Agriculture Committee on June 5th, 2023

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lehoux and Mr. Fréchette.

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

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank my witness colleagues. I called them “my colleagues” because I've previously had a chance to work with them.

I'll start with you, Mr. Roy.

You mentioned that there was work to do. We discussed this in this committee a few years ago. That was more than five years ago, and there's still no plan. However, things seem to be moving. It's obviously still possible to prepare better.

I'd like to discuss border measures. Our Ontario colleague said that animal feed should be screened. We have to determine whether we need to put more measures in place or ensure that there is free trade at the border, knowing that it's impossible to screen everything that enters the country.

As far as you know, are there any technologies that we could use to avoid undermining free trade between the United States and Canada?

[René Roy]

When there's an effective system of penalties at the border, you don't need to monitor all goods there. That makes it possible to stop a lot more goods from entering. It's a tool that's available to us, but we also need to promote that penalty system. When tourists or other individuals who enter the country are aware of the system, that relieves the pressure of the disease on our country.

There's a lot of cooperation between the industry and governments, both federal and provincial. If you're interested, we could discuss the animal health issue.

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

Thank you very much.

Many measures have been prepared to prevent African swine fever. I'm trying to understand how you view the situation. If something happened on the farm of one of your producers, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency would intervene, wouldn't it?

[René Roy]

Yes, that's correct.

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

All right.

That disease isn't limited to pigs raised in Canada. There are also wild pigs living in the woods or in nature. Who would be responsible if the disease occurred in those natural environments? You can take action on the farm, but you have to deal with another authority at some point.

Do you think the various authorities are engaged in productive exchanges?

[René Roy]

Yes, but efforts have to continue in that direction. With your permission, I would ask Ms. McElwain to explain the cooperative work that Animal Health Canada has been doing in recent years.

[Colleen McElwain, Executive Director, Animal Health Canada]

Thanks, René.

When it comes to wild pigs, we have a 10-year strategy. It has recently been accepted as a final draft. We say draft, because there is an indigenous engagement component we need to undertake, as well.

The reason we came up with the strategy was to create a wild pig leadership group. This would be a multi-partner wild pig group to provide guidance on the regional expertise, because, certainly, when you think about wild pigs, it becomes an environmental consideration. There are many partners working together with the provincial pork organizations, as well as at the provincial government level.

We also work with the Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative and the Canadian Council on Invasive Species as a part of this work. They help us as we're building those relationships. Certainly, Animal Health Canada comes from a bit more of an egg background. We're leveraging those different relationships to begin to look at how we eradicate...how we correctly determine the distribution of wild pigs, because if they are found in wildlife, it is still a foreign animal disease.

The CFIA would have some response component for that, but when it comes to containment—and all of the other activities that go with ASF if it were to be found in a Canadian wild pig, or a commercial pig—there would be very large trade ramifications, as my colleagues have mentioned.

It's definitely a collaborative effort. It will take a while to fully get the information on exactly where all the wild pigs are in the provinces where we know we have them. We know some do not. We are also looking at mapping activities, sharing more information, and really moving forward on best practices for eradication over the next 10 years.

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

From your experience dealing.... Obviously, we're talking about ASF, but with other diseases that have come to Canada, and the role you're now playing and played before, do you find you're creating those links between those organizations or government bodies that may not necessarily be used to talking to one another?

[Colleen McElwain]

Yes, I would definitely say the multipartner approach that Animal Health Canada takes working with federal, provincial and territorial governments, as well as with industry partners, is something that takes a different approach. This is because it allows each partner to bring its plans and concerns forward for discussion in a collaborative way, so it helps to break down silos. It also helps to identify areas of duplication and gaps, and areas where there might be some more synergy that can happen. Certainly, the model lends itself to this kind of scenario.

If we were to have a disease other than.... We focus a lot on African swine fever, but other diseases could potentially present just as big a risk, such as something like foot-and-mouth disease. There are also endemic diseases that are out in the wildlife populations—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

[Colleen McElwain]

There are other parasites too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Ms. McElwain. I was trying to let you finish, but I want to be mindful of time.

Thank you, Mr. Drouin.

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

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being with us, both in person and virtually. We're grateful to you for that.

Mr. Roy, you spoke at length about the importance of prevention funding.

Ms. Cameron, you discussed the traceability system in place, but it reports at seven-day intervals. You say that the process should be much quicker and that it requires considerable investment.

If you had to make a recommendation to the government on that, what would it be with regard to investment? You may find it hard to cite amounts, but your recommendation could focus on permanent funding, for example, which would allow for something consistent that would operate over the long term.

[René Roy]

Yes, long-term programming would enable the industry to structure itself more effectively and to deal with the various crises.

Funding for initiatives is currently granted on a five-year cycle. However, that means that, every five years, we don't know whether it'll be renewed. For monitoring, for example, it shouldn't be limited to five years. A long-term perspective should be adopted. That kind of effort would benefit both the industry and the entire population. We must have financial support from the government in order to apply this over the long term.

Would you like to add a comment, Ms. Cameron?

[Audrey Cameron]

With respect to tools, we have the traceability tool. What we currently need is a toolbox. We're trying to develop as many tools as possible, and we could develop many more. We really need support in order to do so. I could talk at length about compartmentalization, a subject that Mr. Bertinotti discussed earlier. That's all I can say for the moment.

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

We unfortunately don't have a lot of time, but take it if necessary.

Are you able to manage those investments as an industry? Do you view that as a decentralization?

I'd also like to know how the five-year funding cycle works. Who manages that money? Do you think it's realistic given the various changes of government?

There should be something permanent, which would be somewhat contrary to the policy.

I'd like to hear your observations on that.

[René Roy]

Yes, getting funding outside the political cycle would afford the industry greater predictability. When we go and see our members to raise funds, we're seeking funding for the long term, not just for a few months.

We're seeking a broader form of cooperation, such as a coalition. The processors, for example, help us with certain initiatives.

It would be much easier to manage funding if we could rely on a partnership with the government. If we know we have long-term funding, we'll be able to rally all our members and go after additional funding from the industry.

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

Thank you, that's much clearer for me.

Mr. Bertinotti, you said something that interested me. You said that the rules regarding the disease have more negative consequences than the disease itself.

Would you please explain to us what you mean and what we could do to improve matters? Do you have a recommendation to make in this regard?

[Raphael Bertinotti]

Since African swine fever is a reportable disease, when a case is reported, the borders are closed to export. Since we export a lot, that means we have to euthanize our healthy animals.

The fact that ASF is classified as a reportable disease puts us in quite an unusual situation globally. Diseases are classified in that category because they have a significant, even dramatic, social and economic impact, but here it's the fact that it's considered a reportable disease that amplifies the economic and social impact on our country because we export a lot.

I have two recommendations to address that. First, we must have effective zoning and compartmentalization agreements, somewhat like those of the Europeans. We met with the Danish about six months ago. They're exporters, but they never consider euthanizing healthy animals, simply because they have agreements that are based on European treaties. Under those agreements, if one case is reported from one day to the next, once they've circumscribed the zone, they can continue exporting to other European countries. This is similar to the principle of communicating vessels. However, it's not at all what we have in North America under our free trade agreement with United States and Mexico.

Second, we could consider removing African swine fever from the list of reportable diseases. However, I think that would be hard to negotiate internationally.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much, Mr. Perron and Mr. Bertinotti. Time is unfortunately up.

Mr. Johns, go ahead for six minutes.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

First, it's great to be able to join such an esteemed committee. I think you have gotten over a half dozen reports done. I come from OGGO, where we haven't completed a single study in two years. It's really good to be at a functioning committee.

I'm subbing for my good friend Alistair MacGregor, who's trapped at an airport, trying to make his way to Ottawa. It's been 24 hours so far in his journey. This is what it's like as Vancouver Island MPs, of which I am one. It can be quite difficult to get here.

It's an honour to be able to be here. This is such an interesting study. I want to thank all the witnesses for participating.

I'll start with an Animal Justice report that mentions a large number of biosecurity breaches that have occurred as a result of authorized personnel on farms. All it takes, I guess, is for one farm to make a mistake, and then we can get contamination to other farms.

I'm just going to read a quote from our critic, Mr. MacGregor, on the second reading on Bill C-275. He said:

...there is an Animal Justice report from 2021 that lists hundreds of incidents of failures of biosecurity that were all by authorized personnel associated with the afflicted farms. I will repeat that. All of those incidents came from people who were on the property with lawful authority and excuse. I want to quote from that report:

“Despite the risk to farms, animals, and the economy posed by disease outbreaks, biosecurity on farms is not comprehensively regulated at the federal level. The CFIA publishes voluntary biosecurity guidelines for some animal farming sectors, developed in cooperation with industry and government. Adherence to these standards is not a legal requirement. Provincial legislation varies, and tends to empower officials to respond to existing biosecurity hazards instead of prescribing rules that farmers must follow to prevent disease outbreaks.”

Maybe I'll start with Mr. Roy and Ms. Cameron.

In 2019, Canada exported over 1.2 million tonnes of pork and pork products, valued at $4.2 billion, to 94 countries.

Do farms need stronger regulation? Are the voluntary regulations enough when a multi-billion dollar industry is potentially at risk? Maybe you can speak to whether there should be a legal requirement.

[René Roy]

Our industry has no interest in having outbreaks. Let's say authorized personnel who enter and create some disease outbreaks are people doing their best to make sure these animals are healthy. Regulations on something that everybody wishes for would not help the situation. If you give a fine to somebody who is doing their best to keep everybody safe, it wouldn't help the situation.

There are tools that could be useful. For example, better understanding of where these diseases come from through research and also the promotion of best management practices would be useful.

Additional regulation would not bring a lot of efficiency in these circumstances.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. de Bruyn or Ms. Terpstra, do you have anything to add to Mr. Roy's comments and feedback?