Evidence of meeting #212 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
—to determine whether they are genuine refugees. If they are, they can stay.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Peter, we have to let Ms. Macklin answer. I think you made the point.
12:10 p.m.
Prof. Audrey Macklin
If it's 3% and it's a matter of life or death for them, I'm not sure why the government insists on proceeding with this. The whole point here is that there is no due process as it is understood under the existing PRRA. The United Nations high commissioner's representative's remarks were based on his belief that what is in the proposed legislation includes a so-called enhanced PRRA, with a robust oral hearing and a full appeal. As I have pointed out to you, these are absent in the legislation. At most, they are a proposal of what may be in regulation, but of course with no obligation to do that.
Second, and candidly, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees does admirable, wonderful work in delivering humanitarian protection all over the world. It is less robust in its defences of the legal protections, and particularly in those countries that happen to be [Technical difficulty—Editor] of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The UNHCR [Technical difficulty—Editor] costs money.
Turning to the United States, I've heard this before—the idea of how do we really know what's happening in the United States and that President Trump doesn't control the whole system. I rely, for my information, on what people who are experts in the U.S. immigration and refugee system are saying about what is happening now. They're talking about the way people are being treated by customs and border police, detention practices, what's happening before immigration judges and what's happening all over the system.
If you are interested in knowing what's happening on the ground, not merely what President Trump is pronouncing, then I urge you to seek recourse to those experts. It is not satisfactory to not seek that recourse, not ask the questions, and then say you don't really know what's happening there. If you want to know—
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Ms. Macklin, we're going to have to move on. We're well over.
I want to get four more questioners in.
We'll have Mr. Poilievre first, and then go back to Ms. Rudd.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Prouse, you mentioned an Ottawa company that designed a strain of soybean. What was the company's name?
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
It's Sevita. They may even be in your riding; I'll need to check.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
They developed a new strain of soybean. Would Canadian soils be suitable for that crop?
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
Yes. We grow a great deal of soy in Canada.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
As a result, this would have been an opportunity for Canadian farmers.
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
Yes, it would have. The cherry on top, the added bonus, is that it had a healthier oil profile. That's the great thing about ag innovation. It's developing healthier strains.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
A healthier product and....
They contacted the regulator and asked if they could plant this, or if it had to go through a review.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
The guys who make the decision couldn't tell whether there was a decision.
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
No, they weren't able to determine whether this was a seed with a novel trait. All seeds with a novel trait have to go through the approval process.
It's worth keeping in mind that nowhere else in the world was there a regulatory body that thought this needed to go through an approval process. Japan itself, which has a very stringent system, one of the stickiest, didn't view this as needing a special review. Canada couldn't decide. It's why we need clearer guidelines.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
The company asked if they were good to go, if they could plant this seed and countries around the world—everywhere—said, “Sure, plant away”, except in Canada, where they said maybe and they'd get back to them eventually.
Did they ever get an answer from CFIA, the Canadian regulator?
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
I don't think they waited to get an answer. They simply moved the operation to the U.S. because there was a market opportunity in Japan. These things tend to move quickly.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
They took a Canadian innovation, developed with Canadian dollars, out of Canada to plant and grow in another country, and now U.S. farmers are harvesting the crop that Canadians paid to develop and are profiting from that opportunity.
12:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
Yes.
For us, it's an example of what is potentially coming down the road on gene editing.
12:15 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, CropLife Canada
As I mentioned in my testimony, gene editing is.... There are going to be several examples like this coming, which is why we are beseeching CFIA to have clear, predictable rules on products with gene editing.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Right, but here we have an example of where government blocked innovation, and as a result, some other country literally harvested the benefit of our investments.
I'm going to move over to Mr. Achen now.
You spoke about the immense paper burden faced by your clients—small businesses across this country. Do you believe there are similar examples, but in other sectors and from other bureaucracies, where Canadian opportunities are blocked by excessive government rules and paperwork?