International Trade Committee on March 9th, 2023

[Daniel Turp]

No, I don't share that concern, because the supply management system, as it was pointed out, has existed since 1971. Has that really prevented Canada from being part of agreements that have benefited all industries? I think it's a little odd we now find it okay to say that this system, which in the past has not harmed Canada, could harm it now.

Why would it harm us? Because other states are telling us we need to open our markets. We didn't agree to do that before, so why would we do it now, especially when there are countries like the United States or Japan that protect some of their industries? I think this argument shows a certain lack of solidarity with our dairy producers. We must keep in mind that the system that was put in place is a unique model and a policy that should be protected.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

To your knowledge, internationally, there are no written or unwritten rules that would make it bad form—or at least make things difficult—for a country looking to negotiate an agreement to have such a mandate ahead of the negotiations.

[Daniel Turp]

No. There are no rules preventing Canada, which created this system, to preserve it, which is still possible. On the contrary, there are rules that allow it. We should continue to rely on those rules to protect this system, whether at the WTO or in plurilateral or multilateral negotiations.

Also, one of the arguments that should perhaps be made is that of food sovereignty. It was clear to us during the pandemic that there were concerns about sovereignty in terms of our dependence on exports. However, we have an industry that is very well established in its environment and that should be able to continue supporting this sovereignty and provide us with goods protected by the supply management system.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

We've heard several times that the system was good but the bill was not, and that tying our hands before coming to the negotiating table and showing our cards would be a bad idea.

You were saying earlier that Canada was anything but a role model when it came to transparency and consultation with its parliamentarians on the mandates we give negotiators.

As an expert, can you tell us what is happening internationally? What is happening in other countries?

We know, for example, that the United States and the European Union have measures that protect cotton and sugar. We know that the European Union holds debates in advance.

It seems to me that, in reality, they're not such bad negotiators.

[Daniel Turp]

No.

In fact, I think that Parliament, and you, parliamentarians, should demand more power in your dealings with the government when it comes to negotiations, to transparency in negotiations.

Before agreements are signed, before they are ratified, Parliament should approve them. It should also be continuously updated on the negotiations.

The benefit of the proposal in Bill C‑282, in restricting the prerogative and powers of the minister to negotiate on supply management issues, is to ensure that there will be no negotiations on these issues and that there will be no concessions.

That is strong and sustainable, unless a new government wants to change that provision later. In my view, this is a very definitive way of ensuring the objective is met. I will say, as I did at the beginning of my remarks, that in this particular case of supply management, it comes down to keeping a promise.

I hear some parliamentarians saying the opposite of what their leader said today. All leaders of all parties have said they would protect the supply management system.

I think that parliamentarians and the parties should respect their respective leaders and honour their word; they should agree to pass this bill because it would ensure this system is upheld.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Turp.

To conclude, I'll give the floor to Mr. Perron.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I would like to sincerely thank all the witnesses for joining us.

First, I would like to say that the Bloc Québécois and all parliamentarians have a deep respect for all agricultural production sectors, as well as all industries.

We will always be there to help them. Everyone who opposes the bill knows that.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I have a point order, Mr. Chair.

Was the six-minute time allocated to the Bloc?

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

No, there are 20 seconds left.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I'm sorry. I didn't appreciate that you were sharing your time.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

That being said, if Mr. Virani wants to chair—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

As he was finishing his question, he had about 20 seconds left. As of now, he has 20 seconds.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I was saying that we have a deep respect for each of our producers and we will always be there to help you, but you know that already, because we know each other.

I still have some questions for you.

Mr. Darling, can't you envision that there might be other models?

That is actually quite obvious. There are different production models that were chosen in different ways.

Is that coexisting well so far?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Answer very briefly.

[Dan Darling]

Agriculture, in general, is a competitive business. If I understand your question right, I compete with my neighbours all the time.

Does supply management have a bit of an upper hand on us because of their industry? Yes, but we manage that. We manage it through international trade. That allows us to get more money out of our products than we otherwise would.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Now we go to Mr. Cannings for six minutes.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you all for being here today.

I'm going to turn to Mr. Slomp with the National Farmers Union. It seems that your organization represents a broad part of the agriculture sector, or I assume much of it, in many ways. I think you said you have experience or do produce both dairy and beef. It's nice to have someone who can probably look at this from all angles.

You started to mention some numbers around the CETA negotiations. I'm wondering if we could dive down into those a bit. The ones I have are that, at the start of the CETA negotiations, Canada had 30,000 tonnes of tariff-free market access for beef and pork together, but it only exported 1,000 tonnes of beef and 100 tonnes of pork annually. Under CETA, the negotiators gave away 17,500 tonnes of the cheese market, which is equivalent to the entire Nova Scotia dairy market, yet we still are not exporting significantly more beef to Europe, by the numbers I have.

I'm just wondering if those things are totally unrelated. Was the cheese market given away for other negotiations? It doesn't seem like beef and pork really need any more help in Europe. I just want to get some clarity there.

[Jan Slomp]

I think the success of Canadian pork and beef sectors cannot be expected from a new trade agreement, because there is lots of room to export into Europe from both sectors. We need to have a close look in Canada at the profitability at the farm level of those sectors. They are clearly lacking.

As we have deteriorated supply management, starting with the WTO—right away, a 3.5% loss in the supply management sector—we have increased market access, but we have, at the same time, allowed the market within Canada to be open for importation. For every success that the beef and the pork sectors claim for export, we import at least the same amount, if not more. I think, from an economic perspective, we shouldn't be so gung-ho on more trade agreements if we lose internal market all the time.

It is the profitability that is lacking. I think there's only way of fixing it, and that is to focus less on trade and to focus more on profitability on the farm. That is exactly what supply management accomplishes.

Rural Canada has been in a downturn for a long time. It is only the supply management sectors in agriculture that have withstood that deterioration. Any other way of improving profitability in the farming community, I welcome, but I do know supply management is one of them.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

You touched on another factor there again that differentiates the dairy market from the beef market. As you said, in the beef industry, we have about the same number of exports as we do imports, whereas in cheese, for instance, or dairy in general, we import five times more than we export. It would seem that the dairy sector is more sensitive to these agreements that allow more exports into a market that we're already fighting for domestically. Is that the case?

[Jan Slomp]

If you look at the success of CETA, you have to admit that Europe has been very successful in terms of agriculture trade. It managed to get, right away, 17,500 tonnes of cheese coming into Canada in exchange for hypothetical beef and pork exports from Canada to Europe, which has not matured at all. Who has been the smart negotiator here?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Okay.

Quickly, I think one of the agreements that we still have yet to complete, as I understand it, is Mercosur, with some of the South American countries. There, we have a country like Argentina, from which we import a fair amount of beef. I don't think we export too much beef to Argentina. What do you think the risks are with an agreement like that, this bill before us and the supply management system in general?

[Jan Slomp]

Is that a question for me again?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Yes.

[Jan Slomp]

Thank you.

Yes, I think we cannot underestimate the potential of the pampas in Argentina to produce cheap beef. Definitely, if the Mercosur agreement goes forward and we are not looking at that as a potential major impediment to our beef industry, we overlook important things. It would be terrible to—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

I'm just going to have to cut you off there. We're about 30 seconds over.