Good morning, everyone. Welcome to meeting number 52 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Pursuant to the motion adopted on Monday, February 23, 2026, the committee is meeting on food price inflation and the national school food program. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the Standing Orders.

We have one witness appearing virtually and one in the room. The witness appearing virtually has been sound-tested and approved.

I would like to advise all members participating today that you have the option of choosing to participate fully in the official language of your choice. Please ensure that you have the channel that gives you the interpretation that allows you to fully participate. Click on the globe icon at the bottom of your screen and choose the official language. If there is an interruption in translation, get my attention and I will suspend while it is being corrected. I would also like to advise everyone in the room to please silence your devices before we begin, and please refrain from tapping on the microphone boom for the protection of the translators. Please wait until I address you by name before speaking, and please direct all questions through the chair.

In our first hour, we have two witnesses appearing on food price inflation and the national school food program.

As an individual, Sylvain Charlebois, the senior director of the agri-food analytics lab at Dalhousie University, is here by video conference.

Did I get it right, Monsieur Charlebois?

11 a.m.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois Senior Director, Agri-Food Analytics Lab, Dalhousie University, As an Individual

That's correct, Mr. Chair.

11 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you.

From Daily Bread Food Bank, we have Neil Hetherington, chief executive officer. He is here in the room with us.

We'll begin with Monsieur Charlebois for five minutes.

11 a.m.

Senior Director, Agri-Food Analytics Lab, Dalhousie University, As an Individual

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation.

Our central message this morning is that a permanent school food program can provide meaningful support to children and families, but permanence must come with protection against rising costs and clear evidence of results. Feeding children at school must also be accompanied by policies that improve food affordability at home.

Our fall 2026 Canadian food sentiment index reported that 32% are using savings or borrowing money to buy food, up 4% from a year earlier. Many families are also experiencing couponing or savings fatigue after years of high inflation.

Our earlier research also identified nutritional trade-offs. In our 2025 study, 45.5% of respondents reported prioritizing costs over nutritional value more than a year earlier. That finding helps explain why access to food and access to nutritious food must be considered together.

Slower inflation does not reverse the price increases families have already absorbed, nor does a national inflation average capture the cost of delivering a nutritious meal in a remote community.

Our forward-looking analysis also identifies three pressures that school food budgets must anticipate right now.

The first is diesel. Our lab's scenario indicates that, if high diesel prices persist through winter, grocery inflation could peak 0.5 to 0.7 percentage points above an easing baseline. These costs move through farming, processing and transportation with a delay.

The second is the Canadian dollar. In our currency scenarios, a dollar at 68¢ U.S. could bring fruit inflation to 4% and vegetable inflation to 5.5%, all else being equal. These are category inflation rates, not additional percentage point increases. A weaker dollar reduces importers' purchasing power, particularly during the winter produce season.

The third is the super El Niño. Our outlook identifies disrupted rainfall and harvest as a risk to agricultural supplies and food-processing costs into 2027.

These are conditional scenarios, and the effects should not simply be added together. They reinforce the need to protect school meal budgets against changing costs.

We offer four recommendations. First, protect the purchasing power of program funding. Second, combine national accountability with local delivery. Third, make equitable access practical. Fourth, measure what children receive and consume.

The lab's research supports taking household affordability pressures seriously. It does not establish that school meals alone can resolve them. Children also eat on weekends, during holidays and throughout the summer. The committee should, therefore, connect this program with broader work on household incomes, grocery competition, transportation and supply chain costs. A school meal can help a family today; lasting food security also requires that family to afford nutritious food outside school.

We support making school food dependable. Parliament should insist that permanent funding delivers sustained access to nutritious meals with transparent costs and measurable benefits for children.

Along with this statement, we also supplied you with copies of our forecast and of our index that was released a few weeks ago.

Thank you. I welcome your questions.

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mr. Charlebois.

Mr. Hetherington, go ahead.

11:05 a.m.

Neil Hetherington Chief Executive Officer, Daily Bread Food Bank

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon.

My name is Neil Hetherington. I have the awesome privilege of being the CEO of the Daily Bread Food Bank. The Daily Bread is Canada's largest food bank, providing more than 90% of emergency food support across the city of Toronto through our network of 221 food banks.

Regrettably, now one in 10 Torontonians has to make use of a food bank. I'll speak more to the fact that there were 4.1 million client visits that we provided food for in the last year alone.

I want to start by giving thanks. Making the national school food program permanent was a historic decision, and it's working. There are 400,000 more children now fed at school.

The questions we have are how we can make this program last, reach every child and deliver the most value for every tax dollar.

Grocery prices are up more than 30% since 2019, and our frontline data shows that when food inflation rises, food bank visits follow. In 2025, we recorded that all-time high of 4.1 million visits, and that was up 340% since 2019. Nearly all of our clients, 96%, point to one single reason why they need to visit the food bank. It is the cost of living. Sadly, children are disproportionately carrying the weight.

Next week, we will be releasing the “Who’s Hungry” report. It's our annual report about food insecurity in the city of Toronto. You're going to read about a startling new statistic. In the city of Toronto, one in eight children now uses a food bank. In 17% of households with children, kids are going hungry at least once a week, and two in three parents are going without food themselves so that their children can eat.

Student nutrition programs address that equation. Thanks to the City of Toronto's leadership and financial support under Mayor Chow, morning meals now reach every student in every public school. That's about 325,000 students. Without stigma, these students eat so they can learn. Now we will be moving to a universal lunch program, which will continue to improve the situation.

Toronto has shown that universality is possible, but a city cannot carry this on a property tax base alone. Government funding covers only 37% of food costs for Toronto's student nutrition program, and Ontario's base funding has not increased since 2015. It's $17 per student per year, so it's nine cents per day.

I offer you four recommendations.

First, every order of government must pay its fair share, and its share needs to keep pace with food inflation. We would ask that you index federal funding to food inflation so that this permanent program doesn't quietly shrink in real terms. Work to build matching commitments into agreements with the provinces and territories so that federal dollars add to provincial investments, rather than replace them.

Second, measure and publish the data. Track each visit, the cost per meal, the share of food costs covered by the government and, ultimately, food insecurity rates among households with children. Report them publicly every year and draw in long-term studies on student health and academic outcomes. That is how Parliament will know this investment is, in fact, paying off.

Third, stretch every dollar further with a federal food donation tax credit. We recommend a 25% non-refundable credit for farmers that donate food to school programs and food banks. This would bring in more fresh, Canadian-grown food into schools and lower the public costs. Ontario has a tax credit like this for farmers, and last year alone, our food bank received over four million pounds of farm donations. Farmers did well by doing good. A stackable federal tax credit would support farmers, cut food waste and give school food programs a cost-effective procurement tool on its path to universality.

Fourth, we recognize that school food is a floor, not a fix. A child can eat well at school and still go home to an empty fridge. After paying for housing, the median food bank client has just $8.33 a day to pay for food, clothing and transportation. Some 85% of our food bank clients are renters. Therefore, we ask that the government consider the Canada's renter tax credit, which could have a substantial benefit to targeted, low-income groups of about two million households. The CRA has already shown it can deliver tax rebates like this quickly, and we look forward to working with the government to provide input in shaping this policy.

The economic case is also clear. Children who are hungry struggle to focus and learn. When parents skip meals so that their children can eat, the stress and health consequences are real. The strain follows food-insecure kids into adult households. We know that those who are food insecure cost taxpayers $450 more per year on average in acute health care costs.

I'd be delighted to take additional questions as they come up. Thank you.