Evidence of meeting #33 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pei.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC
Right. We need a balance between serving Canadians on one side and making sure of the ability for the drug to be developed properly on the other, and also that we have enough time and resources.
Chair, P.E.I. Health Coalition
Australia is one of those countries that's doing a good job of that. They have a lot more generics than we do. They have an almost free drug program. New Zealand is doing a great job. If you look at Scotland and Wales, nobody pays anything for their drugs there. In Great Britain, in general, there's hardly any...but they're developing some drugs. There are lots of examples in the world. Most of Europe, Australia, and New Zealand have it. I was in Australia last year and saw how they are developing their generics. It is a worldwide trade with who they produce the generics for, who they ship them out to, and so on.
Here we're getting new drugs coming on the market with one ingredient; the name is changed, the price goes up. It's a terrible racket. Then there's the safety. They say now you shouldn't take a pill or a drug unless it's been on the market for three or four years, because we don't know with these new drugs what half of them are doing, and yet people are demanding them. With a pharmaceutical program, there would be no advertising. You would streamline the number of drugs coming on the market, and you would pick the best drugs so that Canadians would have the best medical care they could possibly get.
All of those things people have put together in very good studies. They're all available, and we certainly need them.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, Mr. Dhaliwal.
We're moving to our last MP for this afternoon. Go ahead, Mr. Ritz, for five minutes.
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your presentations of diverse viewpoints. We welcome that.
Ms. Boyd, thank you for the work that you've done in Africa. You've been on the ground, and you've seen what is needed.
You made a number of points, and one point I picked up on is that you see Australia and New Zealand as good examples of bringing generics to the market. Do I have that right?
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Then why as TPP signatories, which they are and we are, could we not partner with them and gain from their expertise through the TPP? Why would that be stopped?
Chair, P.E.I. Health Coalition
I don't know how that would work, because there are 12 countries involved, and therefore we would be dealing with all 12 countries and the competitiveness of the United States and the big corporations.
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
There's an overarching umbrella with the TPP, but within that umbrella each country can deal with the other country on specifics that they need to do.
Chair, P.E.I. Health Coalition
Well, sir, we could do that without the TPP. We could just do it. That's the thing.
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
It's not happening. I'm just saying, is the TPP the article that would finally facilitate that?
Chair, P.E.I. Health Coalition
No, it wouldn't be. It wouldn't be, and there was an awful lot of concern in Australia about the TPP. Many, many people share the concerns that many Canadians have. They say that it is not good for Australia.
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Great. Thank you.
Brian and Rinnie, on cattle, of course, we export half of what we produce here in Canada, and it's very similar with pork. When you get into the grain side, it's 80% to 90% in some cases, but we're learning to add value, not just volume, in our exports. We're adding value.
You talk about the small processor here, which is good. They have the flexibility to adjust to what's needed in a lot of these other countries and not just sell what we have, but what they want. That was the whole genesis of the beef centre of excellence in Calgary. We now have all these people from our marketplace coming and showing us how to carve up our beef without losing the quality of those cuts, and so on. It's a good news story, and again, it's all about value.
You made the comment, Brian, about selling into other countries what we get a lesser price for here. I guess the best example is a trim that used to go to the U.S. for basically the cost of transport. It's now going into a lot of that Pacific Rim, including some of the countries that we're trying to set up deals with for hotpot, and we're getting a double A price for it. Rather than just giving it away for the cost of transport, we're getting a double A price. That, coupled with some of the other areas on bone meal and even the hides, tripe, offal, and all that you were talking about, has been adding $200 to $300 per animal in value that we weren't getting at all, simply because now we've redirected it. That's the nature of these trade agreements, being able to derive what they need, working in concert with them, supplying that, and getting that extra value.
You mentioned one other example. You had sent some beef directly into Hong Kong. When we first got beef access into there, the first cuts going in were stomachs and tongues—and I don't see that on a lot of menus here in Canada—to the tune of about $7 million a year. That's a tremendous amount of value for stuff that was going into the grinder, just into the garbage. That's the nature of getting outside of our country and looking offshore. It also keeps the Americans honest. Country of origin labelling was extremely harmful to us. A good diverse stock portfolio is one thing, but a good diverse trade portfolio is another.
If you have any other comments on adding value by looking at these other markets, I'd be happy to hear them.
Chairman, Prince Edward Island Cattle Producers
You've certainly hit on most of them that we're working on, for sure. Hotpot is a big thing that we're very excited about here because we can take our trim and double, triple, or quadruple the value of it, and then if we get into breed-specific animals as well, it just goes up. Prince Edward Island is uniquely situated for raising livestock because I believe in Alberta—and correct me if I'm wrong—a cow-calf pair grazes on about 30 acres.
Conservative
Chairman, Prince Edward Island Cattle Producers
Yes. So on Prince Edward Island, we can put a pair on an acre and then be environmentally sustainable. We have a tremendous ability to grow grass in Atlantic Canada and on Prince Edward Island, and we need to get bact to.... Environmentally sensitive areas need to be taken out of crop production and put into livestock production. It's great for the environment; it's great for habitat and so on, to leave the land the way it was.
Conservative
Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
You talked about the size and scope of some of the farming operations on P.E.I. It's not dissimilar to the rest of Canada. Ninety-eight per cent of agriculture in Canada is still family farmed, family owned, family run. Some of them are large. I'm not aware of any 50,000 cow-calf pairs in Alberta, but there are feedlots of that size, definitely, up to 100,000. One is just going down now because of carbon tax and some of the taxation that's happening in Alberta, but there are all kinds of operations that are 1,000 to 2,000 head.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, Mr. Ritz.
That ends the dialogue with the MPs, and it ends our fourth and last panel today. Witnesses, thank you for taking time out of your day to come and talk to us and tell us your feelings, which are very important.
If you figure you didn't convey something to us, we will take submissions of anything else that you want to add. We're taking submissions up until the end of October.
Thank you again. We're just going to break for a couple of minutes, and then we're going to hear from the audience. I'll just remind the audience that you're going to be limited to two minutes, so get your thoughts together for two minutes, and we'll start off in a few minutes.
We'll suspend.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
We're going to continue on with our TPP consultations.
Here's where we open it up to the audience. I just remind you we're going to keep to two minutes. We have two mikes, so we go from one to two, back to one. What I'll do is ask Ana Whealtey to go to mike one, and to mike two will be Edith Perry, I think. We'll start off. Keep your comments tight.
When it's two minutes, I'll just raise a white sheet. If you have some final thoughts, go to two and a half minutes. We can live with that. Then we'll go to the next one.
Go ahead, Ana. You have the mike.
Ana Whealtey As an Individual
Okay, thanks.
Today I'm representing the P.E.I. Food Security Network. We're dedicated to changing community attitudes and public policy to achieve environmentally sustainable production and distribution of food; access of all people to affordable, healthy food; liveable incomes for food producers; and P.E.I. self-reliance in food. We formed in 2008, and our membership includes people who are working for environmental causes, dieticians, people involved in women's equality, and people with disabilities, as well as people from the Medical Society of PEI, and the Healthy Eating Alliance. We also have farmers and fishers who belong to our network.
P.E.I. has been called, at times, the garden of the gulf, Canada's food island, the million-acre farm. We have good farmland here. We're surrounded by a rich marine ecosystem, and we have farmers and fishers who have the history, the knowledge, and skills to take advantage of those gifts and produce healthy, high-quality food. Yet, this is a place where one in five children lives in a home that experiences some level of food insecurity. Of all Canadian provinces, P.E.I. has one of the highest rates of food insecurity.
On the other hand, we haven't done a terrific job of tending this garden of the gulf. Our food and agriculture policy is centred on the monoculture of potatoes, for french fries, which is arguably not real food, and the export market. It's an industrial model that demands intensive application of fertilizers and pesticides, uses water, and has devastating effects on our environment.
The fish kills due to pesticide runoff into our streams and anoxic events in many of our estuaries, both of which occur on a regular basis, must be included in the costs of this way of doing business. The depletion of our soil and organic material, the loss of soil to erosion, and the high levels of nitrates in our water can also be counted as costs.
We have a vision of a sustainable food system rooted in the concept of food sovereignty, which puts control locally. Our specific concerns include the impact on our dairy farmers, which is an example of a system that does provide healthy food locally. We're concerned about the rights that are given to corporations, in particular, around the investor-state provisions and procurement provisions that interfere with our government's capacity to develop policies that promote local food systems and ecologically sustainable production of food.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
You're well over time. Sorry.
We're going to go to Ms. Perry at mike two, and Colin Jeffrey, be ready at mike one.
I'll remind everyone here that we've received over 20,000 email submissions. Sometimes people are here and they think of other things that they want to add. We'll take any submissions that come in. Yes, we have over 20,000. You have until the end of October. If you don't know where to send it, we have people here who will help you.
Right now, we have Ms. Perry at mike two. Go ahead Ms. Perry.
Edith Perry As an Individual
I am an older Canadian citizen who was born and raised on the Prairies, and whose family comes from farmers on both sides, and I married a veterinarian, who comes from a Nova Scotia farm, so that establishes my credentials. What do I feel about this trade deal? Not much.
Did any trade deals up to now benefit most citizens? No. They certainly didn't benefit me and many others in our communities, including my family across the country.
I'm not going to say much more than this, because I think you've had umpteen presentations, with all kinds of facts and figures and whatnot.
The major concern that I have, particularly about what will happen in P.E.I., and in the Prairies, and across Canada, is water. Is water going to become the new oil? Will it become a wild west, where somebody with power, a rancher, will be able to protect their water supply, which is our common good?
Other concerns are corporate ownership, a monopoly on prescription drugs, supply management in agriculture, and corporate interests will trump everything. There is a nickname that some of us have given to the TPP: the corporate investor rights agreement.
That is my submission. I have a little bit more fleshed out in a written submission.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, Ms. Perry.
We're going to go to Colin Jeffrey at mike number one, and at mike number two will be Andrew John Lush, I believe.
Go ahead, sir.
Colin Jeffrey As an Individual
Yes, good day.
I am the current chair of Save Our Seas and Shores, an Atlantic Canadian-wide organization working to protect the health of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
The Gulf of St. Lawrence is scientifically known to be the most biologically diverse and productive marine region in Canada. A DFO report from 2009 estimates that the economic value of industries in the gulf is $2.7 billion per year, and that sustains 52,300 jobs or more. It's certain, though, that many of these industries rely on renewable resources provided by the gulf, and having a healthy, sustainable gulf ecosystem is critical to the furthering of those industries into the future.
My members and I are very concerned that the TPP undermines the ability of the Canadian government, both federal and provincial, to enact and uphold environmental legislation which allows us to maintain these ecosystems in a sustainable manner.
I'll give a few examples of that, which show these trade agreements are already undermining the ability of governments to uphold legislation, and they're certainly costing taxpayers a lot of money.
An example right here in the Maritimes is the Bilcon case in Digby, Nova Scotia. The American company Bilcon proposed building a large quarry on the Digby Neck. Because of local citizen concern, the environmental assessment became a panel review, the most robust type of environmental assessment. The panel review in the end rejected the development.
Bilcon appealed that decision using a NAFTA tribunal, which voted in its favour. That's outside of our court system, of course. The dissenting government arbitrator found no breach of NAFTA rules and discussed the importance of socio-economic considerations in environmental assessments, and described the tribunal's decision as a remarkable step backwards in environmental protection.
To conclude, essentially allowing companies to sue the government over perceived lost profits puts Canadian taxpayers at risk and it puts our environmental legislation at great risk.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, Colin.
Could Leo Broderick go to mike number one.
Right now, we're going to hear from Andrew John Lush at mike number two.