Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 1st, 2023

[François Dionne, Director, International Program, SOCODEVI]

Good evening.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

The Société de coopération pour le développement international, known as SOCODEVI, is a Canadian co-operative organization that has been working to support international development since its creation in 1985. Our mission is to support and strengthen co-operatives and collective enterprises in developing countries. SOCODEVI is supported by a network of Quebec's largest co-operatives in agriculture, agri-food, forestry and beyond. SOCODEVI is carrying out some 30 initiatives in 19 countries to promote co-operative economic development and collective entrepreneurship, in partnership with local stakeholders ranging from co-operatives and federations to governments. SOCODEVI is Canada's leader in co-operative development in developing countries.

Since 2008, SOCODEVI has been working in Ukraine on three food security initiatives, funded by Global Affairs Canada.

The first focused on the grain sector. We helped establish two co-operatives and strengthen co-operative value chains in the Dnipro region.

In 2014, we launched an initiative to support the fresh milk value chain, in conjunction with Agropur. These efforts culminated in a new dairy processing plant, which opened in July 2023.

The third initiative, launched in 2020, was aimed at revitalizing agriculture in the Donbas region, further to the conflict in 2014.

However, in 2022, the war forced SOCODEVI's teams to shift their focus from supporting co-operatives to providing humanitarian assistance. They helped co-operative members relocate to other regions safely. Decisions regarding the dairy processing plant also had to be made.

The conflict displaced a tremendous number of people and impacted numerous farmers. Farm labour suffered, with some regions losing valuable expertise. Supply chains were severely disrupted, making it difficult to acquire crucial farm inputs such as seeds, fertilizer and plant protection products.

Farm infrastructure in conflict zones, especially in eastern Ukraine, has been severely damaged, often rendered unusable by the presence of mines and other hazards. Farmers in those regions have to worry about safety and security, which hampers their ability to farm and access their land.

The conflict has also had a serious environmental impact, namely the contamination of soil and water supply. That significantly affects the long-term viability of farming in some regions. A return to stability and prosperity will hinge on rebuilding and rehabilitating these areas.

Despite the war, SOCODEVI has continued to stand by farmers in Ukraine, unlike other aid organizations, which left the country because of the conflict. In the face of growing food insecurity and inflation, we tailored the initiative in the Donbas region, transforming it into a large-scale food security co-operative in six new regions of the country. In addition, we raised the funds necessary to finish building the dairy processing plant, and drew on our own funding to provide direct financial support.

More than ever, we are confident that the co-operative model is an essential part of the solution.

Rooted in solidarity, risk sharing and member collaboration, co-operatives are resilient to crises and economic shocks.

In times of war, co-operatives make it easier for farmers to pool resources, which strengthens their ability to overcome challenges and keep production going.

Co-operatives represent a crucial lever for maintaining food production, even in the face of difficult conditions. By virtue of their collaborative structures, co-operatives have the ability to overcome logistical and technical barriers.

What's more, co-operatives provide farmers with training, technical advice and financial support, enhancing their skills and ability to respond to challenges, including in times of war.

By empowering farmers to take charge of their own destiny, co-operatives give farmers greater food production autonomy and improve their ability to deal with external challenges.

No one can predict how long this war will last.

Be that as it may, we know for sure that SOCODEVI will remain committed to supporting co-operative development, food security and communities throughout the conflict. When the time comes to rebuild this amazing country's agricultural sector, we are determined to be there no matter what to help ensure a better future.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dionne.

We now go to MP Epp. You have four minutes.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In the interest of transparency, I'm a former colleague of Mr. Hagerman, an employee at the Foodgrains Bank. Our farm is one of the 28,000 members of the Grain Farmers of Ontario.

Beginning with Mr. Hagerman, you referenced the shifting focus. All entities, governments, NGOs, farms and businesses operate under the laws of scarcity. We have the shock of the war in Ukraine impacting food and triggering more humanitarian crises, yet you talked about the successes of longer-term investments in development.

How does the Foodgrains Bank go at that balance, and what would your advice to government be?

[Paul Hagerman]

Would you mind repeating that question, please?

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

You talked about a shifting focus of NGOs, of entities, pulling longer-term funding toward responding to humanitarian crises, immediate crises, yet you also talked about the successes of investing in longer-term development projects coming out of 2008, which I'll get to in a second.

Can you comment on how NGOs decide where their funding should go on that balance between the long term and the short term? What would your advice to government be on that same question?

[Paul Hagerman]

We NGOs don't have that much leeway in terms of deciding where our funding goes because we are bound by the rules of where the funding comes from. We get a significant portion of our money from the Canadian government, for which we are grateful, but that, of course, comes with certain stipulations: This dollar is allocated for humanitarian, that dollar is allocated for development, and that dollar is allocated to nutrition or whatever. We spend it that way.

We do some fundraising with the public. We have some leeway there, but it's less.

We are trying to balance responding to humanitarian needs in the short term, but we're also trying to build resilience through development so that humanitarian needs in the future will not be as great. We and many other organizations are working on what we often refer to as the nexus, the link between humanitarian aid and development, providing people with food today but also providing something to build a livelihood so they won't need food tomorrow. I think we need to achieve a balance between those two.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

I want to get another question in. I'm going to shift to Ms. Conlon.

Pre-war, 660,000 to 680,000 tonnes of nitrogen were imported into eastern and central Canada. Some of that Russian urea was on our farm. Belarusian potash has been applied on our farm for economic reasons, yet we have all sorts of natural gas in Canada.

You said that there should be the potential—if I heard you correctly—of fertilizer manufacturing facilities for a whole host of reasons in eastern Canada.

Is there a business case for that? Is there a market for that?

[Deborah Conlon]

The short answer is that how to facilitate that kind of investment hasn't been fully explored. As you know, in Camlachie there is a plant that could expand. I have heard that they haven't expanded because of the business environment in Ontario in the past.

There was also a pretty serious investigation into building a facility in Quebec. It's a billion-dollar investment. It needs to have the right conditions. I think that's where government can really play a role to say, “Hey, what is it going to take for you guys—”

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

What are those conditions? Can you be more specific on the conditions?

[Deborah Conlon]

It's the competition with other countries. Fertilizer is a commodity, just like grain. If we're not competitive and the price isn't right to invest in Canada, people aren't going to do it. If there are additional expenses in Canada versus the U.S., they're going to invest in the U.S.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We will now go to Dr. Fry.

You have four minutes.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank every one of the witnesses for coming and for explaining an extraordinarily complex situation to us, but I want to thank Mr. Hagerman because he actually put everything in clear perspective.

How we did things and what made us successful a decade ago no longer exists. The world has changed completely: It's been turned on its ear, and we cannot deal with those problems in the same old way—and I think, as you said, Minister Joly pointed that out. We're going to have to make friends with people we are not normally friends with, as long as we can find some common ground in getting certain things done. We're going to need to look at how we do things differently.

One of the questions I want to ask is.... I mean, you know the old saying that you give someone a fish or you teach them how to fish. My question is, should we always be looking to ourselves as providing the food for the rest of the world? Should we not be teaching the rest of the world how to feed itself? Is that the first question: How do we help those poor farmers in Africa and in developing countries to grow food that's easy for them to grow and ready for them?

Should we be using the massive multilateral groups that distribute food and go to the aid of people who are in need? Are they now overwhelming the situation? Are they top-heavy? Should we actually be working directly, one-on-one, with the farmers in the countries we're trying to aid? I know we do some of it, but should we be using our own farmers to help those people to grow what is essential for their needs?

We're not going to turn back the clock on the pandemic. This is not the first and only pandemic. Conflict is rising. The catch-22 of climate change is making it impossible to grow food in most countries of the world, so how do we find new answers, Mr. Hagerman?

[Paul Hagerman]

I think you hit the nail on the head. It doesn't make sense for us to assume that we can feed the world from Canada. Canada's a huge exporter—will always be—and our farmers are doing a fantastic job, but the needs of the world are greater than that.

Part of the problem we've had is there are only a few big exporting countries. Canada's one, Ukraine is one, and some of the others have been named, and we've had too much dependence on them, so that when one is disrupted, such as Ukraine, it really creates a problem. What I'm suggesting is not to displace Canada from the market but to encourage countries to try to grow more of their own food.

We know that in Canada grain yields can approach 10 tonnes to the hectare. In most of Africa, grain yields average one tonne per hectare. If we can move that up to two, three or four, that would be huge progress. Food could be produced locally and it would be the food people are accustomed to eating, and there wouldn't be long market chains to get it to market. I think there's a great potential to do that. That's exactly the work we've been doing in my organization, and I'd like to see Canada support more of it.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

What about multilateral organizations being the “middleperson”? Should we remove that? Is that top-heavy now?

[Paul Hagerman]

There's definitely a role for multilaterals. Organizations like the World Food Programme, IFAD—the International Fund for Agricultural Development—and the FAO, the Food and Agriculture Organization, are often working with national governments and putting in place countrywide strategies. That's one approach.

Another approach is the approach of my organization—and I should say Mr. Dionne's as well, because I'm familiar with the work of SOCODEVI—of working with farmers on the ground. As I said, we have 60,000 farmers in our programs and we are working with them to increase their own productivity. In some cases that productivity has been so noticeable that the national government has basically come and said, “What are you doing that is really helping so much? Can we extend this further? Can we adopt it with our own agriculture extension officers and carry it out to the rest of the country?”

There's a role for NGOs and for multinationals.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I hope I have 30 seconds, Mr. Chair.

I want to ask this: What about the catch-22 of climate change? How do we adapt growing produce for livestock, given that it contributes to climate change, and yet we need to adapt it to the new climate realities of different countries?

[Paul Hagerman]

You're right that in 30 seconds I'm not going to give you a whole lot of technology.

Agriculture contributes to greenhouse gases, but agriculture's also a solution, notably the conservation agriculture that I talked about. You're incorporating more residues into the soil, and that's actually capturing carbon in the soil. Ways that help people move away from purchased fertilizers towards livestock manures and things like that all help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There are a lot of different techniques that can help people adapt to changing livestock—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Hagerman.

Next we go to Mr. Bergeron for four minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Let me begin by apologizing for being late. I want to say sorry to the committee members. It certainly wasn't planned, but our Conservative friends had this strange idea of calling for concurrence in the report on Ukraine right when the committee was meeting. I had to miss part of the meeting to deliver my statement in the House on another subject entirely. Their decision to filibuster themselves, so to speak, is ironic—after all, this very study stems from a Conservative motion. It's surprising, to say the least, that we find ourselves in this situation today. I do want to thank the member for Shefford. She made herself available at a moment's notice to fill in for me, since I unexpectedly had to be in the House on account of this move by the Conservatives.

Now that that's out of the way, Mr. Chair, I want to continue along the same line of questioning as Ms. Fry. Canada is the world's fifth-largest agri-food exporter, behind the European Union, the U.S., Brazil and China. In 2022, Canada exported nearly $92.8 billion in agriculture and food products.

I'm all for helping farmers in developing countries grow more food for themselves, but with the war in Ukraine and climate change, don't some developing countries urgently need direct assistance—until they're able to increase their own food and agricultural productivity?

In that case, is Canada in a position to help those countries? The question is probably for Mr. Hagerman.

[Paul Hagerman]

Thank you.

Yes, Canada is certainly able to provide aid. Canada is the largest donor of food assistance per capita in the world, which I am proud of as a food assistance person, and I believe you should be too. I think there's going to be an increase in that, because Canada set its minimum commitment on food assistance about 10 years ago and has not increased the minimum commitment since then. Mind you, the actual amount goes up and down each year, and it's quite generous, but there's nothing that says that it couldn't drop at some point.

We have recommended that Canada tie its food assistance to the price of food, so that when the price of food on the global market goes up, Canada's food assistance would go up, and we would be able to provide more to those countries that need it.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Hagerman.

Ms. Conlon, in 2023, the government announced that it was withdrawing Russia's Most-Favoured-Nation Tariff treatment under the Customs Tariff. It also announced that a General Tariff of 35% would henceforth be applied to virtually all Russian imports.

Some agricultural groups in Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada that depend on Russian fertilizer imports objected to the tariff, pointing out that Canada is the only G7 country to impose a tariff on Russian fertilizer, so the measure was counterproductive, since Canadian agricultural products were less competitive on international markets than Russian agricultural products.

Given the circumstances, in the 2023 budget, the Canadian government allocated $34.1 million over three years starting in 2023‑24 to assist farmers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Bergeron, you're over your time.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

So my question for Ms. Conlon is, have you received any of that assistance?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Please answer very briefly, Ms. Conlon.

[Deborah Conlon]

I think your points are correct. This tariff has had an impact. We estimate it at about $200 million for that growing season. The $30-million program that was announced hasn't come to fruition.

That program is not a direct payment to farmers; it is a program for environmental goods and activities related to fertilizer. It isn't really commensurate with the cost that we had.