Evidence of meeting #32 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 fertilizer.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Doug MacDonald  Chief Marketing Officer, Canadian National Railway Company
Peggy Brekveld  President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture
Martin Caron  General President, Union des producteurs agricoles
Ted Menzies  As an Individual
Russel Hurst  Executive Director, Ontario Agri Business Association
William Greuel  Chief Executive Officer, Protein Industries Canada

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

Thank you very much.

Mr. MacGregor, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For my last question, I'll turn to the OFA and to Ms. Brekveld again.

Food prices are a big topic these days. Staying on the theme of food security within Canada, we know that we're very lucky to be living in a country that produces far more food than its own citizens can consume, but we also know that across the entire food supply chain, fully a third of food ends up wasted. That's a pretty significant amount. I know previously the government has brought in the food waste reduction challenge and stuff like that. If you look at the stats, they show we still have a major problem on our hands.

If we have fully a third of our production along the entire supply chain ending up in waste and not getting to people who need it, does the OFA have any recommendations on what you would like to see the federal government do to meet this challenge and help farmers in addressing this issue and making sure that people who are from day to day wondering where their next healthy meal is going to come from...?

If you have any thoughts to add, they would be appreciated.

6 p.m.

President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture

Peggy Brekveld

I think COVID highlighted the fact that there were challenges throughout the process line. I think it also highlights ways that we could certainly improve the process and reduce waste.

We need to ensure at the farm gate we have the ability to have enough people on our farms to harvest the crop to make sure that it gets in and to make sure that it can get out. We need enough truck drivers and healthy transportation lines to bring that product to consumers. At the consumer level, we need the right ways to ensure that the products can be consumed or purchased before the best-before date.

Beyond that, we have to ensure that consumers understand the best way to utilize the food that they purchased before it is a waste.

There are pieces along the whole chain that certainly could be improved and ways that government can help inform and improve it and benefit all consumers. If we have a healthy food chain, we will have less waste and more people able to purchase food.

6 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

That's a great way to finish on our first panel.

Thank you, Ms. Brekveld. Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

Thank you, Mr. Tougas and Mr. Caron.

Thank you here in the room, Mr. MacDonald. Thank you to all of you for your collective work in agriculture and the transportation that moves agriculture products.

Colleagues, don't go far. We have a great second panel. We do have a hard stop at 7:00, so I want to get this meeting started again as soon as possible.

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

I call this meeting back to order.

Thank you for the quick turnaround. We have the second panel. We're going to get started. We have three really good witnesses here today.

First of all, we have the Honourable Ted Menzies. I have a lot of similarities to Mr. Barlow because of his predecessor. I'm sure they said it was very difficult to fill Mr. Menzies' shoes, and for me, it was Scott Brison's.

Ted, it's great to see you here. Thank you for your work as a parliamentarian, and thank you for what I know will be an informed discussion today about the ways in which we can help propel agriculture in the days ahead.

We also have Russel Hurst, who is joining from the Ontario Agri Business Association. Mr. Hurst is joining us online. Thank you for being here.

From Protein Industries Canada, we have William Greuel. I know him as Bill. Bill, thank you for your work in helping to drive plant protein research and opportunities not only across Canada but particularly in the western provinces.

With that, we're going to get right to it. I have Mr. Menzies for up to five minutes for opening remarks, and then we're going to turn to questions.

It's over to you, Mr. Menzies.

6:05 p.m.

Ted Menzies As an Individual

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, let me express my appreciation for this committee's work and efforts on an increasingly crucial issue, which is food security.

You have heard from many experts already, and they have provided some very credible and compelling facts and advice, so please allow me to provide some personal viewpoints and experiences from a Canadian farmer's perspective. I will share some sustainable food production methods and outcomes.

My wife and I spent 30 years actively growing field crops, starting with mostly wheat and barley and then evolving to rotations that help offset disease and pest challenges and help increase the sustainability of the soil. Those included oilseeds, pulse crops, legumes, varied winter and spring crops, and even spice crops. Our farm lies within the geographic prairie triangle that was famously reported by explorer John Palliser to be unsuitable for crops.

Over the years, we adapted and improved our methods, our varieties and our equipment. This year, for example, barley on our home farm with rainfall of eight inches, or 20 centimetres—which is about one-third of the Canadian average rainfall—averaged 99 bushels per acre or six tonnes per hectare. That's more than we've ever grown before. That's double the yield of 40 years ago.

There are many factors that have improved both yield and quality through research, such as improved varieties for drought tolerance, shorter season maturity, in-plant pest deterrents, timed-release nutrients and improved photosynthesis.

The use of satellite technology for data collection, GPS guidance and sectional equipment control have all enhanced efficiency and sustainability. Producers can grow more with less. This is good news for the grower, good for the consumer and good for the environment.

Never forget that sustainability has two fundamental components—environmental and economic. Many countries provide a stark example of not considering both. The EU's nonsensical farm-to-fork strategy has proven actually to reduce food. Sri Lanka's failed organic experiment that caused immediate mass starvation was and still is devastating.

The full-bellied activists want all food to be grown under the guise of regenerative agriculture, a term for which no two people could offer a similar definition. I would invite these activists, who have not set foot on a farm in search of knowledge, to explain to a mother in Kenya, Ethiopia or Somalia growing cassava to feed her hungry family that she should not nurture her crop with fertilizer or protect it from pests and diseases with approved safe chemistries. I was privileged to observe agriculture in Africa that used primitive agrarian practices. Subsistence farming is not sustainable, either for the soil or for food supply.

Why do I give these comparisons? It's because governments tend to listen to loud activists who care less for those who go hungry than they do for their unscientific research gleaned from their own Internet algorithms. They claim we would all be better off growing less food and using less crop protection, but they fail to understand the harm this would cause to the air, water and soil through organic practices that require increased tillage, which causes soil erosion, and organic pesticides, many of which are more harmful to nature than are those approved by certified regulatory bodies. The result is substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from excess field equipment passes.

Many of Canada's food-producing regions benefit from a changing climate, but along with that comes the moral responsibility to help feed those who are negatively impacted by a changing climate, and shame on us if we don't, or if we are not allowed to, step up to that responsibility.

Canada's farmers and ranchers stand ready to do that.

Several witnesses have shared how the war in Ukraine has created serious food insecurity in regions with the fewest available options. They all need our support.

In Canada, we produce more food and continue to do so, but beware of reckless theories, such as a blanket reduction of nitrogen fertilizer use as an attempt to reduce emissions, with no understanding that actions already taken by farmers have accomplished more to reduce emissions through practical methods that don't limit food production.

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

Mr. Menzies, I apologize. I gave you an extra 20 or 30 seconds. We are at time, but I know that you'll be able to continue your thoughts and your testimony because all of us will want to engage.

I'm going to now turn to Mr. Hurst for up to five minutes, please.

6:10 p.m.

Russel Hurst Executive Director, Ontario Agri Business Association

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Russel Hurst. I serve as the executive director of the Ontario Agri Business Association, which is based in Guelph. We represent companies that range from single owner-operators to large multinationals that operate country and terminal grain elevators, livestock feed mills and crop input facilities operating out of approximately 500 locations throughout the province.

In terms of our sector's economic impact, on an annual basis we generate in excess of $16 billion in sales, employ over 30,000 employees and contribute over $4 billion in value-added GDP annually.

Ontario agribusiness members are on the front lines, helping Ontario farmers grow stronger, healthier crops and livestock through the utilization of cutting-edge innovation, implementing established best practices, supplying quality products that increase crop yields and quality, and producing healthy and productive livestock, all while focused on ensuring that our precious environmental resources are enhanced for the next generation.

In respect of recommendations on how this government can improve Canadian exports on the global stage, we view this as an opportunity with two distinct areas of focus. The first is to enable Canadian farmers and the suppliers who support them with the business predictability and access to innovations that allow them to produce food that is desperately needed by the world's population. The second is to have domestic supply chain infrastructure and trade policy that supports the sector domestically and globally.

Our recommendations, Mr. Chair, are the following.

First, we need a predictable business environment that allows for agricultural products to be sourced globally for utilization on Canadian farms.

Eastern Canadian farmers have relied on nitrogen fertilizer imports from the Baltic and Black Sea regions for decades. We are very supportive of the Government of Canada's imposed economic sanctions on Russia as a result of the invasion of Ukraine, but we would prefer sanctions that do not negatively impact our domestic agricultural supply chain. Moving forward, our request is that the tariff be removed to allow our members, who import fertilizer and retail it to farmers, to best negotiate fertilizer imports within an incredibly competitive global marketplace. This will allow for business predictability and a degree of price stability.

Number two is domestic supply chain resiliency through increased value-added processing capacity.

We need a practical and predictable regulatory environment so that our members can make long-term investment plans. Supply chains must be resilient so that our products can get to and from farmer customers domestically. We can add value through further processing, and products can be shipped to both our domestic and global customers so that we can contribute to addressing the global hunger gap and play a leadership role in doing so.

Third, we need strategic investments in transportation infrastructure for this generation and the next.

Canada is a trading nation. A strong agribusiness economy needs to prioritize infrastructure investments in necessary road, rail, pipeline and water-based transportation hubs such as the port of Hamilton. Over 50% of the soybeans and 70% of the wheat grown in Ontario transition through that facility into the global marketplace. In short, the port of Hamilton and its highly efficient transportation corridor are vital to the economic viability of the agriculture sector in Ontario.

Fourth is to foster innovation and climate change resiliency.

Our sector has worked diligently to ensure farmers have both the economically and environmentally optimal amounts of fertilizer to grow their crops. Our members are not only experts in fertilizer products but also in innovative best management practices for fertilizer use. The 4R nutrient stewardship concept has been championed by industry, government, academia and farmers for well over a decade. Embracing 4R nutrient stewardship is the solution that both supports continuous improvement and respects nutrient utilization and environmental responsibility.

In conclusion, global food security is complex. In many cases, it incorporates both political and economic stability concerns. I commend the committee for exploring the role that the government can play in being a champion for Canadian agriculture.

Given the right tools, policy and trade environment, the Canadian agri-food industry is among the best and most resilient in the world. There is capacity to grow and export more. Our members have the ability to efficiently source inputs, provide technical expertise to farmers and export Canadian-grown crops to the world, given a predictable business environment that supports long-term growth.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I look forward to any questions the committee may have.

6:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

Thank you, Mr. Hurst.

We're now going to turn to Mr. Greuel for up to five minutes, and then we'll turn to questions.

6:15 p.m.

William Greuel Chief Executive Officer, Protein Industries Canada

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members, for having me here today.

As mentioned, my name is Bill Greuel; I'm CEO at Protein Industries Canada. We are one of Canada's five global innovation clusters and are working to accelerate innovation in Canada's plant-based food and ingredients sector. We're doing this by building off Canada's strong foundation that makes our agriculture and food sector one of the best in the world: farmland, an abundance and diverse variety of rain-fed crops, and people who are committed to bringing healthy food to the tables of Canadians and around the world.

Over the past four years, Protein Industries Canada, along with the sector, has invested almost half a billion dollars to advance plant-based ingredient processing and food manufacturing right here in Canada. This investment represents a Canadian-made solution to a global food challenge. As a global agriculture powerhouse, Canada has the means, resources and skill to turn crops into food and transform the way the world eats. With this innovation, we believe we are advancing solutions to some of humanity's greatest challenges, including climate change, human health and food security.

As you are all aware, we are facing global food production and distribution challenges at a scale that of many us have never experienced before. The lingering effect of fragile supply chains impacted by COVID-19, combined with climate change and global conflict, have led to food inflation and, in some cases, food shortages. Unfortunately, this is not a one-time event; we should expect food shortages to persist as climate change continues to impact our ability to not only grow food but transport it. This, layered with a growing global population, means that the number of food-insecure people will only increase.

There is no doubt that Canada has an important role to play in helping mitigate this crisis. To do so, I believe there are three main areas where Canada must focus its efforts to increase exports and help lessen global food insecurity.

First, we need to increase domestic ingredient processing capacity. With our strengths in the production of commodities, Canada can do more to support global and domestic food security by processing those crops here at home. Plant-based ingredients and food are a source of sustainable economic growth. Increasing processing allows Canada to seize more value here at home, creating jobs and capturing the economic value associated with food and ingredient processing, which is an estimated additional $25 billion per year and 17,000 jobs by 2035. It will also strengthen our own domestic food supply chain, minimizing our reliance on food import from other countries in a highly competitive global marketplace. It tempers the effects of non-tariff trade barriers that can disrupt the movement of commodities. Put simply, ingredients and food are less likely to become a part of a trade disagreement, meaning that they can continue to be exported to get into the hands of those who need them. Finally, processing and exporting ingredients will require more diversified transportation to lessen the agriculture sector's reliance on rail.

My second recommendation is the need for a regulatory climate that supports and rewards innovation. While Canada's regulatory system is key to our ability to deliver safe food, we can also use it to drive innovation. We need a regulatory system that is timely and predictable and more closely aligned with our key trading partners, such as the United States. This will allow for better flow of ingredients across the border and, ultimately, to other countries.

My final recommendation is that we need to do more to build Canada's international reputation as a supplier of reliable, nutritious, sustainable ingredients and food products. Historically, we have been focused on commodities, and we have a strong reputation as a supplier of bulk grain. However, we are in the middle of a food revolution, and Canada is at the forefront. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to become the preferred global supplier of plant-based foods and ingredients. To take full advantage of this opportunity, we need to tell our sustainability story and create the systems to define and defend our global brand.

I want to thank you for your time today and I look forward to any questions that the committee may have.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

Thank you very much, Mr. Greuel.

Colleagues, just for your knowledge, we're going to be a little bit tight on time. We'll definitely get the first panel in with the six minutes. I'll then go to the Liberals and Conservatives; it might even have to be a bit condensed. I'll do my best to get to the other parties, but Bloc and NDP members, please make sure that you exhaust all your questions in the six minutes in case I can't get back to you.

We're going to Mr. Barlow for six minutes.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Menzies, I would invite you to submit your opening remarks to the clerk, since you weren't able to finish them, so that we have those on the record.

I think some of your comments about our moral obligation to help feed the world resonate. I think part of that shows the importance of fertilizer, crop protection products, and certainly biotechnology and innovation, but I would argue that this government is starting to make some policy decisions based on politics and ideology rather than sound science, and that's hurting our reputation.

For example, can you speak about the government's decision to pause the review on the MRLs—the maximum residue limit—and the impact that might have on our ability to meet our commitments and on us as a trading partner?

6:20 p.m.

As an Individual

Ted Menzies

Thank you for that question, Mr. Barlow.

Just to clarify your question, the maximum residue limits are set up by an international body, and we have one of the most revered systems around the world as far as health protection goes in the CFIA, as well as in our Pest Management Regulatory Agency.

They have to do regular reviews, and we understand that. That's our commitment to other bodies around the world, but these are some of the safest products. The maximum residue limits, the numbers, are usually.... Using glyphosate as an example, you'd have to eat 8,000 tons of something that had been sprayed with glyphosate to have even a sore stomach. These are very health-conscious regulations, but there are concerns that they're not listening to the science, so we as farmers are very concerned.

As I mentioned in my comments, this is the way that we have stopped soil erosion and stopped a repeat of the dirty thirties. It's through these new technologies. Don't take them away.

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

I'm glad you spoke about the PMRA as well, and certainly I would caution the government that it is injecting politics into some of these decisions that should be science-based. For example, on the PMRA, they have now created a politically appointed advisory panel.

Just to quote from part of their mandate, they will insert themselves prior to “evidence-based” decisions on PMRA on pesticides. To me, that is saying that there's going to be a political decision before the science ever comes to fruition.

Do you know any other country that has a similar policy in place?

6:25 p.m.

As an Individual

Ted Menzies

I would certainly hope that there isn't one.

You folks sitting around this table.... I was one, and I was never an expert in every discussion that we had, whether it was on the floor of the chamber or wherever it was. We depend on scientists to give us that information. We can watch what we've gone through with COVID. We depended on science rather than our emotions. To have people who are not the scientific experts as a precedent is very concerning.

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Mr. Menzies, what would be the risks to Canadian agriculture, potentially, of politicizing departments like the PMRA in their decision-making, rather than ensuring that it is science-based and that politics are not a part of those decisions? What would be the impact if glyphosate decisions, for example, were based on politics and activism and not on sound science?

6:25 p.m.

As an Individual

Ted Menzies

Very bluntly, our credibility around the world.... Very simply, would they be so comfortable buying food from Canada if we had a partisan system of reviewing what was safe and what wasn't safe?

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Thank you.

At the end of your comments when you ran out of time, you were mentioning what the fertilizer emissions reduction policy is, for example. It doesn't bring into consideration the understanding of the steps that producers are already taking to ensure that they are not only environmentally efficient but also economically sustainable.

One of our colleagues was very adamant the other day that farmers aren't making these changes to innovation and technology unless they are being punished with carbon taxes or being forced to reduce emissions and usage of fertilizer through a regulation. Do you think that's a fair statement, or do you think farmers are doing everything they possibly can to innovate and embrace new technology when it becomes commercially viable and available?

6:25 p.m.

As an Individual

Ted Menzies

Have you looked at the price of fertilizer?

6:25 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

6:25 p.m.

As an Individual

Ted Menzies

Why would a farmer waste it?

As I mentioned, we've changed our processes. We use more fertilizer where there's a potential of a better crop. I've left 60 acres of my farm to wildlife because it was not good soil. I don't spend any money putting fertilizer on that. I put it on the good land.

You will have seen a report out of Brazil, where they're very concerned about next year's crops because, with the price of fertilizer, farmers have reduced their inputs. Brazil is a major food source for all of South America, so that is another concern simply because of the cost of fertilizer, and that's without a regulatory burden placed on top of it.

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

I'm out of time.

I want to mention your 40 acres. What will happen if you have to use less fertilizer is that you're going to try to force yourself to cultivate those 40 acres, which probably isn't good for agriculture. It is actually going to increase your emissions and use of fossil fuels.

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Kody Blois

Mr. Barlow, we'll have to leave it at that on an editorial note, but I know Mr. Menzies, if asked again, will be able to respond.

Mr. Drouin, you have six minutes.

October 19th, 2022 / 6:25 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Thank you. It's amazing what a market mechanism can do to change behaviour.

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

It's awful.