International Trade Committee on Feb. 29th, 2024

[Jane Proctor]

I think that at this time there's not a tremendous volume of exports to Ecuador. Certainly the hope in a free trade environment is that it could be enhanced. For our exporters, I think it was Mr. English who noted that they're always looking for more export markets and are looking to diversify their export markets. We have a very robust export program, as you know, and very robust production in your area.

Therefore, at this point, honestly, our big focus is on enabling the ongoing reliable supply of fresh produce here in Canada. It's a big issue right now in terms of cost, as you know. Food cost is very significant, and we want to support anything that will enable the Canadian population, basically, to have access to fresh fruits and vegetables, and particularly to make sure that they are offered to them economically.

Our membership is always looking for that diversification of their markets also. I don't know how much the tender-fruit industry is exporting right now. I could certainly find that out and advise the clerk for dissemination of that information.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Proctor. It would be quite helpful if you could share some of that information.

[Jane Proctor]

Yes, absolutely.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Also, I am just looking here at some of the notes. It mentions that on February 21 the Canadian Produce Marketing Association made a submission, and you talked during the public consultations about a Canada-Ecuador trade agreement, underlining that any such agreement “should create the foundation for future [bilateral] discussions on mutually recognizing food safety systems while ensuring the existing systems in Ecuador do not negatively impact our domestic industry.”

Again, I think you were referring to that notion of non-tariff barriers. Do you have anything specific with regard to the Produce Marketing Association and produce, specifically, in terms of food safety requirements or other non-tariff barriers that could be used to hinder the export of produce to Ecuador?

[Jane Proctor]

That's an important question. I think what we're saying is that it's important in any of these agreements. Certainly, right now, we have mutual recognition of food-safety systems between the U.S. and Canada. As I understand it, CFIA is still pursuing one with New Zealand. That is the extent of it at this point, but these types of mutual recognition are so important.

Of course, it might have been Mr. English, or it may have been Monsieur Roy who noted the recognition of CFIA internationally for its standards and for its capacity, especially when we come to something like mutual recognition of food-safety systems. That's what we're trying to get at. If this is pursued, we are always looking for a recognition that our food-safety standards must be upheld in any trade agreement.

In other words, we do not want to import product that would have in any way a detrimental impact on our industry, and of course, we don't want to put our domestic producers in a situation where there may be...notwithstanding the fact that most of the product coming in is tropical, so it's not something they're producing. However, we don't want to in any way introduce any kind of unfair imbalance in terms of what food-safety expectations are for imported products as opposed to domestic products.

It would certainly be the same if they were exporting to Ecuador. We would want them to uphold the same food-safety standards. That's why mutual recognition is so important, because then you have a level playing field, with fair expectations on both sides.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you so much, Ms. Proctor.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

We'll now go to Mr. Sidhu, for five minutes.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here today. In this very important study we're talking about Ecuador and trade. There have been lots of great conversations and some insights. I understand that representatives from the council joined Minister MacAulay in Manila to officially launch the new Indo-Pacific Agriculture and Agri-Food Office. In your news release you called it a pivotal moment for Canadian pork producers. I believe that came from Mr. Roy and his organization.

Moving on, we know about this investment, but could you maybe share more about the Canadian pork producers' being able to reach such a large market and more broadly about why having an expanded presence around the world, in the Indo-Pacific and in Ecuador, is important for you and your members.

[René Roy]

In the last three years there has been a lot of turmoil in the pork market. The CPTPP has helped Canadian pork producers to alleviate the risk and the impact of a lot of the variation in demand during COVID and also given the fact that, although China is the largest pork importer and consumer, it has decided to reduce tremendously the quantity of pork it imports from Canada. It is important that we diversify our market and increase our resilience.

The office in Manila is a good place to start creating new business arrangements. I would like to mention that it helps not only our country but also the local population. In the Philippines we were discussing with the producers and consumers there, and they were saying that the product they produce is mainly for the domestic market. They are not able to produce for the processing industry or the retail industry, because of the requirement for cold. The process has to be cold all along the way, and it's not always possible for the pork producers there to have reliable cold storage. They rely on our product for food security for their own population. I think that's a good example of how this trade is beneficial to both countries.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that. I'm going to turn now to Ms. Proctor.

In your submission to the department's consultations, you mentioned how you support the Canadian government's pursuit of a progressive trade agenda when it comes to topics such as environment and gender. Today, in your opening, you mentioned that you support our government's progressive trade agenda. Could you expand on what you see as a progressive trade agenda, what it means for you and your members, and the benefits and the results of this approach?

[Jane Proctor]

Certainly, as you noted, the environment, the rights of indigenous populations and the rights of populations that are not always as recognized, including women, are part of what we like to see in any kind of progressive trade. For us a progressive trade agenda also means this expansion of how we look at our food safety and how we look at science-based decision-making, for crop protection materials and so on. We can look to the EU and see what happened there. The green deal has started to, I would say, come apart at the seams to a certain degree, because they had a very aggressive agenda—too aggressive, as it turns out. We obviously made comments when they were developing the green deal. I spoke to one of their panels, because this is very important to us. Of course there's an environmental focus for them, but industry is always looking at the science. I think all producers are always very concerned about its being a science-based decision and whether that is going to impact the capacity to feed the population.

We're looking at that as part of a progressive trade agenda, for certain. Is this going to advance the industry and the ability of the industry to feed the populations, or is it going to put up non-tariff—or even tariff—barriers that could in any way hinder that? That's something we're always looking at. We consider what the key requirements are, and of course right now we can't overstate those related to the environment. Obviously we all know what's happening with global climate change, and for an industry that plants its product in the ground and hopes that it doesn't get too much rain or too much cold or too much sun or drought, it is very important to always be considering the environmental practices of both the exporting—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

I will have to interrupt you there. We're about 40 seconds over.

[Jane Proctor]

Oh, I'm sorry.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

That's okay. Thanks very much.

Colleagues, we have time to begin, potentially, a third round of questions. We have about 13 minutes, based on my watch. We could do a third round of questions, or we could say we've had enough questions for this panel. I leave it to the committee.

Okay. Good. We will do a third round of questions.

I have a question as well, so I will take this round for the Conservatives.

Mr. Roy, you talked about a couple of things. You talked about sanitary and phytosanitary matters. I know this is a big issue. It's a big issue for pork; it's a big issue for beef, and it's a big issue in both the EU and the U.K. None of these things have been resolved by the government. There are now long-standing trade irritants that mean, in fact, that you're not able to export, realistically, any pork to the EU or the U.K. These are supposed to be big markets for you.

My question really is this. The government has limited resources. Within the trade department in GAC, there's a limited number of people who can do a limited number of things. When I look at the free trade agreement with Ecuador, it would appear that the potential gains from a free trade agreement with Ecuador are marginal. Canadian trade is about $800 billion, and we're talking about gains in the millions of dollars, potentially, with the free trade agreement, so this is actually a rounding error in the actual comparison of Canada's trade.

I wonder if you think that, if the government would focus instead on resolving these long-standing issues with sanitary and phytosanitary matters with the EU and the U.K., it would be a better use of the government's limited resources in their trade department than pursuing a free trade agreement with a country that won't really add much to our trade GDP.

[René Roy]

We would love to see a change in the non-tariff trade barriers on the EU side and the U.K. side. If there is a study and a plan for Ecuador, we want it to be well done.

That being said, as you mentioned, resources are limited. We are interested in having access to the market with which we should be able to trade. They are trading with us. They are sending their products here. We are not able to send our products there. This is an asymmetry that has to be corrected.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Mr. Chiasson-LeBel, I know it's not necessarily your area, but let's say you had to pick: Should the limited resources of the Government of Canada on trade be dealing with very large volumes that are being denied in pork and beef into the EU and the U.K. due to sanitary and phytosanitary matters, or should they be pursuing a free trade agreement with Ecuador? I don't think the government can do both.

[Dr. Thomas Chiasson-LeBel]

In the hypothetical scenario where they can't do both, I would prioritize the EU, mainly because I don't think the main goal of the free trade agreement with Ecuador is trading goods. Given that the real increase in international business with Ecuador has been investment in the natural resource sector, the main question here is this: Do we protect the mining investors or not? This is what is at stake in Ecuador much more than the other fields, I think.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

I'll turn it over to Mr. Sidhu for five minutes.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague down the way.

My question is for you, Ms. Proctor. I know that you were cut off. I have less than two minutes. Ecuador is seeing a steady increase in its food exports in the last five years. With that in mind, what benefits do you see for the Canadian fresh produce industry and Canadian consumers by Canada pursuing a free trade agreement with Ecuador?

[Jane Proctor]

I'll just underscore what I said earlier in terms of our big concern. Certainly, our membership is diverse. There are a lot of Canadian companies, primarily, of course, but there are also a significant number of U.S., South American, European and so on companies.

One of our big goals is with a program called #HalfYourPlate. Health Canada encourages Canadians to fill half their plates with fruits and vegetables. Again, anything we can do to ensure that Canadians have access to fresh fruits and vegetables will have big impacts in terms of the health of Canadians. We have studies that can show this. We all know the pressure that our health care system is under right now. That's a big issue for us.

Obviously, representing the domestic industry, we want to enhance their ability to export. There's no question that right now we're seeing that increase in imports, but they're all on products we can't grow in Canada. We have to protect the availability of fresh produce for Canadians. We just have to. The availability of a certain product can just turn on a dime with a weather incident or with anything, and that is so important.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that, Ms. Proctor.

I'll turn the floor now to MP Arya.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

[Inaudible—Editor] with very limited time, I'm going to say something. You can say whether you agree with me or not.

Canadian farmers, Canadian agri-food exporters and businessmen did not make Canada the fifth-largest exporter in the world by concentrating on just the developed markets in Europe and North America; they went after every market, be it small, medium or big.

You are also focusing on the emerging markets, including the Asia-Pacific and Latin American countries. The biggest challenge you have is that if you don't have free trade agreements, you are opening the door for competitors.

Am I right?

[Jeff English]

Going back to the point made by other colleagues, small, medium or large, the signal that Canada is open for business on the trading front is a benefit to Canada's pulse sector.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Roy, can you quickly confirm?

[René Roy]

I quickly confirm. Yes.