HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 23, 2002
STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
9:00 A.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. James DeWolfe
MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. We're waiting for some members of the Opposition to join us but given the hour, we want to have ample time to discuss matters of interest to all of us with you, and having said that I would ask the members of the Cattlemen's Association to introduce themselves to the committee members and in turn I'll get the committee members to give their introductions and maybe by that time some more members will have joined us.
First of all, I do want to thank you very much for coming here. We are very much a rural group in here and we take great interest in the industry. So having said that, I would ask you to introduce yourselves, starting with Mary Elizabeth.
MS. MARY ELIZABETH STEWART: My name is Mary Elizabeth Stewart. I work with the Cattlemen's Association on a number of different projects, including communications and market development and association management. Just to give you some background, I have just, within the last year, left the employ of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association. So I have worked in the beef industry for 13 years on a national level, and I'm really pleased to be working provincially and regionally with producers here - it's a little closer to home. I've spent a few too many weekends in Calgary in the last 13 years, so it's nice to be working at home.
MR. CHARLIE MACKENZIE: Charlie MacKenzie, President of the Nova Scotia Cattlemen's Association.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Welcome to our leader from Antigonish. You're pretty handy to Pictou County, where I'm from. It's nice to have you here.
1
MR. BOYD CROUSE: My name is Boyd Crouse. I'm a member of the Executive Committee of the Nova Scotia Cattlemen's Association and also Secretary-Treasurer to the South Shore Cattlemen's Association, and I'm very pleased to be here this morning.
MR. DONALD DOWNE: From Lunenburg County.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Lunenburg County, I understand that. I know that name is definitely Lunenburg.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Having completed the introductions, then I guess, Mary Elizabeth, you're going to start out with a presentation, and we can follow. If the other members want to jump in, just feel free to do so. So we'll just turn it right over to you, Mary Elizabeth.
MS. STEWART: I think you do have a copy of the presentation, so I'm going to try not to read it word for word. I know what it's like to sit and listen to a five-page presentation word for word, and I hope I will be able to maybe interject as I go along to clarify a little of the points that we're bringing up here. This is really just a document to set some groundwork, to show you what the issues and concerns in the beef industry in Nova Scotia are right now, and either during or following my presentation we would all be happy to answer any questions that you would have. Feel free to interject as I go along in case we miss the point.
So I would first like to start by thanking you for taking the time today to listen to our concerns and also to our plans. We very much have a plan to make the beef industry more prosperous in Nova Scotia. It's one of the few agricultural industries that has unlimited potential for growth, which is a nice position to be in although we certainly have a number of constraints at the moment.
The mandate of the Nova Scotia Cattlemen's Association is "to promote and assist in the sustainable development of Nova Scotia's beef production industry in the best interest of the members and ultimately all Nova Scotians." We hope that when you leave the meeting, you will leave with the conviction that agriculture, and particularly the beef industry, is worth government support and indeed that that investment can be a shining example of commitment to developing sustainable resource-based industries in the Nova Scotia economy.
We all know that advancement of non-agricultural industries has captured the attention of the media and policy makers. We tend to be thought of not as the new economy, but the old economy. We would like to stress that that doesn't mean that our economy doesn't work anymore or doesn't have potential. It maybe doesn't have quite the buzz that the new economy does, but we certainly have the potential.
MR. DOWNE: We have the beef.
MS. STEWART: We definitely have the beef.
In addition to contributing to a safe and nutritious food supply, beef production in Canada adds significantly to the national and provincial economy. Canada's beef industry is the largest single-commodity source of farm cash receipts in the year 2000, totalling $6.6 billion, reflecting about 20 per cent of total farm cash receipts. In addition, beef production also contributes to processing, retailing, food service and the transportation sectors. With these sectors included, the production of beef adds another $26 billion to the Canadian economy.
Beef production does take place in every province in Canada, which a lot of people are not aware of, but currently only about 1 per cent of total beef production does occur here in the Atlantic Region, but that's 1 per cent of a very large industry. In spite of our relatively small percentage of national production, our industry here in this province still contributes $22 million in annual farm cash receipts to our own economy and that doesn't include associated income and expenses generated through the value-added production and the indirect impact of other industries. When you look at the multiplier effect, we're looking at the contribution to the provincial economy of close to $90 million a year.
Today Nova Scotia is home to six-tenths of one per cent of Canada's beef herd and even that small amount is down. It was seven-tenths of one per cent 10 years ago. The provincial cow herd in the year 2000 was recorded at 26,500, down from a high of 32,300 in 1997, and since 1996 the number of beef farms has continued to decline while the average herd size has increased in an effort to increase viability. As well, we've seen the number of replacements and animals for slaughter in the province continue to decline as many smaller farms have made the decision to get out of the industry.
Beef cow herds tend to be less concentrated because they tend to be value-added enterprises that turn low value or unmarketable forages and crop residues into protein for the human diet. These resources are found throughout Nova Scotia and often in small quantities. Without the cow-calf farms a great proportion of that land and resource that is used in the production of beef would have no ability to generate any economic value to the province at all. Conversely, adding more beef enterprises or expanding the existing ones contributes significantly to the growth and prosperity of rural communities using that land base, and unmarketable forages and crop residues source that we have that can't be used for anything else.
So basically our problem is, the last four years we've seen a liquidation of the provincial cow herd, the beef herd and there are two causes, quite simply. One is very tight production margins that mean there's really no margin for anything to go wrong, and something went very wrong and that was the weather. The added costs of the recent years of
drought have squeezed those margins to the point when many producers had to liquidate their operations. Even though we've seen record high feeder calf prices at some sales, it hasn't resulted really in positive feedback to the industry because the costs have continued to escalate at a higher rate than those prices have.
So this loss of production and wealth is a loss to all Nova Scotians and not just the 1,200 beef producers in the province. The benefits of the healthy, provincially based, agricultural livestock industry extends to the wider community and has impacts in many other sectors: manufacturing businesses, employment, all of those, and even the tourist industry. I just got back from Virginia last week - and I'm really cold because it was 90 degrees record temperatures - and everywhere we drove we saw pastoral scenes of lots of beef cattle in the fields with well-maintained fencing that was just too well-maintained to not have some input. I suspect that their government has realized that all those tourists driving by not only want to look at the cattle, but want that impact of that picture as part of their experience. So it has an impact on everyone, including visitors to the province.
[9:15 a.m.]
The majority of beef producers are at this point, after these last number of years of drought and low margins, encouraging their children to seek higher education and off-farm work as a way of improving their standard of living, because at this point it's very difficult to see where that improvement and standard of living is going to come within the beef industry. Unfortunately, that means that Nova Scotians then end up selling their most valuable asset of rich farmland, and once it is sold for another purpose you can't get it back.
The goal of the Cattlemen's Association is currently in the midst of developing a business plan for both the association and the industry, to guide the development of the industry in the immediate future. We took the first step with a strategic action plan last year and have moved on to the business plan within the last couple of months. This plan was based on the fact that there is ample farmland currently available to facilitate increased beef production and that the reinvestment will be achieved through a planning process giving consideration to the overall values of society, including the best care of our producers, our customers and the environment. Our members want to be financially secure, have time to spend with family, and to ensure that the farm remains sustainable for generations to come, not unlike what all of us want - to put in a good hard day's work and get a return that is worthy of that investment at the end. And we would very much like the provincial government to be part of that process.
We are faced with some market challenges here. In Nova Scotia local beef producers raise less than 25 per cent of the beef that we actually consume here. I would say that that's a pretty optimistic view; it may be way less than 25 per cent. We do have a ready market for expanded production. The producers of the region have been proactive in developing a partnership with Co-op Atlantic to brand beef sold in Co-op Atlantic stores throughout
Atlantic Canada. Atlantic Tender Beef Classic is the brand name and Co-op Atlantic are more than willing to take local beef production much more than we are already producing into that program. So we do have a market and we don't have restrictions of quotas or a supply management system to deal with which, again, can be an advantage. We can increase production, as much production as we want, as long as the farmers are making enough money to make it worthwhile. Nobody puts your investment somewhere that you know you're going to lose money. So those are certainly opportunities for us.
In the year 2000 the contribution of farm cash receipts amounted to about $825 per cow, and if we use that number Nova Scotia could increase the provincial herd by 50 per cent which would be an additional 3,000-plus cows which would result in an additional $11 million in direct farm cash receipts, plus additional economic spinoffs of $44 million. This is beef that is now being produced in Western Canada and brought here and sold here. We could easily displace that product and keep the money in this region, both with our producers and in our provincial economies. The additional jobs that would result from this 50 per cent expansion would amount to 250 full-time equivalents for the province in both direct and indirect employment.
In order to successfully expand this industry, we know we do have to depend on the development of a highly productive forage program. That is our advantage here. This advantage has been lessened by the drought situation over the last number of years. The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration staff is currently in the process of bringing the type of expertise we need to deal with those weather changes to Nova Scotia, and we encourage provincial support for this necessary service. We have to figure out how to deal with changing climate or we lose the advantages that we have had.
A major concern that we have relates to slaughter capacity. At this point there is only one major federally-inspected - there are some smaller facilities - slaughter facility in the region and that's Hub Meat Packers in Moncton. The rumours have abounded since Hub has been purchased by Maple Leaf Foods, that there is a possibility that they will decide to close the beef kill line at that facility and turn it into a pork-only plant. We hope to have confirmation one way or the other on that within the next month. We had hoped we would have it last month; it has been a source of ongoing uncertainty. That facility kills and processes all of the local product that goes into the Co-op branded program. So if that kill line is shut down, all of a sudden we don't have a middle sector partner for that program. We have a retailer that wants it and nobody to kill and process it. This is a source of considerable concern.
We do have some producers who ship cattle to the Ontario market, but that's not a long-term solution for growth of the industry here. It's not economically viable as a long-term plan. We have had producers who are expressing interest in the development of a new- age co-op that would have some producer ownership, possibly with a retailer partner or another private sector partner. That would be our ideal situation and would give the beef
industry some control over both the programs and the markets. If it comes to that, we would very much hope that we would be able to partner with government to find a viable solution for that to keep the industry alive here and allow it to grow and reach its potential.
In Canada and the United States the trend has been towards developing large plants. Most of the beef slaughter and processing in Canada is done in two plants in Alberta, almost all of it. That's the way the rationalization has gone. In some countries there's a trend backward now to building smaller, more localized facilities. This is particularly prevalent in Britain. With their hoof-and-mouth disease outbreak, they very quickly discovered that trucking cattle long distances exacerbated the problem and was very detrimental to allowing them to contain that disease.
We are seeing some very sensible reasons for going to smaller, more localized facilities, especially as consumers are demanding more accountability in food safety. As I said, we're a little uncertain on that one, and it certainly is a very big question mark for the future of the industry here.
When we look at programs, most of the provincial producers support programs have been eliminated in the last number of years. Our producers look with some envy over to P.E.I., where the beef industry has more provincial support in provincial programs. Our producers in Nova Scotia now rely on the federal-provincial programs, such as NISA, the Net Income Stabilization Agreement; CFIP, the Canadian Farm Income Program; and crop insurance. Unfortunately, these programs have been designed in a fashion that they don't necessarily support the beef sector in this region, particularly when calculating eligible net sales. I won't go too far down that road in this presentation.
It's very difficult, as you know, to amend the federal-provincial agreement. In most cases, the federal government wants to see proof that the program isn't working before it's willing to make changes. Unfortunately for our industry, by the time you prove that it's not working, we've already lost producers because margins are so tight that you can't hang on to wait for a program to be redesigned.
It's imperative for us that the Province of Nova Scotia ensure that these federal-provincial agreements meet the needs of the local cattle industry if they are to be the only risk management tools that we have available. Beef producers are eligible to receive assistance through the Farm Investment Fund, and many environmental projects have been accomplished with that assistance. We're very grateful for that help. It's also important to remember, though, that these projects, while necessary, don't improve profitability on a farm and in fact require significant investment, often on the part of the farmer. If you have a farm with low profitability and very tight margins, it's sometimes very difficult to make that investment. For this reason many are considering simply exiting as these regulations become more and more onerous.
As an association, we would urge that careful consideration be given to the current trend of legislation by enforcement and suggest instead that concentration on driving change in the industry by partnering with farmers to accomplish the necessary objectives is more useful and, certainly, in some cases, is the only way that our farmers can survive.
Just to finish up, the Cattlemen's Association represents about 1,200 family farms in this province, and we are firmly convinced of the value of those farms and their farmers to the Province of Nova Scotia. Unfortunately, the average age of our farmers is about 55. That would indicate that many of these farms are going to change hands in the next 10 years. Whether they change hands to another generation of beef farmers or they become subdivisions and tourist summer homes is still to be decided, and is still very much to be decided.
There have been lots of reports and looks at the industry over the last number of years. In fact, I sat on the government task force on the beef industry in the 1990s that was chaired by Rick Williams, and came up with some excellent recommendations. However, these task forces that have looked at the industry have functioned as think-tanks only and haven't been empowered to really do anything with their recommendations. I will say that from that task force, I think that was the initial birthplace of this Co-op branded program, it was sort of where it was conceived. That's not to say that there isn't good that comes from looking at the industry, but we believe it's been looked at enough. We know what the state of the industry is, and we know where we're going or where we, unfortunately, might be going.
Ultimately, as an association, we would urge this committee to take a proactive approach in regard to the local industry to ensure the conditions will exist to continue its activity in the province. We know that without reinvestment and redevelopment Nova Scotia will continue to export wealth and jobs to the West that we could keep here in the beef industry. We're committed to working with government and believe, with certainty, that investment in the basic infrastructure that is needed by the beef industry will benefit not only the beef industry but all Nova Scotians.
I thank you for listening. Any market-related questions I would be happy to answer. I will absolutely be pushing the production questions that way.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for the overview, Mary Elizabeth. It was most interesting. It's been some time, I think it's three or four years, I know I was on the committee when we last had Frank Foster, I believe was here, representing the Cattlemen's Association. I believe, Don Downe, you're heading out to another committee, I think you had a question. I want to welcome Kennie MacAskill, the member for Victoria, who has joined us, and John MacDonell, the member for Hants East.
MR. DOWNE: First I want to congratulate you for an excellent presentation, Mary Elizabeth. You've done well to get through the five pages, and you really highlighted the key components of it. There's a couple of points I just want to clarify. On your last page you say, "The Cattlemen's Association urges Government to give careful consideration to the current trend of legislation by enforcement and suggest that government instead concentrate on driving change in the industry by partnering with farmers to accomplish . . ." What are we referring to here, can you be a little more specific?
MS. STEWART: I can see they're going to nod at me every time. Well, there's a concern . . .
MR. DOWNE: Charlie's good at answering these things. He knows his stuff.
MS. STEWART: You guys jump in at any point, if you want. I think the concern is simply that margins are so tight in the beef industry right now that if our producers are put in the position of having to implement anything, any environment program, it doesn't have to be just environmental, there are so many regulations that add cost. I guess flexibility is the key. In a year where you are absolutely squeezed and are making a decision about whether you are going to stay or go in the industry, every additional cost makes that difference to that decision.
I don't like to speak on behalf of the producers - Boyd may be better at this - but I sense there are times when producers feel that there's more of a hammer than a hand, that there are ways to reach the same end without tying people's hands. Maybe it's a flexible time period, a phasing in of certain requirements or regulations; maybe it's a cost issue, where government picks up more of the cost in a year. I'm kind of making this up as I go along here, they might hit me. It's basically a question of feeling that they're being squeezed by the inflexibility of regulations in years when they're also being squeezed by the inflexibility of the marketplace.
[9:30 a.m.]
MR. DOWNE: Specifically - if I may, just a couple of questions - recently down in Bridgewater, in Wileville, we had a meeting with the Cattlemen's Association with regard to the new set of regulations or the proposed regulation changes. A lot of concern. It was an informative meeting. It had to do with meat inspection. Some concern was that these inspections, if we don't have a facility to go to, if Hub shuts down, where do we go with the beef? The beef changes were made back in the 1990s, I believe, Boyd?
MR. CROUSE: In 1996.
MR. DOWNE: In 1996, for the freezer beef industry, a slaughter facility that's inspected. They're now talking that the regulations could change that. Ultimately, it will either force that farmer who has that freezer beef business to either go out of the business or do things contrary to what the industry would want it to be, the image of the industry that they would want to have. How do you feel? I know it's only in discussion form, but it is a concern. I know it's a concern from one end of the province to the other, because I've gotten some calls on it. Is that the type of thing you're talking about?
MS. STEWART: We certainly, at a board level, had a lengthy discussion about the proposed changes. In an ideal world you would have a situation that will fit everyone's needs. Yes, it's the type of thing that if a producer is in a situation where they're using a facility and that facility is now going to have increased costs that mean it goes out of business, so they don't have a place to market their cattle or it costs more to get it to market, then we're certainly going to see those people drop right off the end of the business in a tight margin year. Well, they're all tight margin years, but in the tightest margin years, I guess.
MR. MACKENZIE: In some areas of the province there are no slaughter facilities. This is the thing. Where I live there are two inspected plants, so it's not a problem for me, but in other areas of the province there are none.
MS. STEWART: Yes, and that ties the hands of those producers.
MR. CROUSE: A better example of the regulatory regime would be the roll bar issue that was raised about a year and a half ago. It was mandating the installation of roll bars on all farm tractors. It was done in a very tight time frame so that people had to comply within a very limited time space. Now, a number of farmers have a number of tractors on their farm, and that meant that every tractor would have to be fitted with a roll bar. We certainly appreciate the issue of farm safety and know the dangers involved in the industry, but the fact of the matter is that some of these tractors are older model machines, they were not designed to accommodate a roll bar, therefore that tractor would effectively be taken right out of your operation. You couldn't use that tractor anymore because it could not be fitted with a roll bar, and the regulations require that it must be.
This kind of hard-and-fast regulatory regime makes it very difficult to operate when you are in a fluid situation on the farm, when you have older machinery that doesn't accommodate these new adapted safety features and so on. There was a lot of concern expressed and meetings organized about that issue as well. The government was made to realize that they had to go back and look at this issue again and revisit it, because we just could not comply; not only was cost a huge consideration but also the adaptability of the machinery involved, that was the other factor. When they put these pieces of information before the government, they soon realized that this was not the way to go, the regulatory approach would not work in this instance. They just couldn't be accepted by the farming community.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have several on the list. Mr. Langille, I believe you're next.
MR. WILLIAM LANGILLE: First of all, I buy local beef. I want you to know that. In fact, I buy 100 per cent myself and my wife buys - well she buys about 80 per cent local. We shop at a place called River Breeze Farm which is owned by Jim Lorraine, Ed Lorraine's son. We buy all our beef there, and it's excellent beef. There's a misconception that the only good beef is western beef. I'm going to stray from my questions because you brought up a couple of interesting things. (Interruptions)
So with the marketing strategy that you have in place, how do you get the average consumer to stray away from purchasing only beef at your Superstores and Sobeys and various chain stores?
MS. STEWART: Ironically, we did a lot of consumer research when we set up this program with Co-op Atlantic because Co-op Atlantic meat managers thought that their customers wanted western beef. They believed, the same as everyone else believed, including us, that consumers believed western beef was better and that's what they wanted to buy. We did extensive consumer research and that's not what consumers told us. They said, no, we believe you can raise beef here that's of the same quality as western beef, and if it is of the same quality and either you can prove that to us or we buy it and it is proved in that way, we would prefer to buy local. The research was very strong.
We then also took the product and tested western beef and local beef to be sure that the quality was the same because it's one thing to tell people it is. The worst thing you could do is create a demand for a product that you don't actually have. The technical research absolutely proved that either there was no quality difference or the consumers preferred the local, so it is a huge misconception. It's stronger, actually, in the backroom of the meat department than it is in the consumer.
A number of years ago, there was an effort with O.H. Armstrong's plant to sell beef in IGA stores here in an early branded program. As an example, consumers accepted that product. I walked through an IGA store and watched a meat manager come out and point to the local product on the counter and tell consumers not to buy it and that the other stuff beside it, which was western beef, was better. That was the meat manager's belief. It wasn't the consumers' belief. I think the success of Jim Lorraine's operation is another piece of proof there. His product is excellent and has been very well accepted and has people driving from Halifax to Truro to buy their beef.
The other thing that Co-op did on our branded program is strongly advertise it as local and use beef producers in their ads to say this is who's producing your beef. We have a real opportunity to do that. They can't really do that terribly well in the West because by the time you get all those cattle into those feedlots and feedlot alley, you don't know whose
product it is. In Co-op, the producers are signed up to the program. There's a strict feeding regime to maintain the quality of the product. We know who's producing the product.
The industry is just the right size here to develop all kinds of pilot programs to try these things that consumers are demanding all over the world - trace-back systems for food safety, all of these marketing programs. We can do this because we have an industry that's a perfect, manageable size. As a matter of fact, we have people coming to us from Ontario and the West saying, how about we use you to develop these programs because we want to develop it and then take it to the West and make money with it because the feedlots are bigger and the industry is bigger. We have the perfect size to be in the forefront of the industry. It has worked with Co-op.
Now, the problem with Sobeys and Superstore is a different one and that is that we don't produce enough product to come close to putting it on their shelves. We're not supplying enough for Co-op right now, and that's the three Maritime Provinces together.
MR. LANGILLE: You said you're not regulated and that you can produce as much as the consumer demands. I'm surprised at that last statement, that you're not producing enough for Co-op right now under the contract with Co-op. What's the reason for that?
MS. STEWART: Money, price. There's no point in producing more of something that you're not making enough money on.
MR. LANGILLE: I'm not in the cattle business, but my brother is, in British Columbia. I know that the price of beef has gone up substantially in the last while compared to say a year and a half ago. I know that horse meat was going for $1.10 a pound to Europe because of the scare in Europe. Now if the market is increasing and the price of beef is increasing - and you can see that at the Superstore and local stores, too, the increase in the price of beef - why isn't it profitable to enter it now?
MS. STEWART: Just a couple of points. One is, first of all, don't make the assumption because the price went up at the retail store that it went up to the producer. It's not always the case. Sometimes the price goes up for different reasons at retail. Sometimes it comes down for different reasons. It came down considerably in the U.S. when Russia put the poultry ban on. Now you don't think of that as affecting the beef price, but if you've got a whole lot of cheap chicken then it affects the price of everything else that's competitive. The simple answer to why the high prices aren't automatically increasing supply is that input costs have risen as well. The pricing on the production end, I'll leave to our two producers here.
The other thing that I would mention, too, is that Nova Scotia is primarily a cow-calf producing province. There is some beef finishing in Nova Scotia, but the bulk of our industry is a cow-calf industry where we sell calves to P.E.I. and they finish the cattle there to go for
slaughter. So, again, the closer you get to the retail counter the more that increase in price affects - by the time that increase trickles back down to these cow-calf producers there's not a whole lot of trickle-down. Charlie or Boyd, do you want to address the input costs?
MR. MACKENZIE: Our costs just keep going up all the time. There's no two ways about that. Well, the big one last year was the drought. That took the sap right out of us because the feed we made for the winter, we ended up feeding it last summer.
MR. LANGILLE: I could probably go all morning with the questions. However, I just want to point out something, and you brought it up and I don't want to stray from this committee, but the reason you have the glut in the chickens is because of the steel, because the United States, of course, has the anti-dumping steel law and this is, in fact, Russians counter measured and that's why we're in profit. But what I'm saying is, the whole global situation affects us. It affects the beef. More people are eating chicken because it's inexpensive.
MS. STEWART: It affects the beef industry more in Canada than it affects the supply-managed commodities because they have a built-in protection mechanism that we don't. Basically, our beef price is set in Chicago. We can do whatever we want, but the fact is, the future price for beef in Chicago ultimately determines what our producers are going to get relative to what everybody else is going to get.
MR. LANGILLE: Just before I close up here, Hub Meat Packers in Moncton. Actually I was caught off guard when you said they are being purchased by Maple Leaf and may be shutting down. First of all, why would they shut that down? First of all, it's owned by a New Brunswicker, McCain, but why?
MS. STEWART: Well there would be two possible reasons. I won't speak for Maple Leaf Foods or they will come down here and have words with me but, logically, one would be if it wasn't making money, but I have no way of knowing that. The other would be that the trend in food safety towards HACIP systems in plants, is to single species plants, is to not mixing two species in one plant. So to do pork and beef in the same plant facility is very uncommon now. That's probably the only major plant left - it could be in Canada, certainly - that is still killing two species of animals in the same plant. Certainly, their pork kill would be bigger than their beef kill, so the logic may demand that it go that way. We hope it doesn't. We are quite happy to have that facility as a partner in the Co-op program and in future programs. It's not our desire to have to build a packing plant.
MR. LANGILLE: The other one, too, and I should know this, but I don't, I'm going to ask you. Sunrise Beef, Sunrise brand, is that local?
MS. STEWART: It's Hub.
MR. LANGILLE: Where is the slaughtering for that?
MS. STEWART: Moncton.
MR. LANGILLE: In Moncton, and that's where they process everything?
MS. STEWART: Yes.
MR. LANGILLE: Okay, I'll turn it over now. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hendsbee.
MR. DAVID HENDSBEE: Like my colleague, the member for Colchester North, I'll probably be all over the map with various questions but I will probably try to stick to three or four basic themes. I would have to concur, in my own personal taste testing and sampling, the West is not always the best. I think Atlantic Canada's salt air seasoned beef tastes pretty good to me. My concern is in regard to the upcoming summer season, the barbecue season. Everyone is worried about food poisoning or whatever the case may be, concerns of trichinosis with pigs and salmonella with chicken, but when it comes to hamburger or beef, there's not much public knowledge except they hear about hamburger as undercooked beef. What is the Cattlemen's Association doing with any of the local food services with regard to promoting safe food preparation habits?
[9:45 a.m.]
MS. STEWART: Our provincial association and national association are set up a little differently than some of the other commodities. A lot of them have their provincial producer group and their promotion or their marketing branch set up in every province. What the beef industry has done to maximize our limited resources is, all of our consumer education dollars are pooled nationally to create the Beef Information Centre which is a branch of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and it's funded by all provincial cattlemen's associations.
The Beef Information Centre is responsible for all consumer education in Canada related to beef. They do fairly extensive food safety awareness campaigns, both working with retailers in developing on pack stickers for the correct temperatures, cooking instructions to ensure that the product is sufficiently cooked to prevent any bacterial problem, including E. coli. They have a retail program, a food service program, a direct consumer education program including a Web site where people can order food safety materials and, as well, are a founding partner in the Canadian partnership for food safety and something and something - it has many words; basically, a partnership of a number of food organizations that does public education related to food safety. It's been an area of increasing concern for the industry.
The consumer education end is handled by the Beef Information Centre. As well, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association has been funding research into E. coli specifically as a problem in cattle populations and ways to deal with it and if not eliminate it, it's a natural bacteria so probably we will never eliminate it, but certainly to minimize its effect. There's everything down to vaccines for cattle on test and in research, but from the consumer education point, that's what we can do. Even if there is E. coli in ground beef, as long as it's cooked properly it's not a health hazard. Ultimately the consumer has control.
We work both with - I say we because I worked for the Beef Information Centre for so long, but as an industry, we work with food service operators to be sure that their facilities are set up to cook hamburger to the proper temperature. We work mainly through the retailer because the most direct route to consumers is that meat counter and, as I say, with increasing amounts of dollars going to that effort.
Usually about the first of May, before we hit that long weekend, the first barbecue - although Canadians barbecue all year, we think of the long weekend in May as the start of the barbecue season - there will be a push certainly from the first of May on to that weekend in consumer education on that.
MR. HENDSBEE: Further to people's opinions about food safety, recently we heard in the news about various bovine diseases like hoof and mouth in Europe and we heard about Jacob - or whatever you call it - mad cow disease possibly transferring from animals to people with regard to blood concerns and Oprah Winfrey and her comments about beef and everything else, what kind of attitude changes have you seen? Has that had any direct impact locally or is that just something that has blown off the radar screen in the larger population bases?
MS. STEWART: What we tend to see is that whenever there is a food safety issue in the media, awareness and concern goes up very strongly. When that leaves the front pages, it comes back down but it never comes down as far as it was so every time there's an outbreak of some type of food safety problem - this week with Highliner recalling fish sticks, it will affect consumers' confidence, not just in fish sticks but in food in general. Every time there is a recall or an outbreak or a concern, even if it's not in Canada, we do see a spike, it comes back down, but every time that happens, the base level goes up a little bit. We certainly have consumers much more aware and much more concerned about food safety today than we did 10 years ago, there's no doubt about that.
Ironically, that doesn't necessarily translate into purchase behaviour. What we saw when we had some of the first E. coli outbreaks and recalls is that for two to three weeks ground beef sales bottomed out. Within a month they were higher than they had been prior to the recall which, hopefully, indicates a confidence in the recall system or in the inspection system and with the food industry in general, but certainly consumers are more aware and
more concerned than they were, and more demanding that industry look to its own problems and find solutions to them.
MR. HENDSBEE: My other question would be in regard to water safety. You had concerns about droughts and stuff and I know there have been some symposiums this past week or so, and last month in Coldbrook a water management conference, and try to perhaps retain spring runoffs and put them into containment ponds to try to reserve that spring runoff water for the driest time in the summer, but in regard to the cattle grazing and everything else and farm activities, has there been any concern about possible contamination of those water supplies from municipal water purposes where some cattle you see really graze the areas and walk through watercourses and everything else maybe and some of the watercourse may eventually make its way downstream into municipal water supplies. What kind of concerns or safety measures are the cattlemen taking in regard to trying to protect, perhaps downstream, the water supplies for human consumption?
MS. STEWART: This one is a little out of my area of expertise.
MR. MACKENZIE: There are different programs in place. Now we're fencing, to fence the cattle out of streams, and to put systems in where cattle don't walk down. Some provinces outlawed it completely, and Nova Scotia is coming that way too, that you're not allowed to have cattle walking through streams.
MS. STEWART: It becomes part of the greater overall farm management strategy which, you know, producers look at all aspects of their farm and become aware of the potential problems so that they can stop them.
MR. HENDSBEE: My last question this time would be in regard to not just about the meat product, but what about the hides themselves? How is the business in regard to tanneries and providing leather to local artisans? What kind of demand is there for the hides?
MS. STEWART: Generally the hides are part of what in the packing industry is called the fifth quarter. There are four quarters of business and the fifth quarter is everything that is not eaten, and in the packing industry that has traditionally been where the profit is, that most packers I think - well if they won't tell you, then they probably know that that can be the only part of the packing industry where there's actually a return on their investment. I don't know the specifics of where the hides in this region are being marketed.
MR. CROUSE: Mostly in the United States.
MS. STEWART: Most of them go to the United States?
MR. CROUSE: They leave the province.
MS. STEWART: Yes, so they're another export.
MR. HENDSBEE: Those are the questions I have at this time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Just out of curiosity, you mentioned the Co-op's local beef sales, and I think that's very important, but how important are the small operations like Lorraine's operation in Truro, and there's one in Westphal, Steve's Meats, owned and operated by Richard Veenhuis and his wife. It's a local beef supply business and beef products and it's a very stable and growing business. I agree with you that consumers will buy local beef and are willing to pay even at times a little more at the small corner store like that. I don't know how many of those operations are around Nova Scotia, but I'm wondering how important they are because this one has already expanded to Pictou, and it's very good meat - anyone who tries it generally goes back for more.
MS. STEWART: Well, I would say they're quite important for two reasons. One is they take often quite a lot of the production from the provincially inspected plants because provincially inspected meat can't move across provincial borders, so even though we have some excellent provincial slaughter facilities in the province, for instance they can't be part of the Co-op program because that meat can't cross the New Brunswick border. So those smaller independents become very important for the viability of those smaller plants first of all, and secondly I think there is a potential there that we haven't tapped into in that I don't think those smaller plants, because of the conception that western beef is better, have always promoted their product as local product as vigorously as perhaps they could. I think there's some potential there; there could be some co-operative marketing done of those independents. Now that we have the research that shows us consumers actually want local product, there's potential for those facilities to grow as well, I think. Do either of you want to add? Boyd, do you want to add to that?
MR. CROUSE: Well, those outlets do offer a market access to local consumers who want to purchase and support the local industry. That is a very important factor of the equation in terms of people knowing they can buy a local supply and knowing that the store they choose to support has a local supply to offer. So if they know that's what's being sold to them at the counter and they're pleased to support it, then I think that's an important relationship to have in a community.
MS. STEWART: The Co-op program has a big gap in it; the Co-op has no stores in the Halifax Regional Municipality, and that's a huge market that we don't have access to because they don't have retail outlets here. So those independents become very important within this municipality for us to get that message to consumers that local product is good.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I believe most of the Co-op meats come in precut, and at least you can go to these operations like Steve's Meats and say, well, I want some steak this thick for the barbecue. You can pick it out and know that you're getting a good product.
MS. STEWART: Yes, that's right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think it's very important to have that one-on-one with the meat manager.
MR. MACKENZIE: It's just that the small stores are the only ones that do that, though; in the bigger stores, everything is coming in in boxes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's right, yes, and I think consumers really appreciate being able to go and do that and pick out their own meat. John MacDonell.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: I apologize for being late. I am a twin and sometimes I think I can be in two places at once. In a previous life, before I was a school teacher, I took the meat cutting course at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, and another chap and I operated a small meat store in Enfield for about a year. So before I ever started working my fingers to the bone here, I did it then, but I see great potential for the beef industry in this province. Am I wrong that we only provide about 14 per cent of the market? So that's 86 per cent of the market that we don't?
MS. STEWART: That's right.
MR. MACKENZIE: And actually we're the biggest meat eaters in the country, too.
MS. STEWART: On a per capita basis Nova Scotians eat more beef than anyone else in Canada. (Interruptions)
MR. MACDONELL: Come on, this is my time now. Is it true that it's predicted to be somewhere in the range of an $80-million industry here, what's brought in?
MS. STEWART: Yes.
MR. MACDONELL: Probably somewhere close to what the dairy industry - well, the dairy industry would be more than that. But as far as the farm gate sales - because I think we're around $400 million, a little better than $400 million in farm gate sales in the province. And I know the dairy industry; it used to be one-third when we were talking around $300 million. So if it's roughly one-third still, it's a little better.
Well, I'm really a keen supporter of supply management, and I am really interested in what we've given away under WTO for the ability of beef producers. It would seem to me that if beef producers could get enough money for what they produce, they would be producing it. Then your concerns around regulations by government and the necessity for programs and all that wouldn't be quite as extreme, if you could make money raising beef. So I called our lead negotiator for WTO in Ottawa and didn't actually get her, but I got
somebody else who did get back to me. They sent me the negotiating position for Canada coming into 2005, which I've been carrying around for a month. I haven't had time to sit down and read it. I was thinking - actually I was looking more at the pork industry. Pork Nova Scotia is a marketing board, but it doesn't set price?
MS. STEWART: Yes.
[10:00 a.m.]
MR. MACDONELL: And what I ran by this fellow on the phone was around single-desk selling, you know, setting up a marketing board for pork. I said to him, well, what would happen if the pork that came into the province had to come in through the marketing board? If the price that was paid for this pork, either coming from Quebec or the United States across the border, it wouldn't matter, but if those producers didn't suffer, if they got whatever the Chicago price or wherever the price is being determined, if they got that price going through our marketing board and the marketing board also paid producers here a higher price, then would that be considered to go against their free trade agreement because they'd be getting the price they would ordinarily get anyway if we had no marketing board, and they couldn't answer it. They didn't know.
It would seem to me that if there is any wiggle room to try to get producers - pork, beef, I don't know if it would have to be just a red meat marketing board or if you would separate them - but to try to get them a price that's in relation to their cost of production and without knowing everything about what's happened under WTO, are these discussions that you people have had with anyone to see what wiggle room you have to try to secure a price? It would seem to me that the potential for this industry is so great for what it would mean to rural Nova Scotia as far as getting new farmers into the industry, keeping young families in rural Nova Scotia, keeping your schools open, all of these things. I would like to know when I say things like that, do you think does that guy have a clue what he thinks he's talking about?
MS. STEWART: You're talking about a national supply management system?
MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'm not.
MS. STEWART: Okay. That is . . .
MR. MACDONELL: I'm not. I keep being told I have to talk about a national one and I say, no, I don't. I know there's a marketing board for apples in New Brunswick. There's no national marketing board. We have Pork Nova Scotia, which is a marketing board, but what we need is for it to have more power in regard to price. If it goes to Maple Leaf to discuss price, it's kind of yeah, we will; no, we won't. So, it has to be something a little bit stronger than that and I haven't had a chance to - I was really glad that someone did
get back to me, but 2,000 miles over the phone; I would like to have half a day with someone to discuss some of these things.
I just want to know if your organization has those discussions or if anybody ever raises it. I know the cattlemen's meeting that you had in Truro recently I was at, there was a young fellow from the Valley I sat beside and the thing he said was we need single-desk selling, but I didn't know how much that's ever been bandied around in the organization. Is it a viable thing?
MS. STEWART: It has come up, it hasn't been studied per se, I don't think. It comes up. Unfortunately what we have in this region is single-desk buying not single-desk selling, so we are very much price takers not price setters. It's not much of a leap to think that a reversal of that would be a good thing for producers. The Canadian beef industry tends to be fairly cohesive and supply management is not something that you really talk about very loudly in Alberta in the beef industry. Cowboys tend to be a little independent, plus 50 per cent of the Canadian production, most of it going through the West, is exported to the U.S. It's very much an integrated industry in the West between Canada and the U.S. with the Alberta plants being owned by American companies and they just decide where they're going to send those cattle based on which plant is more profitable this week. They may go to Wichita or they may go to High River, Alberta.
It came up in the original beef task force; I think it came up a bit in our strategic planning session last year. Our preference would be to find a model that in a true alliance with a retailer and a packer and a producer, where the profit is - what there is and there isn't a lot of profit in the beef industry from end to end - that we could find an alliance where we could share what money there is, and to do that you have to have a very transparent pricing system from the calf right through to the meat counter. We haven't been able to move very far forward with that because of the packing situation. Obviously we don't have a packer that can commit to that kind of an alliance at this point with the uncertainty.
Our hope is that either Hub will keep killing cattle and then we will be able to negotiate that kind of an alliance through Hub to Co-op Atlantic; or, if we have to, we will have to develop that packing partner independently some other way, whether it's building a plant that producers have, as I say, part ownership in, which we would only be interested in doing if it were economically feasible. Nobody's interested in getting into a second sector of the industry that's difficult to make money in when you're already in one at the production end. As I said, it's come up but it's never had any real study, I guess, is the bottom line.
MR. MACDONELL: Where are you with - I know there was some discussion around another abattoir or packing facility and where has all that gone? Maybe you mentioned that before I got in.
MS. STEWART: No. Well, we had a group of Cumberland County cattlemen who initiated the idea of developing a plant based on a new-age co-op model where producers would have ownership in the plant. They've set up a steering committee which Charlie sits on on behalf of the Cattlemen's Association. They also, I believe, have solicited some proposals for feasibility studies. I'm not sure that it's gone any further than that, I think that's where that effort is.
There's also a group that the Cattlemen's Association belongs to called the Atlantic Branded Beef Management Group, which is essentially a group that's been put together to manage the Co-op brand. I sit on it for Nova Scotia Cattlemen and there's a representative for Prince Edward Island Cattlemen, New Brunswick Cattlemen and two from Co-op Atlantic. That group is also looking at the possibility of having to look at a new plant. We are in the stages of starting a conversation between the two groups because this industry doesn't have enough time, energy or money for two groups to go off and duplicate efforts. So, the Atlantic group will be sitting down with the Cumberland group and seeing where we go from here.
I think the feeling of both groups, although I won't speak on behalf of the Cumberland group - Charlie can do that because he's on that committee, but I think the general feeling - is that we have to look at this as a regional problem. We have beef production that is integrated in all three provinces. As I say, we are mainly a cow-calf producing province here, P.E.I. is mainly a feedlot province. They can't feed calves if we don't produce them; we can't sell them if they don't feed them. It certainly becomes more difficult because you're selling into the Quebec and Ontario market. It has very much developed into an integrated industry so we need to look at an integrated approach to the plant problem. That means if we have to go ahead and we are looking at feasibility, it has to go where it's economically feasible. We don't have any idea yet whether we will have to go down that road or what the outcome might be.
MR. MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, one more?
MR. CHAIRMAN: A quick one.
MR. MACDONELL: Okay. I know that some of the problem around the E. coli in Walkerton was, I think, on the idea that the specific E. coli in that case is one that's generated a lot with animals that are grain fed. I have been curious. I know people you talk to will say if you fatten cattle on grass, it's not the same; the fat's not the right colour, or whatever. But I did know of an experiment that was done where a farmer had 24 animals and finished 12 of them on grass and finished 12 of them on grain and was a little leery. The final answer in the experiment was, what do they look like when you send them to get them killed? Anyway, they did make a decision to send all 24 and all 24 were graded A and there was no difference in the carcasses hanging.
I'm just wondering, as far as the industry, are they doing anything as far as alternatives? You know, we can grow grass here if we get water, so is the industry looking at doing more, or anything along the lines of trying to use . . .
MR. MACKENZIE: There are ongoing projects at Nappan all the time.
MS. STEWART: That's one of the reasons the feeding industry has developed in Prince Edward Island, because they use a lot of opportunity feeds with the potato industry. So they feed a lot of potato and potato waste from the plants there. The research we did in setting up the Co-op program, we found that the best results came with a combination of grass fed for so long and then a combination of potatoes and grain. But we were able to cut back the grain component quite significantly, compared to what they would feed in the West, for instance, which is feeding advantage, certainly, for P.E.I. and, to some extent, for New Brunswick.
MR. MACDONELL: Okay, well I have another question, but I'll give up my time for someone else.
MR. LANGILLE: That's okay, go ahead.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I'm sorry. Did you finish? Okay, go quick.
MR. MACDONELL: I just wondered, you mentioned about research at Nappan, but there have been funding cuts to Nappan, so I just wonder, what's the deal? Certainly, to the Beef Testing Society, what's your prediction there?
MR. MACKENZIE: Well, part of Nappan is under the federal end of it, too, and that's where the tests are going on.
MR. MACDONELL: So what about the Beef Testing Society? I think it was proposed $60,000 for three years. So that's $20,000 a year and with the business plan, but my understanding is that that is just a drop in the bucket to what that would require. Do you know what's happening with that?
MR. MACKENZIE: They put a business plan together and it's the start of it, you know. The $60,000 was to carry them through for this year.
MR. MACDONELL: Oh, this year.
MR. MACKENZIE: That was a start and I think it's 30-20-10. That's the way it's set up over three years. But they just put a business plan together and they need three years to get it in operation. But this year their bull sale was the highest sale they had in 29 years, record prices. So there is interest and it helps them with their plan.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie; Barry Barnet, you have a question.
MR. BARRY BARNET: Mr. Chairman, this is very informative. I recall a two and a half hour train ride with a cattle rancher from New South Wales in Australia about four or five months ago. It is interesting, a lot of the issues that you raised here were issues that he spoke to me about during that two and a half hours. So as far away as you can get on this continent, they're still having the same issues elsewhere. Mind you, he also talked about the conflict between sheep and cattle. Obviously, that's not an issue here.
My questions, however, are surrounding something that I read in your flyer. The country of origin resolution, the U.S. Farm Bill, where does that stand now? Obviously, when the flyer was produced, there were still ongoing concerns.
MS. STEWART: I am trying to remember where it sits now. I think it came off the table.
MR. MACKENZIE: Yes, it came off the table.
MS. STEWART: I believe what happened with the National Cattlemen's Beef Association in the U.S., which is sort of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association equivalent, came out in favour of a voluntary system if anything was to be done, which kind of took the wind out of the sales of the American politicians. The specifics of it, frankly, are a little fuzzy to me because we have so many of these issues that once one drops off the table, I tend to forget why. But my recollection is that it is not a burning issue at this point, but it's one that could come back to the table; it was removed from the bill, but it could come back.
It's a huge issue. If the U.S. does anything that impacts our beef sales into the U.S., it will have a huge impact on our market. We are incredibly dependent on the U.S. right now as a market for our beef. We have increased the beef industry in Canada incredibly in the last 20 years and all of that increase has gone to the U.S. So that border is very, very important that it stays open.
[10:15 a.m.]
MR. BARNET: I see the national advantage to not having that and I understand the reason why the industry lobbied their position. I guess the reason that I asked that is that it would seem to me that it would be in the interest of Nova Scotia producers to do, not necessarily the exact same thing but a similar thing with respect to the product that they produce, to provide an opportunity for consumers to know where the beef is being produced. Although I understand the benefits of not having that U.S., I can see, at least from the cattlemen's perspective, there would be a benefit to have consumers aware of where the product is coming from, particularly from our perspective because we obviously import more than we export. It is my opinion that if consumers were given the choice, and knowing where
the product came from, they would probably choose the Nova Scotia product. Can you see how that would be an advantage if we were to label that?
MS. STEWART: Certainly, I can see the advantage that you talk about. Unfortunately, it's counteractive. Our industry is so integrated that anything we do here we have the possibility of triggering action in the U.S. Even if we did something simply in Nova Scotia, we would probably see that country of origin legislation come back on the table in the U.S. They are, quite simply, bigger than we are. So we have to be very careful what we trigger. It's the same as in our support programs or in our check-off. We are, right now, in the midst of putting in a national check-off system to fund marketing and promotion and research and export development in Canada and we even have to have Newfoundland on as part of that check-off system.
You know, they have some beef, but the numbers, we have less than 1 per cent of national production in Nova Scotia and we have a pretty healthy industry from a numbers standpoint for the size of our province, but we have to have equity of treatment across the country or we invite U.S. action. So rather than label western beef as western beef, what we can do is very vigorously promote local beef as local beef and, by inference, imply anybody who isn't promoting theirs as local then, obviously, it's not. So that's the tack we've taken and it has been very successful with the Co-op program; Co-op's beef sales have skyrocketed with this program.
MR. BARNET: We had the chicken producers before us a couple of months back, or a month and a half ago, and I asked them this question as well. With respect to land-use planning and land values, is there an issue right now in your industry about encroachment of urban development or suburban development and the change of use of land and, if there is an issue, how do you see both provincial and municipal governments dealing with that to try to protect the farmer?
MR. MACKENZIE: There are issues and the big one is that you get a fellow that is winding down or selling out and then someone comes from the town and buys them out and a price goes on the farmer can't compete with. Usually when those people move out to the community, they're not used to it. So if you start spreading manure certain times of the year you know what happens. It's a big issue and it's all over.
MR. BARNET: I guess the reason I asked is, I have, believe it or not, a suburban riding, pretty much 60 x 100 foot lots, but we still have one stand-out farm that exists right in the middle of a subdivision and some of the issues that are raised by constituents that have moved in after the fact is the issue of odour and smell and late night operations. It is a chicken farm, by the way. My reply is that they were there first, basically, but by the same token, obviously, it must be a great concern as a responsible neighbour to have to deal with this kind of stuff and the fact that people are getting more for the value of their land by subdividing it into lots than they can actually earn off of that land. So I guess at some point
in time in the near future, not only as a local provincial government, but as a nation, we're going to have to deal with this issue.
The management of our food supply is something that we absolutely have to do in order to sustain our life. We have to understand that these issues surrounding the large farms that we hear in New Brunswick and elsewhere - it's because of the people who live in my riding and consume those products that these farms are essential. We have to deal with that somehow, that growing conflict between where urban or suburban ends and rural begins, that dividing line. It's something that's not going to go away. In fact, I think what you'll see over the next 10 years to 12 years is a greater emphasis from both sides over protecting where one ends and one begins.
My final question is around the issue - Mr. Crouse spoke earlier about the roll bars, and not necessarily that particular issue, but the government's direction, trying to protect health and safety and all that kind of stuff. The hard thing for us as politicians, both on the government side and Opposition, is to walk that thin line between the public health and safety - not just the consumer, but the farmer as well - and the promotion and encouragement of the market in trying to grow the economy. It is thin. It's razor-thin, and we understand, as a government, that sometimes simply adding a roll bar knocks it off one side and onto the other. From the perspective of a legislator, what is it that you would suggest in terms of us better understanding your issue? How can we stay on that thin line so that we can promote health and safety for the consumer and the farmer and at the same time encourage growth in the industry and create a better market and a better economy for Nova Scotia?
MR. CROUSE: If I can speak to that, we suggested - at the time that issue was on the front burner - that if it was a priority issue with the government to promote farm safety, then they partner with us and make funds available to assist in purchasing roll bars where they were needed and we recognize that some of these implements on farms were of some previous vintage and would not adapt to a roll bar, so those should not be compelled to have one. By partnering with the industry and saying if roll bars are needed for farmer safety and to protect, or prevent the loss of, life - then we should certainly be moving in that direction and that's what's going to happen.
Eventually, the tractors that are being made and the manufacturers are now installing roll bars as a new feature on the tractor that come as part of the unit, so the tractors will come ready-equipped with these things. As the older tractors are retired from the industry, these new tractors will take their place and the issue will be resolved. So it's going to happen; it's going to take its time. We just ask government to realize that in the fullness of time this issue will come to a resolution, and in the interim do not take a heavy-handed approach and just set firm and fast deadlines. That will make it very hard for farmers to comply.
The approach we were taking was more give us a hand up, not a handout; help us to move to that next level if that's what you feel we have to do, but recognize that we are operating in the safest environment that we feel we can supply right now. If we feel we have to move to that next regulatory phase, then do it with some consultative type of thinking and don't just make a heavy-handed resolution that this has to be done at a fixed deadline and if you don't comply, that machine is effectively taken out of your operation, because there would be farmers left with two or three tractors in the yard that were not usable. When a farming season starts to move to the harvest stage every implement is needed on the farm, so you just can't retire it and say, well, we can't use that tractor a, b or c because it doesn't fit the government's criteria.
MS. STEWART: I guess consultation and flexibility are the two concepts that we really feel are essential; not in any way to imply that government hasn't been consulting with industry, but it's certainly something that needs constant renewal. With the cuts in the Department of Agriculture last year, we certainly have fewer people to talk to, at least. So it's very important to continue to develop those new lines of communication if the old ones aren't there anymore and to make sure just that our concerns are out there so that they don't get missed when you're looking at, perhaps, the greater population. These things may have more impact on the smaller population.
MR. BARNET: I couldn't agree with you more.
MR. CHAIRMAN: John Chataway.
MR. JOHN CHATAWAY: Mr. Chairman, certainly I very much appreciate sitting in for Bill Dooks today as it's really terribly well-informed. Much information has certainly come to my ears. I grew up in a small community and one of my best friends was indeed a farmer. He was a cattle farmer and basically, of course, they had dairy cows. Just amazing because certainly the advances being made all along are because of the dedication that you people have to the Cattlemen's Association. Otherwise, I'm not a vegetarian yet. I certainly like eating beef, et cetera.
On Page 3 - I think, also, Charlie, you're a very good president and you've given some good thoughts, as has Boyd, but Mary Elizabeth, you've done a wonderful job of having all this background with communications. Even a naive person like myself, I certainly am far more informed. But on Page 3, it says, "In Nova Scotia, local beef producers raise less than 25% of the beef consumed within the province." Basically, are we very unique in Nova Scotia? Or who does most, or is this the same with Atlantic Canada?
MS. STEWART: It wouldn't be significantly different in New Brunswick. Prince Edward Island is actually in an exporting position because their beef industry, relative to their population, has become quite large, but New Brunswick would be the same. This is a situation that has developed because of the growth in the industry in the West and the
rationalization that has taken place in both the retail and the packing sectors, particularly the retail sectors. There are very few retailers left, I mean as chains. All of the major retailers buy and distribute their beef through central distribution systems. So they buy into one distribution centre.
Sobeys buys into their distribution centre in Debert. All of their beef comes into Debert and then is sent out to their stores. Co-op is putting a new distribution centre in Sydney. All of their beef will go into that facility in Sydney and then go out to all of their stores, so all of the major retailers do this now. That makes it much easier for them, if they can pick up the phone and call one packer in Alberta, Cargill Foods in High River or IBP and say, send us this many of whatever we need and it goes there.
MR. CHATAWAY: Maybe this is naive, are there no government regulations that say if I sell 100 pounds of beef I have to make sure that at least 25 per cent is raised in that province? Is there any obligation on that?
MS. STEWART: None, no.
MR. CHATAWAY: This would keep the Cattlemen's Association happy, would it? To be fair on this, too, the big buyer could say, okay, as long as the price that, say, the Co-op wanted to have was within 10 per cent either lower or higher, they could do business. If they double their price, sorry, you can't do it. Is that doable or is it ever talked about?
MS. STEWART: It's not doable right now because we don't have the production because it's a chicken and egg or a calf and cow thing, I guess, that analogy. But right now, because the situation has developed that has limited our markets, because Sobeys wanted to buy in quantities that we could not supply, the larger buyers were not interested in buying partial quantities. They basically say, sure, we will buy it from you, as long as you can supply every store we have. Of course, we have never been in a position to do that. As the chains got bigger, that demand outgrew our abilities to supply.
They also used to allow what was called back-door sales, which was basically if you were an IGA in Sackville and you had a local supplier and you wanted to buy from him because you liked his beef, then you weren't obligated to take the centrally distributed product. But that doesn't happen anymore, and that's because of food safety concerns. They have to have controls, base quality controls and food safety controls, and they do that best through this central distribution system. We have developed into this - as I say, as the retail chains grew and our markets to them closed, they got so big that we couldn't supply them; that then meant we couldn't grow our industry because we didn't have anybody to sell to.
So, finally, we have Co-op. Right now, we are not supplying all the Co-op could sell. We could increase production just for that one program alone, and we have been, but cattle are not like chickens. It takes more than a month or two to get from the point where the cow-
calf producer is investing in that cow to produce the calf to get it to the feedlot to the packer. It's an incremental process.
[10:30 a.m.]
MR. CHATAWAY: Correct me if I'm wrong. Say we call it Atlantic Canada, and say, okay, the big buyer up here wants - let's keep it simple - 100 proverbial pounds of beef. Why can't the government or the regulations be that you have to buy - you have to make two phone calls? Seventy-five cent of our beef comes from anywhere you've got it, 25 per cent has to come from Atlantic Canada. Is that not doable? (Interruptions)
MS. STEWART: Yes, that's true. I missed that. There has been a change in regulations that has been helpful, and that is that institutional buyers in Nova Scotia are now allowed to buy from provincially. Inspected plants, where in the past they had to buy from federally-inspected plants only. They either had to buy from Hub or from somebody - there's one in Antigonish, one federally-inspected plant, but it doesn't handle quantities of beef. Basically that means that all institutions buying in Nova Scotia had to go at least as far as Hub and often farther if the supply wasn't there or the price wasn't there. They can now buy from Nova Scotia's provincially-inspected plants; that's been a very positive move for our industry.
What you're suggesting is theoretically possible. I don't know how, it but it certainly is a theoretical possibility that would open another market. At this point we'd really like to be able to fill the Co-op market and then we will move on. But we certainly want to develop increased markets, and we also see an export market for our product, frankly. As I talked about earlier, we're the perfect size to develop pilot projects, including natural beef and hormone-free beef; there are lots of places in the world looking for these products. Right now we have a BSE - we could easily have a hormone-free product that would be pretty exportable.
MR. CHATAWAY: Just one final question, if you would. That was on Page 3, Market Factors, third paragraph, "The Atlantic Tender Beef Classic product marketed through Co-op Atlantic demonstrates the growth possibilities for beef products . . ." That's what you've just mentioned.
MS. STEWART: Yes.
MR. CHATAWAY: How long has this been going on?
MS. STEWART: It's been about three years since we started the process. What we did is - because of the supply issues, we did an enrolling launch. We launched the product in Nova Scotia stores first and then brought the other provinces on as we enrolled more producers. This wasn't new production per se, but to sell cattle into this program you have
to enrol and agree to feed to a certain specification; there are also quality specs at the packing plant. The product has to grade a certain way and weigh a certain amount. As we enrolled more producers and got supply up that way, we brought other provinces on. Now we are in all four provinces and, I guess, some of the Gaspé Peninsula and Magdalen Islands that Co-op also sells into.
MR. MACKENZIE: I think Newfoundland has handled more meat than the other provinces put together.
MS. STEWART: Yes. They're big meat eaters, too.
MR. MACKENZIE: Well, that's why that certain centre works best in Cape Breton, because its product is going to Newfoundland.
MR. CHATAWAY: Well, Mary Elizabeth, that's certainly your thing; it says, ". . . meet high quality standards." I maybe know a bit more about Christmas tree growing in Lunenburg County, and one of the reasons we have a good market all over the proverbial world - maybe in the United States, et cetera - is because we have high quality standards.
MS. STEWART: That's right.
MR. CHATAWAY: And we have to keep making sure that we give quality product to everybody who, in theory, wants it. It is competitive; you're right. I very much appreciate the questions, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. MacAskill, you're next on the list, please.
MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and the panel. I appreciate your presentation today. While I come from a rural part of Nova Scotia I am certainly not a farmer. I don't come from a farming area, you know, since the demise of the family farm.
MR. MACDONELL: You're still outstanding in your field.
MR. MACASKILL: Still outstanding in my field - thank you for that. I want to touch first on the announcement of the possibility of the inspection plant that - Hub in New Brunswick. Do they receive federal funding for federal inspections? Is that something that could be picked up somewhere else if they discontinue? Is that something that's federally funded?
MS. STEWART: The inspection service itself is a federal service. The difference between provincial and federal inspection is the different level, a different set of regulations that has to be followed by the plant and a different set of requirements that they have to meet
in order to be designated as a federally-inspected plant. It requires a significantly higher investment to meet those regulations than it would to meet the regulations for a provincially-inspected plant, so you couldn't just move federal inspection into a provincial plant, for instance. It would require significant remodeling of the plant and investment of dollars.
MR. MACASKILL: So what you're saying is it would not be profitable for somebody to pick up that federal inspection agency from another plant somewhere in the Maritimes?
MS. STEWART: I don't know that we could say whether it would or wouldn't be profitable.
MR. MACASKILL: But it would have an effect on the industry locally if that's to close?
MS. STEWART: Oh, yes, absolutely.
MR. MACKENZIE: It depends on the numbers that they're handling.
MS. STEWART: The number of cattle.
MR. MACKENZIE: The number of cattle that they're killing. That's what it will depend - this is going to put their cost higher.
MS. STEWART: Generally, provincial plants are working with much lower numbers of cattle than a federal facility would. Even if they made the changes necessary they may not be large enough to put enough cattle through to make it pay, but that would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis with a feasibility study.
MR. MACASKILL: On your 25 per cent local consumption, that's the high side?
MS. STEWART: That's high. I would say it's probably more like 15 per cent.
MR. MACASKILL: Do you notice a variation much over the last decade or so?
MS. STEWART: No. I would say there's been some increase since the Co-op program came into place because they were bringing in a lot of beef themselves from outside the region. So some of our product that was probably being sold outside the region is now being kept in, but the numbers wouldn't vary significantly.
MR. MACASKILL: I think you will agree with me that the industry has taken some hits internationally?
MS. STEWART: Sure.
MR. MACASKILL: You know, we talk about the mad cow disease; hoof-and-mouth disease; the news reports of recycling animal parts and put back into the food chain; the Oprah Winfrey controversy which said eating meat is bad for you and, of course, the retaliation by the industry. So you wouldn't see a decline in consumption from controversies of that nature?
MS. STEWART: We have seen a decline in consumption over the last 20 years. It has leveled off in the last five years. Actually, the years that we've had some of those incidents that you discussed, we've seen, if not a halt, certainly a slowing to the decline. Consumption numbers tend to be related more to price than they do to anything else. The bottom line is if we are competitive with our other protein partners in the meat case, it's very price driven. Basically, when pork and chicken are cheap, people don't buy beef and vice versa.
It has also been influenced in Canada by immigration. Our demographic in the country has changed and most immigration over the last 20 years has been people who come from countries where beef eating is not traditionally - you know, they certainly don't eat the quantity of beef that we do in North America and, so, in a given month, you don't see an impact of that, but over 20 years you certainly do as the demographic of the country changes and also with the aging population, people tend to cut their meat consumption as they age, as well. So that has an effect, but, to a large extent, it tends to be price driven.
MR. MACASKILL: I would agree with you . . .
MS. STEWART: We still eat considerably less beef in Canada than in the U.S.
MR. MACASKILL: Take for instance, Costco. You can go to Costco and you can buy your whole summer supply of steak as you enter barbecue time and, generally, you look at the price, not where the product was produced?
MS. STEWART: Yes.
MR. MACASKILL: So there's no doubt that has a major effect on a small province like Nova Scotia? That meat, there's no way you would ever penetrate that market, is there?
MS. STEWART: It would be very difficult. Again, they're on a central buying system and they buy, it's certainly national, they may even buy internationally. It would be very hard to get into a system like that.
MR. MACASKILL: But you would agree that people look at the price before they look at the label?
MS. STEWART: Sure, and that's what the consumer research told us when we were looking at developing the Co-op program, was people were more than willing and, in fact, happy to buy local product as long as the quality was the same and the price was the - they say they'll spend a little more, but whether that translates to actual sales you have to be very careful of that. A consumer's intention to spend more sometimes evaporates when the flyer comes around and they see it's cheap somewhere else. So you have to be really careful.
In order to get a higher price, you have to build in more value and that could be by having a better grade of product, a better quality. It could be by, if you can convince them that they're supporting their local community rather than that it's a local product per se. We had a lot of luck, as I said, in tying producers into the advertising for that product because it was the support of the local community. If you can build it in with a natural product or that type of thing, then people are willing to pay a little more, but if you have the exact same product, they want the same quality and the same price and then they will buy yours.
MR. MACASKILL: It's still nice to see that Nova Scotians, on a per capita basis, still consume a high level of meat products. I want to go back, just to your (Interruption) Sorry?
MR. MACKENZIE: The highest in Canada.
MR. MACASKILL: A step in the right direction. You talk about the effects of climate change; if we were to have another drought, similar to last year, apparently there's nothing in place right now to offset that in terms of government subsidies?
MS. STEWART: What would it do? Don't want to know.
MR. MACASKILL: But there are no preparations in place to assist in any way?
MS. STEWART: We're involved in trying to get the information to develop management systems that will deal with it, but that's not a quick fix. That's not something that happens overnight, and again, sometimes there's quite a cost involved in doing these things that are necessary and may be necessary if this is to be a long-term climate change. We're very hopeful that it's not another drought year.
MR. MACKENZIE: Western Canada is going through the same thing right now. There's a lot of liquidation of herds out there. They're worse than we are.
MR. MACASKILL: But do we have the water supply for a proper irrigation?
MR. MACKENZIE: Yes, we do, according to those people who are coming in from the West. They said our biggest problem is management.
MR. MACASKILL: But isn't that the direction we should be going?
MR. MACKENZIE: Yes, they are working on it now.
MR. MACASKILL: But there's nothing on the threshold that would be ready to put in place for a drought this year?
MR. MACKENZIE: A limited amount of dollars was budgeted for this year.
MR. MACASKILL: Thank you, panel and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. We have a few members who wish to ask questions on the second round and we do have a little business to deal with at the very end, so I would ask that we limit it to about two minutes, if that's okay. Just short snappers, leading off with Mr. Hendsbee, then John MacDonell, Don Downe and Bill Langille, please.
MR. HENDSBEE: Thank you. I see you made reference to the Nova Scotia Government changing its tendering guidelines to allow Nova Scotia institutes to purchase provincially-inspected beef instead of going for the federally-inspected beef. With regard to the Buy Nova Scotia policy the provincial government is trying to initiate - and I also see an Atlantic Branded Beef Program being established - could I ask are there many attempts yet to affiliate with the Taste of Nova Scotia promotion that the Department of Tourism is trying to do or the Department of Economic Development is trying to affiliate? You talk about the lack of Co-op stores in HRM; what connections are you trying to do with the restaurant industry here in metro? This is the greatest concentration of restaurants in Nova Scotia, and perhaps that would be an avenue for local beef to be promoted more widely. That's one question.
My second question refers to perhaps there should be uniform levies. You talk about how integrated your industry is in the Maritimes, but you have a $4.00 a head levy over on P.E.I. versus $1.00 or $1.50 here and in New Brunswick, and you talk about the national check-off of those levies. What about trying to uniformly standardize the levy?
[10:45 a.m. Mr. William Langille took the Chair.]
MS. STEWART: Okay. Taste of Nova Scotia, we have a problem marketing beef as Nova Scotia beef because the industry is integrated in the Atlantic Provinces. The calves are here; we don't eat the calves. We have to feed them first, and that's done in P.E.I., so we have to market it as a Maritime or an Atlantic product, which limits what we can do with the Taste of Nova Scotia program. We have worked with them in the past, specifically with the restaurant program.
I can't remember the second part of your first question.
MR. HENDSBEE: The levies?
MS. STEWART: No, the levies was the third one.
MR. HENDSBEE: You touched about the restaurants.
MS. STEWART: Oh, the restaurants, no. As per the Co-op program, Co-op can't sell the whole carcass. Retail generally doesn't sell the whole carcass; they sell way more of certain cuts than others. That's the situation we got into. We have what's called the middle meats, which weren't selling through Co-op. What we did was bring the Beef Information Centre in to work with Hub Meat Packers to develop a restaurant program, because that's what the restaurants buy, the middle meats. We developed a branded program with Hub to sell that product; it sold under their Harvest Gold label as a premium beef product to restaurants in the Atlantic Region. So we did do that.
The levies we're working on through the national check-off agency that has just been set up. Ideally, if we were starting from scratch with a levy system, everybody would have exactly the same levy across the country, but we can't go back 20 years. Everyone has had a provincial levy. What we're working toward is a system where they are as uniform as possible. Nova Scotia cattlemen have passed a resolution at their AGM in February to increase their levy from $1.50 to $2.00, which will put it in line with the levies in most of the other provinces. P.E.I.'s levy is $4.00, but it's only $4.00 on the cattle once they get to slaughter. It's very complicated, but it's actually a $2.00 levy because there's $2.00 at the cow-calf level and $2.00 at the feedlot level; they just collect it once. Their system looks very different, but it actually has the same impact on producers. But, yes, we'd love it if everybody's was exactly the same. We're working towards making them as close as possible.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Hendsbee. Mr. MacDonell, please. (Interruption)
MR. HENDSBEE: So that levy adjustment, will that require legislation or do you do that by regulation?
MR. MACKENZIE: That's our biggest problem. One of our biggest problems is slippage in our check-off that's leaving the province. There aren't enough rules there for us to grab them and collect it.
[10:50 a.m. Mr. James DeWolfe resumed the Chair.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. MacDonell.
MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I will be quick. I just want to know, in terms of the Co-op Atlantic program, the price that you're getting - I'm under the impression that you're not fulfilling all the Co-op could sell, so I'm curious as to why that is. I'm just wondering, is that price - you are getting what you need in the program?
MS. STEWART: No.
MR. MACDONELL: You're not. Even as much as you're trying to promote, it still comes down to retailer and producer and trying to get the margin that you need?
MS. STEWART: The problem is we're selling against an Ontario price and Co-op is buying against a Western price, and there's a difference. There is a gap there. We don't have enough pricing information to know how to close that gap yet. We are doing work through the Atlantic Branded Beef management group to try to find out where the money is. Right now, our price on the Co-op program is Ontario livestock exchange price minus 8 cents. We started out at minus 5 cents and we're now down at minus 8 cents. We're going in the wrong direction. It's a definite problem.
MR. MACDONELL: Is that due to shipping, the minus 8 cents?
MS. STEWART: The minus 8 cents is theoretically based on the cost to sell the cattle into the Ontario market. The extra 3 cents came after Hub Meat Packers had a strike for three weeks. Co-op then bought beef from Ontario and decided that the price that they could buy it at from Ontario was significantly different than what they were paying Hub and went back to Hub, renegotiated that part of the price, which we don't have any input into, and then Hub dropped their price another 3 cents. Now, P.E.I. and New Brunswick came back and added 1 cent; their provincial governments added one of those cents back. Nova Scotia chose not to do that. (Interruption) Three cents for awhile. Which disadvantage - yeah, Co-op put a cent back and those provinces put 3 cents on for awhile to make up that difference. That disadvantaged our producers while that was happening because it gave 3 cents to the New Brunswick cow-calf producers that our guys didn't have.
MR. MACKENZIE: It worked out to about $22.50 a calf without buying calves, a significant profit.
MS. STEWART: But yes, it's a price we definitely have. If we can get the price situation straightened out, the supply will follow.
MR. MACDONELL: Thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Downe, please.
MR. DOWNE: I'm concerned about Hub Meat Packers. If they decide this week or next week that they're not going to take their product, what are the options for our producers in the Province of Nova Scotia?
MR. MACKENZIE: We're in trouble. Big trouble.
MS. STEWART: We have issues; there's no doubt. Co-op Atlantic has expressed interest in doing what's necessary to maintain the program. That may mean that we can look at Co-op doing some type of setting up yards to buy cattle, ship them to Ontario and then bring the meat back. That's not a long-term solution that's going to work for anybody, but it may be a short term stop-gap until we can get another solution. I mean, the bottom line is we need a federally-inspected plant here to take our cattle in this region. There just is no other option if we're going to have the beef industry in the Atlantic Region. So if that happens, we'll have to look long and hard as an industry and as governments on whether or how that can happen.
MR. DOWNE: Has the provincial government done anything to intercede to talk to Hub about the problem for the cattle producers?
MS. STEWART: I don't think, not that I'm aware of.
MR. MACKENZIE: Cumberland County started with a feasibility study, but one county can't do it alone. It has to be a Maritime thing. So actually the two boards have to go together. We can't have two people chasing the same money, so until we get it settled down who's going to do it, move forward on that?
MS. STEWART: Our hands are very tied until Hub makes a decision and an announcement.
MR. DOWNE: But then it's too late, at the same time.
MS. STEWART: I know. It is a Catch-22.
MR. DOWNE: Yet, the Ontario price, minus 8 cents, it confuses me. If we're 25 per cent of the market share, we got product to fill our own market, we don't have to ship to Ontario to sell that product, it can be sold right here. Wouldn't it be Ontario price plus 8 cents instead of minus 8 cents?
MS. STEWART: It would be if we were setting the price.
MR. DOWNE: No, because it costs them 8 cents a kilogram to bring it down, to truck it down. Why are they taking away 8 cents from our producers when that product isn't being shipped to Ontario where, in fact, it's being consumed in Nova Scotia? I can't understand that.
MS. STEWART: Well, the bottom line is we don't have enough accurate pricing information to be able to - we have two problems, we don't have enough accurate pricing information and we don't have any way of judging where the middle of the dollar is going right now because we don't have a committed true packing alliance. We have a partnership
with Hub Meat Packers, that they take the product and they do what we need done with it and they sell it, they tag it for us and they sell it to Co-op, but we don't have any access to any kind of pricing in the information or cost information in the middle of that equation.
MR. DOWNE: The farmers are subsidizing the retailers to buy Nova Scotia product to sell in Nova Scotia, that's what's happening?
MS. STEWART: It could be. We don't have the guns yet to go in and do that. When the program was set up, the goal was to get it set up, get a formula, get a committed partner and prove that we could sell the product. We've done that and Co-op knows that the product sells and that it's working for them. We are just at the gate at the stage of the next phase, and that is getting the pricing formula straightened out. Unfortunately, the packing situation has complicated that, in that it's more difficult to do when we don't know who's going to be taking the product, but if we can get that straightened out we are definitely at the renegotiated stage.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Langille.
MR. LANGILLE: Just in going with Hub, I know there is a person who lives in my area who has the financial backing and he looked into the feasibility of an abattoir and was very interested - did the study and found out that it was not feasible. If Hub went out of the slaughtering of our beef, you said you had two groups that were interested?
MS. STEWART: Well, we have two producer groups that have expressed interest in looking at the feasibility of a new plant.
MR. LANGILLE: Where I'm going here is a federally-inspected plant. I will supply you with his name after the meeting. He would be a contact for you because I know he's interested. The other thing, and Mr. Downe brought this up, our local slaughter houses, for lack of a better word I will say mom-and-pop organizations, that do not sell to retail, however, slaughter and cut meat for local people, anyway that is a concern and we have an obligation to provide safe, clean facilities. My colleague talked about that razor-thin line, you know, that we have to go one side to the other, but anyway just for Mr. Downe and the rest, that is on hold right now and we're taking a good look at it, another look. It is providing a service, and it's a service that the rural area needs and, just for the information of everybody, we are taking another look at it and we will come up with a solution and it will be the right solution, I am sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Your presence today has generated a great deal of interest around this table, I think you will agree, and certainly the members, I believe, have a better appreciation for the concerns and challenges that you face. We certainly hope that by working together with you and your industry we can find ways to expand your margin so as to advance this important industry in Nova Scotia. We wish you much success in the
future and hope that the obstacles you have presented to us today can be overcome in the days and months ahead.
I sense since we last had - three or four years ago - the Cattlemen's Association here, an uplifting in the industry and a more positive outlook to the future. I think that's important not only for you, but for us in government at all levels of this government. So, again, thank you so much and much success.
MR. MACKENZIE: I want to thank you for the opportunity to come here today and hearing us.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for that. We do have some business I would like to bring up if we could.
MR. DOWNE: One little bit of business. I was at a meeting over there, with regard to the representative from Shelburne, and I thought it would be appropriate if I gave this Shelburne pin to Mr. Hendsbee in light of co-operation . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: This part of the meeting has been adjourned. (Interruptions) Gentlemen, I just want to discuss very briefly the next meeting and it will only take a minute and we can say goodbye to the ladies and gentlemen in a second. We're discussing a tour of the entomology centre and we're wondering if we could do that on a Monday rather than a Tuesday. The reason I say that is most of our members are coming from the east, Messrs. Hendsbee and Dooks can come in easily from their direction, and if it was done on a Monday, you know Mr. Boudreau and Mr. MacAskill are all coming in likely from Cape Breton. I'm coming from the east; Bill Langille is coming from the east. I'm just throwing that possibility out. Would you be in agreement to that, if we were to do it say at 10:00 o'clock on a Monday morning?
MR. HENDSBEE: It sounds logical to me.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And meet at Shubenacadie.
MR. MACASKILL: May 28th, will we still be in the House then?
MR. HENDSBEE: Possibly.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Possibly, yes. So how would that float?
MR. MACASKILL: Well, we usually have caucus on Wednesday, so if I come up on a Monday . . .
[11:00 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Oh, okay. So you would rather do it on a Tuesday?
MR. MACASKILL: A Tuesday would be better for me.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have no problem doing it on a Tuesday. I just thought it would be more convenient for our members. It's not a problem for me.
MR. BARNET: I'm flexible, whatever the Chair decides, whatever the committee decides.
MR. MACDONELL: My schedule is a little hairy lately, but I can . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, if we're having a meeting early Tuesday morning, most of the members would be coming up Monday night probably.
MR. HENDSBEE: You can probably refer to the June 4th date, or early June instead of . . .
MR. MACDONELL: That might work better for me.
MR. HENDSBEE: For Mr. MacDonell the early June date would be better because of his leadership contest the end of May, plus we're sure that we're out of the House in May.
MR. DOWNE: Are we out of the House in May?
MR. CHAIRMAN: It's up to the committee to decide what you want. If we want to leave it on the Tuesday morning, then that's fine.
MR. MACASKILL: That would be my choice, Mr. Chairman, but I'm only one.
MR. HENDSBEE: I would prefer early June, to help with John.
MR. MACDONELL: June will be better for me, I think.
MR. CHAIRMAN: All right, let's do it on a Tuesday in early June, and what we will do is finish up with Resources on that date, and coming up we have the Agricultural Development Institute and the Nova Scotia Dairy Producers. Could we schedule them for the fall?
MR. MACDONELL: Well, I just have a question about Northern Lumber which was on our list months ago.
MS. MORA STEVENS (Legislative Committee Coordinator): It was denied.
MR. MACDONELL: It was denied?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Northern Lumber is not on our list.
MS. STEVENS: Northern Lumber was discussed at one meeting and it was denied.
MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I know it was on a meeting to be discussed and we left and didn't discuss it. The next meeting it was on to be discussed and we almost left and didn't discuss it, but I brought it up and I thought the Chairman said, yes, that should be no problem. I never heard about it being denied.
MS. STEVENS: Let me check back on that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You can check that from your notes.
MS. STEVENS: I will check that, because it was on the list.
MR. MACDONELL: Why was it denied?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will have to check on that and get back.
MR. DOWNE: The only thing, Mr. Chairman, is booking meetings at the same time on the same day, you know things happen. It's a small office between here and Darlene and everybody. I mean, you know we all pick dates hoping that we're not conflicting with each other, but in the event that when you check with Darlene on the dates and realize we're at the same time, if you could inform the Chairman, and I'm sure members would be co-operative enough to make sure we don't have the same time. It is hard, especially when you're in the House and caucus members and so on and so forth.
MS. STEVENS: We know usually this meeting conflicts with Human Resources, which doesn't have as many conflicts, but it was actually the cattlemen who wanted to bump it up or they couldn't have been here until late June. So the caucuses were informed about a week and a half ago to warn their members that there would be conflicts.
MR. DOWNE: I appreciate the effort. I just thought I would bring it up.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are we in agreement with that proposal? We will stick with Tuesday morning. We will try to do it early June. We will begin the fall session with the Nova Scotia Dairy Producers. All agreed? It's agreed.
The meeting is adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 11:05 a.m.]