Agriculture Committee on May 19th, 2022

[Paul Samson]

Yes, there will certainly be other factors in play, because the approach is one of flexibility for provinces to design their approaches, and in some cases other environmental priorities will absolutely be part of it.

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

Perfect.

Carrying on, business risk management programs are a big part of the next policy framework, and our committee has done a study on them.

What has the department learned, particularly in the context of climate disasters? What's the main feedback you've been getting from farmers on how BRM programs have or have not worked?

Knowing that extreme weather events are going to be more common in the future, where's the discussion headed on how BRMs might have to be tweaked in order to properly respond to the challenges that are inherent in 21st century agriculture, particularly in the context of climate change?

[Paul Samson]

The business risk management suite is designed to have a holistic approach to the kinds of risks that were noted. There's an AgriInsurance component, which provides a form of crop insurance. There's AgriStability, which responds to income loss or other shocks to the system. There's AgriRecovery, which was the tool used to respond to drought and flood. There's AgriInvest, which is essentially a matching fund for producers to use to draw quick liquidity.

We're looking at all of those to identify the best response, and there is certainly a recognition the system is evolving in terms of the types of risks and frequency, so that is very much a factor in terms of assessing all of those programs and making adjustments.

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

I think it was in 2019 that I had the opportunity to go to the Okanagan and visit AAFC's Summerland Research and Development Centre. The scientists there were so very kind in giving us a tour and explaining a bit about the important work they were doing.

One of the shocking things I found out, though, was the number of novel pests and diseases we import every year. Could you inform the committee what kinds of trends we are seeing? Is the danger from novel pests coming into Canada increasing? How are you coordinating with other departments, both in detection and isolation, so that vast sectors of our agricultural economy are not affected in a negative way?

[Paul Samson]

I'll first offer a comment and then turn to colleagues from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency who may wish to add something, because it's a critical issue for them.

Clearly we are operating in a more globalized setting in terms of trade and the movement of people and things, so there have been some increased risks of transmission. I would just note that by way of a broad context.

Sylvie or Philippe, would you like to comment on the CFIA's assessment on this situation?

[Philippe Morel, Vice-President, Operations, Canadian Food Inspection Agency]

Thank you. Yes, we can certainly add to this.

It's a very important activity for us at ports of entry to look for new species or new diseases that can come with some imported products. I can give you the example of wood imports coming in with certain species that are not welcome. The Asian moth in the west is one of them that we have to destroy.

It takes many years to track and destroy and contain these to an area where we can get rid of those invasive species that can be very costly for our economy. The identification, prevention and destruction of those species are key to support the economy and to make sure that they don't get into areas where we don't want them to be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor. Thank you, Mr. Morel.

Colleagues, here's how we're going to play this: We are going to go for a 15-minute round of five minutes for the Conservatives, five minutes for the Liberals, and two and a half each for the Bloc and NDP. I'm going to exercise one question, because I enjoy asking them. Then we're going to go to estimates and we'll be done for the day.

Mr. Barlow, you have five minutes.

[John Barlow]

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I may split my time with my colleagues here. I'll see how fast I can get through.

This is for the CFIA. The avian influenza certainly is a huge issue for chicken producers across the country. In Alberta, we've had some producers who've been waiting for up to two weeks for CFIA to come on farm to depopulate. My understanding is that this should be done within 36 hours to contain the spread of the flu. It is obviously a big concern if we're waiting for up to two weeks.

What steps has CFIA been taking to try to address this situation to ensure we can contain this outbreak?

[Philippe Morel]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question of the member.

The first thing we have to do when there's an outbreak of avian influenza is to make sure that the birds are contained and don't move. That is usually done after we receive an indication that the disease could be present on the farm. Usually, it's done when either a local veterinarian or a farmer notices a large number of animals that are sick or dying—

[John Barlow]

Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. Morel. I'm sorry, but I have only a limited amount of time.

Is CFIA taking some steps now, seeing as some producers are waiting up to two weeks for CFIA to come on farm to do the depopulation? Are there some concrete steps being taken to address that situation?

[Philippe Morel]

At the moment, right now we have close to 700 of our employees, which is more 10% of the agency, deployed to specific sites. We have 89 sites that are active at the moment, so we go by priority, but we make sure first that the biosecurity is there, that the birds are not moving, and as fast as we can go, we have more people deploying to every site to make sure they don't wait too long.

[John Barlow]

Thanks.

Mr. Samson, my next question is for you.

I've been speaking with potato producers in P.E.I. They've now been told that the disaster funding they received as a result of the export ban is now going to be considered income and could have a pretty profound impact on their AgriStability. Is that true?

I just want to make sure that this is truly the case. If it is, what impact would that have on their AgriStability, not only for this season but potentially for years to come?

[Paul Samson]

Thanks, Chair, for the question.

Typically, most Government of Canada programs—I think the vast majority—are counted as income when received, so therefore, if there's another program that comes later, as in the case of AgriStability, it will count that previous program payment as income.

This happens quite regularly with the AgriStability program. It's not a big disruption if a producer has had a very significant loss that year. That kind of program support should not crowd out in a significant way the other support that would be received. It's done in a balanced manner.

[John Barlow]

Thanks.

I'll turn it over to Mr. Epp.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

The Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act exempted on-farm gasoline and diesel. Greenhouses received an 80% exemption, but mushrooms nothing. Bill C-8 obviously is proposing a rebate, and Bill C-234 is proposing an exemption. In broad strokes, can you comment on the impact between the three different processes for mushrooms and for the greenhouse industry?

[Paul Samson]

Chair, I thank the member for the question.

I wouldn't really be able to comment on the dynamics of the difference between those three. We can certainly give you something in writing if you'd like an answer to that question.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

I would very much appreciate that. Thank you.

I've been hearing a lot of concerns from the industry that there's the potential for pulling agriculture out of the temporary worker program and putting it into some form of its own stand-alone. They're concerned that perhaps ESDC does not fully understand the importance of the seasonal agriculture worker program. What kind of representations are you making over to EDSC on the seasonal agriculture program and its component as a stand-alone entity?

[Paul Samson]

There is a very close relationship between the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food and ESDC, and certainly on this program. I think they understand the importance of the agriculture sector, particularly coming out of COVID-19 and the food security issues that have arisen. We are arguing strongly for the strong recognition of that group of workers coming in and are not sensing that there's a disconnect, if I can put it that way. I think we're well positioned.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. Epp and Mr. Samson. That's time, unfortunately.

Ms. Valdez, you have five minutes.

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you, Chair. I'll be sharing my time with my colleague from Whitby.

Again, thank you to the witnesses.

Mr. Samson, we touched on this earlier, but I want to see if you can comment on the situation in Ukraine as it pertains to the way in which it's impacting Canadian fertilizer. Is there anything we can do to mitigate the risk and produce fertilizer locally?

[Paul Samson]

The way that fertilizer is organized, let's say, in Canada is really quite different depending on the region. The western part of Canada is completely self-sufficient in fertilizer, both the nitrogen fertilizer and the potash, which is a huge export for Canada. There's a regional difference. The outbreak of the war in Ukraine highlighted that eastern Canada imports nitrogen fertilizer into the country, and a little bit over 30% of their fertilizer comes in that way.

I'm pleased to announce that the last of the fertilizer-laden Russian vessels that were coming to the eastern part of Canada were approved to come in. Those did come in as planned this year. Companies are now positioning to not use Russian fertilizer going forward, because there are a lot of other options. As the member noted, there are also plans being looked at as to how we could increase production in the eastern part of Canada or transport additional fertilizer from the western part of the country.

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

I'll hand it over to my colleague.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Again, Mr. Samson, thank you for all your answers here.

I'm interested in asking a few questions about the new agricultural policy framework. I've looked at the Guelph statement. I'm very happy with it. I just wanted to ask you and confirm this from your perspective: Did that work really outline the fact that the new agricultural policy framework will be centred on a sustainable development lens in terms of how it approaches agricultural policy for the next five years?

[Paul Samson]

Chair, I'd like to thank the member for the question.

The framework, just to remind members, is a $3-billion framework that is coming to its renewal next year. What's being negotiated right now is the next five years, starting in 2023. The lens is to drive sustainability, innovation, economic growth and competitiveness. All of those are important, but we've elevated in the conversation, as the member noted, through the Guelph statement, a focus for additional work on sustainability. That's where the budget announced $150 million of new money for the resilience agriculture and landscapes program, as an example of that direction.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you.

I'm wondering where we are in terms of the process. How close are we, and where are we, in terms of consultations and conversations with provinces and territories? I'm assuming that they are part of that process, and a pretty essential part.