Mr. Chairperson, honourable members, and guests, my name is Sheri Strydhorst. I have a PhD in production research. My husband and I farm in northwestern Alberta, and I'm the executive director with the Alberta Pulse Growers Commission.
With me today, and sharing my time, is Richard Phillips.
The Alberta Pulse Growers Commission represents 4,700 pea, bean, lentil, and chickpea farmers in the province of Alberta. I've also been asked by the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers, who represent an additional 18,000 farmers, to let you know that these requests are relevant to all members of the pulse sector.
Last year we had the opportunity to present to the finance committee, and today, while we're talking about the same subject, our requests are more specific. More funds are needed for public research, but properly allocated funds are just as important. We sincerely thank the federal government for Growing Forward contributions to agriculture research; however, there are some critical gaps in the public research system that need to be addressed with future funding programs. Today I'm going to touch upon four of those.
The first is long-term federal funding for agriculture research. We are requesting 10-year funding allocations. Current funding programs are typically three years in length. This makes sense for some types of research, but it's unrealistic and creates burdensome paperwork for other areas of research. For example, to create a new crop variety or to study crop rotations requires a minimum of six to nine years of research to complete the data set. Forcing researchers to work in three-year funding blocks means they collect incomplete data sets or put projects on hold as they seek new funding. This creates inefficiencies and diverts scientific expertise away from research.
The second request is to provide adequate resources to young, leading-edge scientists. The number of Ag Canada scientists has dropped by 7% in the last three years. The majority of Ag Canada scientists will be of retirement age in less than 10 years. Ag Canada is suffering a corporate memory loss. As agriculture research expertise leaves Canada, it will be an impossible resource to replace. Agriculture's future economic prosperity is linked to our bright, young innovative workforce; Ag Canada needs to ensure that they attract these people to agriculture and provide sufficient funding to keep them there.
Our third request is to ensure flexibility in future funding programs. The Growing Forward programs have provided funding for agriculture research; however, some of the conditions make it difficult to take full advantage of that funding. For instance, in the pulse agri-science cluster, the plan had to be scaled back due to a lack of technical help at Ag Canada facilities. One of the program funding conditions prevents using the funds to hire full-time staff. You can hire summer staff and post-doctoral students, but there's simply a labour shortage that prevents the necessary research studies from being conducted. This funding restricts private investment in Ag Canada research stations, and private companies will not increase their contributions when they recognize there's insufficient staff to complete the work.
Finally, we respectfully request the return of Ag Canada A-base budget research funding to 1994 levels. This would require an investment of $28 million for 10 years. Recent studies have shown a 12-time return for investments in breeding research for Canadian farmers, and we're not asking the government to do this alone. Investments in pulse breeding and agronomic research by Alberta and Saskatchewan farmers exceeds $3 million per year. Investments in public research do pay off, which is why producers invest their own money into public research. APG's most important funding allocation is to research, and our refund rate of only 3% is a strong indication that Alberta pulse growers believe this too. It is the one issue everyone agrees on, and it's critical to the pulse sector, as pulse crop research is conducted almost exclusively in the public sector.
There are different funding models that need to be considered. For example, Australia is light years ahead of Canada. Starting years ago, they began taking larger check-offs and funnelling the money into research and encouraging public-private partnerships.
In summary, our requests are to provide long-term funding for agriculture research, to provide adequate resources to recruit young scientists, to ensure the flexibility of future funding, and to increase the A-base budget to 1994 levels of $28 million. There's tremendous value in public research. It will allow Canada to remain a strong leader in agricultural production and it will reduce government support payments to producers. Invest with us in public research so that we will remain competitive and remain an important contributor to the Canadian economy.
Thank you for this opportunity.
We look forward to your questions.