metrics that we may be looking for, we compete well on quality.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kody Blois
Thank you, colleagues.
I have a budget here, and you are going to approve it. That's for this study, and I'm seeing no issues.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kody Blois
We'll see you on Thursday. Mr. Barlow will be in the chair, and, if necessary, with an assist from our good friend from the Bloc.