International Trade Committee on June 17th, 2010

[Carl Grenier]

I cannot give a specific response to that question because the studies I consulted did not contain any specific information on that topic.

However, you are right to point out that many European countries have been at the forefront of the development of such technologies. Consequently, they have made considerable progress on the markets of their own countries and in terms of exports. Clearly, if access to the products resulting from these technologies is opened up, the Europeans will necessarily have a comparative advantage with regard to our companies.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Pomerleau, an article was published in La Terre de chez nous, once again. We discussed it at the very beginning of the meeting. The Europeans are well ahead of us as concerns the appellations d'origine contrôlée, and so forth. Yesterday, a vote was held in the European Parliament on the requirement for the details to be specified on country of origin labels for meat and other products.

We can see what is happening in Europe. This is their trademark, which they have developed using this marketing style. They are known for this. How will your industry cope with this? How will you make a go of your venture in the face of such standards?

[Jacques Pomerleau]

We have to be careful. We must not let the Europeans go too far in defining products that are given either the appellation d'origine contrôlée or protected geographical indication designation. If we are told that baloney or salami constitute a geographical indication, we will say that we do not agree. However, if it is a product that is tied to a region, such as des Grisons meat, etc., we can deal with that.

In our case, I do not think that this plays against us, providing that we define our products well. We could base ourselves on our experience in Japan to see how we could adapt to the European conditions. Up until now, everything that we have received from European buyers has been very good.

Indeed, you should know that, if you go to a market in the United Kingdom, you will find labels stating “Canadian Style Bacon” followed by “Product of Denmark”.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

During your presentation, you referred to two Quebec plants licensed to market their products in Europe. I would like you tell me more about them, as I am intrigued by these plants and interested in them.

Will this system, which appears to exist in Quebec, be inevitable for the future, for all plants?

[Jacques Pomerleau]

No, it is not essential that all plants be authorized by the European Union, but those that wish to be in Europe would be advised to do so, because this is a prerequisite for them.

A new plant has just been built in the Montérégie region. The new plants, including certain plants that are in Quebec and elsewhere, are studying the European approval process very closely. This may also be an asset for other markets, such as Russia and Belarus. Indeed, for certain markets, their reference is European approval. In North America, the reference is American approval. So we need to look at this matter very closely.

Nevertheless, this also implies changing the production process. There are some restrictions regarding ingredients in animal feed, there are some very strict protocols that need to be implemented.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

The European approval goes that far.

[Jacques Pomerleau]

Yes.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

It's a production and processing method.

[Jacques Pomerleau]

I can give you an example. There is the protocol stating that Canadian pork meat must be processed without the addition of ractopamine, a feed additive for animals. Yes, it goes that far.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you. Merci, monsieur Guimond.

That will conclude our round of questioning today. I will again thank our witnesses, Professor Grenier from Laval and Jacques Pomerleau from Canada Pork International. Thank you.

We'll bid our witnesses adieu, but I'll hold the committee for another couple of minutes to give you a quick update on where we're heading, we hope, in the fall.

Thank you again, gentlemen.

I don't think we need to go in camera.

Our sense is that when we resume in the fall, we will continue discussion on this topic and likely carry through in this stage of the discussion. As we have heard, this is probably going to take a couple of years, so I thought we might dedicate the fall to it, if you are in agreement. I want to leave this thought with you, and we can confirm as we go.

The sense at this time is that we will continue this discussion through the fall session. During that time, perhaps in October, the committee would visit the European Union, essentially for a couple of days' briefing by officials and the European Parliament colleagues in Brussels. At this point we may split up the committee and fan out to member states to have meetings. They would not be on-the-record meetings; they would be more in the way of networking and talking to our colleagues in the various member states. I suspect that would occur in October, if the committee is in agreement. We have reasonable expectation that this would be satisfactory to the parties concerned.

That would get us through to the new year and to any other matters that would come up--bills that are referred to the committee, for example. We expect we may hear about Jordan and Panama during this period, but we don't know for sure. In the new year I think we could probably put the EU on hold for a while and take up an additional study on what I think will most likely be the next major pursuit in terms of a free trade agreement, that being India. I'd like members to consider doing a study of India in the second session of this upcoming term. That might suggest a visit to India in the spring, probably March. We will discuss that further.

That's just the general plan. I think we'll continue in September with the EU and other matters that may come up.

At this point, that's all I've got. Unless anybody has any further comments, have a good summer.

Go ahead, Mr. Cannis.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I have a quick question, Mr. Chairman.

In terms of the European community member states, I think there were some discussions in terms of a visit there or breaking up the committee--I might have missed a meeting and I apologize if I did--and we would have to do a presentation on our behalf to the Liaison Committee to get the funds. Have we commenced that part of it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Okay. I must have missed the meeting. I apologize.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I've been having informal conversations. We have the chair of the Liaison Committee with us, so he's fully aware of it. We've talked to whips and House leaders to get a general trend of what's expected in the new year and how we are doing on budgets and stuff like that.

We've been very reasonable in this committee, considering it's an international trade committee. I think we're not going to have too much difficulty in that regard, particularly if we meet in one place for meetings in Brussels where we would have the clerks and the analysts and translators.

After that I'm thinking we would probably venture out to other member states in threes or fours, and you don't need all the staff with you on those visits. There will be more visits on a one-to-one basis with European colleagues in the member states, as well as the European Parliament.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Have a good summer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes. Thank you again, and have a good summer. I think we've had a good session.

The meeting is adjourned.