AGRI Committee Report

THE NEXT AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Ruth Ellen Brosseau

Agriculture and Agri-Food Critic for the NDP

On behalf of the New Democratic Party, we would like to thank all the witnesses who took time to share their views on the Next Agricultural Policy Framework. We are confident that this exercise has been beneficial and instructive for all political parties. The consensus on almost all the recommendations reflects the willingness of all parties to produce a constructive and useful report for decision makers.  

However, the Report does not address all the issues, especially in the sections Program administration, Research, Science and Innovation, and the Temporary Foreign Worker Program. In order to address these issues, the NDP would like to make five important recommendations for a better Agricultural Policy Framework.

1. The Committee recommends that the Government study the possibility of implementing a “one stop shop” approach for the delivery of its programs in the agriculture and agri-food sector.

In the section “Program administration,” several witnesses referred to the complexity of the application process and of the bureaucracy, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses. In his testimony, the Egg Farmers of Canada representative spoke about how long it took just to fill out a simple form.[1]

On this issue, the Dairy Processors Association of Canada clearly recommended that the Committee create a “one stop shop” to facilitate the delivery of its programs in agriculture and agri-food sector.[2]

Therefore, to streamline the application process and facilitate access to its investment programs, it is important that the Government focus on a “one stop shop” approach.

2. The Committee recommends that the Government ensure the effective and timely dissemination of research findings and new knowledge, and fund technology transfer.

With respect to new knowledge funding and technology transfer, the NDP believes that the Committee’s recommendation reflects only part of the testimony we heard.

Regarding the section “Research, Science, and Innovation,” the Canadian Sheep Federation said that technology transfer that sees the interpretation and implementation of research findings must also be well funded.[3] The Dairy Farmers of Canada said that it is one thing to do research, but the knowledge needs to be transferred in order to ensure real change for farmers across the country.[4] The Canadian Organic Growers strongly urged the Committee not to let knowledge transfer activities fall to the bottom of the priority funding list in the next policy framework.[5]

3. The Committee recommends that the Government improve the Temporary Foreign Workers Program to enhance the capabilities and capacities of Canadian farm operations.

The Temporary Foreign Workers Program (TFWP) has been used by many producers for many years, and this program is very much appreciated by farmers. However, some issues that frequently arise include the timing of when workers arrive and when they are needed.[6] Also, high labour turnover makes it really difficult for some industries to get a well-trained labour force.[7]

According to witnesses, adjusting the program to facilitate the arrival and processing of foreign workers could increase the productivity of Canadian farmers.

4. The Committee recommends that the Government review the whole AgriStability program to provide greater support, better protection and ensure that all types of farms benefit. 

Regarding the AgriStability program, the NDP believes that the stakeholders asked for more than just a review of the threshold of payments. In our opinion, the entire program needs to be reviewed.

Witnesses said that the AgriStability program in its current form is unpredictable and unreliable, providing little stabilizing security in the event of a market shock. According to the Grain Growers of Canada, the AgriStability program should have some flexible options to ensure that it will take into consideration different sizes of farms, different types of farms, and where they are located.[8] The Canadian Federation of Agriculture also advocated for the removal of the reference margin limit, which was introduced under GF2. They also said that AgriStability needs to address the lack of support currently available to diversified farm operations.[9]

5. The Committee recommends that the Government study the impacts of the carbon tax on the competitiveness and productivity of the agricultural sector before imposing this tax on farmers. 

The agriculture and agri-food sector has made considerable progress in improving their ecological footprint. However, according to the witnesses, the carbon tax raises a number of questions, primarily with respect to their competitiveness.

According to the Canadian Canola Growers Association, a carbon tax has the potential to significantly increase the costs of production for farmers, thereby making them less productive.[10] Moreover, the National Cattle Feeders’ Association believes that the establishment of a carbon tax should be studied in order to determine whether specific exemptions should be made for certain agricultural sectors.[11] The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association also mentioned that, on the issue of competitiveness, the key issues of climate change and carbon taxes can’t be decoupled, however such a tax would probably lead to price increases among our producers and they would lose their comparative advantage.[12]

Conclusion

The Report of the Standing Committee on the Next Agricultural Policy Framework is the result of a thorough and wide-ranging consultation process. As such, it is worthy of close Government attention. While the NDP supports the Report, it has proposed some additions.

We strongly urge the Government to take every necessary measure to implement both the Standing Committee’s Report and the Supplementary Report of the NDP.