Debates of June 16th, 2022

Global Food Insecurity

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Chair, the minister said something in his speech that really stuck with me: “international assistance is conflict prevention”. I think this is so critically important. I believe we all understand and appreciate the fact that given the incredible country we live in, we are certainly in a position to do some of our global responsibilities socially. Indeed, it is a fact that it is more than that. Just by having that assistance there and by contributing internationally, we are also contributing to global security and global peace.

I wonder if the minister can expand on that particular comment he made.

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Madam Chair, anyone who has read about the history of conflict knows that a lot of the conflicts have started because of the lack of food. If we just look at the Syrian crisis, we see that it was because of food prices increasing that protests took place in Syria, and the Assad regime went extremely hard on the population when the uprising started. Right now we have to be very mindful, from previous experience, to look at the touchpoints where food insecurity is taking place.

We are coordinating our approach so that we can make sure we are showing support, but it is absolutely vital, not just within Canada but also in the international community, that we send a strong message to the global south, which is dealing with this crisis, that we will be there for them while we deal with the crisis in Ukraine.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Chair, we have complex crises and emergencies: the climate crisis, the pandemic, an energy crisis, the war. All of them are affecting food insecurity. When so many complex systems present themselves in crises, there is more we can do than provide food aid, as his department can do. How do we think strategically to actually confront these multiple crises?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Madam Chair, this is exactly what we are doing now. In addition to providing direct support, we are looking at the systems that we have put in place. A lot of investments have already been made. I visited a research lab in Nairobi that is looking at drought-resistant seeds and fertilizers, so there are a lot of things that we can leverage.

We need to look at nations that have the ability to increase their food production. Right now, our department is working on a plan in collaboration with some of our partners within the G7 and the United Nations. This is exactly what we need to do. We need to change the dynamics of how we look at a long-term solution so that we do not rely on the traditional supply chain systems for food.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, I want to say at the beginning of my intervention that I am encouraged by the words of the minister that the Liberal government now understands the importance of things like fertilizer and gene editing and seed technology and the role they will play in the future for food security, because I would think we are in the midst of a food security crisis. This is not something that will happen; this is something that is happening right now. I would hope the minister understands the critical geopolitical role that Canadian agriculture can play, not only here at home but around the world.

To put this in perspective, Ukraine is the breadbasket of much of Europe, Asia and Africa. The uncertainty that is going around with this conflict is certainly have a significant impact on the price of these commodities, and not only in Europe. We were very naive if we thought we were not going to be impacted here at home as well.

We had the honour of having the Ukrainian minister of the economy at committee the other day, and I want to mention a quote from him. He said that Ukraine is seeing a catastrophe on top of a catastrophe, with a global impact seen since World War II, and that farmers have dropped their breadbaskets to stand in breadlines. That is very apropos and puts some perspective on how serious this situation is.

We also had the Ukrainian agriculture minister at committee. She said that Russian soldiers have occupied 23% of Ukraine. They are stealing grain, destroying critical infrastructure and blockading Ukraine's ports. This will seriously impact Ukraine's ability to export whatever harvest of commodities it may be able to achieve this spring and again next year. As the minister said, this will lead to social unrest, famine and, very likely, conflicts around the world, especially around the Horn of Africa. How we respond here in Canada to this tragedy and this food insecurity crisis is critical.

I am going to go in a different vein than the minister did, because I think Canadian agriculture has a key role to play in addressing this food insecurity crisis. I was speaking to Canadian farmers across the country over the last few weeks and months as this started to unfold, and every single one of those farmers has said it is our moral obligation to step up and do everything we possibly can to address this food shortage crisis. They want to be there to help their allies and their friends in Ukraine. Certainly for us in western Canada especially, our agriculture sector was developed and the ground was broken by Ukrainian immigrants who came to Canada more than 100 years ago. We are in their debt.

However, for Canadian farmers to be able to do that, to reach that potential and to reach out and help to address this food shortage, they have to have the tools they need to be successful. Farmers certainly understand that there are many variables outside of their control, but there are some things they rely on from the federal government perspective to have certainty. These things include competitive regulatory and tax regimes, an efficient and reliable supply chain, bankable and efficient business risk management programs and access to global markets. I would argue that unfortunately the government is failing agriculture on all of these pillars right now, which is certainly handcuffing our ability to reach our full potential, to increase our yields to not only meet our commitments, not only here at home but around the world, and increase our ability to step up in times of crisis, as we are seeing right now.

One example of that is the federal carbon tax that the government has imposed on Canadian farmers. We heard at committee today from the Grain Farmers of Ontario about Bill C-8, which is what the Liberals have said is the carbon rebate program to farmers. The message that we are getting from the Liberals all the time is that the carbon tax is revenue-neutral, that whatever a Canadian is paying into that carbon tax, they are getting back. However, we heard in testimony today from the Ontario grain farmers that they are getting back between 13% and 15% of what they pay in the carbon tax. That is a long way from being revenue-neutral. In fact, I would say that it is misleading Canadians when the government says this program is revenue-neutral. It is far from that. The impact is that it is hurting Canadian farmers in their ability to innovate, invest and grow their business and certainly to grow their yields.

The CFIB pretty much ratified those numbers from the Ontario grain farmers, saying that what the farmer is going to be paying in a carbon tax is going to go from $14,000 on average to $45,000 on average as a result of the increase on April. According to Finance Canada today, the average farmer gets back $800 a year. The farmers are putting in $45,000 and getting $800 back. Again, that is nowhere near revenue-neutral.

This program is devastating and unnecessary to Canadian farmers, especially when we have put forward a much better solution in Bill C-234, which would exempt farm fuels from the carbon tax, especially natural gas and propane for heating barns and drying grain. This would allow farmers to reinvest that money in the things they need to improve their operations.

The Food and Agriculture Organization has said that the linkage between energy prices, such as the carbon tax, and fertilizers has put the agriculture sector at significant risk. Renowned agriculture trade expert Robert Saik has said we must be making decisions based on science, not ideology, to ensure the sustainability and health of the agriculture sector.

The World Food Programme has said that 800 million people are facing food insecurity around the world. As a result of the conflict with Russia and its illegal invasion of Ukraine, they are expecting another 13 million people to be at risk of food insecurity. That shows us how serious this situation is and how important it is for Canadian farmers to be competitive and able to reach their potential.

To put that in perspective, the United States has not put a carbon tax on its agriculture sector. The United States is our biggest trading partner but also our biggest competitor on the global stage. In fact, the United States is also not punishing its farmers with a tariff on fertilizer. Canada is the only G7 country in the world that is charging a tariff on fertilizer.

We have asked the Liberal government to exempt the tariff on fertilizer purchased from Russia before March 2 to ensure that Canadian farmers are not carrying that burden, and I want to be really clear here: Vladimir Putin is not paying that tariff. The Russian military is not paying that tariff. Only Canadian farmers are paying that tariff. Now we have seen the numbers, and that tariff is going to cost Canadian farmers, especially in eastern Canada, about $150 million a year.

That is $150 million taken directly out of the pockets of Canadian farmers and going to the Liberal government's coffers. Not only is that a financial hit, but as a result of that we are going to see farmers using less fertilizer. The consequence is that we will have smaller yields. We already had a 40% decrease in yields last year because of weather issues. Depending on the weather, if we see that yield decrease further or not return back to our normal, it is going to have a significant impact. We are going to see food prices increase, not only around the world but here at home as well, and it will impact our ability to try to address food insecurity issues around the world. This only punishes Canadian farmers. It does not punish Vladimir Putin.

We also heard from the Ukrainian minister of agriculture that Ukraine needs seeds, machinery, fuel and temporary storage facilities for its grain and commodities. What it needs is for Canadian agriculture to be firing on all cylinders to make sure we can step up and help when it is needed. However, at this time of a global food security crisis, again when we need Canadian agriculture to be punching above its weight, the Liberals have decided to put burdensome red tape, regulations and taxes on Canadian farmers.

Another example is front-of-package labelling, which is a $2-billion bureaucratic burden on the industry. Not only will that impact Canadian beef, pork and veal farmers, but it will also impact our processors, manufacturers and consumers. We are talking about the food insecurity crisis and the impact it would have on people around the world, in Europe and the Horn of Africa, but food insecurity is also an issue here at home. If we cannot take care of our own, how are we expected to step up and take care of others in their time of need?

This is also sending a very frightening message to our trading partners. Why should they be importing Canadian beef and pork when we are admitting to the world that we feel our products are unhealthy?

In conclusion, in a time of crisis, instead of treating Canadian agriculture with disdain or as a carbon tax cash cow, the Liberals need to see modern Canadian agriculture and our farm families as a way out, as a way to step, as a key geopolitical tool in the fight against totalitarianism and the likes of Vladimir Putin.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Chair, I want to commend and congratulate my colleague on his speech.

As my colleague said, the war in Ukraine means that there is less food globally, which is deplorable, hence the explosion that we can already see in food prices. We may be facing a worldwide shortage and famine.

At the same time, we see that our farmers here need fertilizers, which are produced primarily in Russia on a global scale. In many cases, these fertilizers were ordered, purchased and paid for before the war in Ukraine. However, deliveries are arriving now, if not a few weeks or months ago.

The government chose to bring in the 35% tax to punish Russia. However, since the fertilizers were already paid for and ordered before the war, the only ones hit by this tax are local farmers. Obviously, this is going to be reflected in the final cost, at a time of skyrocketing food prices and shortages.

What does my colleague think about this?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, my colleague is exactly right. We now know that this is going to cost Canadian farmers about $150 million. We support sanctions against Russia. It is very important that it is held accountable for its illegal actions. However, we do not want those actions to be paid for on the backs of Canadian farmers.

We have asked the Liberal government to exempt that tariff on any fertilizer from Russia that was purchased before March 2. Another alternative was, at the very least, to provide compensation to farmers. Rebate that tariff on fertilizer to Canadian farmers that was purchased before March 2. However, in both of those cases, the Liberal government has refused to step up and help Canadian farmers.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Chair, this is a very important debate, and I am glad to see people in the House contributing to it.

One of the big issues I have is that, in foreign affairs and international development, Canada has not contributed its fair share of food security funding for a long time. Right now, we are set at $250 million a year. That is about where we have been through past Conservative and Liberal governments. One of the things the sector is asking for is that food aid be indexed to the price of food so that when it goes up, our contribution goes up.

I am wondering if the member believes that indexing our commitments for food security would be appropriate.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, I had the honour of travelling to Guatemala a couple of years ago before COVID with the World Foodgrains Bank. What is really impressive with programs such as that is that it is not necessarily always about the money. It is about going to those communities and teaching them how to grow their own food, providing them with the assets, resources and technology they need to grow their own food and become self-sustaining.

To my colleague's question, I absolutely believe that Canada has a pivotal role to play in financial commitments to food security around the world, but rather than indexing that or hitching it to something, it is more important that we leverage those federal dollars with the private sector and NGOs to make those countries more self-sustaining.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Chair, I really appreciate the work of my hon. friend from Foothills in making sure people understand how important it is to have fertilizer for our farmers who grow our food here. We also know that the silos in Ukraine are still full because they have been unable to off-load them. If they are able to grow anything, they need places to store it.

In terms of the complexity here, and I know we may not see eye to eye on this, but it needs to be said, the climate crisis has exacerbated the food crisis. To pull back on climate action in Canada when our own efforts are so inadequate to what is needed will worsen the food security problem and worsen our military threats. I put to the member the words of one of Ukraine's leading scientists, Dr. Svitlana Krakovska, who said that the war in Ukraine and the climate crisis have the same root cause, which fossil fuels and our inability to move away from them.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, I am really happy that my respected colleague asked that question because it gives me the opportunity to reiterate the fact that there is, what I will call, a misconception that Canadian agriculture is the problem, when I would profess that Canadian agriculture is the solution.

We have seen how Canadian farmers have improved their operations and the technology and innovation that has happened. I spoke about gene editing. There are seed varieties that are drought resistant and pest resistant. This has allowed us to grow higher yields on the same amount of land with a fraction of the inputs. Whether it is spray, fuel, zero tillage or precision agriculture, we are making those advances, and we are doing that without having to pay a carbon tax. That is what I say is an incredible success by Canadian agriculture.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Madam Chair, I know my colleague is very well versed in this field. When the cost of everything is going up, including the cost of fertilizer for farmers, and there is less fertilizer because of the war in Russia and Ukraine, what is going to happen of course is that people and farmers are going to need to start making choices. Those farmers could make the choice to not put fertilizer on their land because it is too expensive. Could the member please explain to us what the reduction in food production on that land would be with less fertilizer being used?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, if farmers can find ways to be efficient and more cost-effective while protecting their land and improving their yields, they will do it. They use fertilizer as efficiently as possible through programs such as the 4R stewardship program.

To my colleagues's question, it is critically important that, if farmers are using less fertilizer, yields will go down. It is a simple fact. When we are facing a global food crisis, that is not direction we want to go.

The Liberals have also said that they want a 30% reduction in fertilizer emissions, whatever that means, but what it means is we we are asking Canadian farmers to use less fertilizer when they are doing it as efficiently as possible. In Canada, we are 70% more efficient in fertilizer use than any other country on the planet. I will say again that is a great success story for Canadian agriculture. It is something we should be embracing and not criticizing.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Chair, could the member share with the House how important it is to see the issues of global food security and energy security and how closely tied together they are, and especially the ways Canada could help address both of those absolutely essential elements of our world's economy?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Chair, he is exactly right. Through this illegal invasion of Ukraine, Canada is seeing we have two very important geopolitical tools in our tool belt, and those are energy and agriculture. We should be doing everything we possibly can to build those two industries up to play a critical role around the world.

Unfortunately, the government is taking a much different approach to those two critical areas. I found it quite interesting that the Liberal government, after the invasion, said that we needed to increase oil production by 35,000 barrels a day. It has been doing everything it can to cancel out that industry, and it is not like it can turn around on a dime. I will tell the House why.

Most of our drilling rigs have left Canada. Most of our best and brightest in the energy sector in terms of labour have left Canada, and they are not coming back just because the Liberals say they are going to temporarily increase energy. I just find it so hypocritical that we have been trying to say for years how important agriculture and energy are not only to Canada's economy but also to global security, and now they are finally waking up when we see a conflict in Ukraine.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Chair, the economic situation is out of control. People are worried about inflation, and rightly so. For instance, gas is at $2.24 a litre today in my riding, Joliette. This is devastating. The hardest hit are obviously low-income families whose obligations force them to drive a lot. The current reality is also really tough for businesses in certain sectors such as transportation, of course, as well as agriculture. Rising prices will help the energy transition in the long term, but will increase misery in the short term.

The cost of housing is no more encouraging. Finding available affordable housing has become mission impossible. The price of houses and condos has exploded. However, according to experts, rising food prices could soon overtake energy and housing prices by a wide margin. The world is at risk of a food shortage this year, which will lead to skyrocketing prices and a serious global famine.

The current situation is in large part a result of the war in Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine are the world's breadbasket. These two countries account for 30% of global wheat exports and 20% of global corn exports. They also export 65% of the world's sunflower oil. Russia has significantly cut back on its exports so that it can continue to feed its citizens at the same cost. As for Ukraine, its existing reserves are difficult to export, and there is a great deal of uncertainty about potential future harvests.

Food prices in Ukraine are skyrocketing, and Ukrainians could be facing a famine. For example, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, or FAO, around half of the wheat reserves and nearly 40% of the rye in Ukraine are in war-affected areas. The damage caused by the war will reduce grain reserves and limit production and cultivated acreage for years to come.

The damage to infrastructure makes it difficult to get humanitarian aid to Ukraine and to transport the resources that can still be saved.

According to the World Bank, global agricultural commodity prices rose 41% between January and May and are still rising. During the same period, the price of corn jumped 54%, and the price of wheat jumped 60%. With its current budgets, the UN World Food Programme cannot feed as many people.

Also according to the FAO, war and climate change are the main causes of global food insecurity, in Ukraine and elsewhere. It predicts that 44 countries will require food aid in 2022, particularly in West and East Africa due to conflicts in those regions, food commodity prices, and crop failures.

Faced with the expected risk of food shortages, several countries have begun halting exports in order to strategically prioritize their own people. For instance, India stopped exporting its wheat, and then Indonesia halted palm oil exports. This food protectionism could trigger a domino effect with even more tragic consequences.

Here, as elsewhere, production costs will soar, because the price of inputs has also exploded. For example, fertilizers come mostly from Russia and Belarus. Their prices had increased even before the war. Now they have doubled or tripled. What is more, this government is still imposing a 35% tax on them, even though they were ordered and paid for before the invasion of Ukraine.

The rising cost of diesel fuel must also be taken into account. When economist Sylvain Charlebois appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance last month, the agri-food market expert said that supply chain issues are making it difficult for farmers to plan. Their inputs are not consistently available. He also reminded the committee that last summer, western Canada, the United States and Russia experienced major droughts, while Germany experienced major flooding. The result of all this was that the 2021 crops were so poor that reserves are currently low. They were counting on 2022 to replenish their reserves, but with the war, that will not be possible. The economist also added that it was not possible to increase cropland acreage in the short term. However, he did say that the spring flooding in Manitoba is not expected to have much of an impact on the harvest, as it delayed seeding by only a few weeks.

All that adds up to significantly higher food prices in the coming months, much higher than what we are seeing now. For example, Germany is expecting grocery prices to increase by an average of 50%. Food will be 50% more expensive. It should be less than that in Quebec and Canada. That is how it is likely to play out in rich countries.

People in poor countries will likely face famine, which is why international institutions are calling for greater solidarity, especially seeing as less wealthy countries were encouraged to go into debt to get through the pandemic more easily. As a result, they are now deep in debt and will not likely have the means to import enough food at high prices.

Add to that the fact that many of them are already subsidizing basic foods to make sure their citizens can feed themselves. These countries will have to import food at high prices even as they spend more of their budget on food subsidies. African countries are particularly vulnerable.

A significant portion of crops are now traded on the stock exchange. For example, a future crop can be sold in advance and traded several times on the stock exchange. This practice can drive up the price of commodities for speculative purposes. It is a bit like oil. People take advantage of the context to drive prices up and line their pockets. This situation is a reminder of the limits of using markets.

The situation is such that food will be a major problem this year and for years to come. According to a partner with the firm McKinsey, even with an optimistic view of the crisis, things are unlikely to return to normal before 2024. The food crisis will require an exemplary demonstration of international solidarity. It also reminds us that war always has a greater impact than anticipated. Let us hope that a peaceful resolution will be negotiated to end this war, primarily for the sake of the Ukrainian people, but also to limit the effects of a food crisis that has already begun.

We have an obligation to show solidarity to combat hunger on a global scale. We also need to do more to support our farmers. Finally, we must do more to ensure global peace and do our part to limit climate change. I hope this government is taking notes right now.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate that we are able to have this discussion tonight on the importance of global food security.

Certainly, one of the things that my constituents often bring to my attention is the close connection between food security and energy security. This is no more evident than in Ukraine. Those issues are closely connected, even just the industrial connection between modern agriculture and the energy industry, natural gas, for example, being required for the production of nitrogen-based fertilizer.

I would value hearing the thoughts of my colleague from the Bloc on how we can ensure that Canada plays a productive role in both solving the food insecurity challenges that exist, but also being a primary player in global energy security.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Chair, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, or the FAO, said that the current global food shortage and the current risk of famine have two root causes: the war in Ukraine and climate change.

We have a collective duty, here in the House as well, to go green as quickly as possible in order to limit upheaval and ensure greater stability over the seasons so that there are fewer crop failures due to drought, as we saw last summer. This is urgent and it is very important. Clearly, this must all take place in an orderly manner with a predictable transition. That is what the government and we, the legislators, must propose and implement.

With respect to the war in Ukraine, yes, there are energy concerns. We are seeing the repercussions in Europe. In the very near term, Canada obviously cannot magically create pipelines or infrastructure to export its natural gas or oil. That would take 10 years.

The Bloc Québécois believes that the next 10 years would be better spent going green. The planet needs it, and we have an increasing number of examples at present.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Chair, one of the challenges dealing with fertilizer is along the Great Lakes where we actually have over-fertilization that has affected the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes with algal blooms. There is a lack of planning and supports to protect our fresh drinking water supplies and the effect on fish habitat. That is going to create continued complications for sustainability for those types of areas.

What are his comments on the need for us to invest much more in the Great Lakes? The United States is putting over half a billion dollars into the Great Lakes. We finally are making our commitment to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission equal, but we are still lagging behind.

I would like to hear from him on that.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his question. Obviously, more needs to be done to protect our ecosystems. That includes the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway, which provide drinking water to many communities in both Ontario and Quebec. More needs to be done. Do we need to do a better job of protecting riparian buffers? We need to consult and listen to the experts.

With respect to fertilizers, we must continue to ramp up research to improve production and quality with the resources we have, while minimizing the negative environmental impacts.

In the short term, however, our farmers are concerned about fertilizers. They ordered and paid for fertilizers from Russia before the war in Ukraine started. Since the war broke out, the Canadian government has imposed a 35% surtax that will penalize them, without penalizing Russia one bit, since it was already paid for and they were only waiting for delivery.

We have been asking the government to find a solution for our farmers. However, the government seems to be too preoccupied with other things, like passports or airports. There is no shortage of issues, but this is an important one and it should be dealt with quickly.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech and his concern for the agricultural sector. What does he think would be the best way to support our Canadian agriculture in order to sustain ourselves, but also to go a bit further in our international assistance?

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from Beauce and I commend him for all his work and the positive contribution he makes to the House.

There are many things that can be done. When I tour my riding and I meet with our farmers, I am always very touched. In the agricultural sector, the women and men who put food on our tables are not, in my opinion, given enough credit by the public, by the entire population and by elected members. The first thing to do would be to recognize the essential role they play for all of us here.

If we compare the support the government provides to agriculture, Canada does half as much as the United States and three to four times less than Europe, according to the numbers from my critic colleague. If Canada is able to produce a lot with less support, then that is great, but let us never forget that agriculture is a strategic industry since it meets a basic need: feeding the population.

The sector needs recognition, which could take many forms, including real crop insurance.

The labour shortage is another issue. I was on the phone again today with the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship's team, talking about temporary foreign workers. Then there is the tax on Russian fertilizer that was purchased and paid for before the war started in Ukraine. We have a lot to do.

I believe that society as a whole needs to be more involved to better support our farmers, who experience a lot of stress because they are isolated and drowning in work. There is nothing more important to society than the work they do, the critical work of feeding people.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Chair, this crisis is incredible, and its effects will be lasting. I cannot help but think of the old saying, give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

Millions of dollars in food aid is like giving people a fish, not like teaching them to fish. I would like my colleague to comment on how knowledge, local knowledge, especially in African countries, is essential to helping people develop a local, responsible, sustainable agricultural economy.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Chair, that is a very good question.

In the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, international institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, recommended that developing countries that were struggling—the ones with subsistence agriculture that were struggling to feed their people—specialize in growing cotton, for example. They were telling these countries that they would be able to export it, generate revenue and then import their food.

At the same time, the rich countries that properly support their agricultural industries set up aid programs for these countries. When the harvest was good, the rich countries helped them by giving them their surplus crops or selling those crops to them at a low cost.

All of this led to the collapse of local agriculture in developing countries, because they were obviously not able to compete with the rich countries' donations in good years. International institutions encouraged countries to move away from this sector and specialize in export sectors. As a result, these countries have had their subsistence agriculture dismantled.

When the harvest was bad, they did not receive any aid from rich countries. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank told everyone to grow cotton, so many countries grew cotton. Large corporations were the ones leading it, and the price of cotton collapsed. The do-gooders in rich countries and international institutions thought they were fighting poverty, but they actually made it worse. Who are we to tell those countries what to do?

They knew how to go about it. In order to receive international aid, they had to listen to the rich countries, and this made the situation worse. We have to think about that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, I have to say I am absolutely delighted that we are having this debate today and that we have the opportunity to speak about this issue. I firmly believe that the food security crisis that is facing the global community is one of the most pressing issues affecting the world right now. I am going to speak about the impacts of Ukraine on this issue, but I want to start by saying that where we find ourselves today is not just a result of what has happened in Ukraine. In fact, before the war in Ukraine and before February 24, there was a food security crisis on the planet.

Before COVID, food insecurity was increasing significantly. During COVID, those numbers jumped massively, to the point where we had hundreds of millions of people around the world who were food-insecure. Then, the war in Ukraine happened. Two weeks ago, Russia destroyed a major grain warehouse in the city of Mykolaiv, Ukraine. The terminal plays a crucial role in getting grain out of Ukraine into the global market. Many people in North Africa and many people across the Middle East, which some people will describe as the “ring of fire”, are very dependent on the grain that comes from Russia and Ukraine. That major grain export warehouse was the hub for moving those grains around, so the conflict in Ukraine is making what was a very dire situation around the world in terms of food security much worse.

I have heard in the House tonight some talk about how we need to make sure that we give people the tools to produce their own food. I absolutely agree with that, but this is not an issue of giving people tools so they can access their own food. This is the fact that we have an emergency and crisis where there is no food going into these regions. People are urgently at risk of starving to death. This is the reality we are in. The reality is not that we should figure out how to get fertilizer to Canada. That is a different issue. This is not a reality of “we should figure out how to make sure that our development dollars are more effective”. That is a different issue.

What we are dealing with right now is an urgent food crisis where people around the world, in Afghanistan, Lebanon and North Africa, are going to die because they do not have enough food. It is a different conversation that we need to be having in this place right now. I understand the desire to talk about a whole bunch of different things, like the price of oil and gas or the issues that farmers in western Canada are facing. I come from western Canada, and I understand that, but this debate needs to be on the lives of the millions of food-insecure people around the world who will die if the global community does not step up and deal with this.

I want to talk about the implications of that a little. What we are seeing with Vladimir Putin is a madman who has no interest in caring for people around the world. He knows exactly what he is doing when he stops food and crops from leaving Ukraine. He is causing and sowing mayhem in other countries.

Members know what happens when there is not enough food: There is conflict. That happens. People go to war if they cannot feed themselves and if they cannot feed their families. What a perfect way for Vladimir Putin to make the west blink: to make the west divert its attention from Ukraine by having conflict in North Africa, Afghanistan and the Middle East. It is a perfect plan if western countries and the globe do not come together and respond appropriately.

I have to tell members that we have some very clear solutions. We have heard from experts. I will quote until the end of time one of my very favourite people in the entire world, Mr. David Beasley, who is from the World Food Programme and who incidentally has asked time and again to have food security commitments from this country be indexed to the price of food. That is a very clear ask from the World Food Programme. I hope people in this place are listening when I say that this is something the community has asked for. It is something that specialists and Nobel Prize-winning organizations have asked for.

I also want to mention some of the other things we can do. I think it would be irresponsible to come to this and talk about the people who are starving around the world and not provide those solutions, those options, of what Canada can and should do, because there are options here. The next G7 meeting will be happening in Germany in a few weeks' time. The NATO summit is in Madrid, and will take place at the end of June. The Government of Canada can ensure that the global food crisis is on the agenda at those meetings and Parliament can ensure that this happens. We can make sure there is pressure we are putting on our government. We can ensure that famine prevention and response are a core part of the 2022 G7 agenda and at other global forums such as the G20, as well as in the discussions ongoing with the World Bank and the IMF. We can make sure that food security is on those agendas.

Canada right now should be pledging $600 million toward food security around the world. That is the ask, and this urgent pledge needs to happen and be announced very quickly. That $600 million needs to be spent fast. It needs not just to be promised. I do not want a minister to stand up and promise these dollars and not deliver them for weeks at a time. This needs to happen very quickly. This is an urgent need. This money cannot come from other pots. It cannot be money that was devoted to women and girls or to humanitarian aid in Ukraine. It has to be money that is used for food security.

I will say as well that Canada needs to up its game on food security in the long run. I have mentioned in this place before that we give $250 million a year. We are not providing our fair share of food security money to the global community. We need to up that to at least $400 million a year, and it needs to be an annual commitment. It needs to be something Canada stands for. If we are a country that believes in human rights, that believes in women's rights and that has a feminist foreign policy, that is something Canada can do and needs to do right now.

I will tie this very quickly to our responses with respect to Ukraine. We have heard from members of the government and the opposition that there needs to be more commitment to defence spending with NATO. The call has been to ask for 2% of spending for NATO. Do members know what we spend on humanitarian aid in this country? It is 0.3%. What we are saying is that as a country that believes in human rights, in multilateralism and in global solutions to global problems, we are prepared to spend 2% on defence spending and get nowhere near that in humanitarian aid or in official development assistance. We just have that as a fraction. I look around the world and see places like Denmark, which spends 2% on NATO. That is great. It also spends the promised 0.7% on ODA. It also meets its commitments in humanitarian aid. I would say if we are going to raise one we cannot not raise the other because it means that we do not believe in people. It means that we are not supportive of that.

I know I am running out of time. I am going to quote David Beasley from the UN World Food Programme one more time. He came to the foreign affairs committee and told us that Canada and other developed countries have an option. We have a choice. We can pay right now, or we can pay a thousand times more if we wait. That is only in dollars. That is not in human lives, that is not in human suffering and that is not what Canada should be doing.