Agriculture and Agri-Food

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss business risk management (BRM) programs in Canada's agriculture sector and the development of the next agricultural policy framework. Officials from the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Steven Jurgutis and Francesco Del Bianco, explained how these programs help farmers deal with income and production losses due to things like trade issues, weather, and rising costs. They also talked about how the federal government works with provinces and territories to create these programs. The current framework, the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership, lasts until 2028. Discussions are underway to develop the next framework, which will run from 2028 to 2033. Committee members asked about different aspects of the BRM programs. Jacques Gourde brought up concerns about the advance payments program (APP) and how it requires collateral that some farmers can't provide because they already use it for other loans. He suggested allowing farmers to access APP funds through their regular banks. Paul Connors inquired about AgriInsurance and how it addresses climate change impacts, particularly after a drought in Newfoundland and Labrador. Emma Harrison shared her personal experiences as a small farmer and asked about ways to make BRM programs more accessible to smaller farms. Steven Bonk raised the issue of gopher infestations and the damage caused since strychnine was banned, questioning if this could lead to AgriStability and AgriRecovery payments. Dave Epp discussed AgriInsurance in more detail, including the use of reinsurance to manage risk. Kent MacDonald focused on the importance of farm succession planning and innovation in the next policy framework. Sophie Chatel asked about priorities for the next framework and suggestions for improving risk management programs. Sébastien Lemire questioned why agricultural producers have to resort to hoping that the government will create special programs without being able to benefit from regular agricultural support programs. The committee discussed the need for improvements to existing programs to better meet the needs of farmers, especially small and diversified operations. They also talked about the importance of collaboration between the federal government, provinces, and territories in developing the next agricultural policy framework. Francesco Del Bianco agreed to provide written responses to some of the more technical questions raised during the meeting.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the impact of science in Canadian agriculture, specifically focusing on the proposed closure of several research centers. Witnesses expressed concerns about the negative effects of these closures on agricultural innovation, food security, and the economy. Speakers included Alberta's Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation Richard J. Sigurdson, Mayor of Indian Head Steven Cole, CEO of Protein Industries Canada Tyler Groeneveld, and several researchers and agricultural experts. Minister Sigurdson emphasized the importance of the Lacombe Research and Development Centre to Alberta's agricultural sector, highlighting its role in supporting provincial research programs and addressing prairie-specific challenges. Mayor Cole spoke about the Indian Head research farm and the negative impact the closure would have on the local community and agricultural innovation. Tyler Groeneveld stressed the need for continued investment in agricultural research to maintain Canada's competitiveness in the global market. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various issues, including the impact of the closures on research, the role of public and private sector partnerships, and the need for innovation in the agricultural sector. Minister Sigurdson also discussed the challenges posed by Richardson's ground squirrels and the need for access to strychnine to control their populations. The committee discussed a motion to extend the study by two meetings, but the motion was ultimately defeated. The committee agreed to provide draft instructions for the report on Thursday and set a deadline of April 19th for external submissions.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the impact of closing agricultural research centers in Canada. Witnesses shared concerns about the negative effects on agricultural innovation, food security, and the economy. They emphasized the importance of region-specific research and the need for long-term investment in agriculture. Committee members questioned the witnesses about the potential loss of expertise, the difficulty of transferring research, and the economic consequences for local communities. Tyler McCann from the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute suggested that Canada's agriculture innovation system is heading towards a crisis due to underinvestment. He recommended more transparency and accountability from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), embracing partnerships in science, and focusing on the future of research and development. Andrea Brocklebank from the Beef Cattle Research Council highlighted the negative impacts of the closures on the beef industry's ability to remain competitive. She recommended transferring critical programs and expertise to preserve their function and ensuring long-term funding. Alison Sunstrum, an entrepreneur in agricultural technology, emphasized that the closures signal either erosion or renewal. She stressed the importance of investing in modern infrastructure and building a strong foundation for the next era of agriculture. Mayor Thalia Hibbs of Lacombe spoke about the economic and social shock the closure of the Lacombe Research and Development Centre will have on her community. She requested a validation period to assess the potential loss of research assets and publish a cost-benefit analysis. John Ireland, Reeve of Lacombe County, emphasized the need for region-specific research and the importance of unbiased science. Patrick St-Georges and Sébastien Paquette from the Public Service Alliance of Canada expressed concerns about the negative consequences for Canadian agriculture and the loss of expertise. They called on the government to reconsider the budget cuts at AAFC. The committee discussed the possibility of universities and the private sector filling the gaps created by the closures, but witnesses noted that these institutions often lack the resources and capacity to do so. The committee is studying the impact of these closures and will prepare a report with recommendations for the government.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss science in Canadian agriculture, focusing on the closure of research centers. Witnesses included researchers, industry representatives, and a member of the Nova Scotia legislature, all expressing concerns about the impact of these closures on agricultural innovation and regional economies. Speakers emphasized the importance of regionally relevant research, the need for consultation with industry stakeholders, and the potential loss of long-term data and expertise. They also highlighted the role of public research in supporting sustainable agriculture and ensuring food security. Lori Oatway from Western Crop Innovations spoke about the importance of research for developing better crop varieties and responding to emerging threats. She highlighted the Lacombe Research and Development Centre's role in innovation for the beef, forage, and cereal industries, emphasizing the economic impact of its closure on the local community. Serge Buy, from the Agri-Food Innovation Council, stressed the need for more consultation with industry before making cuts and suggested a national strategy for agriculture and food research. Sophie Martel, from Centre d'expertise et de transfert en agriculture biologique et de proximité, discussed the challenges facing Canadian agriculture, such as climate change and pesticide resistance, and the importance of public research in addressing these issues. Committee members questioned the witnesses about the process and priorities behind the closures, the impact on research and innovation, and potential solutions for the future. There was discussion about the need for better coordination between the public and private sectors, as well as the importance of stable, predictable funding for agricultural research. A motion was passed to invite the minister to appear on March 24 to discuss the estimates for an hour, followed by officials for the second hour. Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin, a member of the Nova Scotia House of Assembly, raised concerns about the closure of the Nappan research farm and its impact on Atlantic Canada's agriculture research. She emphasized the importance of location-specific research and the potential loss of expertise and knowledge transfer. Blaine Calkins, a member of Parliament, discussed the accomplishments of the Lacombe Research and Development Centre and the negative impact of its closure on the local community and the broader agricultural sector. Rickey Yada and Heather Bruce from the Deans Council - Agriculture, Food and Veterinary Medicine spoke about the importance of science, technology, and innovation in the agriculture and agri-food sector and the need for continued investment in research. The committee approved three budgets related to studies on science in Canadian agriculture, the closure of research centers, and supplementary estimates. The meeting adjourned after discussing the importance of strategic partnerships between the federal, provincial, and territorial governments on agriculture.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss changes to the Farm Credit Canada Act, specifically clause 223 of a proposed law. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Heath MacDonald, spoke about the importance of Farm Credit Canada (FCC) in supporting farmers and the agri-food industry. He highlighted a new $7 billion investment in the sector by 2030 and emphasized the need for regular legislative reviews of FCC to ensure it meets the evolving needs of farmers. The committee also discussed the closure of agricultural research centers and the allocation of funds to the on-farm climate action fund. John Barlow, a Conservative member, raised concerns about FCC sharing private information with the government during the Emergencies Act and questioned the effectiveness of the on-farm climate action fund. He also criticized the closure of agricultural research centers. Other committee members questioned the minister about trade with China, the Canada Grocery Code, and the protection of agricultural land. The minister responded to questions about research funding, trade relationships, and support for farmers. Justine Hendricks, CEO of Farm Credit Canada, along with other FCC executives, presented on FCC's role in supporting the agriculture industry. She highlighted FCC's investments in ag-tech innovation and its commitment to helping farmers succeed. Committee members questioned Hendricks about FCC's spending on consultants, a loan to Aspire Food, and the sharing of client information with the government. Hendricks defended FCC's practices and emphasized its commitment to supporting small and medium-sized businesses in rural communities. The committee discussed ways to support young farmers, women in agriculture, and innovation in the sector. They also explored the possibility of partnering with Agriculture Canada to offer more universal access to short-term cash flow programs. The committee agreed to send a letter stating they have no recommendations or amendments regarding the proposed changes to the Farm Credit Canada Act.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss science in Canadian agriculture and the closure of research centers. The meeting focused on the impact of budget cuts on the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, which needs to save $154.7 million by 2028-29. This includes closing some research facilities and farms. Lawrence Hanson, the Deputy Minister, explained that the cuts are necessary to make the department more efficient and focus on core goals. He said that older research facilities are expensive to maintain, so consolidating research into fewer locations will save money in the long run. He emphasized that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada will still be the biggest agricultural research organization in the country, with research centers in every province. Committee members, including Andrew Scheer and Blaine Calkins, voiced concerns about the closures, particularly the Indian Head research farm and the Lacombe Research and Development Centre. They questioned whether the savings were worth the loss of research capabilities and the impact on local farmers. Some members suggested that other programs, like the On-Farm Climate Action Fund, should be cut instead. The committee requested more information from the Deputy Minister, including an analysis of the impact of closing the research centers and a breakdown of the costs associated with each center. The committee also discussed the importance of working with universities, producers, and farmers to address challenges like climate change and food security. No specific decisions were made during the meeting, but the discussion highlighted the concerns about the future of agricultural research in Canada.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss reference prices in the beef and pork supply chains, focusing on challenges faced by Canadian producers and processors. Witnesses from Beretta Farms, True North Foods, and Viandes Lafrance shared their experiences and suggestions for improving the industry. They emphasized the need for greater price transparency, support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and addressing labor shortages. Thomas Beretta of Beretta Farms highlighted labor shortages and the impact of the agri-food pilot program's closure on their ability to retain skilled foreign workers. He also expressed concern over the closure of the Lacombe Research and Development Centre. Calvin Vaags from True North Foods discussed the influence of U.S. pricing on Canadian markets and the need for adjustments to reflect Canadian conditions. He stressed the importance of supporting cow-calf producers and small beef packers to ensure food security. Indira Moudi of Viandes Lafrance focused on the structural imbalances in the Canadian beef system that disadvantage independent processors. She proposed a safety net and liquidity support mechanisms to stabilize independent processors. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of the beef and pork industries, including pricing transparency, regulatory burdens, and the role of government support. The witnesses agreed on the need for mandatory price reporting and a Canadian reference price that reflects the realities of Canadian processing. They also discussed the challenges of competing with larger, often foreign-owned, companies and the importance of supporting local producers and processors. Representatives from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food (AAFC) provided insights into their roles in supporting the pork and beef sectors. Donald Boucher from AAFC discussed the integration of Canadian and North American supply chains and the government's support for industry-led efforts to improve price transparency. Diane Allan from CFIA outlined the agency's efforts to safeguard Canada's food supply and protect animal health. The committee also discussed a motion to undertake an emergency study to examine the government’s rationale and decision-making process related to the closure of multiple Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada research centers and experimental farms. The committee agreed to hold a subcommittee meeting to discuss the motion further and to develop a work plan for future studies.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss reference prices in the beef and pork supply chains. The committee heard from representatives from the Canadian Pork Council, Les Éleveurs de porcs du Québec, the Canadian Cattle Association, the Canadian Meat Council, and an agricultural economist, Gilbert Lavoie. The pork industry representatives argued for a mandatory price reporting system similar to the one in the United States. They said this would help Canadian producers better understand market prices, manage price differences with the U.S., and ensure fair negotiations with processors. They believe more transparency would benefit the entire value chain and attract investment in the sector. The Canadian Cattle Association discussed the importance of trade and competitiveness, as well as the impact of government regulations on production costs. They highlighted the need to align Canadian regulations with U.S. standards to lower costs and encourage domestic processing. The Canadian Meat Council focused on the challenges faced by processors, including livestock supply shortages, tariffs, labor shortages, and rising input costs. They asked the government to address these challenges by compensating processors for losses due to tariffs, prioritizing trade diversification, aligning feed ban programs with U.S. standards, and addressing labor shortages. Gilbert Lavoie explained how the U.S. mandatory price reporting system works and how it has helped American producers. He suggested that a similar system in Canada would lead to greater price transparency and a more accurate picture of the Canadian pork industry. During the meeting, committee members discussed the importance of food security, the impact of trade agreements, and the need to support Canadian producers. A motion was passed to invite the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the President and CEO of Farm Credit Canada to a future meeting to discuss budget implementation. There was also discussion about the closure of agricultural research facilities and the need for a strategic vision for science in agriculture. The committee agreed to continue its study on reference prices at the next meeting and set a deadline for submitting witness lists.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss supplementary spending plans for 2025-26. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Heath MacDonald, gave an update on his recent trips to British Columbia and China to promote Canadian agriculture and address trade issues. He highlighted investments in programs like AgriStability and AgriMarketing, as well as support for young people in agriculture. Committee members questioned the minister on topics ranging from strychnine approval to Farm Credit Canada expenses and supply management. Conservative members pressed the Minister on the slow approval of strychnine for pest control, the financial losses from a failed cricket farm, and the travel expenses and leadership of the Farm Credit Canada CEO. They also raised concerns about the impact of the carbon tax on farmers. Liberal members focused on the government's commitment to supply management, support for the pork industry, and investments in agricultural infrastructure. They also discussed the importance of supporting small producers and addressing climate change. Bloc Québécois members questioned the Minister about advance payments for farmers and the government's intentions regarding the Canadian General Standards Board and organic standards. They also raised concerns about fraudulent poultry imports. The Minister committed to looking into these issues and working with stakeholders. Overall, the meeting covered a wide range of issues affecting the agriculture sector in Canada, with committee members seeking assurances and updates from the Minister on various government policies and programs. The committee agreed to move in camera to discuss other matters.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the implementation of the grocery code of conduct. Witnesses from Costco, Empire Company (Sobeys), and Walmart Canada provided updates on their involvement and perspectives on the code. The committee also heard from Karen Proud, the President and Adjudicator of the Office of the Grocery Sector Code of Conduct, who discussed progress on the dispute resolution process and efforts to ensure confidentiality for those raising concerns. Costco's representative, Pietro Nenci, stated that while they support the principles of the code, they don't believe it will directly lower food prices for consumers. Rob Allsop from Empire Company (Sobeys), the first major retailer to sign the code, highlighted their commitment to fairness and transparency and shared updates on their internal preparations for implementation. Rhonda Maines-Corrado from Walmart Canada affirmed their intention to sign the code once all documents are finalized, emphasizing their focus on everyday low prices for consumers. Committee members questioned the witnesses about the potential impact of the code on food prices, with some expressing concern that the government had misled Canadians by suggesting it would lead to lower prices. There was also discussion about the timing of supplier negotiations and whether retailers were changing their practices in anticipation of the code's implementation. Karen Proud addressed concerns about confidentiality and outlined the mechanisms in place to support voluntary alignment with the code. Karen Proud clarified that the code is designed to address fairness and transparency in the grocery sector, not to directly impact food prices. She emphasized the importance of confidential engagement and systemic issue tracking to improve commercial conduct. The committee discussed whether associations should be allowed to join the code. The committee agreed to continue monitoring the progress of the code's implementation and invited Ms. Proud to return in the future to provide an update on its effectiveness.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss regulatory reform in the agriculture and agri-food sector. The committee heard from witnesses about the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Speakers discussed issues like delays in approving new technologies, the need for more transparency, and the importance of an independent review process for complaints. Leta LaRush from BASF Agricultural Solutions Canada Inc. spoke about how delays in regulatory approvals are hurting Canadian farmers and making it harder for them to compete globally. She suggested the PMRA should use scientific evaluations from trusted countries like the United States and Australia to speed up the approval process. Eric Cheff, owner of At Heights Drone Services, talked about the challenges of using drones for agriculture because of slow regulatory progress. He said that farmers are missing out on the benefits of this technology. Tom Barber, President of the Forum of Canadian Ombudsman, and Nadine Mailloux, Ombudsman of Montreal, spoke about the importance of having an independent ombudsman to handle complaints and ensure fairness. They emphasized that an ombudsman should be independent, have the power to investigate, and be transparent in their work. Merril Bawden and Pamela MacDonald from the CFIA explained that they no longer have a dedicated complaints office but encouraged people to raise concerns with CFIA staff and supervisors. Committee members discussed whether to create an ombudsman position for the PMRA and CFIA to address complaints from industry stakeholders. Some members expressed concerns about adding more bureaucracy, while others argued that an independent ombudsman could improve transparency and accountability. The committee requested data from the CFIA on internal complaints and their resolutions over the past five years.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the government's plan to change rules and regulations in the agriculture and food industry. The committee heard from several witnesses who shared their thoughts on how these changes could affect farmers, businesses, and consumers. Speakers included representatives from the Agri-Food Analytics Lab, the Agri-Food Innovation Council, the Canadian Produce Marketing Association, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Alberta Beekeepers Commission, and an individual expert, Evan Fraser. Sylvain Charlebois from the Agri-Food Analytics Lab talked about Canada's competitiveness compared to other countries, taxation, and shrinkflation (when products get smaller but cost the same). Serge Buy from the Agri-Food Innovation Council discussed the challenges of the current regulatory system and suggested ways to make it better, like creating a national agriculture regulatory council. Ron Lemaire from the Canadian Produce Marketing Association emphasized the importance of working with the industry when making regulatory changes and ensuring fair trade. Jasmin Guénette and Juliette Nicolaÿ from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business shared findings from a report indicating that small businesses find the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's rules difficult to follow and that customer service is not good. Connie Phillips from the Alberta Beekeepers Commission raised concerns about honey imports, hive treatments, and bee health. Evan Fraser discussed creating a policy environment that fosters innovation in agriculture and capturing more value from agricultural products. Committee members discussed issues such as the carbon tax, food prices, and the impact of regulations on businesses. There was also discussion about the need for better coordination between federal and provincial governments and the importance of consulting with industry when making regulatory changes. The committee did not make any specific decisions during the meeting, but members expressed interest in further exploring the issues raised by the witnesses. Several witnesses were asked to submit additional information in writing. Finally, there was a discussion about inviting a former redress officer from the CFIA to appear before the committee to discuss her experience and provide insights on how to improve the agency's accountability. The committee agreed to work together to find a suitable person to speak on this issue.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the implementation of the grocery code of conduct. The committee heard from representatives from Lactalis Canada, Loblaw Companies Limited, and Metro Inc., as well as the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers, the Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association, and the Retail Council of Canada. Mark Taylor from Lactalis Canada shared his experience with a similar code in the U.K., emphasizing that a well-used code benefits everyone, including consumers. He noted that the Canadian code is voluntary and lacks enforcement tools, unlike the U.K. code, which has legal backing and potential fines. Nick Henn from Loblaw expressed Loblaw's support for the code and their intention to join, highlighting their commitment to strong supplier relationships. Simon Rivet from Metro Inc. also voiced support for the code, emphasizing fairness and transparency in supplier relationships. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of the code, including its potential impact on grocery prices, assurances that retailers would not withdraw from the code if decisions were unfavorable, and the role of industry associations in representing suppliers. Witnesses generally agreed that the code is not intended to directly lower grocery prices but rather to create a fairer and more transparent environment for suppliers and retailers. They also discussed the importance of finalizing the dispute resolution mechanism before the code is implemented. The committee agreed to invite representatives from Costco, Walmart, and Sobeys to a future meeting to get their perspectives on the grocery code of conduct. They also discussed the possibility of preparing a report or letter regarding their findings on the importation of broiler meat mislabeled as spent fowl.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the issue of broiler chicken meat being imported into Canada but falsely labeled as spent fowl (older egg-laying hens). Chicken Farmers of Canada representatives, Tim Klompmaker and Yves Ruel, explained that this mislabeling allows importers to avoid tariffs and import restrictions, harming Canadian chicken farmers. They want the government to use a DNA test developed with Trent University to identify mislabeled meat. Christopher Kyle from Trent University and Geoff Lumby from Sterisense described the DNA test they created, which can distinguish between broiler and spent fowl meat. The test was developed years ago, but its implementation was halted due to lack of funding and government focus on other verification methods. The committee heard that the test could be updated and implemented, but there are questions about its reliability and cost. Representatives from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Diane Allan, and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), Alexander Lawton and Cathy Toxopeus, explained their roles in monitoring and enforcing import regulations. CFIA stated that the mislabeling is not a food safety issue, as all chicken is labeled as "chicken" once in Canada. CBSA stated that they have been auditing importers and have collected millions in duties and penalties, and that non-compliance has decreased. However, committee members expressed concern that the problem persists and that the DNA test could be a valuable tool. Committee members questioned the witnesses about the impact of the mislabeling on Canadian farmers, the reliability of the DNA test, and the government's efforts to address the issue. There was discussion about the cost of updating and implementing the DNA test, and whether the penalties collected from importers could be used to fund it. The committee is considering recommendations to the government on how to address the issue, including further development and implementation of the DNA test. The committee did not make any decisions during the meeting, but the discussion highlighted the ongoing concerns about mislabeled chicken imports and the need for more effective enforcement measures. The committee will now prepare a report with recommendations for the government.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food met to discuss the mandate of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. The Minister, Heath MacDonald, spoke about his efforts to support farmers, including visiting farms across Canada and working to restore trade with China. He highlighted three key goals: expanding trade, cutting red tape, and investing in technology and innovation. Committee members questioned the Minister on various issues, including trade with China, the P.E.I. potato export ban, and the government's approach to fertilizer and pesticide use. John Barlow (Conservative) pressed the Minister on specific actions, such as meeting with Chinese counterparts to address trade barriers and compensating P.E.I. potato farmers. Paul Connors (Liberal) emphasized the importance of the temporary foreign worker program and asked about priorities for the next agricultural policy framework. Yves Perron (Bloc Québécois) raised concerns about financial support for agriculture and the need to adapt to climate change. The Minister responded to questions, often deferring to officials from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food. Later, the committee heard from witnesses on the topic of regulatory reform in agriculture. Darren Anderson (Vive Crop Protection) spoke about the need for a regulatory system that rewards innovation and improves farm productivity. Daniel McCann (Precision AI Inc.) discussed the potential of artificial intelligence in agriculture and the challenges of regulatory approvals for new technologies. Tyler McCann (Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute) emphasized the need for a policy reset focused on growth and risk mitigation, and proposed several recommendations for regulatory reform. The committee agreed to focus on regulatory red tape for the rest of the meetings until the Remembrance Day break.