Agriculture Committee on Oct. 29th, 2024

[Gayle McLaughlin]

Sure. I'm happy to answer you, Ms. Rood.

Yes, it is of great concern for our canola farmers as well. As I said in my remarks, land prices are going up. Inputs generally, broadly speaking, have been going up over the years as well, and this is creating extra strain and stress on young farmers in particular, our new farmers entering the sector. We believe this essentially moves the goalposts, not only for farmers who are retiring but also for farmers entering into farming, and we have concerns that this will just increase costs for them at a time when costs are already rising.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you.

I'll now turn to Mr. Drouin, please.

You might be splitting your time with Ms. Murray, I understand, but you have up to six minutes.

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

[ Technical difficulty—Editor]

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

We're having some issues. You might be on mute, my friend from Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.

It's not working, Mr. Drouin. We might have to cede to Ms. Murray. We'll give you a few more seconds to try.

We'll go to Yves. We'll give him a precedent, and then we'll turn back to our Liberal colleagues.

Mr. Perron, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We now ask our questions before the government members. God knows what the future holds.

Good afternoon and welcome to our witnesses. Thank you for being with us today.

I'll address my questions to Mr. Bergamini first.

I congratulate you on your new position. We're delighted to see you.

You talked about the risk management review that is to happen by 2028, which we're starting now. Everyone on the committee will agree with me that we've been rambling on about the same thing for a long time.

Where do we stand? Has the government started consulting you? Is anything happening, or is there radio silence? Will the government wait until the last three months of 2027 to begin consultations? If so, there will be a three-year delay, just like last time.

[Massimo Bergamini]

From our side, we have had no indication that a revision was under way.

I think that, in the course of its meetings, your committee has clearly identified the problem. We're talking about programs that used to be called safety nets, which are not adapted to today's reality, an extremely dynamic reality.

The other aspect that's important to stress is that the reality of 20 years ago is not the same as the one we're working in now. Structures and processes will have to be put in place to ensure constant revision. That's why we emphasize the need for an analysis grid that puts agriculture first. In the absence of this, we check and carry on.

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

Thank you very much.

I'll try to proceed quickly. There are a lot of witnesses, and we don't have much time.

Mr. Fulton, in the case of cattle, we're talking about the bovine spongiform encephalopathy standard, or BSE, and the specified risk material standard, or SRM. I don't know if it's because I'm a bit tired these days, but I get the impression that we're going round in circles. I don't know how many times we've raised this issue in committee. We've already made the recommendation to review these standards. Now you're asking us to review them again. I take it, then, that no evaluation or review of these standards is currently taking place.

Is that what you're telling me?

[Tyler Fulton]

To be clear, there is now a new risk assessment. Its public release is imminent, but not yet. What we hope is that the government will take the results of that and immediately reflect them in the regulations going forward.

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

I want to make sure I understand you correctly.

You say that a risk analysis is done. However, it didn't come from the government. So the government hasn't yet taken any action in this regard, but, following this analysis, you want it to act quickly.

Is this correct?

[Tyler Fulton]

Yes, absolutely.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Carey, you talked about interconnection with regard to canola. You're asking that the measure, introduced as a pilot project, be extended for 30 months and ultimately made permanent. We're talking about measures that cost nothing and are easy to apply.

I have two sub-questions for you. Why not make this measure permanent now, since the pilot project already exists? Also, are the 160 kilometres in question sufficient?

In fact, I've met people who are talking about 500 kilometres. I wonder if that's reasonable, since it's going to cost the railways a lot of money.

I'd like to know what you think.

[Dave Carey]

Our ask is for a 30-month extension. Right now, the pilot expires at the end of March 2025. That's a cliff. At this point, there's no ability to prolong that, so shippers are very reluctant to use interswitching because of the threat of retaliation from our two class I railways.

We're asking for a 30-month extension, which would give us 48 months of data. That also lines up with the statutory review of the Canada Transportation Act. We're asking for 500 kilometres, because 160 kilometres does not allow the Peace Region of northern Alberta to have access. It has no competition, and right now the pilot is only in the Prairies.

It is at no cost for government to do; it is simply a regulatory change.

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

Does the distance of 160 kilometres seem sufficient to you?

[Dave Carey]

We're asking for 500 kilometres.

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

Thank you very much.

Ms. Bergeron, you talk about facilitating the application of regulations, making them more practical and science-based. We all agree on the substance. Of course, this depends on transparency, and I know that your organization also advocates transparency. You'll remember the little differences we've had on this subject.

Could you tell me how this registry works? Don't you think it would be better for the government to keep this registry? It would be exactly the same, would require nothing more of your organization and would ensure transparency for the public. It might also avoid misunderstandings, like those we've seen in the past.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

There are 30 seconds left.

[Gregory Kolz]

Thank you for your question.

I think that, in this case, my colleague Ian Affleck is more familiar with this issue than Ms. Bergeron and me. We'll get back to you shortly with an answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

One thing I would like for a follow-up from the CCA.... Again, I think the specified risk material does matter, as it's on competitiveness. As I understand it, Mr. Fulton, once the scientific report is released publicly, that would then justify the regulatory change that your organization is seeking. I think it would be helpful for this committee to know what that regulatory process looks like. Maybe we don't have the time to get into all the nuts and bolts of it, but the more of that road map we have, the more I think it'll allow us all to advocate strongly in your corner.

Mr. MacGregor, you have up to six minutes.

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

Aren't you going to the Liberals?

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

No, Mr. Drouin is still.... I don't know where he's at, so I'm going to go to you for six minutes.

Don't worry. My good Liberal colleagues will get their chance.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome back. It's good to see all of you again. Thanks for coming here to outline your priorities.

Mr. Carey, I'd like to turn to you. In your opening statement, I did hear you mention Bill C-234. I've certainly committed on behalf of my party to honour our third reading vote in the House of Commons, so if the bill ever comes back for a vote, we would vote to reject the Senate amendments. However, did I hear you correctly that you're prepared to accept...that even a part of the bill would be better than nothing at all at this moment?

[Dave Carey]

For our 40,000 farmers.... Of course, the unamended bill is what passed in the House of Commons, what went through this committee. That is what we would like to see. However, given the Senate amendments and the uncertainty in the Senate, we, as the canola growers, are asking for the amended bill to be passed. Even if the House of Commons rejected those amendments, it would go back to the Senate, and all indications are that it would be further amended at third reading by the Senate. Then we'd end up in a protracted game of ping-pong between the two chambers.

Farmers need the relief now. It's been challenging, with the capital gains changes and with a number of other issues, such as labour issues, so canola growers are supportive of moving the amended bill forward as soon as possible in the parliamentary schedule.

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

Okay, so if parliamentarians could stop speaking to the bill so that we could come to a vote, that would be a good thing for you.

[Dave Carey]

The sooner the bill is passed, the better. Then we have to work out, with the CRA, implementation. That's not an easy hurdle—to deal with the CRA post-implementation, post-royal assent—but that would be our ask of parliamentarians, yes.