Agriculture Committee on Jan. 27th, 2026

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Thank you very much.

We'll go back to the Conservatives for five minutes.

Go ahead, Mr. Epp.

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

Thank you.

I'd like to explore, a bit more exactly, the mechanics. How would you see the price transparency mechanism working in Canada versus something that's...? I mean, right now you're basically working off of the Chicago mercantile board of trade and, then, a potential negotiated basis. I assume things like the grain trade exchange and transportation logistics work into that, so how would you see that working or replacing that in Canada?

[Louis-Philippe Roy]

Yes, there is the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, but we don’t base our decisions on what happens in Chicago. Instead, we base our decisions on the prices paid to producers by processors, which are sent to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The same principle, to some extent, that could be applied here, by sending the data to Statistics Canada. Processors could send them data on their sales every week or every month. It could be as simple as that. The information could then be forwarded to producers, or to boards, in the case of the Éleveurs de porcs du Québec—the Quebec pork producers—to enable us to negotiate and ensure that there is no discrepancy between the price paid at the farm and the price paid in different markets for meat.

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

Yes, so what you're saying is that you're looking more for a market. I mean, the Chicago board is, obviously, dealing in live product. Is that correct? Also, is it dealing in the pork cutout? The Chicago Board of Trade is dealing with the price of pigs, whereas you're looking more for the price of the product after the slaughter plant. You're looking at that for that comparison. Is that possible to set up without jeopardizing the privacy of our...?

We do have a limited, unfortunately, number of competitors here in Canada right now. Do you see an issue, as far as setting that up so that private business protection is maintained?

[Louis-Philippe Roy]

It is true that we have fewer processors than the United States, but I believe that we are capable of establishing standards and deadlines for the transmission of information in such a way that our processors cannot be identified in that information.

On the other hand, I am very aware that they are going to sell their products in foreign markets. So it is important to keep this information for strategic purposes. However, we could implement different ways of working. Data could be provided weekly, monthly, or even every three or four months. We could develop a strategy with the government, i.e., with Statistics Canada, to help us obtain this information and benefit from greater transparency while ensuring that critical information about processors’ strategies is not made public. This could be done.

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

Do you see, if the opportunity for more price transparency were available to producers and, potentially, to additional processors here in Canada...? I mean, as I understand, 18% to 20% of our hogs right now are sent south to slaughter. Would that actually—potentially—drive, encourage or facilitate additional slaughter capacity here in Canada, which would then, obviously, affect our ability to service both our own and export markets?

On the one hand, you want to see profit—at the processor level, you want to attract additional investment—but you all also want to see fairness, because what we're also looking for is that lower price for consumers. Ideally, from our perspective, it would be to drive costs out of the system to both maintain profit and to have lower prices for consumers. Can you comment?

[René Roy]

We believe that transparency will bring more capital into our industry because there will be more confidence and, also, an ability to benchmark. If we have a better understanding of our price structure, it will be easier to plan for newcomers or even expansion. In both cases, transparency will help.

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

What we always find helps, both for competitiveness and for lower prices, is competition. More players would lead to more competition. I think there's a bit of that push-pull dynamic between keeping our industries solely provincially focused versus greater competition across the provinces.

I touched on this a bit in the first round. Again, the concerns tend to be about safety of our export markets, yet trying to drive the prices lower for consumers by both maintaining supply chains within Canada and reducing freight costs—obviously freight and all the components associated with it—drives costs ahead.

Can you comment there?

[René Roy]

Yes, it would help the competition of the whole market.

I would also like to remind the committee that 70% of our product is exported, so this price structure—the capacity to be able to see how good we are—will also increase our trust in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

I'll go to the Liberals for the last five minutes.

Mr. Connors, go ahead.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you and happy new year to everybody.

Thank you to the industry for coming out to support.

My question was around that last part that you just spoke about here, about how introducing a Canadian reference marketing pricing system would assist the pork industry. I understand how it would help throughout Canada.

You just said that 70% of our market is exported. When we're competing against other nations globally, how would that system assist the Canadian industry?

[Stephen Heckbert]

We've clearly seen from the USDA a model that's really helped American exporters and American exports because it really helps producers understand what the prices are currently. It eliminates some of the uncertainty around how much they should be producing and the future of the market. Price transparency helps with respect to export markets as well, because if you don't have a product to export, you won't be able to meet that export market.

While the United States is a significantly larger market than us domestically, they still frankly dwarf us in terms of the amount of raw product they export. The price transparency system that they've set up has allowed their processors to understand where in the world they will be competitive and what kinds of cuts will be competitive globally.

It has really helped them build a system that is, in some respects, the envy of the world, by helping them understand how they can best use domestic production to meet the international markets based upon the price of the cutout that they're getting. Everyone understands the cutout price across the entire system.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

For me to get an understanding, in the Canadian system when we're competing internationally with exporting, how would we use that information to compete against other countries?

[René Roy]

The data of the final price is already available. We know how much we are exporting in terms of total value, but having more details about our price structure will allow us to benchmark ourselves against our competitors.

Right now, we have a lot of darkness. This does not allow us to build on our advantages. We do have some advantages, but they are hard to identify because they are privately known. They are not known by the whole value chain.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Going back to Quebec pork, in your opening comments, you mentioned that you have to fill out and report on your website every week—I'm not sure what the timeline was—how much you produce or how much you sell, but the processors don't have to do that.

Can you elaborate on that a little bit more for us?

[Louis-Philippe Roy]

Every day, the Éleveurs de porcs du Québec take information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and publish it on their website. There is a price negotiation mechanism with buyers. The price is therefore published on the Éleveurs de porcs du Québec’s website, but the price paid to pig farmers is based on a weekly average. This information is available on the Éleveurs de porcs du Québec’s website. However, conversely, processors do not have information on the price at which they will sell the meat.

[Tristan Deslauriers, Public Relations Manager and Secretary-General, Les Éleveurs de porcs du Québec]

I would like to add something to follow up on the earlier discussion.

Having a price reference established in Canada would not preclude using or looking at a price reference established in the United States. It would complement a pricing formula in Canada or Quebec in order to mitigate moments of disruption, drop-off and price distortion that disadvantages both producers and processors. It would therefore truly complement the entire pricing formula and approach that we have in Quebec.

We are an export market. The current reference used is therefore the price established in the United States. Most of the time, this makes sense, but sometimes there are discrepancies. This is where a price benchmark established in Canada would help avoid these disadvantages, to truly have a Canadian reality base for the pork market, and perhaps for the beef market.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

That's exactly five minutes. I appreciate it.

We will suspend for five minutes to change panels.

I want to thank our witnesses for being here today and for everything you do to support agriculture in Canada.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

I call the meeting back to order.

I'd like to make a few comments before we start. I'll be really brief.

Please wait until I recognize you or you're asked a direct question by a member. For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, September 18, 2025, the committee is resuming its study of reference prices in the beef and pork supply chains.

I'd like to welcome our witnesses today. From the Canadian Cattle Association, we have Dennis Laycraft and Brenna Grant. From the Canadian Meat Council, we have Kyle Larkin and Claire Citeau. Gilbert Lavoie is here as an individual.

Thank you so much for being here. You will have five minutes for your presentations. We'll probably go for about 35 minutes. Then we have some housekeeping pieces that we need to deal with at the very end.

We will turn it over now to the Canadian Cattle Association for five minutes.

Welcome back.

[Dennis Laycraft, Executive Vice-President, Canadian Cattle Association]

It's nice to be back and to see everyone again.

First of all, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.

My name is Dennis Laycraft. I'm the executive vice-president of the Canadian Cattle Association. As well, I'm very pleased to have Brenna Grant here with us virtually. Brenna is the executive director of Canfax and is one of the most respected market analysts in the world. She'll be able to answer questions as well as anyone I know. Through our provincial associations, we represent about 60,000 cattle producers.

Canadian beef farmers and ranchers play a vital role in high-quality food production and rural economic sustainability, both here at home and for consumers around the world. Our sector is a significant contributor to the Canadian economy. In 2024, we generated over $15 billion. In 2025, we're going to be close to $20 billion in farm cash receipts, contributing about $40 billion annually to Canada's GDP and about 350,000 jobs.

Today's study on the price of meat is of great importance to Canadian beef producers and is closely linked to trade and competitiveness. You will know that we export about 50% of the beef we produce. As a result of that, we capture about 40% more value in every animal we produce.

Back at home in Canada, government policies and regulations have impacts on our supply chain that influence the cost of production and can affect our ability to compete. One of the most pressing issues facing our sector is the impact of government regulations and policies on production costs.

One specific example is related to the specified risk material—or our enhanced feed ban more specifically—and its removal. Current SRM requirements have become more onerous than needed following our “negligible risk” status, which we gained in 2021, and Canadian processors are placed at a competitive disadvantage when compared to U.S. processors. The difference in cost is approximately $32 million a year. As a result, U.S. processors are more competitive, and investment in new processing capacity is more attractive south of the border.

The beef and cattle industry has been working closely with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and industry partners to address this challenge, and we are encouraged by the progress on this file. Resolving the SRM file will help lower costs, encourage new processing capacity in Canada and keep more value-added activity here at home. Increasing domestic processing capacity improves competition, resilience and returns across the supply chain.

At the same time, the beef sector is facing a shortage of cattle across North America. The Canadian and American beef cattle sector is highly integrated. Our prices in Canada track closely with those in the United States. Low herd numbers, restrictions on the ability to import feeder cattle from Mexico and the United States and weather-related conditions have exacerbated this. In addition, increased input costs through the system are up by about 30% from 2020 to 2024 and place upward pressure on prices. Producers are ready to do their part, and we have a number of ideas to support herd expansion and strengthen the sector, provided government policy creates the right conditions.

Last week, Minister MacDonald launched the new policy framework. We're keen to work with our provincial members and engage with governments to ensure the framework reflects market realities and positions the beef sector for long-term growth and competitiveness. It is critical that governments address rising costs by improving existing policies and removing burdensome regulations that inhibit growth rather than create new pathways for imported beef.

There is significant tariff-free access to the Canadian market through agreements like CETA and the CPTPP. In 2025, Canada had the largest imports of beef—the second largest in history—since 1993. Relying on imports may offer a short-term response, but it fails to address the root cause of rising costs and undermines the price signals needed to encourage domestic production and long-term supply.

Canadian cattle producers feed Canadians and consumers around the world. As global demand for beef continues to grow, Canada is well positioned to meet that demand while continuing to supply safe high-quality beef at home. With the right policy environment and support, the cattle sector can grow the herd, lower costs and meet growing global demand. The world needs more Canadian beef, and our processors are ready to deliver.

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

That was perfect timing.

Next, we'll go to the Canadian Meat Council.

[Kyle Larkin, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Meat Council]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the members of the committee for inviting us. It's good to see many of you again.

My name is Kyle Larkin, and I am the president and CEO of the Canadian Meat Council. I'm joined today by my colleague Claire Citeau, who is our vice-president.

The Canadian Meat Council is the voice of Canada's federally licensed meat industry and the largest component of the food processing sector, with annual sales exceeding $32 billion a year and supporting nearly 300,000 jobs across the country. Our members process over 90% of Canada's meat, supplying Canadian families in more than 90 export markets with safe and high-quality protein. The Canadian red meat sector is diverse, encompassing large multinational operations and many small and medium-sized enterprises that form the backbone of rural Canada.

Prior to my remarks, I want to emphasize an important CMC policy: We do not comment on nor engage in discussions regarding retail or wholesale prices. This reflects our commitment to competition law and antitrust principles. Price discovery and competition dynamics are for the market to determine. Our focus is on structural and regulatory barriers that prevent processors from operating efficiently.

To begin, please allow me to briefly outline how Canada's meat supply chain operates and why the current pressures threaten its viability. Canadian livestock begins on farms and ranches across the country where producers breed and raise livestock. These animals then move to processors, companies of all sizes, where they are processed into various cuts and products. From the processor, these products flow to retailers, food service operators and exporters, who distribute them to Canadian consumers and global markets.

It's a coordinated system that depends on consistent livestock supply. Today, this system faces unprecedented strain, reflected in high prices at retail due to a fundamental supply shortage. On the beef side, Canada's cattle inventory has declined significantly, driven by prolonged drought in key producing regions, producer herd reductions and global supply pressures.

When cattle supplies drop, processors cannot operate efficiently. Fixed costs rise per unit processed and margins compress, particularly for the small and medium-sized enterprises that lack the scale to absorb losses.

Beyond livestock supply shortages that are leaving processors with insufficient cattle and hogs to operate at optimal capacity, processors are also facing a multitude of other issues. This includes punitive Chinese tariffs that closed our largest beef export market up until last week and that continue to cost pork processors $177 million annually. It also includes persistent labour shortages, increasing input costs and changing international trade dynamics, all contributing to razor-thin margins.

To address these challenges and support the sector's contributions to Canada's food system, economic growth and rural employment, we urge the government to prioritize the following.

First, address losses due to the 25% retaliatory tariffs on Canadian pork exports from China, estimated at $177 million since they were implemented, by compensating processors similarly to what has been done with other sectors.

Second, prioritize trade diversification. This includes extending the AgriMarketing funding envelope to continue supporting industry advocacy abroad, renewing the funding for the Indo-Pacific agriculture and agri-food office and renewing funding to support industry adoption of assurance systems to meet foreign regulatory requirements.

Third, align the enhanced feed ban program with U.S. standards to eliminate unnecessary compliance costs. This change alone could save the processing sector $25 million annually, savings that would be reinvested in operations, wages and market development.

Lastly, address sector-wide labour shortages by extending labour market impact assessment validity to two years, continuing to support the provincial nominee program and creating a sector-specific immigration stream to stabilize the workforce.

In closing, I want to emphasize one final point. Canada's meat sector is proud of its world-class food safety record and of the role it plays in feeding Canadians and consumers around the world. However, regulatory inefficiencies and trade barriers continue to be obstacles to competitiveness and growth. By working together in addressing these challenges, the sector can continue to grow, contribute to Canada's economy and employ tens of thousands of Canadians across the country.

We look forward to continuing to work with the government to maintain world-class food safety standards, reduce unnecessary regulatory costs, strengthen trade relationships and solidify Canada's position as a global agri-food leader.

Thank you again for the opportunity, and we'd be happy to take any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Thank you very much.

Next, the final witness is Gilbert Lavoie.

You have five minutes, sir.

[Gilbert Lavoie, Agricultural Economist, Forest Lavoie Conseil, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Gilbert Lavoie. I am an agronomist. I started my own consulting firm nearly 19 years ago. I am fortunate to have a great team of nine people, and we conduct economic studies in the agri-food sector. We work with all segments of the industry, including input suppliers, producers, processors, food distributors and, of course, the government. We work in all sectors: pork, beef, grains, poultry, market gardening, etc. We therefore have a fairly broad understanding of the dynamics of the agri-food sector.

The Canadian Pork Council asked me to come and give a presentation today on the American law on mandatory price reporting and to give a quick summary of what it is and what it means.

Essentially, I have had the opportunity to study this law for nearly 20 years now. I have been on missions to the United States. I have met with people from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the people who write the reports. I have met with people from American slaughterhouses and with American producers. I have worked extensively with American researchers at universities in Iowa and Kansas. This also led me to provide expert opinions to pig farmers when there were discrepancies between prices in the United States and prices in Canada. First, I did this because the margin between the producer and the processor had fallen. I had to provide an expert opinion to explain why and how our two markets were reacting differently, and the fact that this was not the reality of slaughterhouses here. Secondly, conversely, I did so because the margin had completely diverged from Canadian slaughterhouses, which was not the case in the United States. So I was asked to come today to explain, to quickly summarize what this law is, where it came from and how it is used by members of the American industry.

Briefly, it is a law that was passed in 1999. Basically, it stems from representations made by American pork producers, and probably by beef producers. I am more familiar with the pork sector. I have studied the beef sector less in terms of the law. For the pork sector, prices have been published daily since 2001 and are based on the price that American slaughterhouses pay for pork. With regard to pork prices and concentration, it is interesting to note that pork prices in the United States are also published regionally. Regional concentration is still very high in the United States.

In 2010, the law was updated or improved to include mandatory reporting of the selling price of cuts. This was done once again in response to pressure from producers in reaction to the growing concentration of the sector. They wanted to ensure transparency and fairness in information to ensure an effective and equitable negotiation process between producers and processors and to avoid an information deficit on one side compared to the other.

The objectives of this legislation were to improve market transparency, reduce asymmetry, provide producers and buyers with clear information on prices and market conditions, strengthen competition in the sector, and also encourage investment. There was a question on this subject, and I will be able to answer it later. It is clear that mandatory price reporting has led U.S. pork producers to start slaughtering when they saw the margin differences that occurred in order to ensure access to more hooks and a fair price for their products. Of course, another objective was to modernize the efficiency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s price dissemination systems.

In concrete terms, the information published gives the net price paid for hogs every day for different regions, different types of contracts and different types of hogs. With regard to the main cuts, it is the prices of the primary cuts that are published, as mentioned earlier this morning. They have the prices for loins, bellies, hams, etc. We will also have the price of a carcass reconstituted according to a methodology that has been agreed upon by U.S. processors, U.S. producers and the U.S. government.

Finally, all contracts—not to mention the vast majority of transactions now—between producers and slaughterhouses are based on a pricing formula that uses either the price of hogs or the price of the reconstituted carcass. Incidentally, in Quebec, all hogs are sold according to a price formula that uses the reconstituted carcass price established in the United States, currently at a percentage of 88%.

So you can see why hog producers here and across Canada are interested in the American benchmark that is established in the pricing formulas.

Why would this information be important in Canada? I think it was mentioned this morning. I’ll go quickly, because I don’t have much time left. Basically, it would lead to greater price transparency. It would also provide a more accurate picture of the Canadian pork industry, because our business environment is a little different. We export much more to different countries. So there are times when the American reality no longer reflects our own.

Essentially, we see that Americans support this law pretty much everywhere. Recently, with the—