AGRI Committee Report

Dissenting Opinion of the New Democratic Party of Canada to the Report on the Agricultural and Agri-Food Products Supply Chain

While we agree with much of content and witness testimony identified in the Committee Report on the Agricultural and Agri-Food Products Supply Chain, the New Democratic Party has put forward an additional set of recommendations. We feel these additional recommendations accurately reflect concerns raised by numerous witnesses who testified before the committee.

1. The majority of witnesses we heard from did not agree with the federal government’s decision to repeal regulations related to container standards, as outlined on page 219 of their 2012 budget. Deregulating consumer packages puts manufacturing and farming jobs at risk in Canada. There is strong potential that manufacturing could be shifted to the United States and that foods being canned and/or processed could potentially be more easily sourced there.

“The government announced in Budget 2012 that they were planning on repealing the container size regulations. Our view is that if that proceeds, the competitiveness of the Canadian wine industry has to be taken into account. A decision to repeal the container size regulations is for foods—food products, in general. Wine gets caught up in that even though we are a different product from your average food product. So the container size regulations that we have in place are extremely important to the Canadian wine industry's competitiveness.

We're not the only jurisdiction around the world that has container size regulations; the United States has them, the European Union has them. However, if they are repealed, we are very, very concerned, being a small wine-producing country, that larger producers can come in with large box-size formats, for example, with economies of scale and be able to undercut the Canadian wine industry.” (Dan Paszkowski, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Vintners Association evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament, April 18, 2013)

“My view is that if there's going to be deregulation, you need to make sure there is an equal playing field in North America, which I don't believe is the case today. I think it would negatively impact many food processors in Canada.” (Dave McAnerney, President and Chief Executive Officer, Sun-Rype Products Ltd.  evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament, April 18, 2013)

“That standard container was put in place to really protect growers from low-priced product being dumped into the Canadian market. Now that is currently being threatened as well…As far as the processors are concerned, if you're a multinational and you have a plant in Ohio and one in Leamington, that's a no-brainer. You just supply the Canadian market from the U.S. side. So they're very concerned about that, because they're not going to retool those shops in Canada at huge expense unless there is a profitability factor, but if you're a multinational, that's not going to happen. For a smaller processor, we do have higher costs of production in this country, and we have to recognize that. If it's now going to come out of the U.S. at a reduced price, the competition for the Canadian processor is that much greater, and it's that much more difficult for them to stay in business.” (Arthur Smith, Chief Executive Officer, Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament, April 23, 2013)

Recommendation: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada maintain regulations for container and packaging sizes so that Canadian processors and producers do not face any competitive disadvantages with our trading partners.

2. The NDP shares reservations of those witnesses who expressed concerns with the 1991 International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV 91). A major concern with UPOV 91 is that it would add significant commercial protections for plant breeders that give them control over the importing, exporting, and stockpiling of varieties they have the rights to. Most importantly for farmers, while the 1978 Act allowed them to use harvested product for any purpose, in the 1991 Act governments can restrict the rights of farmers on behalf of plant license holders. 

“There’s a push to move to UPOV 91. One of the greatest concerns we have with UPOV 91 is that it has a so-called farmers’ privilege which would allow farmers to save and reuse seed, but at the behest of the government... Also, it would give the owner of that plant breeders’ right exclusive rights to control both the conditioning of the seed and its stocking. Conditioning is the cleaning and treating of that seed, and stocking is the bagging and storing of that seed. If those rights holders exercise those exclusive rights, farmers could be cut out of the game altogether because they aren’t going to plant unclean seed on their farms.” (Terry Bohem, President, National Farmers Union evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament, December 6, 2013)

Recommendation: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada prepare a report that the Committee may consider which examines all federal policies affecting the plant breeding sector including available grants and contributions, in-house research programs, intellectual property rights, and regulatory processes and include its recommendations for a policy that will both encourage the development of new varieties of grains and oilseeds and ensure that farmers have the ability to save and re-use seeds on their farms.

3. Many witnesses we heard from agreed that Canada needs a National Food Strategy. The NDP believe it is important to look at the agriculture sector from not only a supply chain perspective, but also from a value chain perspective whereby other stakeholders besides producers, processors and retailers are recognized. These other players include the consumer, researchers, and government.

When asked if he would support a National Food Strategy: “Yes, I'd say that's a great idea, and it's important for two reasons. Not only is it good for jobs in Canada, but it's really good for the environment…I think anything the government can do to continue to support awareness of the positive benefits that supporting local has on the environment, as well as on the economy, would be a step in the right direction.” Dave McAnerney (President and Chief Executive Officer, Sun-Rype Products Ltd. evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament April 18, 2013)

When asked if she would support a National Food Strategy: “I always do agree on things like this. I think the leadership the government can show is important, in particular in helping disparate ministries work together to support an initiative. I know in the grape and wine sector we come across so many ministries that we have to work with all the time, so that leadership at the national level is very helpful to us.” (Hillary Dawson, President, Wine Council of Ontario evidence 1^st session 41^st parliament April 30, 2013)

Recommendation: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada begin immediate development of a National Food Strategy that bolsters local food production, ensures long-term research funding and builds linkages between consumers, retailers, public institutions, and producers.

4. New Democrats believe in a balanced approach to genetically modified (GM) crops that considers human health, the environment, the sustainability of crops and the economic interests of farmers. It is the government’s responsibility to ensure that its policies do not serve to unfairly or negatively affect any one sector of the agriculture economy.

Recommendation: The government establish a policy to require an evaluation of the economic consequences of contamination to domestic and export crops, following an open consultation with industry and farmers prior to its approval of any new GM crops.

The NDP would like to include the four recommendations presented to the committee by the Organic Trade Association on March 3, 2013 concerning Low Level Presence (LLP) into the report as reference:

If an LLP of 0.1% is to be introduced in Canada, as a minimum the organic sector requires and calls for the following:

• Routine public testing of imports for GMOs;
• Publication and communication of the incidence, the crop, the importer and the country or origin of the crop, whether it has come within the action or threshold limit;
• Regular and specific reporting of this information to the organic sector so that our producers, handlers and manufacturers may pursue best management practices and targeted testing in order to protect our products from contamination; and finally
• I would recommend that we look to the lead of the United States and Secretary Vilsack in striking the AC21 Committee to investigate the means from which to manage risk and compensate farmers whose crops and products are contaminated by unintentional GM events.