Finance Committee on Oct. 27th, 2011

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

As a last question, currently in education you have a federal program to pay fiscally $2 billion into the régime d'épargne-études. Currently you have a lot of independent documentation, governmental documentation...to indicate that this program has any significant effect on the augmentation of secondary education in the universities.

If you transferred this program of $2 billion in direct subvention to the universities and colleges, what would be the effect? Would you have a real and immediate effect from the augmentation of $2 billion?

[Dr. Karen Chad]

Could I just have clarification on which program?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

It is the registered education savings plan.

[Dr. Karen Chad]

So the RESP. Okay, great.

Well, certainly that has been and is one of the effective sources in terms of being able to provide an affordable mechanism for our young people. In terms of the maintenance of that particular program, that would be one of a suite of mechanisms for us.

[Dr. Robert McCulloch]

If I may, I'll just add that access to post-secondary education is key. Anything we can do to support that to allow families to do long-term planning would I think be of great assistance.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you. Merci.

Ms. Glover's round is next, but she has graciously agreed to give her time to Mr. Hoback--since he's not as efficient as others are.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

The clock starts now, Mr. Hoback.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Chair. I always appreciate the time you do give me to speak. It's never long enough, but it never will be, so I think you understand that.

I'd be remiss if I didn't talk about agriculture issues and talk about the excitement around the agriculture sector right now. I think you can see where I'm going with this.

In rural Canada right now, there's lots of excitement because the long-gun registry is going to be disappearing fairly quick. I have a lot of people who are excited. Of course, the freedom to farm, with the Canadian Wheat Board changes, is bringing about a whole pile of excitement too.

But I think we need to talk about moving forward. These things are going to happen. It's there, it's going to happen, so what we need to talk about now is the environment that we're going to be in once these changes are done. It's not so much the long-gun registry--I think that's pretty simple--but it's the Canadian Wheat Board. That goes into the whole plant breeding and research side of things.

You made the comment on how much money is being spent in canola, beans, and corn, but not a lot of money is being spent in malt barley, barley, feed barley, durum, or wheat. Now, if you talk to a person like Dr. Fowler at the University of Saskatchewan here, a very famous plant breeder in winter wheat...who has more varieties registered outside of Canada because we wouldn't register them in Canada.

You talked about more funding for public research. What about the regulatory side of things? Do we need to relook at how we go through the approval process for new varieties to come into the market?

Maybe I'll start with you, Todd, and then work our way through.

[Todd Hames]

Thanks, Randy.

I think the regulatory process is very important to agriculture and to Canada. Obviously, streamlining of regulatory systems around the world, and especially the U.S. and Canada, means the better we can work together. There is so much trade going across the border.

I know the federal Government of Canada can't do this on its own, but we have to push for regulatory approvals that are accepted around the world. CropLife members would certainly agree with this. I mean, they're spending so much money on regulations in every country to do the same thing over and over again to satisfy the small differences in the paper. So I think streamlining regulatory approvals across certainly the U.S. and Canada would be beneficial.

There's also the provinces. We have provincial regulations that are not streamlined either.

The other thing with the regulations is that low-level presence is probably one of the key things hitting agriculture right now. That's a regulatory thing. Zero is not a zero any longer. Zero is too small a number. It can be measured in the billions. A one-billion or two-billion detection level of some kind of a GM event or some other residue or whatnot is really a zero, but other countries in the world have to start recognizing a low-level presence is acceptable so that trade can continue. There's too much money at risk to ship products around the world and get them rejected at a port somewhere because of some small level.

If the government could do anything on regulations, I think it would be to push for international cooperation with the streamlining of regulations, to quit spending this money needlessly around the world reproducing identical results.

And stick to the science. We have to take the political and all that out of it.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Dennis, at CropLife, you guys deal with regulations across the border. Do you see us making advances in the recognition of science and the data sets from other countries as we see stuff move forward here in Canada?

[Dennis Prouse]

I'm glad I have an opportunity to speak to this. We were at the market access meeting that was run by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada earlier this week, and we were impressed with both the leadership of Minister Ritz and the work being done in the department. But what it all speaks to is the broader acceptance of science-based regulations.

You either accept science-based regulation or you don't. I agree entirely that there needs to be more research. Our members would agree with that. Yet you mention more research on wheat and you get an irrational push-back from a number of sectors. If we're going to feed nine billion people in the world by 2050, we need to do this research. There has to be broader acceptance of science-based regulation. I appreciate the leadership the Government of Canada is showing on this, but there is push-back both internationally and sometimes within our own borders on science-based regulation. To me, that's the broader issue that has to be tackled.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

We'll go to Mr. Van Kesteren.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and my thanks to you all for coming.

I guess I have the mop-up.

Standing at the corner of Idylwild and the Circle--it sounds like an Eagles song--with the industry committee, I was just astounded. This was four years ago, and I was watching these trucks just barrelling down. It was raw entrepreneurship and it stirred the blood.

I would ask each one of our panel members if you could reinforce what we're doing right, or maybe what you see as being really important. We got the message on the fisheries, and with Mr. Hames on the bridges. I'm from the riding of Chatham-Kent—Essex, and we have the same problems we need to address.

Dr. Chad, maybe you could tell us what we're doing right and what you see that we could improve on.

[Dr. Karen Chad]

I'll frame my remarks around three thematic areas that I think you're doing great on. I've already mentioned HQP in regard to the Canada research chairs program. There is the CERC program. Also, with the Vanier and the Banting, you're bringing high-quality people here--excellent.

As to infrastructure and resources, with things like CFI and the KIP program, you are not only bringing the people and the students, the world leaders, but you're providing the type of infrastructure and environment they need.

That's a great start, but we have to do more.

The third thematic area for me is partnerships. How do we coordinate more between governments, universities, industry, and other sectors of our population? What incentives should we have? You've started things like fellowships and internships and other cooperative things. We have to think more strategically, more innovatively, and more pervasively within the partnership theme.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

We'll skip the university information now and just go on. I'm sorry. You did wonderfully.

I'll go to the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities next.

[David Marit]

I like what I've seen from the government regarding the importance of rural Canada to the growth of the Canadian economy. I think that's important. When you look at the geography and the larger urban centres, they have needs. We know they do. But it seems that right now in rural Canada we have a voice. I also want to say that I think we've given an opportunity for value-adding in agriculture in western Canada. That's important.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Todd Hames]

The first thing that comes to mind is market access, which is absolutely critical. The government has done a phenomenal job of going around the world and trying to open up markets for agriculture and other businesses in Canada, with free trade agreements. I really appreciate what the government has done there.

I think the government is doing a lot of good things and they're looking at a lot of things in agriculture, like the Growing Forward 2 program, consulting with the farm groups, and trying to determine what the best plan of action is. I think they're doing a great job.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

There is about one minute left.

[Dr. Robert McCulloch]

The support of the federal government for post-secondary education projects was noted with great thanks. Thank you for being involved in post-secondary education, but keep looking to that and challenge us to partner with industry.

[Dennis Prouse]

I would echo what Todd said on trade and just add the phrase “science-based regulation”. We've heard the minister and the government continue to promote that. Canada is now playing a leadership role internationally in promoting science-based regulation and solutions among major agricultural exporting nations. They're getting it absolutely right, and it's greatly appreciated.

[Ian Russell]

On what this government has done right, you can't underestimate how far sound fiscal management and competitive tax rates have gone. The work being done by the red tape reduction commission is really important in the area of duplication more than anything else.

The minister's crusade for a single securities regulator is really important in improving the efficiency of our markets.

Finally, we will benefit enormously from the structural changes in the agricultural markets. The removal of the Wheat Board is sort of the third of two steps that were previously taken--the elimination of the Crow rate, and the privatization of the cooperatives. Those have made for a much more flexible marketplace in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I want to thank all of you for being with us here today. Thank you for the excellent discussion. I hesitate to cut it off, but I do not control time, despite what Mr. Hoback wants me to do.

I want to echo my colleagues and thank the clerks, the analysts, the interpreters, the proceedings and verification officers, and our logistics person for all they do behind the scenes to put this together. On the record, I thank them.

Merci à tous.

The meeting is adjourned.