Book 1 - Key files: minister's transition book 2021, AAFC

Table of Contents

  • Setting a forward agenda

    Purpose

    • Provide an overview of potential priorities for setting a forward agenda.
    • Identify key decisions and meetings in the first 30 days.

    Setting a forward agenda

    The Government has set out an ambitious agenda to move Canada forward for everyone, based on a vision of inclusive growth and a cleaner, greener future.

    Significant progress on commitments related to agriculture and agri-food can be advanced over the next 18 months, but will depend on:

    • An ambitious plan to advance initiatives in a manner that reflects the realities of the agriculture sector, in collaboration with ministerial colleagues;
    • Strong relationships and consultations with sector stakeholders, including under-represented groups and agri-climate champions;
    • Finding common ground with provincial and territorial (PTs) counterparts in order to reach agreement in areas of shared jurisdiction; and
    • Leveraging strengths, such as science capacity and nimble programming, to strategically position AAFC and to respond quickly to urgent issues as they arise.

    Key commitments for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

    Successful implementation will require adaptability

    Ambition and scale of initiatives will depend on Cabinet and Budget agendas and decisions.

    Urgent issues and events could lead to calls for an immediate policy response, such as:

    • The detection of African swine fever (ASF) in Canada and/or the continental United States;
    • The persistence of drought conditions into the 2022 planting season;
    • Developments on ongoing international trade issues, including rulings from dispute panels;
    • Shocks or other events that lead to a worsening of ongoing problems in global supply chains, such as border closures.

    “Big data” is rapidly transforming agricultural practices around the world. For Canada to remain at the forefront of this trend, the department will need to apply similar principles and practices to its operations in order to play a leadership role.

    Potential cabinet priorities for a new mandate

    ██████████████████████████████████████████

    • ████████████████████████████████████████
    • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ████████████████████████████████████

    ██████████████████████████

    • ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████
    • █████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    ███████████████████████████████████████

    • ███████████████████████████████████████████
    • ████████████████████████████████████████
    • ██████████
    • ████████████████████
    • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ██████████████████████

    Priorities for first 30 days

    1. Setting the tone

    The department will propose a series of introductory meetings with key partners, including:

    • Provincial and Territorial counterparts
    • Key industry stakeholders
    • International counterparts
    • Heads of agricultural portfolio agencies

    Early regional visits could enable direct engagement with producers:

    • E.g. Visiting Western Canada to assess the impacts of the recent drought and Agri-recovery programming supported by federal and provincial governments

    █████████████████████████████████████████

    • █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    2. Early decisions

    Approach to FPT Annual Conference and NPF Policy Statement

    • Tentatively scheduled for November 8-10 in Guelph

    ████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    • ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    ██████████████████████████████████████████████████

    • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Regular government and departmental business:

    • 2020-21 Supplementary Estimates, delegations, appointments, next steps for programming underway, regulatory business from the CFIA

    3. Briefings on key files

    Your transition briefing package includes introductory information on:

    • Key files and priorities;
    • The department and our work;
    • The state of the agriculture and agri-food sector; and
    • Ministerial and departmental responsibilities (e.g. appointments).

    The department has prepared a proposed calendar of briefings on key files and decisions in order to support you in advancing the agenda over coming months.

    Other issues

    The department looks forward to welcoming you and your office and has prepared other materials to assist you:

    • Administrative and human resources guidance for setting up your office, providing equipment and tools, and on-boarding new staff.

  • Key messages

    Drought

    Issue - Drought

    • Drought conditions across Western Canada this summer have led to significant water and feed shortages for ranchers.
    • As of September 14, 2021, Statistics Canada projects yield losses for grain and oilseed crops of between 35 and 46% compared to 2020.
    • Cattle herds may be reduced by 5 to 10% and hay yields, by up to 50%.

    Current status - Drought

    • Up to $825 million in joint federal-provincial funding, will flow through AgriRecovery agreements with the five affected provinces.
    • This programming will help producers deal with the extraordinary costs of the drought, including securing feed and water for their livestock.
    • The federal Livestock Tax Deferral was also announced, which will allow drought-impacted livestock producers to defer income from the forced sale of breeding animals to minimize income taxes.

    Key messages - Drought

    Specific amounts per province to be updated once all contributions agreements are signed.

    • We are helping farm families to weather the challenges they face today and build a sustainable future. We have worked with British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario to provide up to $825 million in cost-shared federal-provincial funding to help livestock producers cover the extra costs resulting from drought and wildfires. We have also worked with provinces to give producers early access to 75% of their 2021 AgriStability payments, up from 50%.
    • We have made provisions for producers in drought-affected regions in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario, who were forced to sell their livestock due to lack of feed, to defer income tax on those sales until next year.
    • We supported Prairie provinces in making immediate changes to the cost-shared AgriInsurance program to help cover the costs of hay, feed and transportation to increase crops available for livestock producers in this time of need.

    Hay West

    Issue - Hay West

    • The “Hay West” initiative is aimed at helping Prairie producers dealing with hay shortages due to drought conditions.
    • On August 12, 2021, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) announced its intention to launch a Hay West initiative to address the need for hay expressed by producers in Western Canada and the desire of Eastern producers to provide assistance.
    • As of September 17, 2021, CFA was seeking applicants to both receive and supply hay.
    • The Mennonite Disaster Service has also announced a program to move donated hay from Ontario to Manitoba. Initial loads from their program commenced during the week of September 13, 2021.

    Current status - Hay West

    • Small shipments of hay have moved, funded by private contributions (including $50,000 from the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and transport costs for three containers, provided by the Government of Prince Edward Island).
    • The CFA initially asked for federal funding of $6.2 million to cover the transportation costs of moving about 60,000 bales of hay across the country (east to west).
    • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) approved funding of up to $1 million toward the Hay West 2021 project under the Canadian Agriculture Strategic Priorities Program. This reflected the amount of hay the CFA indicated was available to move westward at the time of their application and should meet demand for the coming weeks. The department has committed to consider further funding, if required.

    Key messages - Hay West

    • Drought has hit our grain and livestock farmers hard.
    • We continue to work with the provinces, producers and their organizations to address the urgent needs of our farmers and ranchers suffering from severe drought.
    • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is providing up to $1 million to support the Canadian Federation of Agriculture’s Hay West 2021 initiative.

    Market access and trade

    Issue - Market access and trade

    Canola seed to China
    • China has not reinstated two Canadian companies’ (Richardson and Viterra) eligibility to export canola seed to China; since March 2019 due to alleged detection of quarantine pests of concern.
    China's COVID-19 measures
    • As a result of China’s measures on imported food products due to COVID-19 concerns, 10 Canadian meat establishments have been suspended.

    Current status - Market access and trade

    Canola seed to China
    • Due to the continued lack of progress in the reinstatement of two suspended Canadian canola companies, Canada requested the establishment of a panel, which the World Trade Organization granted at the July 2021 Dispute Settlement Body meeting.
    China's COVID-19 measures
    • Canada is engaging with China to reinstate the suspended establishments.
    • Canada’s position, shared by other trading partners, is that there is no evidence that food or food packaging is a likely source or route of transmission of COVID-19.

    Key messages - Market access and trade

    General trade
    • The Government is committed to helping Canadian businesses and entrepreneurs take advantage of new opportunities under our recent trade agreements.
    • 2020 was a record year for Canadian agriculture, agri-food and seafood exports, with nearly $74 billion, an increase of over 10%.
    • Canada continues to promote international standards and trade rules that are transparent and based in science.
    Canola seed to China
    • Canada is confident that its canola seed, and other commodity exports, meet China’s import requirements.
    • The Government of Canada will continue to work with China to ensure predictable and stable trade.
    China's COVID-19 measures
    • Canada's position, shared by other partners, is that there is currently no scientific evidence that food or food packaging is a likely source or route of transmission of COVID-19.
    • Canada is engaging with China to reinstate the suspended establishments.

    Business Risk Management

    Issue

    • Business Risk Management (BRM) programs are a suite of tools to help producers financially in cases of income and production loss.
    • BRM programs have provided approximately $1.6 billion on average per year to support producers, with the federal government paying 60% of this support. Due to the extreme drought episode this summer, BRM program payments are expected to increase significantly for the 2021 production year, including up to $825 million in joint federal-provincial funding in AgriRecovery payments to livestock producers in the affected provinces, as well as large-scale payments from AgriInsurance for crop losses.

    (Please note: 2021 estimates are currently being developed, but it is expected that AgriInsurance and AgriStability payments will be higher in 2021.)

    Current status - Market access and trade

    • Recent assessments have concluded the suite is working reasonably well but concerns remain related to complexity, fairness, predictability and the ability to adequately address evolving risks faced by the sector.
    • In 2021 the reference margin limit was removed from AgriStability, which could increase pay outs to producers by approximately $95 million. Furthermore, interim payments for 2021 were increased from 50 to 75% in many jurisdictions.
    • The federal offer to increase the AgriStability compensation rate from 70 to 80% remains on the table, but to date there insufficient support from provinces and territories (PTs) to implement this enhancement.
    • Currently, these programs do not directly integrate climate risk management considerations, although they are a key support to recover from disaster events such as droughts and floods.

    BRM programs remain a priority for both producers and PTs. AAFC is continuing to assess ways in which to improve the functioning of the suite.

    Key messages

    • Our BRM programs help producers protect their businesses against income and production losses, and manage risks that threaten the viability of their farms.
    • We look forward to building on our work with provinces, territories and producers—including Indigenous and young producers—to help the sector better manage the risks they face, including climate risk.
    • We have, with provincial support, removed the reference margin limit from AgriStability, which could pay up to an additional $95 million to producers nationally.

    Temporary foreign workers

    Issue - Temporary foreign workers

    • In a typical year, roughly 70,000 temporary foreign workers (TFWs) work in the agriculture and agri-food sector. The Temporary Foreign Worker Program is jointly administered by Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
    • Given chronic labour shortages in the agriculture and agri-food sector, TFWs have been, and will continue to be, a key source of labour, particularly in horticulture and processing.
    • Federal partners collaborated closely throughout the pandemic to ensure continued arrival of TFWs, while also taking steps to improve worker safety on farms and in food processing plants.
    • AAFC developed time-limited emergency programming to offset some pandemic-related costs for employers of TFWs.

    Current status - Temporary foreign workers

    • Despite a 15% decrease in TFW arrivals in 2020, arrivals for 2021 are on track to outpace pre-COVID trends.
    • Recognizing the critical role TFWs play in the agriculture and agri-food system, a number of temporary policies were put in place to facilitate the expedient arrival of TFWs involved in food production. This included the priority processing of applications.
    • TFWs in agriculture and agri-food who are fully vaccinated, with an approved vaccine, are no longer required to quarantine or complete post-arrival testing as of July 2021.
    • Rates of vaccination in key source countries remain low; however many TFWs working in Canada during the 2021 season were offered vaccination, either as part of general eligibility under provincial frameworks or through targeted efforts by provinces and local health units.
    • Unvaccinated travellers must still quarantine for 14 days following arrival in Canada.
    • AAFC emergency programming to offset the costs of mandatory isolation for TFWs stopped accepting applications on August 31, 2021.
    • Federal investments (through ESDC and IRCC) are strengthening the TFW Program and safeguarding the health and safety of TFWs, including the development of minimum requirements for employer provided accommodations.

    Key messages - Temporary foreign workers

    • Both domestic and foreign workers are essential to the production of safe and reliable food in this country.
    • We will continue to work hard to support the safe and timely arrival of TFWs.
    • The Government will also continue to work with industry on a strategy to help it overcome ongoing labour challenges as well as strengthen the TFW Program to safeguard the health and safety of workers.
    • The $142-million Mandatory Isolation Support for TFWs Program was put in place as a temporary support for employers during the most acute COVID-19 crisis period.

    Environment and climate change

    Issue - Environment and climate change

    • The agriculture sector has made significant progress in on-farm sustainability, increasing production while keeping emissions relatively stable.
    • However, total emissions from agriculture sources are not decreasing, and the rate of soil carbon sequestration is slowing.
    • Increased expectations regarding sustainability from trading partners, stakeholders and consumers are putting a spotlight on the importance of addressing climate change, biodiversity loss, water management and enhancing agricultural and food system resilience.
    • More efforts will be needed to contribute to the federal government targets of reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by
      40 to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and to net-zero by 2050.

    Current status - Environment and climate change

    • Over $550 million in federal investments to support the development and adoption of clean technologies and beneficial management practices have recently been announced.
    • Recent programs have been launched to help address environmental issues, including the Agricultural Clean Technology Program ($165.7 million) to support the development and adoption of clean technology, the Agricultural Climate Solutions (ACS) – Living Labs program ($185 million) to support carbon sequestration and GHG emission reduction and the ACS – On-Farm Climate Action Fund ($200 million) to support immediate on-farm adoption of beneficial management practices (nitrogen management, rotational grazing and cover cropping).
    • These new federal programs complement ongoing work with provinces and territories under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership.
    • The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, CoP 26) will be held October 31 to November 12, 2021. Various multi-stakeholder initiatives of interest for agriculture will be launched at CoP 26, including the Global Action Agenda on Agricultural Innovation (led by the UK), the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate (AIM for Climate, led by US and UAE) and the Global Methane Pledge (led by US and EU).

    Key messages - Environment and climate change

    • A healthy environment goes hand-in-hand with a sustainable agriculture sector that continues to provide good jobs and healthy, safe food for Canadians.
    • Canada’s hardworking farmers and food processors have a solid track record of sound management practices, innovation and new technologies to reduce GHGs, while boosting productivity, efficiency and profitability.
    • We are working hard to help farmers develop and adopt agricultural beneficial management practices to support sustainability and clean technology on farms through $550 million in investments.
    • Some programs designed to help improve agricultural sustainability include the $165.7-million Agricultural Clean Technology Program, the $185-million Living Labs program under ACS, and the $200-million On-Farm Climate Action Fund.

    African swine fever

    Issue - African swine fever

    • African swine fever (ASF) is a contagious and fatal disease for pigs (not transmissible to humans) that has been spreading through Asia, Africa, parts of Europe and, most recently, the Dominican Republic and Haiti.
    • There has never been a finding of ASF in Canada, but a single positive case of ASF in Canada would require that all pork and live hog exports halt immediately (70% of all pork and pork products produced in Canada), valued at $5.48 billion based on 2020 export numbers.
    • This would create a domestic surplus that would have significant consequences for pork producers and processors with issues ranging from animal welfare, producers’ mental health, the environment and finances.

    Current status - African swine fever

    • The Canada Border Services Agency and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency have taken concrete actions to prevent the spread of ASF from affected countries to Canada.
    • Federal, provincial and industry collaboration has resulted in an ASF Action Plan that outlines four areas of focus: prevention and enhanced biosecurity, preparedness planning, ensuring business continuity and coordinated risk communications.
    • AAFC invested close to $1 million over the last year to enhance industry preparedness, and the department continues to work with industry to identify additional needs.
    • AAFC is working with the provinces and industry on plans to support the sector should ASF arrive in Canada.

    Key messages - African swine fever

    • ASF would take a terrible toll on the whole Canadian pork industry, from our farm families to our processors.
    • The Government stands with the entire pork supply chain.
    • In the event of an outbreak, we would move quickly to detect, trace and eradicate ASF while ensuring the sector has the support they need.
    • We’re working hard with federal, provincial, territorial and industry partners to prevent and prepare for ASF.
    • That includes the Pan-Canadian ASF Action Plan, which lays the groundwork for a timely and coordinated response to contain an outbreak and minimize the damage.

    Supply management compensation

    Issue - Supply management compensation

    • Market access commitments made under recent trade agreements directly impact the income growth of producers and processors of supply-managed commodities (i.e. dairy, poultry and egg) as the agreement reduces their market share and therefore lowers their overall income potential.
    • In response, the Government of Canada committed to compensate supply-managed sectors for the impacts of these trade agreements.
    • During the 2021 election, the Government committed to determining Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) compensation within the first year.
    CUSMA dairy tariff rate quotas dispute
    • Under CUSMA, Canada agreed to provide additional market access to the US for dairy in the form of tariff rate quotas.
    • The U.S. is challenging Canada’s dairy tariff rate quotas administration practices through the CUSMA dispute settlement process.

    Current status - Supply management compensation

    • All Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) compensation programming has been launched, with the exception of the Processor Investment Fund (PIF), which was announced through Budget 2021.
    • Industry engagement on PIF was put on hold due to the election. Further engagement with industry on PIF could take place this fall.
    • No CUSMA compensation has been announced to date. AAFC has conducted an analysis on the impacts of CUSMA and continues to engage with the sector on CUSMA compensation measures to inform program approaches.
    CUSMA dairy tariff rate quotas
    • Last May, the US requested the establishment of a dispute settlement panel regarding Canada’s administration policies of its dairy tariff rate quotas under CUSMA. The dispute settlement process is now ongoing. The Panel hearing is expected in fall 2021, with the expectation that the dispute settlement will conclude in December 2021.

    Key messages - Supply management compensation

    • We stand fully behind our supply-managed sectors, which supports our family farms and the vitality of our rural areas.
    • We have committed $2.7 billion to compensate eligible dairy, poultry, and egg farmers impacted by CETA and CPTPP and we have invested another $100 million to help dairy processors to adapt to CETA.
    • Within the next year, we will work with the supply-managed sectors to fully and fairly compensate them for the impacts of CUSMA.
    CUSMA dairy tariff rate quotas
    • We take our obligations under international agreements seriously, including our agreement with the United States, our closest trading partner.
    • We are confident that our policies fully comply with our CUSMA tariff rate quotas obligations, and we will vigorously defend our position during the dispute settlement process.

    Wine sector support

    Issue - Wine sector support

    • In April 2021, Canada reached a mutually agreed solution with Australia on a World Trade Organization challenge related to wine.
    • The Government of Canada agreed to repeal the federal excise duty exemption on wine by June 30, 2022.
    • Stakeholders are seeking support to adapt to this repeal, as well as address the impacts of COVID-19.

    Current status - Wine sector support

    • Budget 2021 announced $101 million over two years, starting in 2022–23, for AAFC to implement a program for the wine sector.
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Key messages - Wine sector support

    • The Canadian wine sector has been a tremendous success story for Canada’s agri-food sector over the past 15 years.
    • Under Budget 2021, the Government announced $101 million over two years to support the Canadian wine industry.
    • This investment will help our wineries adapt to ongoing and emerging challenges, while respecting Canada’s trade obligations.
    • The Government will continue to be there for Canada’s wine industry and the thousands of jobs it supports.

    Retail fees

    Issue - Retail fees

    • Retail fees are payments made by suppliers to retailers in exchange for stocking/listing products on shelves/online.
    • Retail fees are a longstanding issue for processors and producers, both with respect to their level as well as how they are applied.

    Current status - Retail fees

    • In November 2020, federal, provincial and territorial agriculture ministers created the Federal–Provincial–Territorial (FPT) Working Group on Retail Fees.
    • With the working group’s findings having been released in July 2021, the ministers called on industry to lead a process to develop a code of practice/conduct and a framework for dispute resolution.
    • AAFC and MAPAQ (Quebec provincial agricultural ministry) are supporting industry’s efforts via third-party facilitation to develop broad consensus around a concrete proposal to improve transparency, predictability and respect for the principles of fair dealing. Industry is expected to update ministers on progress before the end of the year.

    Key messages - Retail fees

    • We all depend on our food producers, processors and retailers for the food on our tables.
    • The Government will make sure that Canada has what it takes for all businesses to thrive.
    • Last July, agriculture ministers called on industry to identify solutions to improve transparency, predictability and respect for the principles of fair dealing regarding retail fees.
    • We look forward to a concrete proposal to improve transparency, predictability and respect for the principles of fair dealing in our food supply chain.

    Federal–provincial–territorial relations

    Issue - Federal–provincial–territorial relations

    • Given agriculture is shared jurisdiction, as well as the regional diversity of agriculture in the country, collaboration with provinces and territories is key to effectively supporting the sector.
    • The current Canadian Agricultural Partnership (CAP) framework provides $3 billion in programming to producers and processors over 5 years (2019–23) across a broad range of priority areas. CAP also encompasses BRM programming, which provides $1.6 billion annually in supports to the sector.
    • Preparations to negotiate the next policy framework are underway, which would be the successor to CAP when it expires in 2023.

    Current status - Federal–provincial–territorial relations

    • The proposed date for the Annual Conference of Ministers is Nov 8–10 in Guelph.
    • Provinces and territories expect that the Conference would include issuing an FPT Policy Statement for the next policy framework, which sets out an FPT vision and priorities
    • The Statement is typically finalized two years before the next agreement takes effect to lend enough time for negotiations in advance of expiration of the current CAP agreement. Stakeholder consultations have occurred at the national and provincial levels.
    • █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Key messages - Federal–provincial–territorial relations

    • Federal, provincial and territorial governments are committed to working together to ensure the success and vitality of the agriculture sector.
    • CAP and past frameworks have delivered critical support to help the sector weather challenges, capture opportunities and drive growth and prosperity.
    • I look forward to meeting my provincial and territorial colleagues soon to continue to deliver on key priorities for the sector, including priorities for the next policy framework.

    Food Policy

    Issue - Food Policy

    • The Government of Canada launched the Food Policy for Canada in 2019, a roadmap for a healthier and more sustainable food system for Canada.
    • The policy’s vision is that all people in Canada are able to access a sufficient amount of safe, nutritious and culturally diverse food and that Canada’s food system is resilient and innovative, sustains our environment and supports our economy.
    • Despite actions taken across governments, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated food insecurity, and stakeholders have called for increased action from government to address the root causes of food insecurity, primarily social conditions and limited financial resources.

    Current status - Food Policy

    • The Local Food Infrastructure Fund and the Food Waste Reduction Challenge were launched as part of the Food Policy and have generated significant interest from stakeholders across Canada, receiving a high volume of applications.
    • In response to increased food insecurity as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, AAFC launched the Emergency Food Security Fund in May 2020 in order to support food banks and other rescue initiatives. As of August 2021, $300 million in funding has been dedicated to this initiative.
    • A UN Food Systems Summit was held on September 23, 2021, which focused on developing national pathways to food system transformation. Leading up to this, AAFC hosted eight Food Systems Dialogues between April and June 2021, engaging with a diverse range of experts and organizations across Canada to discuss food system challenges and opportunities and identify commitments and actions toward a more sustainable and equitable food system.

    Key messages - Food Policy

    • The Government aims to strengthen our food system at every step—from sustainable food production and processing, to strong local food infrastructure, to less food waste.
    • That is why in 2019 we launched Canada’s first-ever Food Policy.
    • Our vision is that all people should be able to access the healthy food they need in a dignified manner.
    • Building on our investments of nearly $250 million to improve food security, Budget 2021 provided an additional $140 million to top up the Emergency Food Security Fund and the Local Food Infrastructure Fund, to help prevent hunger, strengthen food security in our communities, and provide nutritious food to more Canadians.
    • To strengthen food security in the North, we will invest $163.4 million over three years to expand the Nutrition North Canada program.

    Canada Grain Act review

    Issue - Canada Grain Act review

    • Further to Budget 2019, AAFC has launched a review of the Canada Grain Act (CGA), the legislative framework for the regulation of grain quality and handling in Canada.
    • The review is supported by stakeholders, who feel that the CGA is outdated and needs significant modernization.

    Current status - Canada Grain Act review

    • Broad stakeholder consultations were held in early 2021, and the view was that there was a need to update the CGA to reflect 50 years of sector evolution.
    • Stakeholders expect substantive modernization and reforms to address issues raised in consultations, but some disagreement remains on specific changes. Modernization timelines will depend on the specific approach chosen, but legislative and regulatory reforms can take two to three years to complete.

    Key messages - Canada Grain Act review

    • We are delivering on our commitment to review the CGA with the sector.
    • Our shared goal is to modernize the Act to ensure Canada remains competitive in the global marketplace.
    • We have published a summary report of consultations, which we will be using to determine the way forward on CGA modernization.

    Food prices

    Issue - Food prices

    • For 2021, Canada’s 11th annual Food Price Report projects that food prices will rise by 3 to 5%. This is attributed to numerous factors, including the impact of COVID-19 on the supply chain, the closure of restaurants, wildfires in California and grocery store “hero pay.”
    • Over the last eight months, food prices have increased less than the overall rate of inflation. Economy-wide prices (as measured by the consumer price index) were 3.8% higher in August than they were in December 2020. Average food prices in August were only 2.8% higher than they were in December 2020.

    Current status - Food prices

    • While average food prices have increased relatively little over the last eight months, there is more variability in some food categories. For instance, from December to August 2021, the average consumer price of fresh fruit increased by 1.1% while the average consumer price of fresh vegetables declined by 4.8%.
    • According to the latest Survey of Household Spending in 2019, Canadians spend about 9% of their household income on food.

    Key messages - Food prices

    • The Government of Canada is working hard to ensure all Canadians have reliable access to healthy food.
    • During the pandemic, the Government of Canada supported programs such as the Emergency Food Security Fund, the Local Food Infrastructure Fund and the Surplus Food Rescue Program.
    • Canadian consumers are blessed with an abundance of food choices.

    Pesticides

    Issue - Pesticides

    • Work has been ongoing to ensure there is safe and sustainable use of crop protection products (e.g. pesticides) in Canada.
    • A recent joint funding announcement (August 4, 2021) between Health Canada, AAFC and Environment and Climate Change Canada will strengthen the capacity and transparency of the pesticide review process, increase the availability of independent data to support pesticide review decisions and provide funds to AAFC (approximately $7 million) to support research and technology transfer into alternative pest management.

    Current status - Pesticides

    • AAFC conducts research on impacts and mitigation of impacts of pesticides on wildlife, managing pest risks and approaches to reduce the use of pesticides. AAFC will work to implement the development and communication of alternative pest management approaches.
    • Virtual engagement sessions with several provincial grower associations, as well as select non-agriculture groups on the proposed re-evaluation and program re-design, will be held. Following the completion of engagement sessions, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (HC) will proceed with program transformation (timeline TBD), subject to funding decisions.

    Key messages - Pesticides

    • The Government takes pesticide safety very seriously. We are committed to ensuring pesticides used in Canada are safe for people and the environment.
    • Farmers need the right tools to control the weeds, insects and diseases that threaten their productivity and profitability—as well as global food security.
    • We are investing $50 million to give our federal regulators the tools they need to continue to protect the health of people and the environment.
    • This will also support our agricultural and environmental scientists in their ground-breaking research into new biological tools to help farmers control pests while reducing reliance on pesticides.

  • The 2021 drought

    Issue -The 2021 drought

    The 2021 drought is one of the worst droughts in the last 70 years. As of September 14, Statistics Canada projects yield losses for grain and oilseed crops of between 35% and 46% compared to 2020, and impacts on feed supply and cattle herds.

    Droughts can be devastating to agriculture and rural economies; recovery can take years.

    • Business risk management (BRM) programs are providing farmers with immediate and critical support.
    • Investments in science, management practices, education and knowledge transfer are helping enhance climate resilience and sector recovery.

    Federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) governments and industry are closely monitoring drought conditions in Western Canada to assess the need for further action.

    Context -The 2021 drought

    Drought cycles

    • Droughts on the North American great plains follow cycles, based on climate, ocean and weather conditions.
    • Smaller localized droughts occur with no real pattern in Canada, based on regional weather conditions.
    • Other major Canadian droughts have occurred in the 1930s (dust bowl), 1948–51, 1960–62, 1988–89 and 2001–03.

    Impacts of droughts on agriculture and lessons learned

    Depending on how long and intense they are, droughts can have devastating impacts on crop yields, pastures and haylands, livestock health, on-farm water supplies and rural livelihoods (health and socioeconomic).

    • The 2001–03 drought resulted in an estimated $3-billion loss in agriculture revenue and a $6-billion reduction in Prairie province economies.
    • Recovery can take years, but can occur more quickly with better preparation, planning and sound management practices (e.g. no-till, sustainable crop rotations and maintaining wetlands and riparian areas).

    Weather and drought conditions in 2021

    • Dry conditions began in summer 2020 and persisted through the winter. Lack of spring runoff resulted in early-season water supply issues, poor pasture recovery and inadequate soil moisture.
    • Record temperatures amplified the impact of drought. The “heat dome” stretched from Vancouver Island to Manitoba and into the Northwest Territories at its peak and was unprecedented in its intensity and duration.
    • The hottest and driest part of the season occurred during the crop flowering and seed development stages, impacting both quality and quantity of crop yields irreversibly.
    Percentage of average precipitation, fall 2020
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    A map of western provinces showing average precipitation in the fall of 2020 with particularly low averages of less than 40% or 40% to 60% of normal seen in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

    Percentage of average precipitation, winter 2020
    Description of above image

    A map of western provinces showing average precipitation in the winter of 2020 with particularly low averages of less than 40% or 40% to 60% of normal seen in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

    Percentage of average precipitation, spring/summer 2021
    Description of above image

    A map of western provinces showing average precipitation in the spring/summer of 2021 showing average precipitation of 60% to 85%, 40% to 60% or less than 40% through much of the western provinces.

    Mean temperature departure from normal, June 22 to July 19, 2021
    Description of above image

    A map of western provinces showing above normal temperatures, with particularly high temperatures further west—more than five degrees above normal in much of British Columbia, compared with 0 to 2 degrees or 2 to 3 degrees above normal in Manitoba.

    The Canadian drought monitor — 2021 assessment

    The situation in July/August 2021 represented the most dry and widespread period of the drought.

    As of August 31, the drought:

    • covered an estimated 94 percent of the agricultural land in Western Canada;
    • affected 45.9 million acres of crop land, 54 million acres of pasture and over 2 million cattle.

    Despite significant rain at the end of August, and an easing of the severity of the drought, the overall extent of the drought expanded slightly.

    Drought intensity, 2021
    Description of above image

    A map showing the categories of drought across western provinces:

    1. Moderate drought, 1 in 5 year event
    2. Severe drought, 1 in 10 year event
    3. Extreme drought, 1 in 20 year event
    4. Exceptional drought, 1 in 50 year event

    Regions in all four western provinces are experiencing moderate to severe droughts.

    Potential impacts on farm income and production

    Crops

    Prices have been very strong this year and are expected to offset production declines caused by the drought. Early estimates indicate that grain receipts are expected to increase in 2021 by 10.5 percent compared to 2020, with an additional 1 percent increase in 2022.

    Some producers face greater risk of financial contract penalties with grain buyers due to yield losses.

    • Overall there will be reduced export and domestic marketing over the 2021–22 crop year.

    Livestock

    The widespread feed and water shortages are increasing the price of feed and prompting some farmers to reduce the size of their livestock herds.

    • The increase in livestock sales may reduce cattle prices if current high levels of domestic and international demand are unable to offset the extra supply. Higher feed prices will also hurt farmers’ profitability for cattle and potentially other livestock (e.g. hogs).
    • Feed stores are likely to be depleted for the coming winter and ranchers seeking to rebuild herds in later years are likely to be faced with higher prices.

    Summary of potential impacts from the 2021 drought

    Projected impacts are widespread across Western Canada

    • As of September 14, Statistics Canada projects yield losses for grain and oilseed crops of between 35% and 46% compared to 2020 (wheat 38.3%, canola 34.4%, barley 33.5%, peas 45%, oats 43.6%, lentils 37% and flax 34%).
    • Up to 50% reduction in hay yields and shortage could exceed 6 million tonnes, while hay prices have risen significantly compared to last season.
    • Cattle herd may be reduced 5% to 10%. Severe feed and water availability issues, poor pasture and range conditions also affecting other livestock sectors (e.g. bison and sheep).
    • Wildfires throughout many agricultural regions have resulted in the loss of grazing land and forced producers to relocate cattle.
    Feed availability
    Description of above image

    This map shows the severity of feed shortages with moderate to extreme shortages across western provinces.

    Pasture conditions
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This map shows the severity of pasture conditions with moderate to extreme impacts across western provinces.

    Water supplies
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This map shows the severity of water supply shortages with moderate to severe shortages, and a few pockets of extreme shortages, across western provinces.

    BRM programs responding to the 2021 drought

    FPT cost-shared BRM programs protect producers against income and production losses. These programs are designed to work together.

    AgriInsurance

    Will cover a large portion of losses from reduced crop yields due to drought. Preliminary estimates from Prairie provinces indicate indemnities attributed to the drought are estimated at approximately $2.5 billion.

    • Program adjustments were also made to encourage crop producers to salvage low yield crops for livestock feed and help offset additional feed costs.

    AgriStability

    Will support producers with large income declines, including those not covered by AgriInsurance.

    • Interim benefit payment increased from 50 to 75% in all drought-impacted provinces, allowing producers to receive a portion of their estimated payment before the end of the year.
    • Manitoba and British Columbia allowed late enrolment after the deadline.

    AgriRecovery

    Federal funding of up to $500 million for extraordinary costs related to the drought and wildfires, complementing the $330 million in provincial funding announced. Producers can already apply to receive financial support.

    Livestock Tax Deferral

    Allows tax to be deferred on the sale of livestock in cases of drought. Designated regions cover almost all of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and large areas of southern British Columbia and northwestern Ontario.

    Recent findings on climate change impacts in Canada

    Canada’s climate has warmed and climate impacts will intensify in the future

    • Currently there is no increase in frequency of droughts, but flood and wildfire events are occurring more frequently.

    Future projections (2030 and beyond) include:

    • More extreme heat, less extreme cold, longer growing seasons, earlier spring peak streamflow and some increase in precipitation overall, but drier summers.
    • More frequent and intense droughts and greater soil moisture deficits across the southern Canadian Prairies and interior British Columbia.
    • More frequent and intense temperatures will increase the severity of heatwaves and contribute to increased drought and wildfire risks.

    Increasing pace and severity of climate change will require more support for adaptation planning, monitoring and impact assessment, knowledge and information sharing, and adoption of practices to lessen future impacts.

    AAFC has a long history supporting climate resilience and adaptation to extreme weather

    Investment in on-farm education and actions

    • FPT cost-shared on-farm programs delivered by provinces and territories build producer awareness of environmental risks and accelerate adoption of technologies and practices to reduce these risks and adapt to climate change.

    Science and knowledge transfer activities to accelerate adoption and innovation

    • Develop, assess and demonstrate management practices and technologies that help manage climate risks to farms (e.g. Agriculture Living Laboratories and Agricultural Climate Solutions Program).
    • Climate, disease and pest resilient crop varieties and more efficient irrigation systems.
    • Climate, weather and crop models and decision support tools (e.g. Drought Watch assessments and climate impacts on future disease pressure).

    Opportunities to enhance climate resilience

    Enhance programming under the next policy framework

    • Work with provinces, territories and stakeholders to explore options to enhance science, on-farm and BRM programs to meet future needs and challenges.
    • Includes opportunities to explore more resilient on-farm water infrastructure.
    • Continue to enhance science and innovation (e.g. more resilient crop varieties).

    Developing a national adaptation strategy (2021–22)

    • Inform future adaptation priorities, including for the agriculture and food sector.

    Implementing natural climate solutions on agricultural lands

    • Ongoing program delivery and collaborations with OGDs supporting adoption of on-farm
      nature-based climate solutions that increase carbon sequestration and improve climate resilience of agricultural lands.

    Creating a new Canada Water Agency

    • Work with provinces and territories, Indigenous peoples, sector partners and others to protect water resources, including potential science and knowledge transfer activities and enhanced programming to improve drought and flood resilience.

    Looking ahead

    • Existing BRM programs have responded rapidly.
    • Financial and supply chain impacts in 2022 could worsen depending on weather conditions from fall 2021 through the 2022 growing season. Additional recovery and support programs may be required.
    • Climate impacts on the agriculture and food sector are being felt today, and extreme events such as heat waves, droughts, floods and wildfires are projected to intensify in the future.
    • Increasing support for adaptation planning is key to increasing preparedness for future extreme weather events.
    • Continue to assess options and explore other on-farm and BRM program enhancements—learning from past experiences, including 2021.

    Annex: comparisons to past drought years

    • The 1961 drought was one of the most severe droughts on record. Low precipitation and record monthly temperatures led to wide-scale crop failures and farmers selling off cattle due to lack of feed and water. Losses were disastrous with losses to Prairie wheat production alone totalling $668 million. Overall yields were reduced by 54% in Saskatchewan and 51% in Manitoba.
    • The 1988 drought represents another significant drought period on the Prairies that caused agricultural production to be reduced by 50% in Saskatchewan and 44% in Manitoba.
    • The 2001–2002 drought represented a longer period of moderate drought. Despite single-year droughts being less severe, its cumulative effects over 4 to 5 years resulted in significant impacts including a $3.6 billion reduction in agricultural production in 2001 and a 30% yield reduction in 2002.
    • The 2021 drought is one of the most widespread and severe single-year droughts. Impacts are still being assessed but appear lessened due to better management practices, drought preparedness and improved seed varieties.
    August 17, 1961
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This map shows the spread and severity of the 1961 Western drought.

    August 17, 1988
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This map shows the spread and severity of the 1988 Western drought.

    August 17, 2021
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This map shows the spread and severity of the 2021 Western drought.

    Annex: drought impacts on the agriculture sector

    Increased risk to soil health and lower soil moisture

    • Reduced and depleted soil moisture and water supplies (e.g. dugouts, wells)
    • Increased soil erosion and salinization (salts)
    • Reduced seed germination and lower yields
    • Increased demand and use for irrigation water, which can be costly

    Reduced water quality

    • Lowered water flows and levels in rivers and dugouts reduces water quality

    Reduced crop and feed growth, yields and quality

    • Decreased farm revenues, increased feed costs and demand, lost market opportunity
    • Increased need for more pasture and hay, and reduces future productivity

    Increased stress on livestock and animal welfare issues

    • Reduced weight gains, increased risk of mortality due to feed and water shortages
    • Increased pressure to reduce herd sizes, lowers future breeding numbers

    Other related management issues

    • Increased presence of pests further impacts yields and quality of crops, pasture and hay
    • Increased incidence of wildfires impacts access to pastures, and threatens buildings/yards sites and livestock
    • Increased human health impacts (e.g. mental and physical) from dust, stress and accidents

  • Next Agricultural Policy Framework

    Purpose - Next Agricultural Policy Framework

    • An overview of the current Canadian Agricultural Partnership (CAP) - a federal-provincial-territorial (FPT) framework for agricultural and agri-food policies and programs.
    • Current preparations for the development of the next policy framework (NPF), which will succeed CAP when it expires in 2023.

    Frameworks provide a mechanism for FPT co-operation and coordinated support for the sector

    Agriculture and agri-food is a shared jurisdiction where Federal, Provincial, Territorial (FPT) consensus, co-operation and commitment help drive the sector forward.

    • Since the implementation of the Agricultural Policy Framework in 2003, five-year multilateral framework agreements (MFAs) between the federal and provincial/territorial governments have played a significant role in providing direction and support to the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector.
    • CAP and the previous frameworks have allowed the federal and provincial/territorial governments to work together to develop and implement policies and programs to assist the sector in addressing challenges and seizing opportunities.
    • Framework investments are administered according to multilateral and bilateral agreements negotiated with PT governments, which allow jurisdictions to address diverse regional needs while supporting common outcomes.

    Overview of the Canadian Agricultural Partnership

    CAP aims to strengthen and grow Canada's agriculture and agri-food sector. This FPT partnership includes a $3-billion, five-year (2018-2023) investment in strategic initiatives and funding for business risk management (BRM) programs (average of $1.6 billion per year).

    Strategic initiatives

    • More than $1 billion in federal programs and activities that are national in scope and are funded and delivered by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
    • $2 billion in cost-shared programs that are funded 60:40 (F:PT) and delivered by PT governments.

    Business Risk Management programs

    • An average of $1.6 billion annually for demand-driven BRM programs to assist producers in managing significant risks that threaten the viability of their farm and are beyond their capacity to manage.

    CAP provides investments in a number of key areas

    CAP is focused on achieving a number of objectives:

    • Expanding domestic and international markets and trading opportunities for the sector by pursuing new trade agreements and working with industry to expand and seize market opportunities.
    • Enhancing competitiveness and strengthening competitive advantages by advancing science and innovation capacity and encouraging the adoption of products, practices and processes.
    • Anticipating, mitigating and responding to risks to support the sustainable growth of the sector by providing producers with access to a suite of business risk management programs and other risk mitigation tools.
    • Supporting the resiliency and environmental sustainability of the sector through, for example, a range of on farm initiatives and beneficial management practices.
    • Improving the growth of the value-added agriculture and agri-food processing sector through science, innovation and capacity building for small and medium enterprises.
    • Securing and growing public trust in the sector through outreach, education and other actions.

    Charting a course for the next policy framework

    CAP, the current five-year framework, is set to expire on March 31, 2023.

    Given the extensive negotiations with provinces and territories and sector consultations required, it can take approximately two years to finalize a new framework, which would have effect from April 2023 to March 2028.

    The NPF provides an opportunity to chart a vision for the sector, including consideration of the broader 2030 agenda and the role of the agriculture sector in climate change action and advancing sustainable development goals.

    It will also be important to build on lessons learned from previous frameworks and ensure a smooth transition in programs/policies where appropriate.

    NPF expected major milestones and timelines

    Based on experience negotiating previous frameworks, the anticipated timeline for developing the next policy framework – the MFA and bilateral agreements, consists of the following key milestones:

    Timelines for NPF

    Description of above image

    A range of graphic boxes showing the three key milestones for the Next Policy Framework:

    1. proposed ministerial policy statement
    2. multilateral agreement signed by the minister by 2022
    3. the launch of the Next Policy Framework April 1, 2023.

    This is followed by the 4 phases of the NPF:

    1. developing the policy statement
    2. Federal-provincial-territorial negotiations
    3. bilateral agreement
    4. Next Policy Framework implementation

    Federal-provincial-territorial negotiations and consultations encompass both business risk management and strategic initiatives.

    ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Progress to date on NPF development

    Preparations to advance the development of the framework include:

    • Proposed policy statement: Federal, provincial and territorial officials are negotiating the policy statement to be reviewed and approved by agriculture ministers.
    • Federal positions for MFA negotiations: AAFC officials are working to consider key thematic areas, identify PT views, and recommend federal negotiating positions to inform MFA discussions with PTs.
    • Priorities for federal-only programs: AAFC officials are also working to determine the areas of particular focus that should be addressed through federal-only programs.
    • Engagement: Consultations to inform the NPF are ongoing, with federal engagement to date occurring with industry groups and non-governmental organizations, Indigenous stakeholders, youth and other groups.

    Takeaways from federal consultations

    To date, stakeholders have provided input through national engagement sessions, consultations with Indigenous groups and youth organizations, meetings with sectoral representatives and comments submitted online.

    Many stakeholders have identified linkages between priorities (e.g. environmental, economic, science/innovation, trade and social issues) and the need for stronger performance measurement. Non-exhaustive examples of comments include:

    • Environment: Perceived as a significant challenge/risk, although perspectives regarding recommended measures differ.
    • Markets and trade: Emphasis on new opportunities in emerging markets, as well as existing issues such as interprovincial trade barriers and growing geopolitical risks.
    • Science and innovation: Viewed as vital to advance productivity and competitiveness.
    • Reporting: Highlighted the importance of measurement and transparency, noting the ability to understand the results of programming to date has been limited and should be improved.
    • Value-added/food processing: Need to address the opportunities presented by value-added.

    Working collaboratively with provinces and territories

    Although PTs have their own perspective and views, there is scope for alignment between federal positions and PT priorities.

    • Continued support for competitiveness, markets and trade, science and innovation, value-added and other key priorities are areas of expected collaboration between federal, provincial and territorial governments.
    • Progress has already been made to identify priority areas for the NPF, although work remains to be done to finalize and achieve consensus on details of the approach.
      • Specifically, on July 15, federal, provincial and territorial ministers of agriculture met to discuss several key areas of interest for Canada’s agriculture sector, including the NPF.
    • Discussions with PTs will continue in fall/winter 2021, as we work collaboratively to finalize a proposed policy statement and initiate negotiations toward the development of the MFA.

    Potential areas of federal focus

    The priorities for the NPF will need to consider current challenges and opportunities, as well as those that are expected to be key for the sector over the next five to ten years.

    • Negotiations with PTs to finalize the policy statement and discussions toward the development of the MFA present an opportunity for the Government of Canada to seek commitments in federal priority areas.
    • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Next steps and areas of immediate focus for fall/winter 2021

    Your input and direction will be essential as we clarify areas of federal priority, determine negotiating positions and pursue discussions with PTs.

    In particular, areas that will require your attention in fall/winter 2021 include:

    • 1. Proposed policy statement: Determine way forward on an NPF policy statement, which would outline the principles, priorities and outcomes to be achieved.
    • ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

    Annex: the Canadian Agricultural Partnership: context

    The Canadian Agriculture Partnership overview
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    The Canadian Agricultural Partnership: The Calgary Statement of July 2016 outlined a vision, objectives and priorities for CAP:

    Vision: Creating the most modern, sustainable and prosperous sector in the world

    Overarching objectives: Federal, provincial and territorial governments will collaborate with industry to drive the sustainable growth, innovation and competitiveness of the sector through six priorities:

    • Markets and trade
    • Science, research and innovation
    • Risk management
    • Environmental sustainability and climate change
    • Value-added agriculture and agri-food processing
    • Public trust

    Strategic initiatives

    $1 billion over five years for these federal-only programs:

    • AgriScience, $338 million
    • AgriInnovate, $128 million
    • AgriMarketing, $112 million
    • AgriAssurance, $74 million
    • AgriCompetitiveness, $20.5 million
    • AgriDiversity, $5 million

    $2 billion over five years for federal-provincial-territorial cost-shared programs

    Designed and delivered by provincial/territorial governments and cost-shared on a 60:40 basis

    Flexibility to address regional needs while advancing shared federal-provincial-territorial Canadian Agricultural Partnership priorities as follows:

    • 50% of funds to be spent on initiatives that support science, research and innovation, environmental sustainability as well as markets and trade
    • Remaining 50% can be allocated as provinces and territories see fit

    While variation exists among provinces/territories, overall they have allocated funding as follows:

    • Science, research and innovation, 31%, Agri-technology/clean tech development and adoption, farmer/industry-led research, knowledge transfer, primary agriculture and agronomy
    • Environmental sustainability and climate change, 27%: Climate change adaptation, clean tech, irrigation/water management, soil health, BMP adoption
    • Markets and trade, 18%: Export and domestic market access, promotion, trade missions, business support and development
    • Risk management, 18%: Farm safety, food safety, animal welfare, biosecurity
    • Value-added and processing, 6.5%: Processing infrastructure and increased capacity, for example, meant and plant protein, diversification
    • Public trust, 1.5%: Public education and awareness, assurance systems, transparency

    Cost-shared business risk management programs:

    • An average of $1.6 billion annual for AgriInsurance, AgriInvest, AgriStability, AgriRecovery
    • Commitment to business risk management review

  • African Swine Fever overview

    Canadian hog sector

    • The Canadian hog sector contributes $28 billion to the economy; there are 2,300 farms and 28 federally inspected processing facilities, for an estimated 100,000 jobs.
    • 29.5 million hogs are produced annually, primarily in Quebec (24%), Ontario (26%) and Manitoba (30%).
    • Slaughter capacity also resides primarily in Quebec (39%), Ontario (20%) and Manitoba (26%).
    • Currently, 14 million hogs are in the production pipeline.
    • The Canadian hog sector is highly integrated with the U.S. sector.
    • In 2020, over 1.49 million tonnes of pork, valued at $5.1 billion, were exported to 94 countries.

    Top three markets for Canadian pork

    • United States
    • Japan
    • China

    African Swine Fever (ASF)

    • ASF is a contagious and fatal disease for pigs that has spread from Africa to Asia, parts of Europe and, most recently, the Dominican Republic and Haiti.
    • While the virus cannot be transmitted to humans, it has a high mortality rate in infected pigs and can survive for prolonged periods of time in animal products.

    A single positive case of ASF in Canada would require that all pork and live-hog exports (70% of domestic production) halt immediately. This would have significant financial consequences for producers and processors as they grapple with lost markets and price declines driven by an oversupply of pork relative to domestic demand.

    Initial impact

    • Disease management and eradication: The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is responsible for containing and eradicating the disease as quickly as possible.
    • Trade: Immediate loss of all export markets (70% of domestic production).
    • Surplus hogs: Given the border closure, millions of surplus animals would need to be culled, generating extraordinary costs for industry as well as concerns around animal welfare, farmer mental health and the environment.
    • Pork producers: Hogs with no market would back up the pork production cycle, and depopulation decisions would need to be made quickly. Live hogs destined for the U.S. would be an urgent priority for euthanization.
      • It is estimated that at least 50% of the hog herd (7 million hogs) would need to be culled.
    • Pork processors: Processors would lose the majority of their market overnight. Export-oriented processors or smaller-sized establishments might eventually cease operations.
      • ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    ASF could arrive in Canada any day
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    A map showing that in 2018 there were small pockets of ASF in Asian, Africa, and Europe. Beside it is a second map showing that in 2019 the majority of Europe and Asian has ASF and a slightly larger swath in Africa Finally a 2020 Map showing slightly larger amount compared to 2019, still in Asia, Africa, and Europe.

    Red represents ASF-infected countries
    White erpresents ASF-free countries

    Source: OIE WAHIS

    • Summer 2021 — ASF has reached the Americas, with ASF confirmed in the Dominican Republic and Haiti, further increasing the risk of entry into Canada.
    • The highest risk pathways are thought to be international travellers (clothing, equipment, or illegal pork products), or through illegal commercial shipments of feed.

    Current prevention and preparedness efforts

    • CFIA and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada have played an active role in developing and executing on an ASF Pan-Canadian Action Plan, an FPT-Industry effort to coordinate and prioritize ASF-related prevention and preparedness work across the country.
    • AAFC invested $828,928 last fiscal year (FY) to enhance industry readiness, including on-farm biosecurity, communication plans and traceability.
    • Since the 2019-20 FY, CFIA has been dedicating unprecedented internal resources to ASF prevention and preparedness ($3.5 million in 2020–21):
      • Investment in developing surveillance and in diagnostic testing
      • Proactive negotiation of zoning arrangements with trading partners
      • Activation of the National Emergency Operations Centre in preparatory mode for ASF
    • Budget 2019 announced funding of up to $31 million, distributed over the next five years, for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to acquire, train and deploy 24 new food-, plant- and animal-product detector teams.
      • 15 detector dog teams have been trained and deployed. Nine more will go through training in fiscal year 2022–23.
    • Following the discovery of ASF in the Dominican Republic, CFIA has received an additional $300,000 for traveller awareness campaign efforts (totalling $500,000) and increased collaboration with the United States.

    Pan-Canadian ASF Action Plan

    To date, there has been significant coordination with the provinces and industry groups to advance the Pan-Canadian ASF Action Plan.

    Action plan pillars

    • Pillar 1: Prevention and Enhanced Biosecurity
    • Pillar 2: Preparedness Planning
    • Pillar 3: Ensuring Business Continuity
    • Pillar 4: Coordinated Risk Communications

    Pillar 1: Prevention and enhanced biosecurity

    First line of defence to protect the Canadian swine population from ASF by limiting the potential sources of virus introduction.

    Authorities for wild pigs led by multiple departments (AAFC, Environment and Climate Change Canada, etc.), industry associations and counterparts in the U.S. (Department of Agriculture and Plant Health Inspection Service).

    • Import controls, led by CBSA and CFIA
    • Biosecurity, led by CFIA and industry
    • International engagement, led by CFIA
    • Prevent entry into Canada, reduce spread if it does enter

    Pillar 2: Preparedness planning

    An early and rapid disease response will be critical to stop the spread of the virus and mitigate the impacts of an outbreak.

    • Diagnostic and surveillance, led by CFIA
    • Response plan and procedures, led by PTs, CFIA and industry
    • Training and exercise, led by CFIA, provincial governments and industry

    Pillar 3: Ensuring business continuity

    Impacts of an ASF outbreak may be mitigated through proactive engagement with trading partners and by providing support to help the sector adapt to market changes.

    Zoning - Led by CFIA and industry

    • Zoning is an internationally recognized approach to disease control that also manages trade risks. A zone can be established around a defined area, on a geographical basis.
    • Canada confirmed and is working to develop zoning arrangements with some trading partners.

    Compartmentalization — Led by CFIA and industry

    • Compartments are a voluntary and separate population control established prior to the introduction of ASF based on management and biosecurity practices rather than geography.
    • Compartment acceptance requires negotiation with trading partners.

    Market interruption response - Led by AAFC, provincial governments and industry

    • Immediate: Develop a national coordinated approach for surplus hog management, with flexibility for regional needs - includes assessing and investing in infrastructure for depopulation. AAFC has established an incident management system.
    • Longer-term: Industry adaptation and sector transition planning.

    Pillar 4: Co-ordinated risk communications

    Prevention

    Work is underway to develop risk-communications plans to address prevention, preparedness, response and recovery actions related to ASF.

    Led by industry, CFIA, AAFC, provincial governments

    • Prevention
      • Awareness campaigns
      • Travel and domestic
    • Preparedness
      • Planned messaging
      • Public trust
      • Coordinate communication amongst players

    Next steps

    • Enhanced prevention and biosecurity efforts
      • Support the industry in finalizing the national swine on-farm biosecurity standards (fall 2021).
      • Wild pig management plans (spring 2022).
      • Heightened monitoring of Dominican Republic situation and enhanced import controls (ongoing).
    • Preparedness planning
      • Identify operational needs during the first few days of an outbreak.
      • █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
    • Ensuring business continuity
      • ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
      • Engagement with industry to understand which hogs will go to domestic market vs. welfare cull.
      • ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
      • CFIA to continue negotiating zoning arrangements with key trading partners (ongoing through 2021–22).
    • Coordinated risk communications
      • FPT partners and industry continue to work together on a variety of coordinated risk communications plans to address prevention, preparedness, response and recovery actions related to ASF (ongoing).

    Annex: Roles and responsibilities

    • CBSA
      • Enforce import controls to prevent entry of ASF into Canada
    • CFIA
      • Lead disease control and eradication activities.
      • Handle compensation for animals destroyed, where appropriate.
      • Secure international acceptance of zoning and compartmentalization approaches.
      • Lead strategy to regain disease-free status and international acceptance.
    • AAFC
      • █████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
      • Coordinate discussions in multi-jurisdictional areas, such as welfare culls at processing plants, to facilitate a consistent, national approach.
      • Develop and deliver federal support programs, where appropriate, that meet national needs.
    • Industry
      • Proactively manage business risks by leveraging existing programming and private risk-management tools and making business decisions based on market conditions.
      • Implement on-farm biosecurity standards to help mitigate against disease introduction.
      • Lead on surplus hog depopulation and disposal activities on the ground, as well as developing and implementing biosecurity measures, supported by FPT governments, as necessary.
    • Provincial–territorial governments
      • ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
      • Facilitate implementation of mass carcass-disposal options, and work with municipalities to establish capacity.
      • Develop and deliver support programs that meet regional/sector needs, in co-operation with municipalities and industry.

  • Supply managed sectors and programming

    What is supply management?

    Supply management (SM) is the production and marketing system under which dairy, eggs, chicken, and turkey are produced in Canada. SM aims to ensure a reasonable return to producers for their labour and investment, while consumers receive a predictable supply of products.

    The SM system is based on 3 pillars:

    • regulated price
    • limited production
    • controlled imports

    Annex A provides an overview of the SM sectors.

    Supply management: How it works

    Production: designed to match domestic demand.

    Production levels are set at the national level then allocated to provincial marketing boards, which then allocate maximum production levels to producers through quotas.

    Pricing: aimed at ensuring producers receive a fair return for their labour.

    Provincial marketing boards establish the prices producers receive, reflecting factors such as the cost of production and inflation. Retail prices are not regulated.

    Import: managed and administered through the federal government.

    Imports of SM products are controlled through Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs):

    • Limits are set on the volume of imports allowed to enter Canada at low or zero tariff rates, with much higher, over-quota rates for additional imports.

    The federal role in supply management

    The federal government is one player in a system based on intersecting federal and provincial powers and close industry cooperation. However, the federal government plays a number of roles to help ensure the long-term sustainability of the SM sectors including:

    • Supporting sector competitiveness through agricultural programs and research;
    • Maintaining effective border controls and import predictability for supply managed commodities through TRQ administration and robust compliance verifications;
    • Supporting the SM system in line with legislated accountabilities via the Canadian Dairy Commission and Farm Products Council of Canada. Both federal institutions play key, yet distinct, roles in regards to allocation and pricing policies.

    Recent trade agreements

    • CETA – 2017, Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, dairy (cheese) only
    • CPTPP – 2019, Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, all SM sectors
    • CUSMA – 2020, Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, all SM sectors

    Recent trade agreements provide Canada's key trading partners with additional access to the domestic dairy, poultry and egg market, while keeping the SM system and its pillars intact.

    This additional access was provided in the form of Tariff Rate Quotas, which allow a set amount of specific products to be imported at a low or zero rate of duty.

    Increased imports under these agreements replace products that would have otherwise been supplied by Canadian producers.

    Imports under CETA and CUSMA to date have been at or near 100% filled for most commodities. However, under CPTPP, certain TRQ fill rates have been slightly lower than expected due to various reasons.

    GOC response: CETA and CPTPP compensation

    • August 2017 – $350 million in funding is announced for two new programs to support dairy producers and processors for the impacts of CETA.
    • March 2019 – Budget 2019 announced up to $2.4 billion in support for dairy, poultry, and egg producers for impacts of CETA and CPTPP.
    • August 2019 –The Dairy Direct Payment Program is announced providing up to $1.75 billion to dairy farmers, and year 1 of program is launched.
    • November 2020 – $691 million in funding for two new programs is announced to support poultry and egg producers.
    • April 2021 – Budget 2021 announced $292.5 million for a SM Processor Investment Fund, and reiterated commitment to provide compensation for CUSMA.

    Current status: CETA/CPTPP

    As of April 2021, all CETA and CPTPP producer compensation programming has been launched, with the exception of the Processor Investment Fund (PIF).

    Preliminary engagement with industry on PIF took place in summer 2021 and could be concluded this Fall.

    Industry expects the program to be launched in early 2022.

    Current status: CUSMA

    In Budget 2021 the government committed to full and fair compensation with respect to the CUSMA and to working with representatives of the supply-managed sectors in determining that compensation.

    During the 2021 election, the government committed to determining this compensation within the first year of their mandate.

    Ongoing engagement with the sector on CUSMA compensation measures could inform program approaches.

    Clarity on CUSMA compensation is a priority for supply managed stakeholders.

    Other considerations for CUSMA

    The U.S. has challenged Canada's allocation of dairy TRQs under CUSMA, alleging that Canada's allocation of a significant proportion of TRQs to processors violates our CUSMA commitments.

    • Canada is confident we are in full compliance with our obligations
    • The dispute settlement process is expected to conclude in December 2021

    GAC is undertaking a comprehensive review of TRQ administration for all of Canada's supply managed commodities.

    CUSMA is unique as the Agreement also imposes duty charges on Canadian exports of milk protein concentrates (MPC) and skim milk powder (SMP) above specified thresholds.

    This may impact a long-standing issue within the industry regarding structural surpluses of SMP.

    Next steps

    • Confirm the path forward for the CETA/CPTPP Processing Investment Fund and CUSMA compensation.
    • Continue engagement with the sector on trade agreement impacts and programming approaches.

    Annex A: Sector snapshot

    Dairy
    • 10,095 dairy farms in Canada, with majority (80%) located in Ontario and Quebec
    • Farm cash receipts (2020) = $7.13 billion
    • Average Net Operating Income (2019) = $164,892
    Poultry and eggs
    • 2,837 chicken producers, 515 turkey producers, 236 broiler hatching egg producers, and 1,205 egg producers in Canada, with majority (62%) located in Ontario and Quebec
    • Farm cash receipts (2020) = $4.89 billion
    • Average Net Operating Income (2019) = $203,156

    Processing sector

    • Approximately 514 dairy processors and 460 poultry and egg processing plants in Canada, majority located in Ontario and Quebec
    • Manufacturing shipments = $25.4 billion ($17.3 billion for dairy and $8.1 billion for poultry and egg)
    • Employment Dairy Processing = 24,500 people (employment figures reported by industry)
    • Employment Poultry & Egg Processing = more than 28,000 people (employment figures reported by industry)

    Annex B

    Dairy producer compensation programming

    Dairy Farm Investment Program, 2017–18 to 2022–23

    CETA compensatory program designed to support on-farm investment to improve efficiency

    6-year, $250-million program, launched August 2017

    As of July 2021, 3,428 producer applications have been approved, totalling almost $230 million

    Dairy Direct Payment Program, 2019–20 to 2022–23

    CETA and CPTPP compensation program that provides funding directly to dairy producers based on their quota held (i.e. farm size).

    • For example, in year 1, an 80 cow dairy farm received around $28,000, and a 100 cow farm received about $35,000.

    4-year, $1.75-billion program, launched August 2019.

    • $345 million in 2019–2020 – Delivered
    • $468  million in 2020–2021 – Delivered
    • $469  million in 2021–2022 – To be delivered
    • $468  million in 2022–2023 – To be delivered

    Program based on industry’s recommendation for compensation.

    Poultry and egg producer compensation programming

    On-Farm Investment Program, 2021–22 to 2030–31

    CPTPP compensation program that supports on-farm investments.

    10-year, $647-million program, launched in May 2021

    Funding will be allocated as follows:

    • $347.3 million for chicken producers;
    • $76.9  million for turkey producers;
    • $134  million for egg producers; and,
    • $88.6  million for broiler hatching egg producers.

    Program and funding allocation based on industry recommendations.

    Market Development Program, 2021–22 to 2030–31

    CPTPP compensation program that will help increase domestic demand for poultry products through promotional activities.

    10-year, $44.2-million program, launched in April 2021

    • $19.2 million for the Turkey Farmers of Canada; and,
    • $25 million for the Chicken Farmers of Canada.

    Program and funding allocation based on industry recommendations.

    SM processor compensation programming

    Dairy Processors Investment Fund, 2017–18 to 2020–21
    • Compensation program for dairy processors supporting investments that will improve productivity and competitiveness, and help them prepare to market changes resulting from CETA
    • 4-year, $100-million program, launched in August 2017. Program recently extended to March 2022 to support applicants facing delays due to COVID-19.
    • To date, more than 105 projects were approved for a total commitment of $87.35 million.
    Processors Investment Fund 2021–22 to 2026–27 (TBC)

    CETA and CPTPP compensation program to support private investment in SM processing plants.

    • 7-year, $292.5-million program announced in Budget 2021, expected to be launched in early 2022
    • AAFC currently seeking input from industry on program design.
    • Program based on industry's recommendation for compensation.

  • Business Risk Management programs

    Canada’s approach for supporting the sector is driven by economic growth objectives and assisting producers with managing severe risks

    Production risks

    Canada’s geography lends itself to weather risks

    • Short growing season,
    • Climate change and extreme weather events (for example, droughts, floods).

    Disease and pests can also lead to significant losses.

    Market risks

    As an export-dependent sector, Canadian producers are vulnerable to volatilities in world markets

    • Global supply/demand shocks (for example, US drought),
    • Exchange rate fluctuations,
    • Foreign government policies and trade barriers (for example, canola imports to China),
    • Strong dependence on energy inputs (for example, oil, fertilizer).

    Producer capacity

    To mitigate against the risks identified, producers can employ risk mitigation strategies (for example, crop varieties; insurance)

    • Availability of private sector risk management tools can be limited because of acute risks facing the sector.

    Effective risk management

    Sector risks can cause severe losses and threaten the viability of producers. Over time, federal, provincial, and territorial partners (FPT) have supported producers through:

    • Ensuring producers continue to have a suite of business risk management (BRM) programs that are comprehensive in scope and effective in helping manage the impacts of production losses, severe market volatility, extreme events and disasters.
    • Promoting the development of private sector risk management tools.
    • Supporting proactive mitigation activities that enhance sector resilience (e.g., assurance systems, traceability, fostering solutions through science and innovation).
    • Recognizing that supply management is an important BRM tool for some commodities.

    Together, risk management approaches enable growth and stability, stimulate investment and promote confidence in Canadian agriculture.

    Producers have access to a complementary suite of business risk management tools

    The current suite consists of the following shared FPT programs:

    • Agriinsurance offers cost-shared insurance against natural hazards for certain commodities, to reduce the financial impact of production or asset losses (averaging over $1 billion per year);
    • AgriStability provides support when producers experience a large margin decline (averaging about $320 million per year);
    • AgriInvest offers cash flow to help producers manage income declines (approximately $270 million per year); and
    • AgrirRcovery Framework delivers disaster recovery relief following natural disaster events.

    Under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership (CAP), BRM programs have provided up to $1.6 billion on average per year to support producers.

    See Annex 2 for program details.

    Additional Business Risk Management programs

    Federal-only risk management programs include

    • AgriRisk supports the development of new, private-sector led risk management tools ($55 million over five years);
    • The Advance Payments Program is a loan guarantee program which provides producers with easy access to low-interest cash advances to support marketing flexibility (an annual loan average of $2.3 billion); and
    • The Canadian Agricultural Loans Act provides a loan guarantee program designed to increase the availability of loans to farmers to help establish, improve, and develop farms (averaging $100 million in loans annually).

    Livestock-specific program (Western Canada)

    • Livestock Price Insurance (LPI) allows cattle and hog producers to purchase insurance coverage against unanticipated price declines, offering protection against volatility in the marketplace. Producers pay 100% of premiums while governments (FPT) pay administration costs and insurance deficit financing covered by Canada (2020 LPI premiums $24.1 million).

    Business risk management programs help producers to  manage significant risks that threaten the viability of a farm beyond their capacity to manage alone.

    BRM suite financial support — Example 1

    Crops damaged by spring flooding on Manitoba farm

    The challenge: Bob and Marcie operate a 2,500-acre grain and oilseeds operation in southern Manitoba. This year, the region they farm experienced a severe spring flood, leaving 1,500 acres under water and unseeded. Bob and Marcie applied fertilizer in fall, and have already prepaid most of their herbicide and pesticide.

    Due to these events, the farm will experience a $330,000 drop in revenue, leaving them with a negative production margin of $30,400.

    Bob and Marcie make use of the full suite of BRM tools available to them:

    • They regularly contribute to AgriInvest.
    • They have crop insurance, which includes AgriInsurance’s Excess Moisture Insurance.
    • They are enrolled in AgriStability.
    Farm financials
    Average year ($) Disaster year ($)
    Grain sales 550,000 220,000
    Total expenses 290,000 250,400
    Margins Reference margin 260,000 Production margin (30,400)

    A producer is eligible for an Agristability payment if the production margin in the current year falls below their historical reference margin by more than 30%.Bob and Marcie received $105,000 in indemnities for the unseeded acres through AgriInsurance’s Excess Moisture Insurance. This indemnity will be accounted for as revenue in establishing an AgriStability payment.

    They received $75,180 in support from AgriStability.

    In total, they have access to $25,200 through AgriInvest:

    • They currently have an account balance of $22,000 they can withdraw.
    • They are also eligible for a matching government contribution of $3,200.
    ($)
    AgriInsurance indemnities 105,000
    AgriStability payment 75,180
    AgriInvest payment 25,200
    Total BRM support 205,380
    Disaster year production margin (30,400)
    Disaster year production margin with program payments 174,980

    BRM suite financial support — Example 2

    A New Brunswick potato grower sees a drop in market demand

    The challenge: Lindsey has a 240 acre potato operation. This year, fast food chains have decreased portion sizes in their restaurants in response to consumer demand. Lindsey noticed a lower demand for potatoes, and a significant drop in price for her new crop of potatoes.

    • Due to these events, the farm will experience a $300,960 drop in revenue, this leaves Lindsey with a production margin of $45,040.
    • Lindsey has been a regular contributor to AgriInvest and is enrolled in AgriStability.
    • The revenue loss is from a drop in price, not a production loss; therefore, AgriInsurance does not apply.
    Farm financials
    Average year ($) Disaster year ($)
    Potato sales 792,000 491,040
    Total expenses 446,000 446,000
    Margins Reference margin 346,000 Production margin (45,040)

    A producer is eligible for an AgriStability payment if the production margin in the current year falls below their historical reference margin by more than 30%.

    Lindsey received a $138,012 payment through AgriStability.

    Lindsey has access to $33,300 through AgriInvest:

    • She currently has an account balance of $29,000 that can be withdrawn.
    • She is also eligible for a matching government contribution of $4,300 this year.
    ($)
    AgriStability payment 138,012
    AgriInvest payment 33,300
    Total BRM support 171,312
    Disaster year production margin 45,040
    Disaster year production margin with program payments 216,352

    Assessments of BRM programs

    The BRM suite has been assessed against program objectives a number of times, including internal and external reviews.

    Reviews have highlighted:

    • The BRM suite meets many of its objectives, but improvements to individual programs is necessary to improve synergy and overarching response.
    • Enrollment challenges and a lack of confidence in agristability due to its complexity, lack of timeliness and predictability. ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ Recent changes have addressed some of these challenges, particularly equity and complexity.
    • AgriInsurance is simple, predictable and quick to respond, thus it is well-liked by producers; however, because it is commodity-specific, it can provide support for normal losses relative to whole-farm income and is largely only available to crop producers.
    • AgriInvest provides predictable support each year, thus it is well-liked by producers; however, the program design allows support to be used for purposes other than risk management.

    Additional external analysis is ongoing to determine how to enhance the programs, particularly agristability.

    AgriStability enhancements under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership

    FPT governments continue to work towards enhancements to BRM programs and agreed to the following:

    • Simplified enrollment and established late participation mechanisms under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership (CAP);
    • Modified the agristability program in 2021 by removing the Reference Margin Limit (a complicated calculation that limited payments). Changes have made the program more responsive to all types of farming operations.

    Additional enhancements are still under consideration:

    • Further enhance agristability by increasing the compensation rate from 70% to 80%:
      • Insufficient support from provinces currently exist although a number have proceeded with the change on a provincial basis.
    • Potential alternative approaches for future BRM programs:
      • Substantive changes to AgriStability,
      • Transition to a whole-farm revenue or margin insurance program.

    Stakeholder views

    While the BRM suite allows for a response to sector needs and crises like the current drought (agrirecovery), pressure to adapt to evolving risks faced by the sector (e.g., climate change, international trade uncertainty, labour, pandemics) remains.

    Stakeholders are most critical of agristability, but remain heavily supportive of agriinsurance and agriinvest for their simplicity, ease of understanding, timeliness and responsiveness.

    Key BRM objectives consistently highlighted by stakeholders include affordability, effectiveness, flexibility, predictability and the importance of a level playing field with international competitors:

    • Stakeholders also stress the role of BRM programs in providing producers with liquidity to allow for adaptation to changing market conditions and opportunities.

    Stakeholders are interested in feeding directly into BRM policy and program design and do so, in part, through the National Program Advisory Committee.

    Looking ahead

    Given funding levels and direct link to producers, BRM is a top priority with provinces and territories, and BRM is a topic of discussion at most FPT meetings.

    Improvements to the suite as a whole and to individual programs are under evaluation.

    Possible options for program enhancements will be provided for advancing discussions with provinces and territories and will likely factor heavily in conversations around the next policy framework.

    Annex 1 — BRM principles

    Thirteen principles guide the BRM suite.

    Some of the most frequently referenced are included below:

    • Programs shall be in conformity with Canada's international trading obligations and should minimize countervail risk,
    • Programs should have a clear purpose, and be comprehensive, comprehensible, predictable, and simple to administer,
    • Programs should apply to the stability of the entire farm entity,
    • The financial resources of Canada should be allocated to provide, over time, the same level of protection for farmers in similar circumstances.

    Annex 2 — Overview of BRM programs

    AgriInsurance

    Insurance protection against natural hazards (i.e. drought, flood, wind, frost, excessive rain or heat, snow, losses from uncontrollable disease, insect infestations and wildlife).

    • Addresses production declines caused by natural hazards (e.g., wind, frost, excessive rain or heat, snow, disease and pests, etc.).
    • Insurance plans are tailored by provincial administrations to respond to regional needs:
      • Provinces monitor the industry (e.g., new crops, new production techniques, etc.) and respond to the needs of producers by developing or adjusting insurance plans to address gaps in coverage.
    • Producers choose the commodities to insure, the type of plan, and the coverage level, and governments share in the cost of premiums with producers:
      • Generally 60% of premiums are paid by governments, and governments cover the full cost of program administration.
    • Indemnities are paid when production volume or quality falls below the insured level of production.
    Program cost-share
    • Producer, 40%
    • Federal, 36%
    • Provincial, 24%
    Program delivery
    • All 10 provinces
    FPT payments to date, as of August 3, 2021 ($)
    Growing Forward 2 (2013-2017) 5,171,822,278
    Canadian Agricultural Partnership (2018-present) 2,966,069,638
    Targeted areas of coverage
    AgriInsurance support
    Market price fluctuations No
    Farm operating cash flow No
    Increased expenses No
    Production/ quality losses Yes
    Investment in risk management tools No
    Investment in farm operations No

    AgriStability

    Individual margin-based program that assists with large margin declines caused by severe market volatilities and disasters.

    Provides support to producers who experience large margin declines (30% plus) in a given year compared to their historical margins.

    Payment represents 70% of losses beyond a reference margin.

    Covers all major income-related risks of a farm in one program (i.e., income loss due to production problems, decreases in commodity prices or increases in input costs).

    Coverage is available for most agricultural commodities and is tailored to individual circumstances.

    AgriStability has paid out over $2.4 billion to producers since 2013.

    Program cost-share
    • Federal, 60%
    • Provincial, 40%
    Program delivery
    • Federal: Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador
    • Provincial: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Quebec
    FPT payments to date, as of August 3, 2021 ($)
    Growing Forward 2 (2013-2017) 1,607,553,449
    Canadian Agricultural Partnership (2018-present) 846,957,745
    Targeted areas of coverage
    AgriStability support
    Market price fluctuations Yes
    Farm operating cash flow No
    Increased expenses Yes
    Production/ quality losses Yes
    Investment in risk management tools No
    Investment in farm operations No

    AgriInvest

    Government-matched savings account to address income declines or make investments to manage on-farm risks.

    • A producer savings account, which governments contribute to:
      • Contributions are based on a producer’s allowable net sales (ANS) –  sales minus purchases of allowable commodities (e.g., flower or tree sales less seed or seedling purchases).
    • Producers can deposit up to 100% of their ANS annually, of which the first 1% is matched dollar-by-dollar by governments (up to $10,000).
    • Government contributions must be withdrawn first, and are taxable upon withdrawal.
    • There is no trigger for withdrawal – producers manage their accounts as they see fit.

    There is over $2.4 billion in AgriInvest accounts, with a balance of about $26,000 on average per account (as of June 2021).

    Program cost-share

    • Federal, 60%
    • Provincial, 40%

    Program delivery

    • Federal, in all provinces except Quebec
    • Provincial, in Quebec
    FPT payments to date, as of August 3, 2021 ($)
    Growing Forward 2 (2013-2017) 1,391,273,064
    Canadian Agricultural Partnership (2018-present) 573,770,937
    Targeted areas of coverage
    AgriInvest support
    Market price fluctuations Yes
    Farm operating cash flow Yes
    Increased expenses Yes
    Production/ quality losses Yes
    Investment in risk management tools Yes
    Investment in farm operations Yes

    AgriRecovery

    An FPT framework that facilitates the implementation of federal/provincial responses to natural disasters and disease/pest outbreaks.

    Acts as a mechanism for FPT governments to develop individual initiatives to address specific disaster events within predefined criteria.

    The framework provides:

    • A protocol for FPT interaction;
    • A definition of disaster to guide when intervention is warranted; and
    • Guidelines on the type of assistance to be provided.

    Focuses on assisting with the extraordinary costs required to recover following a disaster, not meant to replace available coverage under AgriInsurance, AgriStability, and AgriInvest.

    Not intended to provide responses to recurring disaster events, as a recurring disaster might indicate that there is a need to look for longer-term options.

    The federal government recently committed to providing up to $525 million through AgriRecovery initiatives to help producers facing additional costs due to the drought and COVID-19 (includes set-aside programs for cattle and hog producers).

    Program cost-share

    • Federal, 60%
    • Provincial, 40%

    Program delivery

    • Federal, on a case-by-case basis
    • Provincial, in all 10 provinces
    FPT payments to date, as of August 3, 2021 ($)
    Growing Forward 2 (2013-2017) 36,963,863
    Canadian Agricultural Partnership (2018-present) 61,479,960
    Targeted areas of coverage
    AgriRecovery support
    Market price fluctuations No
    Farm operating cash flow No
    Increased expenses Yes
    Production/ quality losses No
    Investment in risk management tools No
    Investment in farm operations No

    AgriRisk Initiatives

    Funding for research, development and implementation of new and tailored insurance products and other private-sector risk management tools.

    Two project funding streams

    Stream 1 – Research and Development: Support projects related to the development of agriculture risk management tools or strategies

    • Microgrants: provides funding for academic research proposals that explore alternative risk management tools or propose different ways to address issues with existing BRM programs.

    Stream 2 – Administrative Capacity Building: Supports the implementation of agricultural risk management tools or strategies that have already been developed by providing financial assistance for start-up costs and activities.

    Targeted areas of coverage
    AgriRisk support
    Market price fluctuations No
    Farm operating cash flow No
    Increased expenses No
    Production/ quality losses No
    Investment in risk management tools Yes
    Investment in farm operations No

  • Environment and climate change

    Agri-environmental context

    The success of the agriculture sector depends on natural resources.

    • Strong interdependencies between productivity and the agricultural ecosystem, including climate and weather, land use and soil health, water quality and use, and biodiversity benefits and threats.

    Agriculture production can have significant impacts on the environment.

    • While producers have made progress in some areas (soil health, air quality), more work is required to reverse undesirable trends and reduce overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

    Producers have different challenges and opportunities than other sectors in the fight against climate change.

    • There are barriers to widespread adoption of beneficial practices, including managing risks to production and ensuring the adoption of such practices is economically viable.

    A number of initiatives, including measures announced under the strengthened climate plan, are underway to further support the sector.

    Importance of environmental sustainability

    Building long-term resilience to climate change and environmental risks

    • Improving on-farm environmental resilience can reduce impacts and enable farms to recover faster from extreme weather-related events (e.g., droughts and floods).
    • Resource conservation (e.g., soil, water) will ensure long-term viability of farming for future generations.

    Supporting sustainable growth and production to respond to global demand

    • Increasing demand for sustainable products means a sustainable approach will be required to take advantage of emerging opportunities.

    Addressing market and consumer demands

    • Food processing and retail companies are making sustainability commitments that include their supply chain.
    • Input providers, the sector and industry are taking action to promote stewardship and report on sustainability.

    Contributing to larger outcomes, such as Canada's 2030 and 2050 GHG emission reduction targets and sustainable development goals.

    Climate change and Canada’s agriculture sector

    Climate change will create greater challenges in the coming years and decades:

    • Changes in precipitation and more frequent extreme weather events can increase risk of soil erosion.
    • More frequent heat waves can impact crop yields, stress livestock and increase greenhouse gas emission intensity.
    • Pest and disease outbreaks will become more prevalent.

    Warmer winter and spring temperatures could increase crop and livestock productivity in some regions.

    Projected changes in future precipitation (2050-2070)
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    Two comparative weather maps of Canada: the first map shows that Canada will have wetter than normal springs (between 5% to 10% and 30% to 35% more precipitation compared with 1981 to 2010); the second map shows that Canada will have drier than normal summers (between 5% and 10% more precipitation and 15% to 20% less precipitation compared with 1981 to 2010).

    Emissions profile of the Canadian agriculture sector

    Agriculture emissions, which account for 10% of Canada’s total GHG emissions, have been stable since the 1990s.

    Despite increased production, industry efforts have reduced emissions per unit of production over time. However, without further action, overall emissions will increase and sequestration levels will decrease.

    Most agricultural emissions are from biological sources, such as crops and livestock.

    Opportunities for absolute emission reductions are limited by current technologies.
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    Chart on Emissions and Removals, both Observed and Projected - Description: A bar graph comparing 2005 and 2030 emissions of Livestock (which was at 44 mega tons in 2005 and projected to be 37 mega tons in 2030), next Crops (which was at 16 mega tons in 2005 and projected to be 26 mega tons in 2030) next Fuel use (which was at 12 mega tons in 2005 and projected to be 13 mega tons in 2030) and finally removals of carbon by soil (which was at minus 11 mega tons in 2005 and projected to be minus 1.5 mega tons in 2030

    Sources: NIR 2020 and Canada’s BR4

    Environmental risks — soil health

    Healthy soils are the foundation of agricultural production.

    • Soil erosion, compaction and loss of soil biodiversity negatively impact production.
    • On-farm adoption of soil health practices and natural climate solutions can lead to improved soil health across Canada, carbon sequestering, and increased resilience to climate events such as droughts.
    • Croplands in the prairie provinces changed from being net carbon emitting to carbon-sequestering between 1996 and 2011 but have now reached a plateau.
      • Significant improvements through the adoption of soil health practices, such as minimum tillage.
      • Southeast Manitoba, where tillage practices are different because of wetter conditions, has carbon-sequestering potential.
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image
    Soil Quality Compound Index
    Year Index Value Status*
    1981 64 good
    1986 65 good
    1991 66 good
    1996 70 good
    2001 75 good
    2006 78 good
    2011 78 good
    2016 77 good

    *Status:

    • 0 to 20, At risk;
    • 20 to 40, Poor;
    • 40 to 60, Moderate;
    • 60 to 80, Good;
    • 80 to 100, Desired.

    Environmental risks – water

    Water is a critical resource in agricultural production.

    • Agriculture impacts water quality (e.g., nutrients, pesticides) and water quality can impact crop (e.g., salinization) and animal production (e.g., productivity, diseases).

    Agriculture is the biggest “consumer” of water – a fact receiving public scrutiny.

    • From 2012 to 2018, as conditions became drier, the amount of irrigation water in Canada increased by 74% and the total irrigated area increased by 17%.
    • As provinces look to expand irrigation, particularly in the Prairies, there will be increased competition with other users for limited freshwater resources.

    Climate change will impact production and water resources.

    • More frequent and intense extreme weather events (e.g., floods and droughts) will increase erosion and runoff, as well as farmers’ demand for more drainage, irrigation and improved on-site water storage.
    Risk of Water Contaminatin by Nitrogen Index
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image
    Risk of Water Contamination by Nitrogen Index
    Year Index Value Status*
    1981 88 Desired
    1986 85 Desired
    1991 87 Desired
    1996 79 Good
    2001 64 Good
    2006 81 Desired
    2011 69 Good
    2016 74 Good

    *Status:

    • 0 to 20, At risk;
    • 20 to 40, Poor;
    • 40 to 60, Moderate;
    • 60 to 80, Good;
    • 80 to 100, Desired.

    Environmental risks — biodiversity

    Canada’s commitment to protect 25% of land areas by 2025 and 30% by 2030 could help highlight conservation efforts in agricultural landscapes.

    In agriculture, biodiversity refers to cultivated and farmed species, including their genetic diversity, as well as living beings (e.g., birds, insects, microorganisms, etc.) with which they interact.

    • Biodiversity in agricultural landscapes increases resilience to extreme weather events and creates habitat for endangered species and pollinators.

    Addressing biodiversity loss is critically important because agricultural lands provide habitat for many species, including species at risk.

    • Declines result from loss of forage and pasture lands, increased annual cropping and urban expansion in Central Canada, despite program activities.
    • Activities promoting the adoption of natural climate solutions (e.g., grasslands, agroforestry) could help improve habitat conservation in rural areas.
    Wildlife Habitat on Farmland Index
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image
    Wildlife Habitat on Farmland Index
    Year Index Value Status*
    2000 62 Good
    2005 62 Good
    2010 62 Good
    2015 63 Good

    *Status:

    • 0 to 20, At risk;
    • 20 to 40, Poor;
    • 40 to 60, Moderate;
    • 60 to 80, Good;
    • 80 to 100, Desired.

    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) science supporting environmental sustainability

    AAFC collaborates with other federal departments, provinces and territories and stakeholders on the science needed to support the sector.

    • Crops and livestock research to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change
      • Developing more drought-tolerant and nitrogen-fixing cereal crops, genomics and feed additives for livestock to lower emissions.
    • Development of beneficial management practices for sustainable crop and livestock production
    • Evaluation and adoption of technologies and practices to protect and conserve resources and improve input use efficiency
      • Variable-rate irrigation, precision application of nutrients.
      • Knowledge transfer activities to accelerate adoption and innovation.
    • Development of monitoring, assessment and forecasting technologies and decision support tools
    • Drought Watch; crop yield forecasts; Canadian Soil Information Service.

    Key AAFC actions supporting environmental sustainability

    The Agriculture Climate Solutions program will support the agriculture sector in mitigating climate change through nature-based climate solutions:

    • $185 million over 10 years to support the implementation of “Living Labs” across Canada; and
    • $200 million over 3 years to support immediate, on-farm climate action in the areas of cover cropping, nitrogen management and rotational grazing.

    The Agricultural Clean Technology program will provide $167.5 million over 7 years to support the development and adoption of clean technology:

    • Includes targeted investments for more efficient grain dryers and to help power farms with clean energy.

    The national target is a reduction in absolute emissions from synthetic nitrogen fertilizer application to 30% below 2020 levels by 2030:

    • Includes a commitment to get the sector involved in developing measures to achieve the target.

    The new Canadian agri-environmental strategy will provide longer-term direction for priority agri-environmental themes, including reducing GHG emissions.

    Federal-provincial-territorial (FPT) actions supporting environmental sustainability

    Collaboration with provinces and territories through cost-shared funding programs and activities to support on-farm education and actions.

    • On-farm programs through the Canadian Agricultural Partnership are delivered by provinces and territories ($438 million over 5 years in FPT environmental programming).
    • Build producer awareness of environmental risks (e.g., environmental farm plans) and speed up adoption of technologies and practices to reduce these risks and adapt to climate change.

    The next policy framework (2023-2028) provides an opportunity to address key agri- environmental issues, including:

    • Climate change mitigation and GHG emissions
    • Adaptation and resilience
    • Healthy soils
    • Water availability

    Challenges and opportunities

    Pressure is mounting on all sectors, including agriculture, to contribute to Canada’s national greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets of 40%–45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2050.

    The key challenge is to maintain productivity and respond to global demand for food and bioproducts while significantly reducing environmental impacts.

    Producers are looking for opportunities to contribute to, and gain recognition for, stewardship activities that advance environmental priorities.

    • They are interested in participating in the carbon offset market and opportunities for low-input feedstocks contributing to sustainable, low-carbon biofuels production.

    Government support for the adoption of solutions by the sector is critically important in achieving reductions and scaling up beneficial practices.

    • Potential solutions must be easy to adopt for existing production systems and minimize producer burden and risk (lost yields and outputs, cost and time).

    Need for better systems, e.g., certifications and data, to measure and demonstrate sustainable practices at home and abroad.

    Looking ahead

    Opportunities for AAFC-led engagement and collaboration:

    • Negotiation of the next policy framework (2021–22)
    • Development of a Canadian agri-environmental strategy (2021–22)
    • Work with the sector to determine approach for meeting the new fertilizer emissions target (2021–22)
    • Next steps for new clean technology and on-farm support programs

    Other commitments of interest to the sector

    • Launch of the Federal GHG Offsets System (fall 2021)
    • Launch of Clean Fuels Regulations (December 2022)
    • Toward a Zero Plastic Waste in Canada Initiative (2021–22)
    • Establishment of the Canada Water Agency (fall 2021/winter 2022)
    • Returning a portion of the proceeds from pollution pricing directly to farmers in backstop jurisdictions

    Upcoming international engagement and commitments:

    • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – CoP 26 (November 2021)
    • Convention on Biological Diversity – Development of Post-2020 Framework and the development of an agriculture sector species at risk action plan (2021–22)

  • Labour and temporary foreign workers

    Issue

    Labour shortages are a long-standing issue in agriculture and food production, and a barrier to growth for the sector.
    Despite constant recruitment efforts, some sub-sectors (e.g. horticulture and meat processing) are heavily reliant on temporary foreign workers (TFWs).
    Worker health and safety and public perception of the TFW program have been exacerbated by the pandemic.
    As a multi-jurisdictional issue, addressing labour challenges will require leadership from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and partnerships with other government departments, provincial governments, industry, labour groups and other stakeholders.
    As the sector increases its adoption of technology and evolves its production practices, the types of skill sets required by employers will continue to evolve in the future.

    Employment in the agriculture and agri-food sector

    Labour force in primary agriculture and food manufacturing
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    In Primary Agriculture there are 279,400 people working, but that this sector has seen employment decline by 7% between 2010 and 2020.

    In food and beverage manufacturing stating there are 288,800 people working, but that this sector has seen employment increase by 8% between 2010 and 2020. [/Description of the above image]

    Primary agriculture has experienced a decline in employment over the past decade, while farm cash receipts have steadily increased – this decline is expected to continue with increasing mechanization, technological advances and farm consolidation.

    Food and beverage employment has remained fairly stable over the last decade, while gross domestic product (GDP) and sales grew by 13.8% and 33% respectively – the sector continues to report labour shortages as a barrier to growth.

    Positions are mostly low- and semi-skilled, low-wage and rural

    Low and semi-skilled jobs account for the majority of crop production (87%), animal production (84%), and food and beverage processing (66%) jobs.

    On average, paid agriculture workers earn a wage rate below that of other industries, and food-processing wages are lower than the average wages in other manufacturing sectors.

    The shares of rural employment in the primary-agriculture and food-processing industries were 72% and 19%, respectively, while the shares of rural employment in manufacturing and all other industries were 17% and 15%, respectively.

    Share of high-skill employee positions, 2020
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image
    Share of high-skill employee positions, 2020
    Share of low- and semi-skilled positions (%) Share of high-skilled positions (%)
    Crop production 87 13
    Animal production and aquaculture 84 16
    Food and beverage processing 66 34
    Manufacturing 50 50
    Total, all industries 38 62

    Source: Statistics Canada and AAFC calculations

    Vacancy rates are high, and some parts of the sector are constantly recruiting

    The vacancy rate in the sector remains higher than in the economy as a whole, with chronic labour and skills shortages impacting many parts of the sector.

    Job vacancy rates are highest in crop production – the absolute number of vacant positions typically remains stable through the year, but the number of payroll employees increases from Q1 to Q4, causing a declining vacancy rate.

    A high proportion of agriculture and agri-food vacancies are considered to be “constantly recruiting” – particularly for industrial butchers and meat cutters, fish and seafood plant workers, and harvesting labourers.

    Job vacancy rate, quarterly, 2019
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    Bar chart colour coded to each quarter in 2019 for various industries. For crop production job vacancies dropped from over 11% in Q1 to 6% in Q4.

    For Animal production and aquaculture vacancies started at just over 4% in Q1 dipped in Q2 and further in Q3 finally rising to over 3% in Q4.

    For Food manufacturing the job vacancy rate stayed steady at 4% from Q1 to Q3, dropping slightly in Q4.

    For beverage and tobacco manufacturing job vacancies rose from under 4% in Q1 to just under 5% in Q2, eventually dropping to slightly under Q1 numbers by Q4.

    For all industries, job vacancies followed a similar pattern to beverage and tobacco manufacturing, but were consistently slightly less across al quarters.

    Job vacancy rate: The number of job vacancies expressed as a percentage of labour demand (vacancies/(payroll employees + vacancies).

    Source: Statistics Canada, Job Vacancy and Wage Survey (JVWS)

    Labour shortages look different within the sector

    Chronic labour shortages are most evident in processing and horticulture.

    The type of labour needed varies depending on the sub-sector:

    1. Year-round, low-skilled positions (e.g. workers in meat processing, greenhouses, mushroom farms)
      Estimated $1.15 billion in lost sales for meat processors and value-chain producers (Canadian Meat Council).
    2. Seasonal, low-skilled positions (e.g. workers in on-farm primary production, seafood processing, fruit and vegetable processing)
      Estimated $2.9 billion in lost revenues for the primary-agriculture sector in 2017 (Canadian Agricultural Human Resources Council).
    3. Year-round, high-skilled positions (e.g. veterinarians, engineers, data scientists)
      Estimated demand for 49,000 additional workers in the agri-food and food-tech sector by 2025 (Information and Communications Technology Council).

    Several avenues exist to improve domestic labour capacity

    The success of the agriculture and agri-food sector as an economic driver requires continued cross-jurisdictional action on systemic labour challenges, including:

    • Facilitating technology adoption and automation to mitigate labour shortages and improve productivity.
    • Providing education and training to the future workforce and upskilling current workers.
    • Improving recruitment and retention, as well as increasing awareness of career opportunities in agriculture.

    AAFC collaborates with federal partners and provinces/territories (PTs) to influence policy, share labour-market information, and fund and deliver labour- and skills-development programs. Efforts include:

    • Youth Employment and Skills Program – helps agricultural employers hire youth to gain agriculture-specific experience and skills (2,000 young Canadians expected to be supported in 2021–22).
    • Skills Development Table – launched in August 2021 and jointly chaired by AAFC and industry – is expected to include work on recruitment and retention of workers, and future skills training and training options.
    • Canadian Agricultural Partnership – includes programming targeting education and skills development, and investments in technology (e.g. Ontario offers cost-shared funding with which producers and processors can invest in the development, commercialization, and adoption of technology and equipment to improve labour productivity).

    But TFWs continue to be a critical source of labour

    70,000+ TFWs worked in the agriculture and agri-food sector annually from 2017 to 2020.

    Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia account for the highest number of TFWs.

    Most TFWs in the sector are hired in low-skilled/low-wage occupations, such as general farm workers, nursery and greenhouse workers, and fish plant workers.

    Preliminary 2020 data indicate that:

    • TFWs accounted for about 18% of the primary-agriculture workforce and 8% of the food-and-beverage-processing workforce.
    • Top TFW employment industries included horticulture and meat processing.
    Number of temporary foreign workers, agriculture and agri-food sector, 2017–2020
    Description of above image

    Number of temporary foreign workers, agriculture and agri-food sector, 2017–2020

    A bar graph showing that agricultural industries had more temporary foreign workers than food and beverage processing, with the agricultural industries generally having more than 50,000 workers for 2017 to 2019, and then almost exactly 50,000 in 2020.

    Source: Statistics Canada and AAFC calculations.
    Note: 2020 data are preliminary.

    Agriculture is the heaviest user of the TFW Program, which is a shared responsibility of ESDC, IRCC and CBSA

    Key components required for hiring through the TFW Program:

    • Positive Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) issued to employers by Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC).
    • Eligibility for work permits determined by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC); permits issued to foreign nationals by Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).
    Stream Relevance to agriculture and agri-food sector
    Primary Agriculture Stream Includes Seasonal Agriculture Worker Program (SAWP), Agricultural Stream, and Streams for low and high-wage positions
    Low-wage positions Commonly used in fish and seafood processing, meat processing
    High-wage positions Less commonly used by agriculture and agri-food
    Global Talent Stream Less commonly used by agriculture and agri-food

    The responsibility for recruiting or selecting foreign workers for jobs in Canada fall to employers, or partner countries for positions approved through the SAWP.

    Employer responsibilities vary by stream: SAWP and Agricultural Stream require the employer to provide housing and round-trip transportation costs; additional fees and caps outside primary agriculture.

    Ongoing efforts to reform the TFW Program

    The pandemic has underscored both the essential nature of agriculture and agri-food workers, and the challenges within the TFW Program.

    Industry has advocated for reforms to the TFW Program for several years, notably (1) simplification of program streams, (2) reduced Labour Market Impact Assessments (LMIA) and work-permit processing times, and (3) an increase in the cap on the proportion of low-wage TFWs per worksite in food processing

    • ESDC-led consultations with stakeholders took place between 2017 and 2020 on various elements of the TFW Program (e.g. 2017–2019 Primary Agriculture Review).
    • ESDC and IRCC have implemented changes addressing some industry concerns (Annex C), but the perception exists that ready-made solutions could be implemented quickly to improve the TFW Program (e.g. Trusted employer).

    ESDC is proposing significant reforms to the program over the next few years, including regulatory amendments and housing requirements, that could improve worker health and safety, housing, program administration and integrity (i.e. inspections regime).

    AAFC and industry stakeholders, along with PTs, municipalities, source-country governments and migrant-worker groups remain heavily engaged.

    Changes to immigration may help alleviate labour shortages

    IRCC-led immigration pilots have been introduced to help address permanent and persistent job vacancies in lower-skilled, year-round occupations (e.g. meat cutting and processing), but it is too early to determine the impact

    • Agri-Food Immigration Pilot launched.
    • Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot launched.
    • Atlantic Immigration Pilot extended.

    Launch of a new pathway to permanent residence for 30,000 essential temporary workers, including in agriculture and agri-food (April 2021)

    • Application cap reached in June 2021; data on applications received is anticipated in fall of 2021.

    PTs can make use of Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) positions to target areas of need, but most dedicate few positions to agriculture

    • 2,000 new PNP positions are for semi-skilled workers, an area of significant shortage.

    AAFC areas of focus to address labour and skills challenges

    In coordination with key partners, considering sub-sector-specific solutions for a new Agriculture Labour Strategy, reflecting the varying needs found in different parts of Canada’s agriculture and agri-food industry.

    Monitoring international travel restrictions and working with key partners to ensure the timely arrival of TFWs for the upcoming 2022 planting season.

    Collaborating with ESDC, IRCC and Service Canada on TFW Program reform (including proposed housing requirements), immigration pilots and policies, and worker protection.

    Engaging with industry and stakeholder groups, including through the recently launched industry-government Federal Skills Development Roundtable.

    Annex A – FPT government response to COVID-19

    Federal initiatives Provincial / territoriral initiatives
    Economy-wide initiatives: Canadian Emergency Wage Subsidy, Canadian Emergency Response Benefit, Canadian Emergency Business Account, $3B in essential worker wage top-ups, etc. Program responses to help enhance health and safety on farms and in processing facilities, including purchase of PPE (BC, AB, MB, ON, QC, PEI, NB, NS, NL) and address labour shortages (ON, QC, YK,PEI)
    AAFC program support for employer costs related to the mandatory isolation period, as well as worker health and safety both on-farm and in processing facilities Job connector portals in BC, AB, ON, QC, NS and NB
    Public Health Agency of Canada guidance for health and safety guidance for employers Linkages with Business Risk Management suite – Ontario with labour as an insurable peril for AgriInsurance
    ESDC/IRCC introduced temporary flexibilities into the TFW Program and are exploring further options for Program reforms and worker protections, including housing standards Centralized, government-run isolation program for workers upon arrival - includes accommodation, meals and wrap around services (BC)
    Dedicated federal Task Team to monitor agriculture TFW arrivals throughout the season, as well as address emerging issues to facilitate safe entry into Canada Provincial inspections of on-farm health and safety measures prior to workers release to the respective farms (Quebec and others)

    Annex B – 2020 TFW Program flexibilities due to COVID-19

    Temporarily waived 2-week recruitment period for agriculture and agri-food employers.

    Prioritized processing for agriculture and agri-food sector LMIAs and work permits.

    Increased maximum duration of employment under LMIAs from 1 to 2 years, as part of the Agri-Food pilot.

    Allowed TFWs in Canada on employer-specific work permits to temporarily begin working in a new job while their application is being processed.

    Extended period to apply for the restoration of TFWs' legal status beyond the 90-day timeframe.

    Allowed visitors currently in Canada, with a valid job offer, to apply for an employer-specific work permit without having to leave Canada.

    Allowed certain SAWP workers to continue working beyond their identified end date and extended certain SAWP workers’ work term beyond 8 months.

    Streamlined visa issuance and facilitated biometrics capture at point of entry into Canada to facilitate entry.

    Annex C: Examples of federal government TFW Program changes, 2016–2021

    Improving efficient access to TFWs

    • Created a joint industry/government-led working group to help address administrative irritants (ESDC, 2018).
    • Froze the cap at 20%, and implemented a temporary seasonal exemption to the cap for positions of up to 180 days (ESDC, 2016); implemented a change to the cap calculation (ESDC, 2019).
    • Introduced an LMIA online pilot (ESDC, 2019).
    • Expanded the National Commodities List, adding grains, oil seeds and maple syrup (ESDC, 2020).
    • Announced a temporary increase of 10% to 20% in the maximum number of TFWs in low-wage positions in Quebec (ESDC, 2021).

    Improving worker protections

    • Piloted the Migrant Worker Support Network in British Columbia to provide better supports for migrant workers and to educate workers and employers on obligations and rights (ESDC, 2018); Budget 2021 confirmed funding for migrant worker organizations (ESDC).
    • Strengthened program compliance regime, including risk-based and unannounced inspections (ESDC, 2018).
    • Introduced open work permits for vulnerable workers, which allow workers with employer-specific work permits in situations of abuse to leave their employer and work for another (IRCC, 2019).
    • Invested $35 million to improve health and safety on farms and in employee living quarters in order to prevent and respond to the spread of COVID-19 (AAFC, 2020).
    • Introduced a job-matching platform to help match TFWs with employers who have already obtained or applied for an LMIA (ESDC, 2021).
    • Budget 2021 announced $54.9 million over three years, for ESDC and IRCC, to increase inspections of employers and ensure TFWs have appropriate working conditions and wages.

    Enhancing pathways to permanent residence options

    • Added 2,000 additional National Occupational Classification (NOC) C spaces under the Provincial Nominee Program (IRCC, 2019).
    • Launched the Agri-Food Pilot (IRCC, 2020).
    • Increased the maximum duration of employment under LMIAs from 1 to 2 years for positions in meat processing, as part of IRCC’s Agri-Food pilot (ESDC, 2020).
    • Launched a temporary policy to grant permanent residence to up to 90,000 graduates and essential workers (including seasonal agricultural workers) (IRCC, 2021).

  • Canadian retail fees

    Retail fees in Canada

    • Retail fees are payments made by suppliers to retailers in exchange for stocking/listing products on shelves/online (Annex 1).
    • The announcement by retailers of new retail fees in the summer of 2020, combined with COVID-19 challenges, increased attention on the impact of these fees on their suppliers.
    • Some retail fees are viewed as mutually beneficial as they increase the suppliers’ sales (for example, promotional or marketing fees).
    • However, retail fees have increased in size and scope and are increasingly applied in a manner viewed by suppliers as contentious (retroactive, unilateral, unpredictable).
    • Suppliers also contend that these fees can have no direct impact on their sales, and are designed primarily to offset retailers’ costs (for example, fees imposed to finance retailer infrastructure investments).

    Calls for action

    • Following the Summer 2020 new retail fee announcements, industry called on federal and provincial governments to take action to ensure fair, transparent and predictable business practices for the agri-food industry.
    • Most are calling for a Code of Practice/Conduct for the food retail sector, modelled largely off the United Kingdom and Australia (Annex 2).
    • As a result, in November 2020, Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Agriculture Ministers created a Working Group on Retail Fees chaired by the federal and Quebec Agriculture Ministers to clarify the impact of retail fees and explore solutions.
    • Following extensive research and engagement (over 60 meetings), the FPT Working Group issued key findings in July 2021 (Annex 3).

    Industry proposals

    • Throughout 2021, industry took the initiative to develop solutions to the retail fees issue.
    • Despite significant progress within industry, there was clear division in the approaches proposed, with both mandatory (regulated) and voluntary codes being proposed:
    • Food, Health and Consumer Products of Canada (FHCP) et Empire Company Ltd (Sobeys) ont proposé un code obligatoire (réglementaire) fondé sur l'expérience du Royaume-Uni; l'Association des transformateurs laitiers du Canada et le Conseil des industriels laitiers du Québec se sont ralliés à cette approche.
    • The newly formed Canadian Food Industry Collaborative Alliance (includes Retail Council of Canada, Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers, Food and Beverage Canada, Canadian Produce Marketing Association) proposed an industry-led process to develop a mandatory but non- regulatory Code of Practice, applicable to all supply chain partners. An enforcement model was to be defined.
    • Key producer organizations (for example, Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Union des producteurs agricoles, Dairy Farmers of Canada, Canadian Horticultural Council) support a mandatory code.

    Current status

    • In July 2021, FPT Agriculture Ministers called on industry to reach consensus on a proposal to improve predictability, transparency and fair dealing in supplier-retailer relations.
    • Mandate of the FPT Working Group on Retail Fees was extended to support industry.
    • Using an independent third party facilitator, key stakeholders are currently:
    • Developing a governance structure and a work plan; and
    • Discussing the scope of supplier/retailer practices that should be addressed through any solution.

    Moving forward: range of potential options

    In reviewing other countries' experiences, options for solutions include both voluntary and mandatory Codes of Practice/Conduct, with a variety of models for oversight, including formal or informal dispute resolution.

    Voluntary Mandatory

    Could include:

    • Principles/guidelines: aspirational objectives for business interactions (for example, predictability, transparency, fair dealing and access to recourse for dispute resolution).
    • Voluntary Code of Conduct/Practice: codified articles on acceptable supplier- retailer business practices (for example, specific procedures for payments and deductions).

    Requires implementation across> various jurisdictions -PTs have authority to make laws in respect of property and civil rights (whereas Federal Government has authority to make laws in respect to interprovincial trade and competition).

    PTs could delegate authority for implementation to a federal governmental entity, non-governmental entity, or individual person.

    Note: May be possible to have a mandatory code with or without regulation.

    Oversight could include awareness-raising; annual reporting; grading on compliance; mediation/dispute resolution, binding or non-binding arbitration, investigative powers and/or financial penalties.

    Considerations

    • Consensus is needed on a variety of key elements:
      • Whom the framework would cover (for example, all within the supply chain or a focus on retailers and processors).
      • The kinds of activities that would be addressed (for example, fee practices or other supply chain interactions).
      • Whether it is mandatory or voluntary.
    • International experience has shown that enforcement helps to ensure compliance.
      • While the UK started with soft oversight, over time (10 years) it recognized that stronger dispute resolution was required, including ability of adjudicator to impose fines.
    • Retail fees are related to commercial dealings between two businesses and primarily fall under provincial jurisdiction.
      • Coordinated PT action required under a regulatory scenario to avoid a patchwork of approaches.
      • Engagement of PTs has been increasing, with Quebec playing a key leadership role.

    Next steps

    • Industry continues work with a facilitator on a common vision.
    • Status update to FPT Ministers in Fall/Winter 2021 with the results of current industry deliberations.
    • Possibility of co-chairs (AAFC and Quebec agriculture Ministers) meeting to determine next steps.

    Annex 1: Retail fees

    Fee name Description
    Ad out-of-stock fees Penalties charged to suppliers should they short product while on promotion.
    Core/national agreements In general, Core Agreements between retailers and suppliers establish national sales objectives and provide a bonus to the retailer for attaining the stated objective. These agreements may result in ‘preferential treatment’ since retailers are incentivized to provide more shelf space to suppliers with a Core Agreement, in order to achieve their sales targets. These agreements can make it difficult for new suppliers to compete.
    E-commerce development fee A percentage-based fee vendors are required to pay on all products sold by the retailer via its e-commerce platform. The purpose of this fee is to offset investments to accelerate expansion of online grocery distribution and e-commerce capabilities.
    Exclusivity fees These typically do not exist on their own but are a negotiating 'chip' which can be swapped for slotting fees.
    Extended “blackout”/”price freeze” period Food retailers will unilaterally impose a price freeze (mandatory 'black out' periods) during which suppliers are forbidden from requesting price increases. These usually coincide with holiday periods (for example, from September to January). If suppliers face a price increase on ingredients during that period, they have to postpone raising their price, and in some instances, they have to provide the retailer twelve weeks’ advance notice. If the retailer accepts the new price, the increase is valid from date of acceptance and is not backdated to the date of initial notification.
    Extra terms A 1-2% deduction, applied by some large retailers on its suppliers, to finance store renovations or recent acquisitions.
    Infrastructure development fee/ strategic acceleration allowance This fee, typically expressed as a percentage of the cost of goods purchased by the retailer, is charged to vendors to offset the retailers’ infrastructure costs, which could include remodelling of stores and logistics networks, building new distribution centres, and/or implementing new and upgraded systems to improve supply chain efficiencies.
    Late delivery fees Fees that are deducted off-invoice by the retailer as a penalty for deliveries being made later than indicated on the purchase order. These fees generally range between $500-$1,000 per order, or $200-$500 if the retailer is given advance notice of the delay.
    Over and above (O&A) fees These fees are a percentage of the suppliers’ sales, typically from 1% to 15% that is deducted by the retailer for marketing support (such as promotional flyers) and distribution. O&A fees are a common practice in the industry but vary from one company to another. They are applied to all suppliers, including established players and newcomers.
    Payment terms Generally, suppliers in the industry will offer a 2% reduction on payments made within 10 days, or charge no interest for payments within 30 days. However, some large retailers mandate other standard payment terms (for example, no interest for payments made within 90 days). In addition, some retailers take a 2% deduction from the wholesale invoice, even if payment occurs outside the 10-day window. While this practice is not necessarily a barrier to entry for suppliers, it is a major cost constraint because there is no guarantee of when, or how much payment will be received.
    Shelf listing fees/slotting fees/listing fees A ‘shelf listing/slotting fee’ is charged by the retailer to allot shelf space for each food item. These are lump-sum payments due upon approval with no guarantee of minimum sales duration. While it is generally understood that space will be reserved for 12 months, the retailer is not obliged to respect this timeframe. The assessment of Shelf Listing/Slotting Fees is viewed by many suppliers as the most controversial retailer practice because there is no set fee table. These fees are established through negotiations between the retailer and supplier.
    Unloading (lumper) fees Drivers are forbidden from participating in the offloading of their trucks in almost all retailer distribution centres. As a result, every centre employs an on-site 3rd party company (known as ‘lumpers’) to handle this service. These fees cost $50 to $500 depending on the number of pallets and time it takes to unload.
    Unsalable merchandise fees In the past decade, the liability for product damaged either in-transit or in-store has been transferred from retailer to manufacturer. This fee is charged to the supplier as a percentage of annual sales (for example, 1% to 1.5% for shelf-stable goods) and is usually accounted for in the suppliers’ pricing of most products.

    Source: List developed with information from various sources, including Simon Dessureault (University of Guelph) and Sean Lippay (Strategic Food Solutions).

    Annex 2: Examples of other approaches

    United Kingdom’s Grocery Supply Code of Conduct

    • Legislated by the Competition Commission.
    • Focus on efficiency and predictability.
    • Overseen by a Grocery Code Adjudicator to engage with suppliers and retailers, investigate and arbitrate (with enforcement power).
    • Code Compliance Officers, designated by each retailer as first point of contact for suppliers
    • Addresses practices of "designated" retailers, defined as those with grocery sales of over £1 billion (13 retailers in 2021).

    Australia’s Food and Grocery Code of Conduct

    • Legislated; applies if retailers voluntarily join, but once signed, compliance is mandatory.
    • Prescribed under the Competition and Consumer Act (2010) and regulated by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).
    • Government-appointed Independent Reviewer has non-binding oversight; signatories appoint Code Arbiters to investigate and propose a resolution to possible breaches notified by a supplier.
    • Code applies to retailers and wholesalers; the four major retailers have signed on.

    Annex 3 : Key findings of FPT working group on retail fees

    Key findings

    • Concentration in the retail sector enables retailers to use their bargaining power to levy a range of fees on suppliers to supply and market their products in store. Recently, retail fees have increased in their form and scale, and they have changed in the manner in which they are imposed.
    • The unpredictability and lack of transparency in how some fees are levied, along with limited and often complex recourse for dispute resolution, has led to an overall straining of supply chain relationships from retailers down to primary producers. This has also cultivated the perception of Canada’s investment environment as less attractive to some food manufacturing companies.
    • There are other secondary impacts of this dynamic, including preventing small processors and producers from accessing the market, impeding innovation, and creating particular supply and price challenges for independent retailers and the local producers they purchase from.
    • Facing similar issues, a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, have addressed the issue of retail fees via legislated codes of conduct. These processes usually took a number of steps, starting with industry-led voluntary approaches.
    • Certain principles and good practices have been recognized by various stakeholders and constitute the basis of a healthy relationship between suppliers and retailers, such as: fair dealing in relationships between suppliers and retailers, predictability, transparency, and access to recourse for dispute resolution.

  • Canada Grain Act Review

    Issue

    • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) has launched a review of the Canada Grain Act (CGA), the legislative framework for the regulation of grain quality and handling in Canada, as was committed to in Budget 2019.
    • The review is supported by stakeholders, who feel that the CGA is outdated and needs significant modernization.

    Canada Grain Act (CGA)

    The CGA was enacted in 1912, and it has not seen significant changes since 1971.

    • The CGA provides the legislative framework for grain quality assurance in Canada (for example, grades and standards). The CGA also establishes producer protections (for example, payment security), recognizing market power imbalances with buyers.
    • The CGA primarily regulates grain handling in Western Canada, where 85% of Canada's grain production is located. There is limited CGA oversight in Eastern Canada.
    • In 2020, Canada produced 99.7 million metric tonnes of grain, with approximately 57% exported to international markets.
    • In 1971, Canada produced 42.1 million metric tonnes of grain and exported 55% of major grains.

    Canadian Grain Commission

    • As set out by the CGA, the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC):
    • Institutes and maintains science-based standards for Canadian grain;
    • Regulates grain handling in Canada; and
    • Provides producers safeguards to ensure they are fairly compensated for their grain.
    • The CGC conducts grain research to establish standards and support international grain market access. The CGC also performs mandatory inspection of grain exported by vessel.
    The CGC’s various roles along the value chain
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    CGC's role in the value chain effect

    Various arrows pointing towards the many components of the value chain. CGC Licensing touches Grain producers and terminal elevators and Primary Elevators.

    CGC Certifications touches terminal elevators, and bulk exporters.

    All of these players send their products to Buyers.

    CGC Licensing and Certification is part of the larger official grading system, which also involves Grain research. Grain research is informed by the Harvest Sample Program and then informs Quality Assurance.

    Support for modernizing the CGA

    • AAFC is leading a review, with the support of the CGC, to identify what changes may be needed to Canada’s legislative and regulatory framework to meet the needs of a modern grain sector.
    • Broad stakeholder consultations were held in early 2021 and pointed to a need to update the CGA to reflect 50 years of sector evolution.
    • Stakeholders expect substantive modernization and reforms to address issues raised in consultations.
    • There was consensus that the CGC should continue to have a prominent role in setting and maintaining a world-class grain quality assurance system.

    Producer protections remain a high priority

    General support from producers for the CGC remaining “in the interests of the grain producers.”

    Producers indicated that existing producer protection programs offered by the CGC (for example, payment protections, grain grading arbitration) were valuable and should be maintained to protect producers.

    Additional suggestions to further protect producers include:

    • Ensuring consistent regulatory treatment across all operations that buy and/or handle grain.
    • Expanding eligibility for producers to request final CGC grades.
    • Enhancements to the CGC’s producer payment protection program to improve coverage and responsiveness.

    CGC role in export grain inspections

    Grain handlers, processors and an increasing number of producer groups are interested in the CGC shifting from direct delivery to regulatory oversight of export grain inspections.

    • Currently, the CGC directly performs mandatory outward inspections. Many organizations indicated that a large percentage (> 7%) of exported grain is inspected twice prior to departing Canada to satisfy
    • contract requirements in addition to CGA requirements.
    • Many respondents believe changing the CGC service model could reduce costs that are ultimately passed on to producers.

    Other organizations expressed concerns with respect to the CGC no longer providing inspection services and the impact that could have on the “Canada Brand.”

    Other issues discussed

    There was broad stakeholder support for reviewing the CGC funding structure, including calls to increase appropriations.

    • Changes to CGC provision of export inspection services would necessitate changes to the funding model as nearly 90% of CGC revenue came from mandatory service fees in 2020.
    • Producer organizations requested increased CGC oversight of grain buyers and handlers.
    • Significant calls from producer organizations for increased CGC statistical reporting, including implementation of export sales reporting similar to what is available in the United States.

    Next steps

    • Officials will propose next steps in the modernization process, including industry engagement on reform proposals and potential changes within existing CGC authorities.
    • Officials will also be seeking direction on options that could be pursued, with respect to specific legislative and regulatory changes.
    • Modernization timelines will depend on the specific approach chosen, but legislative and regulatory change can take two to three years to complete.

  • Food Policy for Canada

    Purpose

    To provide an overview of:

    • The Food Policy for Canada
    • The submission of Canada’s National Pathway Document to the UN, further to the UN Food Systems Summit

    Food Policy vision and outcomes

    Vision

    All people in Canada are able to access a sufficient amount of safe, nutritious, and culturally diverse food. Canada’s food system is resilient and innovative, sustains our environment and supports our economy.

    Long-term outcomes

    • Improved food-related health outcomes
    • Inclusive economic growth
    • Vibrant communities
    • Increased connections within food systems
    • Sustainable food practices
    • Strong Indigenous food systems

    Near-term action areas

    • Help Canadian communities access healthy food
    • Make Canadian food the top choice at home and abroad
    • Support food security in northern and Indigenous communities
    • Reduce food waste

    The Food Policy for Canada was launched in 2019 after consultations with over 45,000 Canadians through events held across the country.

    Current status of Food Policy for Canada initiatives

    Local Food Infrastructure Fund (LFIF)

    • Funded $60 million/5 years
    • Launched August 2019 (AAFC). Support small infrastructure and equipment purchases by community-based food security organizations.

    Food Waste Reduction Challenge

    • Funded $20 million/5 years
    • Launched November 2020 (AAFC): Four innovation streams to support innovators through the process of developing and deploying solutions.

    Tackling Food Fraud

    • Funded $24.4 million/5 years
    • Launched Novembber 2020 (CFIA): Conduct inspections, collect & test foods for authenticity, and gather intelligence to better target oversight activities.

    Engaging provinces and territories on school food

    • ESDC conducted an environmental scan in 2019 on existing school food programs in consultation with PT counterparts and key stakeholders.
    •  

    Northern Isolated Community Fund

    • $15 million/5 years
    • Launched December 2020 (CanNor): Supports community-led projects for local and Indigenous food systems to increase food security across the North.

    Harvesters Support Grant

    • $40 million/5 years
    • Launched April 2020 (CIRNAC): Increase access to traditional foods by reducing high costs associated with traditional hunting and harvesting.

    Buy Canadian Promotion Campaign

    • $25 million/5 years
    • Pending (AAFC): Rebranded as Canadian Agri-Awareness Initiative, to increase public appreciation and trust in the agriculture and food sector.

    Federal Leadership in Food Waste Reduction

    • Reallocated $6.3 million/5 years
    • Ongoing (AAFC): Efforts have focused on engagement to mobilize collective action and the development of emergency programs as part of the COVID-19 response (e.g., Surplus Food Rescue Program).

    Canadian Food Policy Advisory Council

    Launched in February 2021, the Council’s role is to provide the Minister with timely and independent advice on current and emerging issues across the food system, and advance Food Policy priorities.

    Independent body appointed by the Minister comprising 22 food system experts and leaders.

    Includes diverse views from across the food system, representing health professionals, civil society, academia, and the agriculture and food sector.

    Council members have formed working groups on four key areas:

    • School nutrition
    • Reducing food insecurity
    • Reducing food loss and waste
    • Supporting sustainable agriculture

    Food policy during COVID-19

    Uncertainty around food supply resilience during early stages of pandemic raised public attention on food systems, from production to disposal, including:

    • Food insecurity rates, particularly in Indigenous and Northern communities
    • Food system labour issues — front line workers, meat processing plants, on farm labour
    • Food sovereignty – reliance on trade for food processing, importing staple foods (e.g. produce)
    • Resilience of centralized, just-in-time supply chains in the face of rapid chances to demand
    • Food loss and waste due to impact of lockdowns on restaurants, foodservice and hospitality sectors

    Food Policy principles helped to inform federal response programming during the pandemic:

    • Emergency Food Security Fund
    • Surplus Food Rescue Program
    • Emergency Processing Fund
    • Additional investments in the Local Food Infrastructure Fund

    United Nations Food System Summit and the Food Policy

    In October 2019, UN Secretary-General announced a Food Systems Summit (FSS) to be held in order to focus on food system transformation as a means to accelerate progress toward meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.

    In the year leading up to the Summit, the UN implemented a comprehensive process aimed at engaging and mobilizing food system actors across the globe towards actionable commitments for better food system outcomes.

    As part of the process, AAFC and other organizations held a series of “Dialogues” in spring/summer 2021 that brought together a wide range of food system stakeholders on key elements of sustainable, equitable, and resilient food systems (see Annex).

    Member states have been invited to outline planned commitments and actions in a National Pathways document, to be submitted to the UN.

    Follow-up and stock-taking by the UN is expected after the Summit takes place on September 23, 2021.

    Common emerging themes

    Platform or mandate commitments Food Policy commitments Food Systems Dialogue recommendations United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals
    Food loss and waste No-Waste Food Fund

    Food Waste Reduction Challenge
    Federal Leadership in Food Waste Reduction

    		 Develop a National Strategy on Food Loss and Waste Reduction

    Support Canada’s progress towards the UN SDGs, including:

    • Zero hunger,
    • Good health and well-being,
    • Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure,
    • Reduced Inequalities,
    • Responsible consumption and production; and
    • Climate action
    School Food Program

    National School Food Policy
    National school nutritious meal program

    		 Consultation with PTs on School Food Programs Support for National School Food Program
    Food security Work with First Nations, Inuit and Métis Nation partners to improve food security.

    Northern Isolated Community Initiatives Fund
    Harvester Support Grant

    		 Supporting Indigenous-led food security data collection and roadmap
    Sustainable local food Strengthen local, sustainable and value-added food supply chains in Canada Local Food Infrastructure Fund Support Sustainable Local Food Systems

    Next steps

    Food Policy for Canada

    Advance the Food Waste Reduction Challenge process.

    • Streams A and B that focus on innovative business models were launched in November 2020; two Grand Prize Winners (up to $1.5M each) are expected to be announced by Summer 2023.
    • Streams C and D that focus on innovative technologies were launched in March 2021; two Grand Prize Winners (up to $1M each) are expected to be announced by Spring 2024.

    Finalize and obtain approval on approach for the last two years of the Local Food Infrastructure Fund for an anticipated intake launch in early 2022. Continue assessments of last intake period to disburse funding before end of fiscal.

    Implement the Canadian Agri-Awareness Initiative strategy in Fall-Winter 2021.

    Re-engage key departments and agencies to reduce food waste in federal facilities and consider developing a National Strategy on Food Loss and Waste Reduction as part of Federal Leadership in Food Waste Reduction.

    Continue to work with the Food Policy Advisory Council on key themes.

    UN Food Systems Summit National Pathway Document

    Bring forward recommendations for Canada’s National Pathway, in coordination with other federal departments

    Continue active engagement with key stakeholders and Indigenous partners

    Ministerial launch of Canada’s National Pathway and submission to UN

    Seek necessary policy authorities on new commitments

    Annex

    Taking a whole of government approach

    Other related government initiatives
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This graphic depicts a four circle venn diagram showing other relevant government initiatives grouped across four themes: environment, economic growth, food security, and health. A venn diagram is used as some inititatives overlap multiple themes. A list of the initiatives is included in the slide notes.

    Recognizing that greater coordination and coherence is essential to making meaningful progress on complex and systemic food issues, the Food Policy was developed as a whole-of-government initiative, emphasizing a coordinated and collaborative approach to achieving positive social, health, environmental and economic outcomes in Canada’s food system.

    Canada’s Member State Dialogues (2021)

    Canada's Member State Dialogues
    Description of this image follows
    Description of above image

    This graphic describes the themes of the various member state dialogues that occurred in 2021. The previous text boxes describe dates the dialogues occurred.

    The themes include: food insecurity root causes, measurement, and solutions; inclusive and resilient food systems; integrated approaches to food systems; and sustainable production, consumption and disposal. The final dialogue held on June 30 discussed game-changing solutions and pathways to equitable and sustainable food systems in Canada by 2030.

Date modified: