national agriculture leaders debate - questions &...

NATIONAL AGRICULTURE LEADERS DEBATE - QUESTIONS & ANSWER SUMMARY

Question 1 – Research

Question 2 – Labour

Question 3 – Next Generation/Ag Careers

Question 4 – Environment/Biodiversity

Question 5 – Social License

Question 6 – Risk Management

Question 7 – Trade

Click on one the titles above to go to that question.

o This is not a full transcript, but covers the majority of the debate and the participants’ main points. All answers are listed in order of response.

o For sectioned out videos of the questions, go here. o For full text of debate questions and CFA messaging on priority election issues, click here.

http://www.agcanada.com/electionag2015

http://www.cfa-fca.ca/election2015


QUESTION 1 - RESEARCH: What plans does your party have to address these

issues and increase public investments in agriculture research in the short and

long-term?

Malcolm Allen, New Democratic Party of Canada

“One of the things we’ve seen over the last number of years and … to be fair, it predates to the

Conservative government - it actually started with Liberal government… [W]e’ve seen de-funding for

public research. The continuation under this Government has been to close research stations and

actually move field trials.”

“To be fair to the biotech firms, they do research …They do it to create a profit and that’s what they

should do that’s their business. Public research will actually engage in research that perhaps the bio-

sector will never do because they don’t actually see an immediate return. We need to continue that

strong research that we’ve done over the years in the public sector. We need to stop the drain of letting

great scientists go before we actually have none left. We have to … cut the job losses, reinstate them,

bring those jobs back, reopen those stations, reopen those libraries that have closed and make sure that

we actually have that public research that actually goes to farmers. It can’t be just research that’s done

in the lab and stays in the lab. It needs to move into the field, it needs to move to the farmer, it needs to

move into the industry.”

“[W]e need to put money back in because we don’t know what that private research is actually going to

generate for us at the end of the day. Now 50, 60, 70 years ago when we did it [invest in public

research], there were all kinds of strains and new varieties came out of public research. We got to

continue to do that, we need to find a better balance between what we do in the public side which is

the government or what the private sector will do. You find that balance and will have a better ag

sector.”

Andrew West, Green Party of Canada

“Public research has been all but eliminated except for a small amount through some various

programs…The Green Party would eliminate funding for GMO products, keep those dollars in Canada.

We would also invest in research and university technology. We would cut all federal biotech funding to

agriculture and agri food business and fisheries and oceans, which would save about 1.1 million each

year over the next five years alone. The Green Party would also phase in funding to create a universal

health school programming and support rapid expansion to organic agriculture rather than subsidizing

costly chemicals and industrial food products and genetically modified foods. We’ll start by investing

700 million in 2015 and increase that to 950 million by 2019-2020.”


“We would also invest 75 million back into Environment Canada, Health Canada and also research so we

can have locally or national funded solutions to agriculture problems. Because we see this shift that’s

happened away from agriculture, science and other sciences towards things that will make money for

the oil sands, for example. We want to shift that back to where it is desperately needed because this is a

large section of the GDP and basically this is what we need to survive.”

Gerry Ritz, Minister of Agriculture, Conservative Party of Canada

“The federal government still plays a leading role in basic research. However, we have re-schooled what

we do to gain more results based dealing with industry and with our partners in province in academia to

get the results to farmers much quicker than we do through basic research that doesn’t necessarily

always hit the target. It’s all about those quicker results, there are still an investment at the federal level

on basic research of about 80% in industry and other partners about 20%. We have invested since we

formed government 2006 $3.4 billion in agricultural research.

“Nothing has been cut, there are certainly are scientists that retire … They are a small breed but at the

end of the day we make sure that we have the welcome mat out for them and we are hiring as is

needed. Biotech certainly is the answer moving forward when it comes to agriculture. It’s a lighter

environmental footprint even in organic because there you are burning a lot more diesel fuel to summer

fall and cultivate and so on.”

“It’s the only way possible that we are going to maintain our trade status on the world in the volume

and the value of product that Canadian producers put out there everyday… We’ve signed some

tremendous cluster research founding. For most of the larger food production groups, grains and oil

seeds, dairy, beef, pork all have access to a port of money to drive the research that they are looking to

do.”

“That work is actually being done. Just because the NDP voted against it, it doesn’t mean it didn’t

happen. Farming is evolving, constantly changing governments programs must too. When it comes to

research site there’s a lot of duplication, there was a lot of work that wasn’t being done that benefited

the industry as well. For an effectiveness and efficiency level at the federal government to make sure

your tax dollars are spent properly, we have fine-tuned a lot of those.”

“There are still lots of people out there doing great work. Of course it’s not as labor intensive as it was at

one point because there’s a lot of equipment out there that’s available now that wasn’t available even

10 and 20 years ago. As farming evolves and the demands evolve so must government programing.”

Mark Eyking, Liberal Party of Canada

“Well the reality is here it’s been cut, research has been cut our scientists are leaving.”


“ I think you got to listen to the farmers and farm organization - where do they see the future? Where

do they see the crops? Where do they see the products? Then we bring the scientist in, give them the

proper environment and research stations and then let the rest flow.

Yves Lessard, Bloc Québécois

“We do not do what we need for our farmers. All the standards that they have to apply firstly on the

quality of their products. Also the way that they handle their products and all the management of the

soil as such. To withdraw from basic research is to get rid of an important support to help our farmers

meet the requirements that we imposed upon them.”

QUESTION 2 – LABOUR If elected, how will your party work towards

ensuring Canadian farmers can address these acute labour needs on a

timely basis in the short-term?

Andrew West, GP

“Family farms are being squeezed out of agriculture. This is causing the labour shortage. There [are]

200,000 farms in Canada - about 100,000 are small family farms and they are the ones that, from my

understanding, don’t have the labour shortage. They have an income shortage because they are being

undercut by foreign cheap labor. The Green Party supports small farmers. We don’t want these huge,

impersonal farming operations stuck by impoverished foreign temporary works. We believe that if

someone is good enough to work here they should be good enough to be paid. Canadians and the Green

Party want labour standards, safer standards, food standards and building codes. They want agriculture

to follow the rules just like everybody else. We would eliminate the temporary for workers program and

increase immigration labour where shortages are established.”

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“Certainly, as a government we have celebrated the fact that 98% of farms in Canada are family owned

and family operated as of today that’s a great statistics… We also as a government exempted the

changes for TFW’s to primary production of agriculture right up through to the field lot level. There is

still the ability to bring those temporary foreign workers in on a seasonal basis. However, most farm

operations now have work year round … They are wanting to bring these people in and keep them here,

make them into Canadian citizens which we welcome. We have made changes to the express entry

system in 2011 under the provincial nominee … I will use Nova Scotia as an example. They’ve put an

additional 300 places for agriculture into their list, which brings that total in the provincial nominee for

1,300.”


“That’s the type of programing that does bring this people in to then become Canadian citizens as soon

as their English and their skills are recognized. Alberta and Saskatchewan have also moved to that,

expressed entry level program and welcome that. We are also as a government working with our

provincial partners to fund regional colleges that offer programs partner to agriculture. Now anybody

who is a farmer in here will tell you, you are a jack of all trades. You got to be a welder, a mechanic, an

electrician, a plumber, a carpenter and still be able to run that equipment. You’ve got to be able to

punch in the GPS coordinates to make your sprayer and your combine and your air seed to work the

most efficiently. There’s a tremendous number of varied skills that are required and I’m happy to say

that we are funding those types of colleges. I know there’s one in Saskatchewan in York and that we

founded under GF2. Working with the provinces of Saskatchewan, turning out some great kids that are

anxious to get back to the farm.”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“The Green Party is totally off pace with this foreign cheap labour and that we shouldn’t bring them in.

We have horticulture operations that have been bringing in people from Jamaica, from Mexico for years

and have good relationship with paying them over minimum wages…The biggest problem with that

system is that these farmers have been doing a great job, good relationship, have good standards…

[h]ave to go to this bureaucratic nightmare every year to try to get approval and that’s what needs to be

changed from the seasonal workers. The temporary foreign workers was a good program. The problem

is the present government let everybody into it and then you had abuse in it.

“Now we have the shackles going right back to it and everybody is using it so that you see mushroom

growers, green house growers they can’t get those temporary foreign workers. At the end of the day,

the CFA worked with the study - it was called the Canadian Agriculture and Agri Food Workforce Action

Plan -which really did a good job on seeing how we can improve having a labour availability. Even our

own Canadians to be able to work on farms, to making it better with EI, to making it better from coming

in another certain seasons. That action plan that came out of the CFA, the Canadian Federation of

Agriculture, is a good blueprint and it’s something this government should have followed and any future

should take to heart and take the lead on.”

“[T]he issue is we should have a pathway for these temporary foreign workers to become Canadian

citizens and that’s the key.”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“There’s no question, there’s actually a report done… the Workforce Action Plan.. It’s a great read and

people ought to look at it…”

“I’ve had the industry tell me this for the last four years. We look for Canadian workers every time, we

can’t find them. We need to bring workers from offshore. What a bulk of the industry is saying and as


Gerry mentioned earlier, they are not temporary anymore. Why are running full time workers through a

temporary foreign workers program?

“Why don’t we do as a federal government, what the federal government did for my father in 1963 and

his family? He showed up to work and they gave him land status and they gave his kids land and status

at the same time. That’s what we need to do for agriculture workers who want to come here and work

in agriculture full time. Lending them a status, if they choose to become Canadians it’s a choice they’ll

make, I believe they will.”

Yves Lessard, BQ

“Now in Quebec what we did is we have a system that did a study on labor so that farmers must look at

identifying what labor they need. Is it available locally and if it isn’t, then they can look the foreign

workers as well...

“…I know that whole fields of raspberries were lost in Quebec because the people who were used to

picking them, they were not able to come in because we made it too difficult and we can look at a

number of other examples. These are blockages. These difficulties have to be eliminated so that the …

the money that they [farmers] have invested to train - they qualify even if they do come offshore. Well

then, if we don’t have the labor here then we have to remove the blockages from letting them come in

to the country and work.”

Andrew West, GP

“Well I just want to clarify that. We are for scrapping the temporary foreign work program but I made it

sound like we are against foreign temporary workers. Well as what we really want is to make sure that

they get paid the same as anybody else. Is the large agriculture … Is the large agribusinesses that are

mostly taking advantage of the foreign workers program and because it’s cheaper labor, because they

get paid by the head of the product rather than by the hourly wage. That’s pushing out smaller farmers

who do rely on their families and local people to run their businesses and we want to put more support

in that. It’s not that we are trying to shut our borders the way it made it seem, no we want to make sure

that people are treated fair. Not only the temporary foreign workers are treated as fair but also the

100,000 smaller farmers who are treated fairly as well.”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“Well I think the reality is if you go to a processing plant …[t]hey [temporary foreign workers] were

getting paid as the unionized people, they are getting treated well and they are getting paid. I don’t

think that’s the issue, the issue is we should have a pathway for these temporary foreign workers to

become Canadian citizens and that’s the key…. One doesn’t fit all for different farms. If you have a

horticulture crops and is very perishable you need offshore labor to come in and get your crop out,


there’s no way around it. Then but some of these processing plants … I think we have to have a mix that

works for everybody but I don’t see across this country anybody abuse any farmers or food processor

abusing workers or not treating them properly.”

QUESTION 3 – NEXT GENERATION/AG CAREERS - Despite a wealth

of career opportunities available across all skill levels, agriculture continues to

struggle in attracting youth into the sector. Since it falls beyond the mandates of

any one government department or industry group, agricultural career

promotion seems to be slipping through the cracks. If elected, what would your

party do to address the lack of interested Canadians and support agriculture’s

labour infrastructure over the long-term?

Mark Eyking, LPC

“When you look at the climate change and the challenges in the world of producing food and how we

are positioning Canada we are one of the most positioned best positioned countries in the world to

expand on food production. …The pathway is very important and pathway for them to be able to, not

just work on a farm but work in the agriculture sector is key. They also told me where, I went to

Agriculture College many years ago, but there’s been a downturn for entrance and now it’s coming

back. Where’s a real big interest and new interests in young people going to Agriculture College, going

into food sciences…”

“…Mr. Trudeau recently announced that we are going to put a $500 million increase in the labor market

developments with the provinces … We are also putting $200 million a year in funding to help train

workers. Because it’s one thing to be interested in going to agriculture but it’s the other thing to be

ready for the technology and what’s happening down the road. When you look at it, it is a vibrant

industry, it’s an industry that has opportunity. It’s how do we get Canadians that are interested to being

part of this industry?

Also the other challenge is some of the farms are fairly substantial in value right now. These families

have put all of their net worth into these farms and right now the next generation needs to take them

over. We have to work on better generation transfers from one generation to the next, make sure the

tax laws are there and the pathway is there for them to be with takeover these farms.

Yves Lessard, BQ

“The Bloc proposes that we invest in the next generation. Now we are looking at the transfer regulations

allowing them to transfer to other members of the family... We also want a plan that they can have a

retirement fund. These are the measures that we find very important, and if we transfer this envelope


of money for agriculture it can be done by other provinces that wish the same retirement. Next

generation is very important. It’s the engine for the sustainability and the long life of agriculture for us. If

we look at other sectors they have that possibility because they have greater facilities than agriculture

has. That means that we put in danger the use of our lands and family new generation within the family.

For Quebec that would be to really empty the regions that live from agriculture.

The new generation is very much the engine of the future and it should be for all members of the

immediate family… The government should intervene and should support them and much better than

they support them now.”

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“This is something that has been a center of discussion at a lot of the CFA sessions that we have before

the fed/prov meetings over the last number of years. We continue to have discussions around this - how

do you entice young people and new and beginning farmers into an operation. The first and foremost

thing is to have a solid bottom line. No one is going to enter into something with the cash intensity that

agriculture takes without having the ability to recoup that and make those payments. We are very

fortunate, we are seeing that new and beginning farmers growing at about 8% a year that’s a good start,

but there’s lots more work to be done. As to the training that’s required - of course there’s nothing

better than being raised on a farm…”

“We are seeing increases in provincial regional colleges as I said before with pertinent training for the

skills that are required or an update of those skills. The U of S in Saskatchewan the entries …into the Ag

colleges U of S are up 11%. It’s the only growth they are seeing in that young farmers have their own

mentorship and awards program that I’m happy to fund as the ministry of agriculture. For 4-H, finally

they have five year stable funding, I was able to put that in place sometime ago.”

“There’s a lot of discussion around succession planning and what needs to be done there, we’ve just

moved as a government, we went from 500,000 to a million dollars now. In recaptured capital gains

allowance for those that are moving a lot of that product to their sons, daughters, nephews, nieces,

neighbors and so on. There’s always lots of work to be done you need a good solid rural infrastructure

broadband internet the way agriculture works now it is a big business. We have to have hospitals and

schools and we’ve maintained the transfers to the provinces in order to do that and of course, you need

roads to hold that product out to market, ports that can handle it and so on and as a government, we

put a tremendous amount of money into that infrastructure.”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“There’s no question, there’s a disconnect…You move to downtown Toronto into major urban centers

and those young people never grew up in a farm. Their family never was on a farm…”


“…We used to do extension programs across this country through the provinces. Perhaps the Fed’s need

to look at actually investing in specific extension programs that tie into those culinary programs. Not just

to community colleges but actually in high schools…”

“…4-H quite often was just on the farm, farm kids learn to do things in 4-H. The conversation we had is -

how can you take that program or bring it to the city? …”

“ One of the ways to continue to do that is to continue to stress the importance of this industry. To

continue to encourage them and to encourage young folks. High skills is what a farmer is today...”

“…We need to find a way to communicate that to the new kids, younger folks, new entrants that want

to actually come into agriculture. That the skills they’ll have to bring weren’t what they thought were.

They are actually the skills that they actually have and need an education and they need all of those high

class skills that we’ve actually developed going to school and university they can bring those back to the

farm.”

Yves Lessard, BQ

“…[W]hat is happening at this time is that the interfamily transfer [of farms] is breaking and when it

breaks, we lose things. We lose the knowledge that moves from generation to generation and also of

course with the assets and the rest of it…There are various cuts to the program, for the support program

that is called Growing Forward and by having these cuts, we have weakened the fact, weakened the

ability of young people to get started in agriculture. The risk is that most of them are starting out and

are more sensitive to price variations and the risks caused by the hazards of the weather. Most of them

are already trained in agriculture because you know that in Quebec, we have a Training School and I

think is a model school really and they learn there. Most of them go there. There’s also the knowledge

of family transfers from father to son and so on.”

Andrew West, GP

“… As far as I know it still faces an uncertain future. What we want to do is work with the provinces, we

want to establish a counsel of Canadians. We’ll work with the Prime Minister and all of the Premiers as

well as aboriginal leaders to find our solutions that work best for the provinces, because this is a

provincial issue as I said.

We also want to work on ways that we can make it more profitable for new farmers to enter into the

industry. As far as I know, if someone has a mortgage they can’t make a farm work as simple as that.

People are going into dairy, egg and poultry production to have to compete to get quota. We want to

invest $1 million into youth programs mostly in municipal programs but as an MP, I can help to establish

this to spread out into bringing in youth into different programs to introduce them into farming. This is a


three year program for total appointment of a 120,000 young people. We think that this is a start to

introduce young people into the farming industry to make sure that it thrives.”

QUESTION 4 - ENVIRONMENT/BIODIVERSITY - What approach would your

government take to work with agricultural producers to promote biodiversity on

working landscapes, if elected?

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“…It’s an ongoing collaborative work I would say with the provinces and the municipality of record land

use and what’s being done in the land is predominantly a provincial issue.

“We do have these discussions around the fed/prov table and we are seeing a lot of biodiversity done

right on the farm making use of a lot of the off product. Some of that nutrient management and so on…”

“Last year under, Growing Forward 2, there’s a program called Environment Farm Plans and that allows

farmers to put forward ideas and receive funding and there’s some $64 million spent to increase their

ability to make sure the environment is sound, that water is clean on their farm, and so on. Something

else that governments need to assess as they move forward is to make sure that the regulations that we

put in place are based on sound science and not knee-jerk to a weather system or something that looks

like its farm related but it’s not. We have to make sure that our regulations aren’t punitive. We continue

to work collaborative that way. Last year’s budget we put several hundred million dollars into Ducks

Unlimited and nature conservancy….”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“I think when you look at who are the best stewards of the environment other than farmers they control

most of the farm, agriculture industry controls most of the green space out there and manages most of

the water resources out there of any industry. What better opportunity if we are moving forward to

have a greener country and is to work with the agriculture community. Mr. Trudeau has announced on

his platform on the environment that there’s going to be over $6 billion the next four years - very

specifically to the resource sector there’s $200 million a year allocated for land and water management.

That can be translated right to the farmers and what they are doing. There’s things that are working

already in Canada that we don’t need to close…[W]hen you look at the PFRA which is one of the most

respected organizations not only in Canada but around the world of dealing with soil and water

management - they did a wonderful job and that has been canceled…”

“…I think what you need to do is have a government that’s going to invest in them and partner with

these operations.”

Andrew West, GP


“Well we would like to level the playing field to make sure that those who are good stewards of the

environment are not penalized by other farmers that undercut. To that sense we want to look to have

credits to reward producers for using clean water, clean air and biodiversity protection. Make sure that

farmers they are learning, well actually I should say … Farmers are learning that hydro’s and wetlands

are valuable to production. Services include pollinator and pest protector habitats, water cycle

moderations and wind production. We would like to start educating farmers on the benefits that

biodiversity and habitations protection have on their farms. We would also like to ensure that farmland

is not lost. Ontario we are losing 355 acres of farmland a day. Once that’s gone it’s difficult to get that

back. We have to work with the provinces to take the steps to make sure that our farmland is

protected.”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“…[W]e need to help with water management, land management. We need to actually be involved with

them in that aspect so that they can continue to make sure that the things they do, the practices

continue to do get better over time. We can help with public research…”

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“…The pastures that PFRA managed in Saskatchewan are not closed. The actual ground that we manage

as a federal government was provincial in nature and the province already maintained a number of

pastures. What we are doing over a multiyear transition is transferring the management of that ground

back to the province that actually owns that ground. When it comes to PFRA, they are now a vital part of

our environmental and science branch so all of the soils and water work that they had done over the

years is there and it’s being maintained and continues to be done. On the tree farm, we maintained the

actual science part of that to make sure that new varieties of trees that are more friendly, user friendly

to Western Canada are developed there. The actual day to day operations of the tree farm have been

leased out to private operators. Trees are still available just not free like they were under the federal

government. Last year, 98% of the trees that went out went to everybody but land owners. They were

selling to other nurseries in order to maintain their ability to produce. There are very few trees actually

being planted in farmland in Western Canada now than around the yard site simply because we don’t

have the erosion problems anymore with continuous cropping and the great work that’s done to mellow

the soil …”

QUESTION 5 - SOCIAL LICENSE: What role or support would your party provide to

agricultural producers to help demonstrate continuous improvement in these

areas that would contribute to agriculture’s social license?

Yves Lessard, BQ


“Now despite the barriers that the government has put into place, farmers in Quebec love their work

and they continue to innovate… The problem is that rather than being inspired by high standards such as

Quebec standards …the Canadian government has adopted regulations which compromise the efforts of

farmers.”

“…[T]he Bloc favors anything that brings food safety and the Canadian government should give the

necessary tools to the CFIA because they need to have proper inspection in the plants, in the federal

plants so that food safety is assured for consumers.”

“If we look at the role of the CFIA …. to clarify the possible consequences of it’s double mandate.

Clearing up the rules so as to eliminate any ambiguity … to make sure that anything that is imported into

the country has to meet the same standards that we have to meet in Canada. If we look at organic

products, we must require from the government, the federal government to adopt a policy, mandatory

of labelling those items that are genetically modified, they are GMO’s. With a standard that will apply as

much for products from Canada as the products that we import…”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“I have got to commend the Egg Farmers of Canada and the work they’ve been doing with the animal

rights people. When you look at the ambitious plan the egg farmers have taken over the next few years

of changing their cage size to a more friendly for the hens you see that, and it’s where we work together

as Canadians - for the betterment of not only for our animals, but an understanding of what consumers

want to see... I got to commend the egg farmers for stepping up the plate it’s going to be in a big

investment for them over the next few years to change all their cage sizes.”

“What we don’t need to be doing is cutting some of the institutions that help us give that confidence to

Canadians. When we look on the farmers’ side, we really need to do more improvement with pest

management. Some of the farmers have products that they want to be using or trying to get from other

countries and they are having a problem getting them in here and into Canada. Also you see the cuts to

CFIA, the inspectors and we are talking hundreds of inspectors so over the next few years and the ones

that are already laid off. It does not give confidence to the Canadian consumer.”

“There’s a lot of opportunity - I think our investment has to be there. It doesn’t have to be all

government investment. I think it has to be between the farmers, government and the people that are

processing our food. I think the other most important thing is education. GMOs are mentioned - I think

we have to educate the consumer what food is safe, where it comes from and I think that’s one of the

biggest challenges. There’s no reason why we can’t have very vibrant farm markets, why we can’t have

supply management, that is a local food. I think when you look at it, I think the federal government has a

big role with the provinces and farmers and producer and the consumer…”

Gerry Ritz, CPC


“This is a debate that took precedence at the fed/prov level and a lot of it centers around educating

consumers as to why farming is done, the way it’s done …. Chicken Farmers of Canada did an excellent

job in putting out that message and a lot more needs to be done at all levels. Our bio security is the best

in the world and other countries come to emulate that. We’ve seen outbreaks of disease in other

countries that our guys have been able to hold at bay - simply because of that farmyard to farmyard

biosecurity, as I said is second to none. We have an organic equivalency agreements with the US, with

the EU and with Japan, which certainly helps our farmers build an organic standard and export to those

countries. Companies like McDonalds Canada are using the Canadian model and the work that is done

on farm as a basis for their worldwide marketing campaign…”

“There’s a tremendous amount of work in just that education, there’s a tremendous amount of groups

that are taking a stab in that. There’s some coordination, there’s some funding under GF2 I know - Farm

Credit Canada has a program that they sponsor called Ag More Now Than Ever. It’s an outreach program

- a lot of work being done with food banks to get that good quality Canadian food out there as well for

people that are most in need. Never enough being done, lots more to be done but there’s certainly

money at the federal level to fund the great programing that helps us get that message out to

consumers.”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“I think we said it federally but we have to do it in conjunction with farm groups, in agribusiness… How

do we get social license basically from consumers who don’t understand the ag sector? They need

confidence with the policy they are going to get is actually a gold standard that they actually can say,

“Okay the government set a gold standard for us perfect. I don’t have to listen to the retailer who’s

trying to market to me.”’

“One of the most critical components obviously is Canadian food inspection. It needs to be world class.

Unfortunately, we’ve had a couple of incidence over the last number of years under this government’s

watch …”

“What we need to do is we need to have that as a public inspection agency. Not semi-private and not

pushing stuff over to the private sector - Canadians need to be reassured that their food is always safe

all of the time and that their government is in charge of that. That’s how folks actually say to you, you

can have a social license actually set bars when it comes to animal husbandry or how you do crops

biodiversity…When they actually believe in you when you set the bar, you’ve got social license that you

can go forward with the policy - in conjunction with the agri-food businesses and farmers across this

country.”

Andrew West, GP


“The Green Party believes in the humane treatment of livestock. More and more, people are requesting

this - I’m one of them. The Green Party will start by changing the livestock codes of practice from

voluntary to mandatory. We’ll do this to ensure that just the few people who aren’t following the rules

don’t wreck it for the rest of farmers who do treat their animals well. We’ll also shift the focus off of

cheap food onto quality food. We’d also shorten the distribution chain and reduce the food miles and

retain some of the taste and freshness. Here in Ottawa, this is a huge food agriculture city. We have to

send our food to a distribution center in Montreal before it comes back here to our grocery store. We

believe in a 200 kilometer diet. We also encourage more direct marketing so people can find out more

about their farmer and where their farm food comes from. The other thing that we would also do is we

take the CFIA out of the trade promotion because there’s a conflict of interest. We would expand the

food inspection to improve food safety and public trust.”

Yves Lessard, BQ

“The consumer is concerned because he wants healthy food and clean food. We must make sure that

we have enough inspectors so that we know what is happening in the processing plants and in the

slaughter plants. That’s clear, and so we have to add inspectors but the farmers that have to compete

with products that come from outside Canada …”

“I would like the Minister to tell us … what effort have you made so to that the products that come into

Canada are products that meet the standards, the high standards that we have here?”

QUESTION 6 - RISK MANAGEMENT If elected, would your party commit to

improve the AgriInvest and AgriStability programs so that agricultural producers

can confidently invest in their operation and deal with the diverse hazards that

can hurt the farm community and the agri-food marketplace?

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“Certainly the changes that were made were made with the offices of the federal, provincial and

territorial boards. The way that it operates is the provinces and territories actually have a vote. We have

a veto - if we didn’t like it we could actually start over again. We didn’t implement it in this case because

we do agree with keeping our finances and our treasury boards happy with what’s required in

agriculture. There are four succinct pillars that are involved when it comes to business risk

programming. The first one, of course, is insurance, it’s available and it has been available for quite

some time for crops. It’s now available for livestock as well, and both beef and pork have undertaken

that in various provinces. The provinces lead on that and are able to tweak those insurance-based

programs to suit the diversity that they have in their provinces.


“AgriStability is the second round … but the changes that were made were not a zero sum game. As the

top end went down, the bottom end for negative margins, those that need it more and more, actually

came up so it’s a trade-off.”

“AgriRecovery is provincially demanded if there’s a major setback when it comes to weather or market

related systems and it’s a demand driven program - whatever money is needed will be there. Of course,

the fourth is AgriInvest. That’s a one-to-one matching contribution between farmers and the federal

government and provincial governments to a certain level. No one else has that availability. We

ultimately agreed with the changes that were made, we are constantly reviewing these programs to

make sure that the changes that were made do not affect the bottom line for farmers. That they still

have the ability to ensure that they have the ability to go forward. Again we are right in the midst of GF2

and that review is underway as to whether these programs need to be changed.”

Andrew West, GP

“AgriStability takes the burden off the production and price fluctuations off the farmer and puts the

burden onto the taxpayer. Society, we have to decide whether farmers should get any of the supply tax

dollars. If Canada wants tax cuts then AgriStability doesn’t work. Minister Ritz hurt AgriStability when he

lowered the loss margin to 30%. At 30% AgriStability is not a sustainable program. Payments come

about a year later. If we want to focus on exports then we need to subsidize agriculture properly. We

want to focus to domestic, in which case no taxpayer-funded subsidies are needed but we would need

protection and standards from the federal government. In the absence of any help from the government

the Green Party encourages its farmers to subsidize their own farms by diversifying. Downsizing and

growing quality and focusing on domestic sales.”

“The CFIA has a conflict of interest and when it’s both the food inspector and the trade promoter.

Greens would like to abandon AgriStability and replace it with protections and promotions for farmers.

To do this we need to get rid of trade agreements that don’t work for Canada.”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“Every other developed country helps their farmers when they are in need. Other people help their

farmers, whether it’s a bad climate or prices they need to help them. Mr. Ritz is blaming the provinces,

but you starved the system and you changed the percentages and that’s why there’s no trigger there for

many of the farmers to use and that’s where you’ve got 200 million from Mr. Harper.”

“I think there is some movement we could do in AgriInvest. I think when a farmer is expanding they

should be able to take out the fund one instead of fund two, the nontaxable fund.”


Malcolm Allen, NDP

“There’s no question when you go across the country and talk to farmers and you talk about BRM, they

have great complaints about AgriStability. Before it was sluggish, it was unresponsive, it took forever

and the auditor general wrote a report, I actually was part of that committee and studied the report.

The auditor general said yes it was, so farmers are right. This time farmers are saying to me when I talk

to them, ‘It’s a useless program but I’m stuck in BRMs, if I want them I have got to be in or I can’t just

cherry pick out.’ Part of the problem becomes, they say, ‘Well this is of no value to me.’ I think they are

right. I think if the auditor general was to do a report to you two, three, four years from now you are

going to find out he’s going to say the same thing as he said before when it was unresponsive. It isn’t of

any value to them, so ultimately we need to sit down and say what works, what do farmers really need

and build a program.”

“Ag has a dual responsibility in this country. Federally and provincially, we have got to figure out how to

do this.”

“There’s no apple on a tree in July, then there’s no apple to be harvested come September, it’s pretty

simple. Well this programs need to be responsive, it can’t just be a program sitting in a bureaucrat’s

office that says, ‘We’ve got this program.’ It has to be responsive to the needs of farmers and it has to

actually help farmers. If it’s not doing those things, they are useless and it’s time to get rid of them and

it’s time to start again. My view is most farmers are saying to me, by and large, AgriStability is useless.

Time to redo it and start again.”

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“None of the programs are tied. There are four pillars and you pick the ones that work for you - all of

them, none of them, two of them, three of them whatever combination works best for you. We are

trying to make this as bankable and predictable and timely as is possible. They cannot be trade distorted

either. The difference, too, when it comes to time on this is the vast majority of these programs are

administered by the province of records, with the exception of Manitoba and Atlantic Canada those are

still federal. It’s the province of record and Nova Scotia has just put something in about apple blight. We

located it, it’s tied up under this caretaker convention during the election but those cheques will be

going out just as soon as October 20th happens.”

“We also made some significant changes on AgriStability since it is long-term, you need the end of the

year numbers and so on and then you can get a cash advance on your AgriStability… We also made very

significant program changes to the APP or cash advance programing for farmers. It’s no longer tied to

the commodity, you can pay it back with cash. You are not forced to sell your commodity in order to

make that payment in a timely way. I just extended the repayment terms on canola because the harvest


in Western Canada is delayed. We’ve moved it off for another month so those are the flexibilities that

we are building into a lot of this BRM programing.”

Yves Lessard, BQ

“I believe that we have to recognize that the economic energy in the country comes from the

agricultural sector. We know in Canada, as we do know in Quebec, that what generates agricultural

products it brings a value, it brings value added. The added value is necessary and it is the only thing

that is going to help us have proper succession. Because with a better economy we are obviously able to

have better succession and better use of the land. The new generation will be able to continue feeding

the world. We’ve had campaigns and we have said a campaign feeds a city. Each time that we make a

cut to a program, specifically the programs that come out of Growing Forward, we are then obviously

weakening any new arrivals, any new younger people that want to get into agriculture. What we really

need to do is not touch these programs at all. To make sure that we make them stronger by

consolidating them to ensure the stability of our young people on the land.”

“Now what we propose then is to invest into these new generations and to allow the transfers to other

members of the family that are less than 40 years old. Also, we want a savings plan so that they can

create a pension fund that is not taxable. Because we don’t know everything that is going to happen, we

have to have something at the end. We then will do everything we can in Quebec to help the new

generation. Why in Quebec? Because we use the knowledge that we have so that we can have good

management and other provinces can benefit from it too.”

QUESTION 7 - TRADE What would your party do to ensure farmers reliant on

export markets and those operating under supply management systems have

the proper tools to thrive in domestic and international markets?

Yves Lessard, BQ

“Now as a matter of fact there is not a program that is necessarily better than another, both have to be

supported and we cannot have these two programs competing with each other when you look at the

realities of farming in the west and Quebec. What we then have to do and look at is that when the

negotiations take place there should be no giving in to the supply management because that’s where

the issue is now. They want to save the farm by giving as little as possible but they do give away a little

bit each time. We have seen it and we know that it has been affected by the 17 million tonnes of cheese

that we can now import. Supply management was not abolished, but it is weaker and weaker.”


“Canada should not give anything away in one or the other sectors and we need to trust that this can be

done. We do not want to go through the same scenario with the Trans Pacific Partnership. I would say

that for supply and management and I would come back to what I asked at the beginning to say to you,

Mr. Minister, can you commit that you will keep supply management and keep it intact. If you do not do

it, will the other parties then commit to tell us that they will vote against any sort of motion that will be

presented?”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“The problem with domestic side is, if you put it on the trade table what do you do? The prime minister

said just the other week, there are a thousand competing interests at TPP. If you put the domestic

industry, which has virtually has no other market than a domestic market, on an international trade

table and give some of it up what do they do? They have nowhere to go, they are a domestic-centered

industry. They have no other market than this one. If you give some of it away, like what happened at

CETA, they no longer have it. Conservatives voted actually for the motion from my colleague who said

you need to compensate if they indeed lose their market. Conservators said sure.”

“Now there’s all kinds of numbers floating around about TPP. One thing is absolutely certain, supply

manage programs are on the bargaining table at an international trade negotiation. Our domestic

market is up for trades at an international level. If you believe what we’ve read in the press it says, ‘US

will get this amount into the Canadian market. Canadian diary farmers will get nothing.’ Of course they

don’t have an international market, they are domestic-centered so they get nothing. We get something

else at some other level perhaps maybe that’s the quid pro quo. Why on earth would you put a

domestic market on an international trade table?”

“Some will say ‘Well then they won’t talk to us.’ I would suggest that there’s lots of other things they are

probably looking for. Ultimately, it depends on how you want to approach this. Yes, we need to be in

trade and international markets. And yes we need to actually have all of the things we export, all of the

great things we export, those need to be open markets, those need to be actually helped into those

open markets. When you combine the two, one is going to be a real loser and it certainly looks like it’s

going to be supply management this time.”

Mark Eyking, LPC

“Liberals have always included farmers at the table. Whenever we did trade negotiations, we did it in ’93

and we did it in 2005, it wasn’t always easy but we had them there with us. What we’ve seen with the

European agreement is that farmers were not at the table. They found out later that all of a sudden they

were going to lose as much as dairy productions in Nova Scotia or Manitoba and there was this

compensation package thrown over to keep them quiet while it never came through. I think at the end


of the day, when you do these talks, you have got to look for markets for some of our products that we

are exporting. I’d like to ask Mr. Ritz, is [supply management] on the table or not in Atlanta?”

Gerry Ritz, CPC

“Everything starts out on the table and then is negotiated accordingly. I think we have a very successful

outcome from the CETA arrangement - 17,000 tonnes of cheese not 17 million. We have unlimited

access back, that does mean setting up a world price quota but it certainly can be done. There were 10

or 12 artist and cheese producers from Quebec at the Paris Food Show, all did exceptionally well and

have got new market streams into Europe and we continue to build on that. To say that supply

management is only domestic is not a zero sum game. Supply management will benefit from the CETA

agreement because their dairy cow is hormone free and when they are slaughtered they will have

access to 50,000 tonnes of new beef access. Veal calves that were basically worthless a couple of years

ago will now be worth a portion of the $600 million of beef access that we have in Europe. We’ve got

hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of genetics coming out of Canada, including dairy and poultry and

so on going out in the world stage.”

“There’s a trade component that supply management will benefit from and as I said it’s not a zero sum

game. At the same time, we were going to and always have and always will maintain the pillars of supply

management so they have the ability to continue on with that process here. We also said if there’s

proven shortfalls on the CETA agreement the same will follow through on TPP; the prime minister said

that. It’s a demand driven thing, if there’s loss on your farm, your processing site then you will be

compensated. This is zero negative impact on supply management at the end of the day simply because

we value that system. We know the cornerstone that it is in rural Canada. The great things they bring

the rural economies, billions of dollars of expenses that they bring because they’ve had that solid

bottom line over the years. We value supply management…”

“Farmers are well representative, they are briefed every night as to what’s going on. I listen in the media

how this is some secret deal, certainly it is. We don’t negotiate through CBC. Why would we negotiate

through the major media? We already get enough twisting in the wind from the way our media reports

on things and of course the other 11 countries pick up on that and know there’s some antagonistic

system here at home.”

Andrew West, GP

“The biggest barrier to agriculture trade is high dollar. The TPP is not about selling beef the way the

Conservatives are talking. It’s about selling oil and when oil prices go up, the high dollar price goes up.

We live in a global market and we require our beef prices to be low to be competitive. Now the minister

said that if there’s a problem, if supply management is removed in TPP…”


“There is pressure being put forward to the government to remove trade barriers… Here’s the thing, the

World Trade Organization says once a subsidy is removed you can’t replace it with another subsidy. If he

is saying farmers are going to be compensated for the fact that supply management is going to be

removed, it’s gone – you can’t re-subsidize the farmer. You can re-subsidize the trade. We think that this

trade agreement, simply put, hurts farmers.”

Malcolm Allen, NDP

“The minister said we’ll compensate folks if they lose something and they’ve got a new export market.

Well, I guess when supply management, if it loses another two, five, six, or seven percent, whatever it

ends up being, well they’ve got a new market. They can simply slaughter their cows if they are hormone-

free and sell them through the CETA agreement that he doesn’t actually have yet. I’m not sure where

exactly those cows are going to go since you can’t actually ship them under CETA because you don’t

have an agreement. You announced one, but you don’t have one and you may not have one for years

according to the Europeans. There isn’t any market actually set under CETA.”

“There are no subsidies in a supply market system, they take it from the marketplace that’s why they are

tied to the marketplace. That is the way you lose, to put it all on the table and say ‘Why don’t you pick

the stuff off you don’t like.’ What you tell them is ‘Here’s what we are willing to bargain with you’ we

put it on the table and we hash it out and they’ll put one on the table and they’ll hash it out. Don’t put it

on the table if you don’t want to lose it. That’s a guarantee that you will lose part of it if you put it on the

table.”

“Negotiations should be quiet, but they shouldn’t be without Canadians understanding the general

principles of what you intend to do. That’s the fatal flaw in these agreements as well. The only thing the

House of Commons will do when it returns, whenever these trade agreements come before the House,

is they will vote on the implementation of the agreement. There’s no changing it when it comes to the

House, it’s either voted up or voted down. That is also a flaw on how this country determines its

international trade agreements that its own democratically elected Parliament has no input, only one

side does.”

national agriculture leaders debate - questions &...

Documents