Agriculture Committee on Oct. 10th, 2024

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

We're talking about reciprocity. On the other side of the border, people must be saying the same thing. They don't want to be duped and lose their market share and they want to discuss the situation. Discussions must be held. It's quite a big process.

[Pascal Forest]

There's a great deal of work to do.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Yes. In your opinion, how soon could this be done? I guess that it depends on how long the government takes.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Madam Gill, your time is up.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I talk a lot. People know me here.

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

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Normally we would now turn to the NDP for questions. I'm going to take the prerogative of the chair and ask some questions at the end instead. I think we'll move on to our second round.

Mr. Steinley, you have five minutes, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have a couple of questions. I was listening to my friend from the Liberals talk about the data that we have. The Environment Commissioner, Jerry DeMarco, did a report on the agriculture department last year, and he said there really isn't enough data. The agriculture department doesn't have a set strategy to reach any emission targets. That was what came out in his report.

When we're having these conversations, a fundamental question I ask most people, most witnesses, is what is our benchmark? Does the Department of Agriculture have a benchmark of where we are when it comes to emissions? They focus on carbon, but what about carbon emissions? Do they have any data on how much the agriculture sector as a whole has sequestered? I think that's the question we have with a lot of these discussions around CBAM. Where are we actually at, Kyle or Pascal?

Have we talked to the Department of Agriculture, and do they have those numbers to even get us started? I'm from Saskatchewan. When it comes to zero-till sequestration, the grasslands that sequester when it comes to the cattle that we're raising, do they have an idea of how much carbon is being sequestered in the agriculture sector?

[Troy Sherman]

I really appreciate your question, so thanks for asking that. I appreciate it because you're asking something that's hugely complex, and even we are trying to wrap our heads around this data question and what government has or does not have. I'll just give you maybe a glimpse into the world of data as it relates to agriculture and emissions within the Government of Canada. This is such a fast-evolving space, but even within the federal family, we have different methodologies and tools that are used. For example, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is going to use the Holos model to determine some of the emissions from the sector. Environment and Climate Change Canada has a different team that reports on the emissions reduction plan, for example, that has a different model from what agriculture has. Then there's also a slightly different model for reporting as part of the national inventory report.

It's a hugely challenging and complex space. We are all trying to navigate that. I know that Environment and Climate Change in particular is trying to update our reporting through the national inventory report significantly so we can get to a better level of baseline information that we can import internationally. It is a very large challenge. It's something that we are working with the government on quite actively, and especially the science and technology branch of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

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

I'll jump in for one quick second, and then I'll share my time with Mr. Lehoux.

The Department of Agriculture set a benchmark of 2018 when they started new technology. I know where I'm from that we've done zero-till. We've done crop rotation. Our soil health is probably better than it's been in 30 or 40 years in Saskatchewan.

How are we going to move forward and give credit to the good practices that lots of our producers have been using for years? I feel like the Department of Agriculture right now, under this current government, is not giving the credit due to some of the producers that have been doing the right things and have had great practices for decades.

[Troy Sherman]

I want to speak to that very quickly. I know my colleague here would like to jump in on that as well.

It is a massive challenge. It's a big part of the discussions we've been having with the federal department, particularly as it relates to the development of the sustainable agriculture strategy. How do we recognize early adopters and the folks who have been doing this for 20 or 30 years?

Part of the challenge with the way we're calculating this is that the government is very focused on additionality. It recognizes but does not look at some of those practices moving forward because they're already being done and they're already being factored in.

I think your question is fundamentally about how we recognize early adopters and how we make sure they can access some of the programs in place that can reward them for those practices they've been adopting for 20 or 30 years. That's an ongoing discussion we are having, along with my colleagues and others, about how we can make sure the federal government properly recognizes those early adopters.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Mr. Lehoux, you have 30 seconds.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Forest and Mr. Legault, you both spoke about the impact of input taxes. If you don't have time to answer, please send the committee your written response. It would be good to have your perspective on this matter.

What's the impact of these taxes in terms of percentage? My Bloc Québécois colleagues often say that the carbon tax doesn't apply to Quebec. However, we know that taxes apply to all inputs and also to anything produced abroad.

Mr. Forest, could you give us a quick answer? Does it have an impact?

[Pascal Forest]

Of course it has an impact. When it comes to the percentage, I will ask Mr. Legault to answer you.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

You're out of time, Mr. Lehoux.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Please send your answer in writing to the committee, Mr. Legault.

Thank you.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Now we'll turn to Mr. Louis, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I appreciate all of our guests being here today; they represent farmers from across Canada. I want to take the time on behalf of a grateful nation to thank all farmers for putting food on our table as we're about to gather for Thanksgiving. Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.

Having you here and having industry expertise is really crucial to shaping agricultural policies, so I appreciate you being here.

We're learning today and on many days that we need to act locally and, at the same time, think globally. In my riding of Kitchener—Conestoga, you can buy local produce from a neighbour's farm, and at the same time, we're also exporting local pork products to the world. Canadian farmers aren't just local; we're international players. We're learning that there needs to be a close partnership globally with ongoing collaboration. Discussions like this are important to ensure smooth cross-border movements of agricultural products. I believe Mr. Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said in the last hour of testimony that competitiveness is a big factor.

I'll start with Mr. Larkin from the Grain Growers.

What measures right now are the Grain Growers taking to ensure that Canadian grain remains competitive and preferred in international markets? How can government support your industry in ways like investments, research and development, innovation, marketing and business risk management? What can we do to further help you on that international stage?

[Kyle Larkin]

To answer your second question, there are many things that the government can do to support grain farmers. Lowering taxes and regulations is number one on the list. We talk about the capital gains tax, Bill C-234 and the carbon tax as unfairly penalizing grain farmers. There are a number of regulations and taxes out there that are really penalizing grain farmers. That really hurts their competitiveness.

When you look at the international market, Canada is known for having some of the highest quality grain around the world. We export over 70% of the grain and grain products that we produce here in Canada. It's fundamentally important for the competitiveness and profitability of grain farmers. We need to keep those international channels open.

Our largest worry is protectionist measures by some of our largest trading partners. The top five trading partners right now, or as of last year, in order are the United States, China, Japan, Indonesia and Mexico. Some of them have carbon pricing schemes and some of them don't.

What we know is that our grain farmers are reliant on trade in grain and grain products getting to those markets and another 145 markets around the world. We need to ensure that when we're looking at mechanisms like carbon border adjustment mechanisms, we're truly looking at the global market and how this could impact grain farmers back home.

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

Mr. Sherman, from the Canola Council of Canada, to support innovation, to support resilience, to boost productivity, we want to help farmers produce more food and increase profitability, not only for local food sovereignty but also to help feed the world. In order to meet those challenges of improving sustainability in production and increasing resilience in the climate of extreme weather, how can industry and government work together to help with higher yields, greater disease resistance and resilience in cases of extreme weather?

[Troy Sherman]

That's an excellent question, so I thank you very much for that.

There are two things that I will mention. The first I've already alluded to, which is significant investments in research dollars. We need more federal investment in this space. I think looking at the next policy framework is an opportune time to figure out what kinds of investments can be made for the agriscience cluster program. It's something that we avail ourselves of on behalf of the canola industry. We know there's a significant ROI from the economic perspective of that research, but the research we did 10 years ago is being put into practice by farmers today. That is extremely helpful, so, as we look at the next policy framework, the first thing I would recommend is a significant investment in research.

The second element is on the trade front. As folks may know, the federal government recently announced the last leg of the stool as it relates to gene-edited products and plant-breeding innovation. That is a massive development for Canada. It is going to drive significant investment in research by the private sector here so that we can have gene-edited products that are...so that we can have canola crops that are more heat-resistant and more drought-resistant.

Moving forward, looking at our trade environment, we have to work very closely with our negotiators to make sure that any future trade agreements we're negotiating have the most ambitious language possible as it relates to biotechnology so that, when we do produce gene-edited products here in Canada, we don't have market access barriers when we are exporting them abroad to some of those export markets. We are starting to have those discussions right now with Global Affairs Canada, but having the most ambitious language possible on biotechnology is going to be absolutely crucial for us as we develop and implement gene-edited products here in Canada.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Thank you Mr. Sherman, and thank you Mr. Louis.

We'll now go to Madame Gill.

Mrs. Gill, you have the floor for two minutes and thirty seconds.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Legault, we have not forgotten you, even though you are appearing by video conference. I would like to know if you want to add anything or round out what Mr. Forest said about the eight questions I asked in a row.

[Benoit Legault]

Thank you.

All eight questions seemed important to me. Since we are doing a kind of brainstorming on the way to approach the issue, I would add one point.

When it comes to Quebec’s grain farmers, we see that the challenge is linked to the fact that we often work in silos. We are currently talking about a very specific measure: border carbon adjustments. We are even talking about it on the margins of the whole carbon tax and carbon policy issue.

What I find regrettable is that we are not addressing the whole issue of how Canadian agricultural policy is supported. We often focus on carbon, but we don’t understand that it impacts other aspects of agronomy, for example, and the economy. We often work in silos when it comes to agronomy, but also policy, when we talk about these subjects. I think Europe may be performing a little better on that side, in terms of planning for the needs of a sector like agriculture. They look at their common agricultural policy, adjust it and integrate it a bit more into other files, like the one we are discussing now.

I think we have to take it into account because we can’t separate the two. They are closely linked, because what we can grant on one side could be compensated for on the other. However, we are currently looking at them separately. So, I’ll raise this point for now: We have to study the issue more globally. That means looking at all the challenges affecting the sector, the policies and the agronomic approach to carbon.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

We can also talk about those sectors globally. For example, you talked about Europe. At the European Commission, every country is present and can discuss what is happening on their end. Then, they can coordinate. I think they have challenges too, obviously.

It is a bit as though some kind of organization were missing. I don’t how to put it exactly, and I don’t want to put words in your mouth. In short, we need an organization. It could be very cumbersome, as we might imagine, but it would help us get the big picture and work from there.

I think that’s what you wanted to say, to a certain extent. Everyone’s working in silos and we just can’t get a big picture of the situation. It’s hard to move forward if everyone can’t talk to each other. Obviously, even if many things are similar, I can say that what agriculture looks like on the North Shore is not the same as elsewhere.

Thank you, Mr. Legault.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Richard Cannings]

Thank you, Ms. Gill.

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

It being past 10:30, I'm going to take my prerogative as chair to ask a couple of questions, and that will end today's meeting.

I want to start with Mr. Larkin. You mentioned fertilizer as one of your concerns in terms of increased input costs with a border adjustment, as that is one of the sectors the EU is talking about in their opening round of CBAMs. If they implemented that policy, it would only affect fertilizers going into the EU. If we decided to have reciprocity and a CBAM with the EU and have a new agreement with them, it would obviously affect fertilizers coming from the EU into Canada.

Is that what you're concerned about, or is it more of a broader question of whether we involve the United States and other countries?

I don't see us doing border adjustments with the world. It would be more as trade agreements with groups such as the EU and not with other countries, but I'd like to get your comments on that.