Finance committee  I would echo what Todd said on trade and just add the phrase “science-based regulation”. We've heard the minister and the government continue to promote that. Canada is now playing a leadership role internationally in promoting science-based regulation and solutions among major agricultural exporting nations.

Finance committee  I'm glad I have an opportunity to speak to this. We were at the market access meeting that was run by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada earlier this week, and we were impressed with both the leadership of Minister Ritz and the work being done in the department. But what it all speaks to is the broader acceptance of science-based regulations.

Finance committee  In terms of regulation, Mr. Chair, I'd be happy to speak to the issue of food safety. Canada has one of the safest food supplies in the world. Never once has a food safety issue come up on biotechnology and genetically modified foods. So in terms of where we should place emphasis, food safety in Canada is excellent, largely because we have a science-based regulatory regime.

Finance committee  I'm not sure there's any magic wand that's going to make that happen. That's just a continuation of good tax policy. We've talked in our submission about regulation and the ability to make approvals faster. If you want Canada to be a centre for research excellence, there have to be clear and somewhat easier paths to approvals.

Finance committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. CropLife Canada thanks you and the other committee members for inviting us here to testify today. CropLife Canada is the national trade association representing manufacturers, developers, and distributors of plant sciences innovation, including pest control products and plant biotechnology for use in agriculture, urban, and public health settings.

Environment committee  I couldn't let that opportunity pass, Mr. Lunney, without telling you about the Clean Farms program that CropLife Canada launched and now runs. It's absolutely free of charge to farmers. Since the program was in operation, we've collected 87 million empty pesticide containers from farmers and 1.4 million kilograms of obsolete pesticides.

Environment committee  It goes back to what I spoke about a little bit earlier, and that's eroding public confidence. The regulatory process is the same. What we're talking about here is the ban against urban pesticides. You will see there are various forms of them. In some provinces, you'll see this happen at municipal councils, and a great deal of very colourful language is used to talk about how dangerous these pesticides allegedly are.

Environment committee  Yet those same products are being used agriculturally. In fact, it's worth noting that I believe--and Peter, correct me if I get this figure wrong--96% to 97% of our member companies' products are sold agriculturally, yet it's that 3% to 4% that's used in urban areas that is the subject of such great debate.

Environment committee  We actually avoid the use of the word “cosmetic”. We talk about urban use, because we think that preserving urban green spaces is very important. The word “cosmetic” is meant to imply that it's not necessary. We think in many cases it's necessary. It starts to become a little difficult, for example, when a municipality now has problems with noxious and invasive species on roadsides and now they have to spray.

Environment committee  I'd be happy to speak to that. We are encouraging the Pest Management Regulatory Agency to more publicly talk about the process and defend its science. Just to give some other context to that, Transport Canada goes out and speaks about how it regulates boating safety, how it regulates automobile safety, how it regulates air travel safety.