Evidence of meeting #116 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 farm.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Kyle Larkin  Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada
Julie Bissonnette  Director, Canadian Federation of Agriculture
Alex Docherty  President, Skye View Farms Ltd.
Logan Docherty  Secretary, Skye View Farms Ltd.
Scott Ross  Executive Director, Canadian Federation of Agriculture
Mark Nelson  Farm Owner, Oakhurst Farm
Phil Mount  Vice-President, Operations, National Farmers Union

9:05 a.m.

Director, Canadian Federation of Agriculture

Julie Bissonnette

There are a number of possible solutions. It's a complex issue. There isn't any perfect solution either. We've been talking about this for such a long time, but not much is happening.

For Quebec's next generation of farmers, the creation of a pension fund was just one of our requests. This would take the pressure off the transferor in terms of the need to have money set aside. This is certainly one of our requests. Tax measures should also then be introduced to facilitate the sale of land to the next generation of farmers. These measures are the best way to encourage people when they help put money in their pockets. Something must be done in this area.

In Quebec, less than 2% of land is farmland. The pressure on this land is enormous. It must be made available to the next generation. Yes, access to funding matters, but the first step is to obtain access to the land. Sometimes, young people don't even know that the land is for sale. Given its scarcity, it sells quickly. That's one possible solution. Everything must be studied. After all these years, something must be put in place, because the problem keeps getting worse.

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

If you have any specific recommendations for federal initiatives, we would be grateful to receive them afterwards.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Thank you very much, Mr. Perron.

Now we will go to Mr. Cannings for two and a half minutes, please.

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Thank you.

I'm going to start again with Mr. Larkin.

I think we were talking the other day about the fact that there are grain farms on many scales. Most of them.... At least from my perspective in the Okanagan Valley, where I grew up in an orchard, even the small ones are big, and some of them are really vast. I imagine that the bigger ones are more and more owned by corporations rather than by families.

I'm just wondering if you could give me an idea of where that shift happens, in terms of size and value, from predominantly family grain farms to more corporate-owned farms.

9:10 a.m.

Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada

Kyle Larkin

It's a good question. The good news here in Canada is that still 97% of farms are family farms. They're owned by mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. They could have multiple shareholders that include cousins, nieces, nephews, etc., but the challenge we're facing is that we're losing, again, 500 to 1,000 family farms each year.

The other challenge we're facing, which I think the CFA could speak to a little more, is that there are around 190,000 farms across the country, but about 25% of those produce 90% of the food that we export globally and use here in Canada. There are a lot of farms out there that I would consider hobby farms. I have a friend who lives in Kemptville, for example. He has a nine-acre farm. I wouldn't necessarily consider that a major operation.

When we're talking about farms that are actually producing the food that Canadians and the world rely on, we're talking about farms that are 3,000 acres, 4,000 acres or 5,000 acres in the Prairies. In Ontario, you're probably looking at 400 acres to 800 acres. If you just do quick math on farmland value, that's where the challenge with the capital gains happens.

I'll give you some statistics. For the data, we could go as far back as 1996. In Alberta, the cost per acre was $554 in 1996. Today, it's worth $6,900. In Ontario, the cost per acre in 1996 was $1,620. Today, it's worth over $19,000. It's really just a question of the increasing farmland value. That's why farmers are getting hit in general by capital gains, but now they're being hit again by a capital gains tax increase.

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Ross—

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

You have about five seconds left.

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Thank you.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Thanks, Mr. Cannings.

Thanks to our witnesses.

If you don't mind, colleagues, I have a couple of quick questions to ask.

Mr. Larkin, to go back to my colleague Mr. Drouin's question, he was mentioning that there are different tax codes and stuff within each province. I believe that, in the data you submitted last spring, you did have a breakdown of the difference in each province, but the average was 30%. Am I accurate in that assessment?

9:10 a.m.

Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada

Kyle Larkin

Exactly. We considered all the different tax schemes in different provinces. You know, everything kind of changes, but on average we saw 30%. Some provinces were 29% and some were 32%. Taken across the country, we saw a 30% tax increase.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Thank you.

Mr. Ross or Mr. Larkin, it seems that we have this ongoing every spring. We had the underused housing tax and the bare trust tax change, and now we have the capital gains inclusion rate change. You were talking about the impact on accountants and the farmers who are going to their accountants. What kind of frustration is this?

It just seems to be this stop-and-go where they're putting these new taxes on producers every spring. Is this happening? Is it not happening? They had to back off on the bare trust at the very last minute.

What kind of frustration is this putting on your members and your discussions with financial advisers and accountants?

9:15 a.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Federation of Agriculture

Scott Ross

I would say it's adding considerable frustration, but also uncertainty. To Mr. Larkin's point earlier, we could not get definitive assessments of the impacts of these changes, which were implemented very quickly, until months after the initial announcement took place, because we were waiting on draft legislation. Then, as you suggested, there's this back-and-forth of potential changes and tweaks that follow.

The net result is that advisers weren't even in a position to provide financial advice for some time after the announcements were made. That creates immense frustration, especially when you're in the midst of a very long, drawn-out succession plan that you could be nine-tenths of the way through when suddenly this throws a complete curveball into what you've been working on for upwards of a decade.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Do you want to add to that, Mr. Larkin?

9:15 a.m.

Executive Director, Grain Growers of Canada

Kyle Larkin

I can tell you a small story that I think really highlights the issue. I know a farmer in Saskatchewan who used to owned an 8,000-acre family farm. When this was announced through budget 2024, that individual still had five years in their succession planning. They didn't have a son or daughter or nephew or niece who could take over. Their succession plan was always to sell it to another farm. They still had five or seven years to go in their farm, but because of this quick announcement that was then implemented on June 25, they decided to quickstep their succession plan. They actually sold out their 8,000-acre family farm to a large corporate farm of 100,000 acres plus.

That's a small example of how this is accelerating the loss of family farms across the country.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

I have just two last quick ones.

I know that the government has talked about the Canadian entrepreneurs' incentive. You did talk about changing the rules to allow farmers to qualify for that. It's my understanding that, if you are an incorporated farm, which the vast majority would be, even though it's in the family, they do not qualify for that program. Is that correct?

Mr. Larkin or maybe the CFA, if you guys could submit how many farms of those 190 farms would actually qualify for that incentive and how many would not, I think that would help us out with this analysis as well.

My last question is for the Dochertys. It's good to see Logan here as well. We need the voice of that younger farmer.

In my conversations with my constituents all summer on this issue, the number one thing that came up with succession planning was the mental health toll this has taken. When you've done years of transition planning and this has completely scrapped it, you have to start over.

As a young farmer looking at getting into this industry, what is your frame of mind here with this capital gains inclusion rate change? Your father talked about the carbon tax and other input costs. Do you still see farming as a viable option? What is your outlook?

9:15 a.m.

Secretary, Skye View Farms Ltd.

Logan Docherty

My personal outlook is, if I knew nine years ago, or whenever the Liberal government took government, that they were basically going to try to do everything they could to destroy my family farm....

9:15 a.m.

President, Skye View Farms Ltd.

Alex Docherty

I'll take over for that.

It's hard to describe everything we've been through. We've been at this for probably four years now. I talked to our accountant the other day, and he said maybe it's going to take another five years to finish, which is insane.

The way I look at it, and I've said it for quite a number of years—if I give the farm to the boys, forget about the money, but I would hope they could keep going and not go broke. I always said, “Just don't lose the place.” It's so sad, the state of the country now, and I don't believe farmers perhaps even understand, but on the advice of my accountant, I had to buy a $2-million life insurance policy for the fact that, if I get hit by a bus this afternoon when I walk out of here, the Government of Canada is going to destroy our farm just for taxes. It's insane.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Thank you very much, Mr. Docherty.

Mr. Docherty, I can certainly sense your passion and the pressure you feel you're under. Thank you very much for sharing your story with us.

Mr. Larkin, Ms. Bissonnette and Mr. Ross, thank you very much for coming.

We will suspend for a couple of quick minutes and welcome the next panel.

The meeting is suspended.

9:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Colleagues, let's get started.

I believe that most of you understand what occurred. Unfortunately, Mr. Mount, who is the vice-president of operations for the National Farmers Union, does not have the right headset. What we will do, colleagues, is allow Mr. Mount to read his statement. His copy was given to the interpreters so they can read it. We can ask Mr. Mount questions throughout the last hour of our meeting here, and Mr. Mount will submit his answers to those questions in writing to the committee. He won't be able to physically answer, but he will just take the questions and respond in writing, and they will be submitted.

I need agreement from this committee to allow us to proceed in that manner and to append his answers to the minutes.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The Chair

Thank you.

9:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

I welcome Mr. Nelson, who is with Oakhurst Farm. We appreciate your being here.

Mr. Mount, thank you for being accommodating to the situation here. We have to protect our interpreters, and we have some strict guidelines around that.

Mr. Nelson and Mr. Mount, you will each have about five minutes for your opening statements. If you go a bit longer, don't worry. There are only two witnesses today. We won't be too strict on that.

Mr. Nelson, from Oakhurst Farm, I begin with you for five minutes, please.

Mark Nelson Farm Owner, Oakhurst Farm

Firstly, Mr. Chair, thank you for inviting me here.

This is tremendous. I'm so excited to live in a country where we have this opportunity, where people like me, regular citizens who have an issue, can come talk to people and be listened to. I'm very proud to be Canadian.

I'm an owner of Oakhurst Farm, with my wife, and we've been working on the farm for about 32 years. We are second generation. It is considered a small to medium-sized farm based on Mr. Larkin's description of a farm....

I'm sorry. I'm mildly nervous.

I am here today to discuss how capital gains changed my plans, my life. When I was 22 years old, my wife and I started investing in our future, putting a little money away and doing all the things we were told to do. We succession-planned our farm from her parents, which took about 10 years, in large part because there were things that just had to be decided—her father died along the way, so we had to deal with that.

We paid down our mortgage and invested in our business. We raised our two children on the farm. It was a wonderful place for them to live, but at this point we're empty nesters and our children do not want to succession-plan the farm. They grew up in the life and saw how difficult it was, so we're in a situation where we would like to scale things back, think about our retirement and slow down.

We put our farm up for sale. It was looking quite promising that we were going to sell it, and then this capital gains tax change came into effect. Our plan, with our financial experts, which we had in place for quite a few years, was no longer a valid plan. They informed me, “This is not something that you are financially able to do right now.”

I'm just here to let you know that this is a real problem and something we are genuinely experiencing. I just want to thank you for the opportunity to tell you.

Thank you very much.

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative John Barlow

Thanks, Mr. Nelson. There's no need to be nervous. We're all regular folks here, for sure. We really appreciate your being here to tell your story. That's important.

Now, Mr. Mount, you have up to five minutes, please.

Dr. Phil Mount Vice-President, Operations, National Farmers Union

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, all, for the opportunity to speak to you on this very important question.

My name is Phil Mount. As you know, I'm the NFU vice-president of operations.

I think you've heard from your first panel today many of the important questions on the transfer of intergenerational farms to family members. I want to broaden this out because, right at the end of that session, you started to address some important questions on intergenerational land transfers to other farmers, non-family intergenerational transfers.

All across Canada, members of the NFU, the National Farmers Union, have prioritized research and action on policy enabling young and new farmers to succeed in business. Many of us own our own farms, so why is this top of mind? Well, it's because many of our members are also the determined, dynamic, young, new immigrant farmers who are our future. They are struggling to make it, particularly in years three to 10 of farming. They're often unable to access capital, equipment to scale, knowledge and, especially, farmland. Prices driven up by speculation and the use of farmland as an investment vehicle have put the cost of land well beyond the productive value of that land. Mr. Perron touched on this near the end of the last session.

Those eager farmers are stopped before they begin because they often do not inherit land. If they rent, they pour years of work and sweat equity into the land, often only to find it sold just as the soils are improved.

We need those keen farmers to succeed. The National Farmers Union is pleased to be offering a program to increase the possibility of new and young equity-deserving farmers succeeding in agriculture. Our program “The Exchange”, which is supported by the AAFC AgriDiversity program, is oversubscribed with eager young farmers who want to learn all they can. In Ontario, we're pleased to be working with other organizations to provide training to new entrants and to farm employers.

There's much more to be done—and quickly—because Canada's loss of farmers is alarming. We're all getting older. I'm a case in point. In fact, if our younger farmer members were not working so hard today, they would have been speaking to this panel. However, they are working—on rented land, in co-operative structures, however they can make it work—because they believe in wresting control of their lives through farming.

Canada's total outstanding debt, as has been mentioned earlier today, is close to $146 billion. This means that retiring farmers generally need to sell their farms to pay off debt and have an income to live on in retirement.

Strategic policy action is needed to ensure that this next generation of farmers succeeds, with better access to land, equipment, education and training that doesn't result in crippling debt and unmanageable risk. New entrants must have access to affordable land through non-family farm succession supports and financial support for the critical first decade of their establishment.

I'd like to sort of echo and follow up on Mr. Perron's suggestion toward the end of that last session. We have many options for how we might accomplish this. I want to focus on two.

The first we're calling a foodshed lands program. In collaboration with community-owned land trusts and land banks, we develop a non-market farmland acquisition program in peri-urban areas of every province to ensure that class one and two farmland is available for food production at rental and lease rates aligned with the land's food production value. Therefore, farmers who produce food for sale in a nearby city with low-emissions production methods that protect water quality and biodiversity would be provided secure tenure on these lands.

This fund would buy three billion dollars' worth of farmland annually. This would promote long-term food security and rural livelihoods, and it would prevent our best farmland from becoming urban sprawl or highways. Look at it like this: Prudent and forward-thinking municipalities protect their drinking water sources through watershed protection. This program would protect the long-term agricultural value of our municipality's foodshed lands.

The second suggestion here is an income stability supplement. Income stability is the single biggest challenge to new farmers as they start their new business or take over an existing farm operation. An income stability supplement would allow younger people to commit to farming in a manner that bridges the seasonal income gap or reverses the trend of aging farmers, and perhaps reduces the need for off-farm employment as a survival strategy.

With a guarantee of stable income year-round, farmers would be more able to invest in their own infrastructure, improve their production equipment and practices, and potentially hire staff and create jobs. This supplement could also allow for farmers to make more ecological improvements to their farm production methods to improve biodiversity and adapt to a changing climate.

While an income supplement for new farms would not directly address high farmland prices, it would make it easier for young and new farmers to take on the risk of farmland ownership and possibly slow the rate at which farmland is being bought by foreign investors. It would also help new farmers develop viable businesses. The guarantee of a consistent cash flow would encourage them to spend in their communities, circulating cash through the local rural economy.

In the future, an expanded income supplement for all farmers could also reduce the pressure on older farmers to sell their land—since their biggest retirement asset is often their land—and open up new avenues [Technical difficulty—Editor] for both new and retiring farmers. Along with the young farmers, we strongly recommend that the project be designed to encourage participation from women, visible minorities, indigenous peoples and persons with disabilities.

Programs like the two I've discussed here would directly address the biggest challenges we face in addressing the intergenerational transfer of farms and ensuring sustainable farming communities in this country.

Thank you.