Agriculture Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2023

[Pierre Lampron]

Yes. These diseases are always frightening. So we have to have as many means as possible to try to counter them. I'm glad to hear about working with other countries. That's also very important.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lampron and Mr. Perron.

Mr. MacGregor, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Monsieur Lampron, you've had a preview of the question I am going to ask.

Just to make it clear, we have seen CFIA investigations where they have been looking at the cause of an outbreak on a farm and the biosecurity standards or guidelines on the farm were not followed. This has been documented. I know the guidelines are voluntary.

For an organization like yours that represents thousands of farmers, we're only strong if everyone is following them. I'm wondering if there's a role for the CFIA to get more involved in these voluntary guidelines, or does the CFA have a process by which, after an investigation, you get more involved with the farm in question?

I'm just thinking of our trying to be as prepared as possible and trying to prevent these outbreaks. If some farms are not pulling their weight while others are, I think that could be a very real disservice to their neighbours. You see what I'm trying to get at here.

[Pierre Lampron]

Thank you for the question, but we think it's better not to make it mandatory.

It takes information. People need to be aware of the biosecurity consequences and risks. That is what the associations representing each production are trying to communicate. I'm not sure we would get any better results by making it mandatory. It's mainly a matter of awareness and research, as we were saying earlier. It's important to know why people are doing this. You have a better chance of doing that by informing and educating people.

Even if it's mandatory, people won't necessarily do it. As we've seen on the ground, when people are well educated, they take good biosecurity measures. We have to give them information.

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

On that last point then, you're in favour of its remaining voluntary. Do you think then that the CFIA could just play a little bit of a better role in promoting what the guidelines are? Is there a gap in that?

Ultimately, is there a recommendation that we as a committee could make with respect to the CFIA's role on the voluntary guidelines? Does it need to be more active?

[Pierre Lampron]

Yes, I agree with that. We say we need more resources, and that's part of it. Each organization has its own responsibilities, and the responsibility of the CFIA needs to be better known. This must be part of the general information to be given to producers, and even to the public. They need to be told to pay attention to biosecurity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much, Mr. MacGregor.

Thank you, Mr. Lampron.

Folks, that brings us to the end of our first panel here this afternoon.

On behalf of the committee, I want to thank Mr. Joly, Mr. Lampron, Ms. Lockwood and Mr. Berrigan for jumping in and providing great testimony that I know will be helpful to the committee in its deliberations in the days ahead.

Colleagues, we're going to take a brief pause to get ourselves set up for the second panel. Please don't go far. We are a little bit behind, and I want to make sure that I can get you out of here slightly after 5:30.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I call the meeting back to order.

I would now like to welcome the second group of witnesses who are joining us by videoconference.

First, we have Jean‑Pierre Vaillancourt, full professor at the Université de Montréal. He'll be appearing as an individual. From the Canadian Animal Health Institute, we have Catherine Filejski, president and chief executive officer. Finally, we have Martin Pelletier, consultant for the Fédération des producteurs d'œufs du Québec.

Each witness will have five minutes.

Dr. Vaillancourt, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Dr. Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt, Full Professor, Université de Montréal, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will make my presentation in French, but I will answer questions in English when they come to me in that second language.

First of all, I would like to make a comment on backyard farms. It was said that backyard farms were a problem because they were a reservoir of a number of pathogens. However, research has shown that backyard farms aren't a major risk factor for avian influenza if there is no epidemiological link between the backyard farm and commercial farms. In France, research has been done that shows the opposite, that is to say that it is often the commercial farms that will infect the backyard farm, in terms of avian influenza.

I sent the committee a sheet containing a number of points, but I'll highlight just a few. The first is the need for standards for new construction, new farms. You can erect a new building 30, 50 or 60 metres from another on the same site, but in the case of a new farm, it's important not to erect a building next to an existing building, which would increase regional density.

Countries like Italy and Australia have measures in place, and that's what Canada lacks. We need a centralized computer system linking the provincial and federal laboratories. More or less, it's important to control these diseases, whether it's highly pathogenic avian influenza or African swine fever, among others. It's a question of communication and rapid intervention. That's why the information must be computerized and available to people, who can use it to react.

We also need data banks in Canada, not only for reportable diseases, but also for endemic diseases that we want to eradicate or limit as much as possible. These aren't reportable diseases, but it would be important for Canada to have these shared information banks.

We often talk about the “one health” approach, which involves a number of players, including the Public Health Agency of Canada. The people at the agency are very well-intentioned, but they aren't familiar with the animal industries. It's a problem. If a pathogen like H5N1 avian influenza becomes zoonotic, the agency has to be on the front line. The problem is that it often lacks the information it needs to make sound decisions. We really need to work on that. Between that agency and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, for example, industries need to work better together in the preparation of such zoonotic diseases.

We need to invest in technologies to increase compliance, which was mentioned by the people on the first panel. We're familiar with biosecurity measures, but a number of data from around the world show that there is a lack of compliance. We need to invest in technologies to increase that.

I was able to raise $126,000 U.S. The United States sought me out and asked me to invest in it. The same project didn't even go beyond the letter of intent stage in Canada. There's a gap. We need to find ways to increase compliance, because human nature is such that, in general, we don't always follow the rules.

There's an absence of structures to supervise non-quota commercial farms. That's a problem right now. We've seen it with the conversion of buildings used for hog farming to duck farming. It's a problem in the east and, in the west, we have colonies with different species in the same place. We really need to look at these factors, because they're important, not only for poultry, but for other animal species too.

The main problem will be to increase biosecurity on the farm and to have a regional perspective.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. Vaillancourt.

Now we will have Ms. Filejski, please.

It's over to you for up to five minutes.

[Dr. Catherine Filejski, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Animal Health Institute]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee members. My name is Catherine Filejski. I am both a licensed veterinarian and the current president and CEO of the Canadian Animal Health Institute, or the CAHI.

CAHI is the trade association that represents the developers, manufacturers and distributors of animal pharmaceuticals, biologics, feed additives, veterinary health products and animal pesticides. We are a national association serving as the trusted science-based voice of the Canadian animal health industry since our founding in 1968. Our full member companies are responsible for the sales of approximately 95% of Canada's animal health market.

Biosecurity plays a critical role in animal health management by preventing and controlling the spread of diseases. As a result, biosecurity preparedness is essential for the well-being of animals and Canadians alike. The availability of effective veterinary medicines, including vaccines, plays a key role in Canada's preparedness to deal with both foreign animal diseases and outbreaks of endemic diseases that have an impact on production.

The growing challenges of climate change, increased international trade and the emergence of new diseases are putting pressure on the Canadian animal health industry to safeguard the health of our flocks and herds, while still continuing to innovate and adapt to remain competitive in the global market.

The industry also faces many other challenges including its small size, representing just 10% of U.S. animal health sales and only 2.5% of the global animal health market. Given the substantially smaller size of our national flocks and herds, Canada is a lower-tier commercial market for veterinary medicines offering a lower return on investment than other jurisdictions.

A Canadian regulatory environment that is not adequately aligned with those of major animal health markets like the United States and the EU makes veterinary product development, introduction and maintenance in Canada increasingly difficult. When this lack of alignment is then paired with steep increases of up to 500% in regulatory fees for the licensing of veterinary pharmaceuticals, the result is both a loss of existing products from the market and a significant impediment to the entry of new innovative products into that market. We are already seeing the effects of this with a dramatic 40% decrease in the availability of licensed veterinary drugs on the Canadian market over the past five years.

COVID-19 highlighted for us the importance of drug and vaccine availability in Canada. Animal health, however, was out of the spotlight of direct pandemic response, and disruptions to international veterinary supply chains received little attention. Consequently, we have increased vulnerabilities in the system now, yet veterinary supply chain disruptions are consistently deemed to be a lower priority, despite the significant risks they pose to animal health, welfare and biosecurity.

Those vulnerabilities are at risk of being further exacerbated by other government policies such as those currently being developed to regulate the so-called forever chemicals—that is, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS. PFAS are used in a wide range of products and industries with active ingredients in drugs, both human and veterinary, accounting for about 5% of the total notified uses of PFAS since 1994.

In the animal health industry, PFAS are found not only in veterinary drugs but also in other medicines, medical equipment such as catheters and surgical devices, and personal protective equipment such as masks and gloves. They are also used in the production of pesticides and animal feed and are key components in manufacturing equipment, consumables, drug delivery devices and packaging.

Earlier this year, the federal government released a draft “state of PFAS” report for consultation, which set out the rationale for a class-wide ban on the use of all PFAS in Canada. A growing number of jurisdictions, including the EU and some states in the United States, are addressing or proposing to address PFAS broadly as a class. All those who have tackled that problem by implementing class-wide bans have also recognized the need to identify exemptions for essential or non-avoidable uses of PFAS, either at the outset of such initiatives or subsequent to the implementation of bans that proved to have unintended consequences. PFAS used in veterinary medicines need to be exempted as essential and/or unavoidable uses in any Canadian regulation going forward.

Canada's animal health industry plays a key role in biosecurity preparedness by providing the veterinary medicines that veterinarians and producers need to prevent, treat and control disease outbreaks. However, bringing products to market is just the first step, and the ability to maintain products on the market once they are registered here needs to be taken into consideration as the Canadian government looks to the future. If we are successfully going to prepare for and navigate emerging disease threats, ensuring the availability of veterinary medicines needs to become a government priority. We look forward to working with the federal government departments more closely in order to tackle the growing challenges that the animal health industry faces in Canada.

I thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the opportunity to put the animal health industry's perspectives on biosecurity preparedness before you today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much, Ms. Filejski.

We'll go to our last witness, Mr. Pelletier, for five minutes.

[Martin Pelletier, Consultant, Fédération des producteurs d'œufs du Québec]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, members of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

As the representative of the Fédération des producteurs d'œufs du Québec, I'll deliver my remarks in French, but I can answer your questions in English or French.

The federation represents about 200 egg producers and about 100 pullet growers whose farms are spread out across Quebec. The Quebec flock totals nearly six million laying hens that produce just under two billion eggs to meet the demand of consumers in Quebec.

The reason producers have been able to meet consumer demand is that they have kept their birds healthy over the years and have always made quality and biosecurity top priorities. They've developed strict, precise rules for egg production and storage. Over the past few years, they've also implemented programs to manage certain pathogens, such as salmonella, which can cause food poisoning. This was all done successfully in collaboration with Quebec's Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

We know various diseases can affect poultry, and some are worse than others. Each disease requires its own control or eradication strategy. To prevent and manage the diseases that present the greatest threat to the sector's economic health, the federation works with leading industry partners in Quebec, such as other producer associations, millers, slaughterhouses and hatcheries.

In 2004, all these partners created the Équipe québécoise de contrôle des maladies avicoles, or EQCMA, which has been working with governments for years to develop and improve an avian influenza emergency response plan. The industry has also collaborated on plans to respond to other infectious diseases affecting commercial poultry, such as infectious laryngotracheitis and Mycoplasma gallisepticum. The EQCMA adopted strategies for those two diseases in 2010.

The EQCMA's primary mandate is to prevent disease, so we've developed biosecurity protocols that serve as a foundation for the work Quebec's poultry sector stakeholders and producers are doing together. We are currently revising those protocols to develop teaching tools that will help improve biosecurity on farms and in the operations of other stakeholders.

Since 2022, we, like the global poultry sector, have been facing a new threat: a strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza initially spread by wild birds. To date, Canada has recorded 330 cases of this type of influenza resulting in the loss of nearly eight million birds. Quebec has seen 47 cases over the past two years, 20 of which affected flocks under quota production. Members of the federation have had only two cases of avian influenza.

We know the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has lead responsibility and legal authority to intervene to eradicate this disease, which has cost Canadian taxpayers over $200 million to date. However, industry partners have a vital role to play in intervening to eradicate this disease. In Quebec, the EQCMA coordinates this shared responsibility. CFIA resources have been pushed to their limit over the past two years, so the industry itself has taken on more responsibility for intervention in recent months.

The federation and its EQCMA partners have therefore set to work to find solutions to a number of problems, including depopulation of infected flocks, disposal of dead birds and identifying specialized external suppliers. Given the scale of the challenges, particularly rapid depopulation of infected flocks, the EQCMA is investigating new technologies for rapid, humane depopulation. Some of those technologies require significant investment. We appreciate the contribution that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada confirmed last week for work on one new technology.

However, we would like to see the establishment of a specific fund like the one for African swine fever preparedness to equip the poultry sector in Quebec and the rest of the country with better tools to deal with future outbreaks of avian influenza, which will likely remain a threat for many years to come.

Thank you for inviting me to appear before the committee. I'm available to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. Pelletier.

We'll move on to questions.

Mr. Lehoux, you have six minutes.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the witnesses for being here with us today.

Mr. Pelletier, you said there have been a lot of losses over the past two years. The existing program covers euthanasia and, if necessary, disposal of infected carcasses. Are there measures to compensate producers? We know there are costs associated with those animals before they are euthanized.

[Martin Pelletier]

At the moment, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency offers compensation that covers the value of the birds and the cost of depopulation and carcass disposal. However, there's no compensation for cleaning and disinfecting infected sites, and those costs are significant. In Quebec, the industry set up insurance to compensate producers, but our insurance plan has really been put to the test the past two years because of that.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Okay, thanks.

Dr. Filejski, you said a lot about vaccines and the importance of vaccine development. We know that many new strains of pathogens are emerging. You say there aren't enough resources. The private sector is doing its part, but could it be better equipped to support the development of new vaccines as quickly as we need them?

I'll take this opportunity to ask you a second question. If I understand one of the last things you said correctly, the government's priorities aren't really focused on that. What should the Canadian government be doing?

[Dr. Catherine Filejski]

To answer the first question, certainly the development of new vaccines is a large portion of what the private sector does in terms of research and innovation. That said, Canada is a market that depends pretty much exclusively on the development of vaccines in the larger markets, and their production in those larger markets is similar to what we found with COVID vaccines during the pandemic, whereby we don't have a lot of domestic production facilities. We have some for autogenous vaccines in the veterinary sector, but we are highly dependent on the import of the vast majority of veterinary vaccines that we use.

As a result, the Canadian voice at the table in terms of determining what vaccines are developed is usually subordinate to those of the larger markets. That's another challenge we face in general as an industry here. Certainly, the global nature of diseases right now and the global spread of diseases work to a certain extent in our favour in terms of Canadian priorities being shared by those of the United States, but it's sometimes difficult, I think, to ensure that our voice is heard appropriately and that our needs are met with respect to that.

As for the second question you had in terms of priorities, I think what industry worries about is that we often have challenges in terms of identifying the availability of veterinary drugs and vaccines that are regulated by Health Canada, and we are, therefore, always competing against the importance of the availability of human drugs and vaccines—and rightly so. However, it can be very difficult to prioritize the availability of the veterinary drugs when it means that we may have to pull resources from activities geared towards ensuring that there are infant flu vaccines on the shelves in pharmacies as well.

I think anything we can do in terms of bringing government attention to the priority that needs to be given to veterinary drugs and vaccines as a way of ensuring that we are protecting the health of our livestock in this county and, therefore, our trade interest is always beneficial.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Dr. Filejski.

You mentioned government priorities, and we know these issues are important, but is there actually a detailed plan to respond to pandemics at this point? Is anyone making sure everyone has the resources they need to respond to these situations appropriately should they arise? We know what happened in the last couple of years with avian flu, but it could happen in other agricultural sectors too.

[Dr. Catherine Filejski]

Certainly, I think there's a large push right now to look at the development of a foot-and-mouth disease vaccine bank, specifically one that is domestic to Canada and not just the one that is shared across North America. There are priorities around that and, I think, some work. However, to a certain extent, we're also dealing with it case by case. Foot-and-mouth disease is one, but African swine fever is another story entirely. We don't have vaccine candidates for that, right now. Avian flu is also handled differently.

Looking at a more comprehensive approach—not necessarily just a hazard-by-hazard approach in terms of specific diseases—and at the issue of the availability of vaccines and drugs cohesively, as an industry and as a nation, would be beneficial to every disease we might possibly be looking at in the future.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Dr. Filejski.

Dr. Vaillancourt, you said a lot about computerization, information centralization and databases. You said there's a lot of work that needs to be done on that. What recommendations would you make to the Canadian government to ensure better information distribution in general?

[Dr. Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt]

Essentially, federal authorities need to be able to work with each province, or at least with the provincial lab system to digitize information so it can be accessed quickly. Then a computer system has to be set up.

Vets would benefit from access to databases of the viral genomes of different strains. Making that happen will take leadership on the part of the industry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Dr. Vaillancourt and Mr. Lehoux.

Colleagues, I probably should have said off the top that we are a little tight on time. I propose we just do six minutes for each party. If you have any very last-minute, burning questions, we can allow a bit of discretion, but I'll warn the parties moving forward.

To my Liberal colleagues, split your time accordingly.

We'll go over to you, Mr. Drouin, for six minutes.

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

I will be splitting my time with the good member of Parliament for Malpeque.

Dr. Vaillancourt, you talked about zoonosis and the lack of co‑operation between Canada and other countries. How are those other countries collaborating to investigate zoonosis and everything related to that?