Agriculture Committee on Dec. 7th, 2022

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Mr. Forbes, I want to ask again about the clean technology program. You have the research and innovation stream and the adoption stream. In your department, you're trying to quantify the number of emissions we're trying to reduce for dollars spent.

In the department's experience, what has shown to have the most promise in the adoption stream? How are farmers making the most progress? What specific technologies are really helping them in this effort?

[Chris Forbes]

I'd say it's still early days in this program. When people were making applications, we certainly looked at the expected emissions reduction. I think some of it will be seeing what we get. We'll get more information as time goes on.

We've obviously done lot in the grain drying area. Biodigesters have been a popular item as well for people with animals. We've seen a range of projects. I think the real test over time is going to be building up more experience and understanding what works and what the outcomes are.

We're a little over a year into the program at this stage, so it's a bit early to check outcomes.

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

Better research into biodigesters and grain drying is promising. Would you say those are the two that are leading programs for the research element?

[Chris Forbes]

Those are the big ones on adoption for sure, because that technology is current and well known.

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

They're current, but I guess there's always room for improvement.

[Chris Forbes]

Yes. The costs may be barriers or they're newer technologies. In the research stream, I don't have projects with me, but those would be moving us forward in newer technologies.

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

Next month will be two years since the review of the Canada Grain Act was launched. I know I tend to ask you this every time you appear before our committee, but I regularly have conversations with the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, and that's just one of their things. They're wondering where it's at.

During the consultation phase, how much money did your department allocate to ensure that there was broad enough consultation? What resources did you dedicate to that? Where are we now, and what can we expect in the future?

[Chris Forbes]

In terms of the consultation, I wouldn't have a specific dollar amount, because we tend not to break it down that way, but one of our goals in any consultation we do—and I think we would have achieved it on the Grain Act—is that we try to be broad in terms of the options we present people.

There is regional diversity, but also different ways of engaging. Whether they're written submissions, Zoom meetings or in-person meetings, we try to find multiple ways to reach out to stakeholders. We also give them time, because there are points in the year when it's not really a good time to talk to producers, so we try to be as broad as we possibly can in terms of finding effective and simple ways for those engagements to happen.

On the results themselves, as you know, we published a “what we heard” report. I would say that the internal reflection on that, thinking about the possible ways forward and how the government will proceed, is still ongoing, but I would imagine that will happen in due course.

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

I know you can't answer questions about if or when legislation could come, but can you quickly summarize whether there was a lot of call for the legislation to be amended? Was that a high priority, or did a lot of people think more of a regulatory approach under the act's provisions?

[Chris Forbes]

I think the way I would characterize it is that stakeholders look at the issue as opposed to whether it's a legislative or a regulatory change. You get questions about the inspection regime, the science or producer protection. All of these issues come up, and I think we have to look at that package.

With anything like that, there is then a question about whether it's a regulatory package, the way the Canadian Grain Commission is operating, or legislation, or some mix of the three.

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

I also had a meeting with Soy Canada. They were noting that our competitors have invested pretty significantly around the world, and I believe our soy bean research cluster is going to expire in March 2023. Can you tell us a little bit about post-March 2023 in that area?

[Chris Forbes]

All of our agriscience research clusters under the Canadian agricultural partnership will expire in March, and we've been working with stakeholders in all of the current clusters and with others as we get ready for the new sustainable agricultural partnership that will launch next April.

We're in engagement with them, and certainly the expectation is that—I can't speak to precise dollar amounts or projects—the cluster program is going to continue. It's been a very successful one, and we think it's quite popular with stakeholders. We have lots of private partner investment in research priorities, so that program will still be there.

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

For that sector specifically, is the research showing promise in growing better crops with better yield, or is it also in what soybeans can be used for?

[Chris Forbes]

I'd have to look, quite honestly, at what's in the specifics of the soy cluster, Mr. MacGregor. We found generally that, as you point out, productivity is key for producers. For most of the clusters, there's an aspect that it's productivity. It's yield and disease resistance and tolerance, or pest resistance and tolerance.

Certainly we do occasionally get issues around the quality. Questions come up as well about how to improve certain attributes of the product. Those would be classically or traditionally what we would see in the cluster in the group of projects that soy or any other commodity would have through the cluster program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

We'll now go to the Conservatives.

I think Mr. Barlow is going to lead us off.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks. I'm going to split my time with Mr. Steinley.

I have a couple of quick questions.

We did talk about the gene-editing framework that was there. I know this was signed off on by Health Canada in May. We are now eight months past that. Most of our trading partners, including the United States, already have this framework in place. The minister did mention that more research on her side has to be done.

You do have the support of Health Canada in signing off on this. We thought the novel food side would be the holdup, but this is on the biosecurity and on the animal side.

What is the holdup and what is the timeline in getting this framework completed and signed off?

[Chris Forbes]

As the minister said, I don't think it's research per se. The way I'd put it is that the work has largely been done from CFIA on how to update the guidelines. I think the question that has been raised by the organic sector is how this matches with their needs and their approach to certifying organic products.

There are ongoing discussions on how to move forward and, as the minister said, to support the innovation that we need, which this tool can provide. It's to support us with all the challenges we face, while at the same time meeting the needs of the certification or standards of the organic sector. I think she said that's a priority and something that's on the front burner.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Yes, and I do appreciate, Mr. Forbes, that you do understand how important this is and how critical it is for innovation and technology. It's nothing against the organic side, but the rest of the industry is waiting for this to be moved forward. Certainly it would be good if you could address their concerns, but the greater good is an issue here, and I appreciate it.

I will move on to Mr. Morel, and maybe, Chris, this is for you as well.

On the P.E.I. potato issue, farmers have received about $4.2 million in compensation from CFIA in lost sales. However, we know that the estimated loss on seed sales are probably more than $10 million.

The federal government announced that as much as $28 million in funding was available for P.E.I. potatoes. Do you know how much of that $28 million has been allocated or accessed?

[Chris Forbes]

I don't have the precise number, but I would say the vast majority—$21 million—has been allocated so far.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Maybe Mr. Morel could answer this really quick one.

I've also heard from P.E.I. farmers that for other vegetables—carrots, onions and turnips—CFIA is not giving them export certification due to soil concerns. Is that factual?

[Philippe Morel]

That's correct. We're managing the potato wart, the pests and the soil that could be on vegetables. If it is and they're not washed, they need to have the same kind of process as potatoes. It's not only for potatoes.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Is this a new protocol?

[Philippe Morel]

No, it's the same. Those industries are way less impacted because they already had the process in place to clean and remove the soil. That's why we heard less of them.

Just to correct you regarding compensation, up until now we have spent more than $6 million in compensation to 33 growers for seed potatoes that were destroyed.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks.

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

I have a few rapid-fire questions.

Would you be able to bring a breakdown of the 8% of agriculture emissions to this committee so we could see what sectors of agriculture are emitting a certain percentage?