International Trade Committee on March 20th, 2023

[Keith Currie]

Again, it would depend on the trade deals that are in place. That question would be very difficult to give an accurate answer to, but in all likelihood I think you're going to see them disappear rapidly.

The U.S. is looking every day at getting further access to our products. What people don't understand is that if the U.S. had 100% access to our dairy products, it still wouldn't fix their oversupply problem, but it would kill our dairy sector here in Canada.

I don't see a really bright future with the loss of supply management. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe it would be fine. Maybe they'd figure out a way, because our farmers are extremely inventive and have great initiatives, but I don't see a really bright future for it.

Let's not forget the quality of the products that our supply-managed sector is producing, as well.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Keith, on that, I've been down in Washington a few times talking with American legislators on a number of issues. I was talking with a legislator from Pennsylvania. He kind of got it. He started talking about what's happening in the United States with technology that's being integrated. It's happening across the world. He was talking about multiple milking times in a day. They're overproducing. The price goes up and everyone overproduces, and then they start dumping their milk.

Could you make some comments about that? I think you went down that route about living beside the United States. With ten times our population, what they're doing with their dairy farmers could create some jeopardy if there was not supply management. Is that correct?

[Keith Currie]

Well, it already is.

The U.S. works on a world milk price, so their solution to low milk prices is to add more cows. Their solution to having access to high milk prices is to add more cows. What that means is increasing production. It's not a good formula for their producers from an economic standpoint.

The producers I talk to in the U.S. would love to have the type of system we have here in Canada, because it controls production and it is also a guaranteed return on investment for the farmers.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

The other thing is that we know that all political parties are currently supporting supply management. However, it seems that every time there's a leadership contest within certain parties, this question comes up. The students of political science history would tell you that this subject does come up, usually in leadership contests, and that in some cases it's been very close to being a reality.

Do you have any comments on that? Would you agree?

[Keith Currie]

All I can do is go back to what I said earlier. Two weeks ago, we had all five leaders at our annual general meeting. They all stood on the stage and all committed to supporting and keeping supply management. I have to take them all at their word.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

You're a good politician.

Joe Biden is coming to town this week. We know his favourite food is ice cream, so I hope he stops somewhere in Ottawa for some delicious Canadian ice cream.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Get Chapman's.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have one minute left.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Okay.

My next question would be on the non-tariff barriers.

When I was in high school, Jim Kelleher was a Conservative trade minister. He started talking about how the Americans are using non-trade barriers to stop...I think it was pork. I guess the Canadians were inoculating our swine with a certain formula that the Americans said they had not tested.

Is it still a reality that they could come at us in these ways with non-trade barriers and that we still have to stand on guard for all sorts of agricultural...?

I'll finish with Keith, since I've been talking with him.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Give a brief answer, sir.

[Keith Currie]

Absolutely. It happens all the time around the world. There are non-trade barriers that go on. We just have to continue to work with these countries to make sure that we get over those hurdles, whatever they are.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll now have Mr. Savard-Tremblay for two and a half minutes, please.

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

I'm going to turn them over to Mr. Perron.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Pelissero, what amazes me is hearing several elected officials being in favour of supply management, but not wanting to put it on paper. I'll give a silly example: when you buy a house, you sign an offer to purchase.

I'd like you to explain why Bill C‑282 is important to your productions. Why do you need it? What would be the impact of the bill if a government later decides to put supply management back on the table?

[Roger Pelissero]

I'll bring some comments and I'll also turn to my counterpart, Mr. Destrijker, to add some.

I'd say it's death by a thousand cuts. Support supply management. Support supply management. It's another piece of the pie back to everybody around this table. We're the carrot, either at the beginning or at the end of the trade deal. I feel for my beef and pork producers; I used to have a hog farm. There are non-trade barriers in place such that our counterparts can't ship. For every pound of beef that we ship to the EU, there are 11 pounds that come back, and Mr. Currie has talked about that.

When our government finally stands up and addresses those issues and we talk about non-trade barriers, here in Canada our farmers have to meet certain standards to produce food to put on the Canadian table. Eggs can come in from other countries, and those farmers don't have to follow those same standards.

I remember going to a trade deal, and Steve Verheul said all our government has to do is stand behind you, put them in place, and the product won't come in. Where is our government? Where are they standing with us, or behind us? They're not. It's not about defending us and saying there's no more.

This bill will really put the rubber to the road. We need to promote supply management around the world, because it's a great system that brings fair returns for farmers.

Mr. Destrijker, I'm not sure if you want to add to that.

[Emmanuel Destrijker, Second Vice-Chair, Egg Farmers of Canada]

Thanks, Roger.

For decades, we have heard our governments say that they will protect and defend supply management. Yet with each negotiation, a small part of it is cut.

So we're asking the government to stop cutting that small piece to give our producers back their confidence to reinvest and pass the businesses on to their children in the future. That is what we are asking for, quite simply.

We believe you, our members of Parliament, and we trust you, but this happens every time. We want it to never happen again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Cannings for two and a half minutes, please.

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

Thank you.

I want to follow up on that discussion. It seems very important and it's at the core of this.

We're talking about supply management. At the core of that is managing the supply, and we can do that domestically. Obviously, we do that. We manage the domestic supply and we manage pricing to make it fair for farmers and consumers, but we have to manage the supply that's coming in from the outside. Over the years, in the last three agreements, we've lost 10% of that market share. There was something like 8% already there, so we're at 18%, as I understand it. When does supply management stop working? You say death by a thousand cuts. Is there a point where you say, “What's the point?”

The Conservatives here seem to think it's okay that we use this as a negotiating chip and that we give it away every time just to get the deal done. I'm wondering, when does it stop working?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

That isn't what we said.

[Roger Pelissero]

I don't know the magic number when it stops working. All I do know is that when our young people stop coming back to the farm because they don't want to be involved....

My children say they don't want to be involved in a hog farm because there's really no future there. Thirty per cent of our egg farmers in Canada are under the age of 45. That tells you that they want to be involved, but at some point that will change. If we're looking at trade negotiations and things that have happened, if it's so good for us, why are they giving us compensation packages to mitigate the trade deal they gave us? I'm sorry. It doesn't matter what the party of the day is; they're looking to give us a compensation package. If it doesn't have a negative effect on our industry, why are we getting a compensation package?

Sure, you can talk about stats that show growth, but we have population growth, so the growth is also related to that. This country needs more immigrants, more people coming in. We want to fill those markets with Canadian eggs and we can do that. However, please look at what's happening when we have counterparts in beef—James and his family farm, and my family farm—and you're pitting us against each other. Find a way that he can ship beef to other parts around the world without giving part of our domestic supply away to the Americans and other countries around the world.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I had a request for some committee business time.

I want to thank all of the representatives this morning. Thank you very much. It was very informative.

I will suspend for a moment for all of you to exit the room, and we will go in camera for committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]