Agriculture Committee on March 10th, 2026

[Richard J. Sigurdson]

We fund RDAR. It has research projects within post-secondary as well as some of our facilities in Alberta, including Western Crop Innovations, WCI, as well as CDC South, our crop development centre south, and our CDC North. It engages as well with Olds College and Lakeland.

RDAR has a multitude of investments in project-based research across the different platforms in Alberta. It's not just on-farm research. It's a very co-operative model that extends to multiple different research facilities, including the Lacombe research facility itself, where, as I mentioned in my presentation, they're doing $2.5 million in research within that facility. It's project-based research there as well.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

You mentioned that we need more investment in research. I want to talk about some of those institutes, such as the University of Calgary the University of Alberta, which are doing a lot of research in agriculture and agri-food. Do you think there's a way that we could do more with those centres?

[Richard J. Sigurdson]

When we look at the research dollars we put towards agriculture, there's no better investment in Canada right now than exactly that. When we talk about the overall impact you've heard, every dollar we spend now can equate to six to 10 in the future.

I will make the comment that it's essential that we take a look at the models with colleges, universities, crop development centres and our applied research centres across individual provinces and industry, as well as farmers. This is the key, not really focusing on one but on all as an essential piece to make sure that we have the most impact with the dollar spent.

I would say that the research that we have ongoing, whether it be at the U. of A., U. of C., Olds College or Lakeland, is having an incredible impact on our industry.

I was just recently in Dubai, and I need to make this comment. When we're talking about the global demand, Canada is known for the highest grade commodities in the world, but the comments expressed to me were that countries like Russia, Australia and others are catching up extremely fast.

If we continue to decrease the amount of research money, they will surpass Canada, and we will lose massive market share. That's the reality, and that's why we need to continue to make sure that we not only maintain the dollars towards research in all facilities but have the opportunity to increase those dollars in the future to be able to maintain Canada's agricultural advantage.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Thank you so much, Minister.

Next, we'll go to the Bloc for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Cole, I'd like to start with you because you mentioned something I'd like you to expand on regarding the impact of these $400‑million cuts.

Can you tell us more about that research or study? What is your assessment of that?

[Steven Cole]

I have Dave Gehl here. He is my colleague and has far more knowledge on this. I'll switch over to him, if that's all right.

Go ahead, Dave.

[David Gehl, Retired Officer in Charge, Seed Increase Unit, Town of Indian Head]

Thank you, Steve.

This was basically, I believe, based on comments from Dr. Richard Gray at the University of Saskatchewan. He's looking at the introduction of improved crop varieties that are coming out of the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada system.

At Indian Head, the seed increase unit is a bridge between science and commercial farming. It receives the newly developed varieties from research scientists, and it produces basic breeder seed of the new varieties each year. That seed is distributed to the pedigreed seed growers who propagate it through their system and produce certified seed. That is then sold to commercial farmers.

Delaying the release of these improved varieties will result in an annual loss to farmers. We're seeing fairly rapid genetic gain in all traits, especially disease and yields. We've seen that yields really have improved in the last 10 or 15 years. Especially with our cereal crops, we're seeing a real improvement. If we reduce the introduction of that new technology, it will lead to a loss for our farmers. That's what we're talking about with a delay of innovation.

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

Thank you for your presentation. It is interesting to see that $8 million invested generates $400 million in economic benefits. Therefore, cuts to agriculture will have an impact on an entire ecosystem and on knowledge. In my region, we experienced this when a research centre in Kapuskasing closed. The impact is still being felt decades later. It has to be made up elsewhere. We'll come back to this in the second hour.

Minister Sigurdson, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. As Alberta's Minister of Agriculture, do you feel that the federal government can pass the bill on to you rather than paying it? Obviously, this data in agriculture is fundamental. Your argument has demonstrated that in a particularly effective way. Is this a way for the federal government to shirk its responsibilities and pass its deficit on to the provinces?

[Richard J. Sigurdson]

I'm here to express that the loss of research dollars will have an overall impact on the industry, right down to our farmers and ranchers. Whenever these facilities are closed, we understand how essential the research happening at these facilities is to the industry. We're going to have to find a way to continue that research in order to make sure that we continue to be global leaders. That is our competitive advantage in the global market space, and it has to be maintained.

Of course, when this is closed, it creates pressure on us to partner with industry, agencies, boards, commissions and farmers in order to pick up that research and continue it, because agriculture is essential to Alberta's economy. It's our second-largest industry and arguably the most important industry to food affordability, food safety and security within our own country. We will have to continue that work in some way, shape or form. This will be a downloaded cost in one way, shape or form in Alberta at a time when we're struggling.

I want to be clear in saying that we need to be partners in this. Federally, provincially and municipally—right down to industry, farmers, ranchers, agencies, boards and commissions—we all have to be involved in research in a meaningful manner. I urge the federal government to continue the partnership.

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

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Chair, you are signalling to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

I just thought you might want to say one final thing.

We'll do four minutes and four minutes. It's over to the Conservatives.

Mr. Bonk.

[Steven Bonk, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you.

I'd like to make a comment to Minister Sigurdson.

I want to thank him for his advocacy when it comes to strychnine, which Mr. Bexte brought up earlier, and for working with Saskatchewan. I know Minister Marit and Mr. Harrison previous to him are also very much on board with this, as well as the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities and many other producer groups.

Thank you very much for the work you're doing on that.

My farm and ranch are very close to the Indian Head research centre. I would like to take this time to advocate very strongly for that centre and the good work it does.

I'll ask His Worship Cole if he could give us a quick synopsis of what this closure would mean to the town of Indian Head.

[Steven Cole]

It's another huge impact. Twelve years ago, we had our PFRA tree nursery farm shut down. We lost 70 to 100 jobs there. Now it's another impact for Indian Head again—losing the research farm. Indian Head was built off these two farms. It started off with the Bell farm, and then the research farms came into effect.

Closing this farm down is going to have a huge impact on our community: loss of jobs, loss of businesses and people moving again. It's just not a good thing for the community.

[Steven Bonk, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I want to highlight some of the great innovation that's come out of the Indian Head research centre.

The minister told us that it costs about $3.8 million a year to keep that centre going. Look at what's come out of that centre and the good work that Guy Lafond and Jim Halford did when it comes to zero tillage in particular. I've had the good fortune of travelling all over the world promoting Canadian agriculture. We see companies like Seed Hawk, Bourgault and John Deere, which bought the Conservapak technology that came out of Indian Head. There's a huge economic impact.

Can you or Mr. Gehl talk quickly about economic impact when it comes to soil health, moisture retention in cropping and the yields we've gotten out of that?

[David Gehl]

We're talking about a huge impact on increasing productivity in all areas of the world dealing with rain-fed agriculture. We've seen that here at Indian Head. For example, we have what's called a long-term rotation study, which is a benchmark study that's been going on since 1957. It's been looking at the impact of management practices on soil health and crop yields. Since the adoption of zero tillage in those plots 30 years ago, we've seen a marked increase in yields. They've doubled. We're seeing huge increases in soil carbon sequestration that are not plateauing, as originally thought. We're having an impact on the climate and improving soils through our innovations.

Zero tillage is being adopted around the world, wherever we're looking at rain-fed agriculture.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Mr. Gehl, we're going to have to stop.

Next, we'll go to the Liberals for four minutes.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

I'm going to share with MP Harrison.

Minister, there were no cuts to the actual research budget, so that will continue on, and RDAR seems to be a very successful program in Alberta. Would you like to see, under the next policy framework money or research money, more investment in those types of models?

[Richard J. Sigurdson]

Definitely one of the engagements I'm doing right now is stakeholder round tables on the next policy framework as it relates to the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership, SCAP. We've seen lots of positive impacts from the investment through SCAP. We are currently engaging with our producers, agencies, boards and commissions on what they would like to see. I think what we're hearing from the ground level right now is more flexibility from province to province to be able to guide research that fits the soil conditions, the climate and the industries' understanding that Canada is a very broad nation. As well, the increase in research dollars, I think, defensibly creates a great economic argument on how we can continue to grow GDP for the country.

When we look at the new policy framework, we'd love to see more dollars come into this to be able to connect with our industry, to be able to support research projects. Also what we're hearing from our producers is more flexibility in the next policy framework to allow more provincial and producer-led research as it relates province to province, understanding the unique and distinct differences we have across the country.

[Paul Connors, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

MP Harrison.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Gehl, I was hoping that you could finish elaborating on the question asked by my colleague Mr. Bonk about no-till and the success of that. I've seen on my farm first-hand how successful no-till drilling is.

Could you elaborate or submit to the committee further testimony in regard to that?

[David Gehl]

Zero tillage is now the commonly used practice in western Canada. When I started out as an agronomist in the mid-1980s, we were seeing a large proportion of summer fallow used for moisture conservation and weed control. That has almost totally vanished, so now we're seeing continuous cropping with diverse crops. That includes cereals, oilseeds and pulses, and we know how successful Canada has been. We've seen a huge increase in our oilseeds and canola. We're world leaders in that. Zero tillage has been really key to those changes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Thank you so much, sir.

I'm going to extend a two-minute round to the Liberals and Conservatives, and then we'll pause and go to the next round.

Mr. Epp.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing.

Mr. Groeneveld, you stated in your testimony that we—Canada—are in a trade race. Minister Sigurdson said the same thing, identifying countries, in particular, that we are racing to maintain our trade advantage with. You also said, “Innovation is the foundation”. Innovation occurs at the nexus of the private sector, academia and public research. Academia has come and basically testified that they are stretched, given the present situation in university funding. Can you comment on what the withdrawal or the reduction of public research does to that nexus? We have basic research, innovation, commercialization through....

By withdrawing another leg, what is the impact to both the protein cluster and agriculture, broadly speaking?

[Tyler Groeneveld]

Innovation is the foundation. Canada has a very strong innovation agenda, which does include academia, the federal AAFC, farms and industry. Withdrawing a leg at this point in time, as we're trying to create more value-added ingredients and food production, more economic opportunities.... It's not the time to be pulling back on innovation right now. We need to continue to invest there and, along with resources, to scale up and commercialize more of the innovations that we create in the country across all facets of agriculture.

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

Thank you.