Agriculture Committee on June 18th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

I'd like to call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 43 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room. I don't think we have anyone attending remotely.

Before I continue, I'd like to ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents, and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including our interpreters. You will also notice a QR code, for your reference, on the table.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of our witnesses and members here today. Please wait until I recognize you by name or you're asked a question directly by a member before speaking.

I'd like to remind all witnesses and committee members that anyone may ask questions in French and English, so please have your earpieces prepared. This is a reminder that all comments should be addressed through the chair. The clerk and I will try to manage the list to the best of our ability.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, September 18, 2025, the committee is resuming its study on food security in the face of global instability.

I'd like to welcome Minister MacDonald. Thank you so much for being here today. I know you have your team with you today.

We have, from the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lawrence Hanson, deputy minister, and Tom Rosser, assistant deputy minister; and from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Debbie Beresford-Green, who is a vice-president. Welcome to each of you.

Minister, you have five minutes.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Thank you, Chair.

It's great to see some new faces, obviously, at this committee. I sat on this committee for a number of years, and I certainly enjoyed every moment of it. Once again, I want to recognize the important work of the committee, and that includes your current study on food security.

As you have heard many times around this table, farmers and the whole sector are facing intense geopolitical pressures right now. Your study is also very timely because it was just a week ago that we launched the first ever national food security strategy.

Canadian farmers and food processors are central to the strategy. They are vital to the food security of our country and our world. The national food security strategy is about giving Canadians more choice, more control and more affordable, locally produced food on the shelf. It's about giving our farmers and food processors the tools they need to make it happen.

Last year, Canadian farmers and food processors exported more than $100 billion in high-quality food to almost 200 countries around the world. We're, hopefully, helping farmers diversify those markets even further. However, at the same time, we need to get more of our homegrown food into our kitchens and onto our tables right here at home—and that's what this strategy is about. Backed by a total investment of $3.2 billion, the strategy identifies key steps that will improve food access and food affordability for Canadians.

The farmers I meet across the country are primed and ready to grow their markets right here at home, but they need the tools to do that. That's why, under this strategy, we will speed up the time it takes for farmers to get their hands on new products, such as fertilizers and pest control technologies. This has been a long-standing competitive issue for our producers. Less red tape will help Canadian farmers to produce more food for Canadians while competing on an even playing field with producers in other countries.

To ensure food security for the long term, we will make it easier for young farmers to enter the sector and take over family operations. Every time I sit down with young producers across the country, I come away even more optimistic about the future of the sector. They are the innovative ones. They are ambitious and they are passionate about the sector, but their biggest challenge is daunting: the start-up costs of fulfilling their dreams for farming.

To help them get established in farming, we are doubling the guaranteed loan limit and extending terms of the Canadian Agricultural Loans Act. We have increased the lifetime capital gains exemption to $1.25 million for qualified farm property, which will be indexed to inflation starting in 2026. We are launching a task force to examine potential supports for intergenerational farm transfers, to better reflect the structure of modern farm operations, and we're including youth, who will be at the table.

To help our fruit and vegetable growers expand year-round Canadian production, we will invest $750 million in controlled environment agriculture.

We will help our food and beverage manufacturers have better access to targeted programs and new financing that support growth at all stages so that they can innovate, grow and scale. As well, Farm Credit Canada will establish a $1-billion agri-food project finance fund that backs food and farming projects that can transform the industry.

We will help provincially licensed food businesses get the help they need to meet the federal requirements. That way, a Canadian product made in one province can more easily reach a shelf in another.

Canada's first ever national food security strategy is a win for farmers and a win for Canadians. By keeping our farmers productive and competitive, we will drive new jobs, new economic opportunities and stronger food security for Canadians. As we said last week, it's more choice, more control, more Canada.

Lastly, I suspect that members of this committee will be pleased to hear that we successfully established an African swine fever zoning arrangement with Japan last week. This is an important step in protecting Canada's pork sector, which consists of more than 7,000 hog producers and 31,000 farm jobs, and supports 103,000 direct and indirect jobs across the country.

With that, Mr. Chair, I am now happy to take questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Thank you very much, Minister.

I just wanted to mention that MP Joseph is here.

Welcome, Mr. Joseph, and thank you for filling in for MP Harrison.

We'll start with the Conservatives for six minutes.

Please go ahead, Mr. Barlow.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister.

You talked about the importance of food security. We had Jeff Harrison, the chair of the board of the Grain Farmers of Ontario, here last week, and he said that you can't have food affordability if farmers can't afford to farm.

One key thing that you could have done as part of your announcement last week was remove the 35% tariff on fertilizer imports. Canada is the only G7 country that has that tariff.

Have you asked the Prime Minister and the finance minister to remove that tariff, yes or no?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It's not a yes-or-no question because, to your first part of your question, there are tariffs from the EU on fertilizer coming out of Russia, so part of that question I can't answer because you're not directing it in the right sequence. By 2028, I believe the EU is going to charge 100% tariff, so they don't want Russian fertilizer either.

Back to the first part of your question, I've had this discussion many times with a lot of my colleagues and Jeff, of course, was one of them. We're watching this situation very closely. I met with the G7 ministers last—

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Minister. I know the answer to the question. The answer is that this is going to stay. You talk about the EU, but this isn't impossible. Your government exempted tariffs on other commodities like airplane parts and cobalt from Russia.

For some reason, your government is picking winners and losers and, once again, when it comes to decisions by your government, farmers are losing. You could have asked for that tariff on fertilizer to be removed, as you have exempted other commodities like cobalt and airplane parts.

Going on the same theme, you talk about food security. Ontario is losing about 320 acres of farmland every year, the equivalent of about nine farm families every week, as a result of development, urbanization and those types of things. We now know that the Alto high-speed rail will impact about 500 farms just between Montreal and Ottawa.

Do you know how many farms will be impacted by this high-speed rail for the entire length of the project?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We had a discussion the other day on Alto, and I've been in recent contact with UPA's Martin Caron. We had good discussions. I've been talking to the transport minister with concerns relevant to the agriculture sector in both Quebec and Ontario and will continue with that, and I think part of the issue here is the lack of communication from Alto. I think they need to do a better job of explaining the processes of what's transpired.

I've been a part of a plan, what they called a plan B at home, where we built highways through agricultural land, so I fully understand the impediments and the worry from farmers, but communication is key.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

It is very concerning. You can blame Alto, but this is your project, your government's project, so I don't think you can just put this on Alto.

To me, the fact that you do not know how many farms are potentially going to be impacted by this rail means that you have not been part of the consultation or part of the process within your cabinet, and it concerns me that you have not had some influence on this.

Can you or your department table with the committee exactly how many farms are going to be potentially impacted by this rail? It would be great if that could be tabled.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

There is a point of order.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC]

I would just like to mention that, as we have already discussed at a committee meeting this week, we will be resuming a study on the Alto project this fall, as soon as we receive the information from Alto. The routes have not yet been finalized.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

That doesn't stop me from asking the minister. What's the point of order here?

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC]

I do not think it is appropriate today, when the meeting is about food security, to ask questions relating to the Alto project, which are still under discussion.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Okay.

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

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chair. I would like to point out that the motion concerning Alto has not been adopted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

Just hold on for one second, folks.

Mr. Barlow, continue.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Just to rephrase the question then, how much food production will be removed as a result of the Alto high-speed rail? That certainly would impact Canada's food sovereignty and food security. How many acres in yield production will be removed from use as a result of the high-speed rail?

Do you know the answer to that?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

The route has not even been chosen yet. It's very hard to analyze what the loss of acreage will be or how many farms will be affected until the actual final route is chosen by Alto and the government.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

I'll move to another topic.

We had you here a few weeks ago, and we asked you about the closure of the research centres. Again, this certainly relates to food security and food sovereignty. In answer to a question from a colleague, you said that those closures were worthwhile. Do you still believe that the closure of seven experimental farms and research centres is a worthwhile decision?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

No one likes change, but the closures' relevance to what we're doing is more on the operational side as opposed to the science side. The science side is the important aspect that people keep talking about, and we're not doing less science. From what I've heard across the country, even through my national policy frameworks, we've had 20 cases, and people are saying that we're not doing science appropriately, we're not doing it enough or we need to do a better job of doing science.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you, Minister.

That's an interesting answer, as 54% of the workforce cuts and 75% of the spending cuts in your department are coming from the science and innovation research branch. I think your answer to this committee is a little misleading.

My last question is about your conversations around the country. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities voted 98% in opposition to the closures of these research centres, so I think you're getting a different message.

When I was in Nappan at the research farm, I was told by the constituents there that your colleague the member of Parliament for Cumberland—Colchester asked if she could tour the Nappan experimental farm. She was told by Ag Canada that if she stepped foot on that farm, she would be arrested.

Is it a directive from your department that the experimental farms are telling elected officials that they cannot come on these farms or they'll be arrested?

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Coteau]

I've let you go for almost seven minutes, so I'm going to stop there and turn it over to the Liberals for six minutes.

Mr. MacDonald, go ahead.

[Kent MacDonald, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you, sir.

Good morning, Minister.

We know that Canada and the agriculture sector, in my mind, get overlooked sometimes. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture has a goal of increasing our GDP. It's $150 billion now, and one in nine jobs are in agriculture. It has significantly contributed to the Canadian economy.

I think the goal of increasing that $100 billion over 10 years to $250 billion is going to need the co-operation and support of the federal government. With the national food security strategy that you released last week, what are the first concrete actions that are going to take place, and what deliverables will we see over, let's say, the next 12 months so that farmers and processors can measure the success of the strategy?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

To the first part of your question, the first thing we started working on when I became minister, which I had a concern about, was the regulatory impediments farmers face each and every day around seeds, feeds, fertilizers, innovation and technology, and how slow that process works and how it put us at a competitive disadvantage with other countries we trade with. That, first and foremost, is what I'm hearing from stakeholders across the country.

When you look back at the 2006-22 time period, you'll see that we've lost almost 2% of our GDP because of an accumulation of regulatory impediments, maybe, or the speed, and we've also lost about 10% of our investment over that period of time. That is certainly something we are going to do expeditiously.

We put it right in the food security strategy that within six months, my good friend to the left from the CFIA will have all of the backlog completed. I think that's extremely important.

We've already had discussions with departmental heads involved in the FSS. The Prime Minister is on the issue. He wants to see action and he wants to see results, so we're working very closely with different organizations, whether that be greenhouses, Food and Beverage Canada or the Federation of Agriculture. We're trying to do everything possible to expedite the process of the FSS. It's been a week, but we've already had several meetings on it.

[Kent MacDonald, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

A lot of farmers are concerned with the price of fertilizer this spring, so can you update us on what type of role the federal government can play in an input strategy that will give us more self-reliance in fertilizer in Canada?