Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank the members of the committee for the invitation to appear today.
Canada's business risk management, or BRM, programs have supported producers through many cycles of volatility, but the environment has changed. Risk in agriculture is no longer limited to weather and prices. It is now shaped by global markets, supply chain disruptions, input volatility and geopolitical uncertainty. These risks are broader, faster-moving and often originate beyond the farm gate. Yet our current approach remains largely reactive and centred on compensating losses after they occur. If we are serious about improving resilience, we need to shift from a model that primarily absorbs risk to one that helps the sector manage and distribute risk more effectively—and we can do that without increasing public spending.
I would offer three recommendations, grounded in free-market principles and with no required new spending.
First, we should improve market transparency by expanding risk disclosure. Markets function best when participants have access to clear, comparable information. Requiring standardized risk reporting from BRM program participants—covering exposure to key inputs, markets, logistics and climate—would strengthen decision-making across the sector.
Second, we should enhance predictability by moving toward more rules-based program delivery. One of the challenges producers face is uncertainty around when and how support will be delivered. Establishing clear, predefined triggers tied to measurable indicators—such as margin declines or cost spikes—would improve confidence and allow producers to plan accordingly.
Third, we should use existing programs to encourage voluntary risk-sharing across the value chain. Today, a significant portion of risk is concentrated at the farm level, even though value is created across processors, distributors and retailers. Rather than mandating outcomes, BRM eligibility can be structured to incentivize the use of supply agreements that include mechanisms such as price bands, cost indexing or volume commitments. This would allow market participants to negotiate how risk is shared, while public policy simply reinforces those behaviours.
Finally, the Canadian agri-food sector is highly capable, but policy should not substitute for market signals—it should support them. If we align our programs with how markets actually operate, we can improve resilience, reduce distortions and make better use of existing resources. At the moment, we are managing outcomes. We should be enabling better decisions.
Thank you for your attention. I look forward to your questions.