Agriculture committee  Thanks, Wayne. Not to get into the details, following the CFA presentation will be a start. Because of the value of the packaging for a product that's imported, your comments are absolutely valid in terms of other countries capitalizing on that “grown in Canada” name. I think we have to define what that is.

Agriculture committee  The short answer would be yes, because we have national programs specifically in the supply-managed sector for all five of the commodities that are national, and then the provinces implement them and work with the provincial regulatory bodies, and other commodities are doing that as well.

Agriculture committee  Thank you. Yes, and I think the question is even broader than that. A lot of that pertains to emergency preparedness plans that individual producers, commodities, provinces have. What the national strategy would do.... I think we're maybe seeing the start of it in the traceability working group.

Agriculture committee  I was using that as an example. I don't know if they're a problem, but the systems in different provinces and regions need to be able to communicate to each other.

Agriculture committee  Yes, thank you. That really has been our point, because we ran into that situation specifically in eggs and some of the other sectors in 2004 with avian influenza in B.C., where the Health of Animals Act can cover only for the value of the animal. Specifically in egg production, we really appreciate that, but a much bigger portion of it is if you have a big disaster like that, it's difficult to find replacement stock because producers in Canada and the U.S. generally do not produce replacement stock on speculation.

Agriculture committee  Thank you for the question. That's the question that we're asking. We're not sure. I think part of it might be because all of the details of the program have not been finalized yet, as well as the funding. But that's a question we're asking because we're hearing mixed messages on that 15%.

Agriculture committee  Yes. In response to that, there are a couple of things. We're looking at the disaster portion of the BRM because we were told that it's where the disaster coverage is going to occur in the future. There are probably a couple of things from the poultry side. There is a schedule—I don't have it with me—in terms of the numbers that we looked at after the AI experience in the Fraser Valley in 2004.

Agriculture committee  In eggs, we're in the 1,100 to 1,200 range across Canada, and it has stabilized. We have seen it decline in the past, but now it's stabilizing.

Agriculture committee  Thank you. I'm not exactly sure where it was lost, but I'll begin at the second paragraph on that page. Further to the suite of BRM programs, we'll use an example in the poultry sector to illustrate our point. Poultry farmers do not receive sufficient compensation through the Health of Animals Act regulations in the event that their flocks are ordered destroyed due to animal disease.

Agriculture committee  Thanks, Jacques. Disaster coverage is a concern for our sectors. The November 17 announcement of the suite of BRM programming falls short in this area, as a disaster component now known as AgriRecovery will only offer compensation to a collective and not to individual farmers.