Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 61 - 75 of 1263
Darren Ference
View Darren Ference Profile
Darren Ference
2021-06-03 17:12
When we went through it as part of the Alberta board, there was very little understanding from the police on what biosecurity was. They entered barns without any biosecurity protocols. They did not put on any biosecurity clothing or clean their footwear or anything else when they were going in, which is standard in the feed industry. Anybody who's associated with a barn or with an operation would do that. They had no understanding of that, and they just entered to remove the trespassers. I think a lot needs to be done there.
View Alistair MacGregor Profile
NDP (BC)
I'm asking that question because I think the police have a very good understanding of what trespassing is: being unlawfully present on private property and not leaving when the owner says to leave. The CFIA is an organization that intimately understands the concept of biosecurity. They have already testified before this committee that if Bill C-205 were to come into effect, they would not have the resources to take on the added responsibility.
How do we fix that? If Bill C-205 does become part of the Health of Animals Act, how do we fix the situation if police decide to apply charges? Would they need to have CFIA officials with them to give them an understanding of biosecurity? I'm wondering if you have a solution to how we fix the resource problem in implementing the law and enforcing it.
Darren Ference
View Darren Ference Profile
Darren Ference
2021-06-03 17:14
I think it could be some simple training on some simple biosecurity practices. In the rural or agricultural areas, it should be part of the RCMP training.
View Yves Perron Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you very much.
Mr. Ference, I would like to go back to the matter of resources. You said earlier that the police will need to be trained, but people from the Canada Food Inspection Agency are telling us that they will not have the resources they need to enforce the act.
If the bill is passed and the police see that an offence has occurred, would it not be enough to communicate the information, so that the procedure can take its course? Could you tell me your views on that?
Darren Ference
View Darren Ference Profile
Darren Ference
2021-06-03 17:27
If the CFIA doesn't have the resources, I still think the RCMP has the resources. They're our resource in rural Canada. They're in every community. They just need to be properly trained on how to access or enter a farm differently from another business. I think they could efficiently and effectively be our resource for this bill.
Marcel Groleau
View Marcel Groleau Profile
Marcel Groleau
2021-06-03 17:28
I believe also that there can be collaboration between the Canada Food Inspection Agency, CFIA, and the inspectors from the Quebec Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. There can be a presence in all provinces. The CFIA already has a presence in abattoirs everywhere. Collaboration with provincial agencies also seems desirable.
View Yves Perron Profile
BQ (QC)
Do you feel that the local force observing the offence would be enough?
According to the wording of the act, it would be.
Marcel Groleau
View Marcel Groleau Profile
Marcel Groleau
2021-06-03 17:28
If the federal and provincial levels could collaborate, but also transfer responsibilities, as we see in other areas, it would help with the enforcement of not only Bill C‑205, but perhaps even aspects of other agreements between the federal government and the provincial government on the whole area of healthy livestock operations.
View Alistair MacGregor Profile
NDP (BC)
Thank you, Chair.
I'll continue with the Turkey Farmers of Canada.
In the existing “Prohibitions” section in the parent act, the Health of Animals Act, where prohibitions are defined, when they deal with how to treat a diseased animal—for example, it's illegal to bring it to market, to conceal it or to let it go out into a pasture—they refer to “no person”, whereas Bill C-205 is using the specific language:
No person shall,
but then it includes:
without lawful authority or excuse
There have been a number of cases in which employees at a farm have been responsible for introducing a biosecurity threat. Is there anything we can do to make sure that every person—no matter whether he or she is a protester or a farm employee—is actually respecting those biosecurity protocols? Is there anything further the federal government can be doing to make sure that any person who's entering a place where animals are kept is observing those strict biosecurity protocols?
Are there any suggestions you might have?
Darren Ference
View Darren Ference Profile
Darren Ference
2021-06-03 17:31
I don't have any suggestions on how you can support it. Phil does. I know we have our animal flock care and our on-farm. We're audited by a third party. We're doing all we can do for that.
Phil, do you have more to add?
Phil Boyd
View Phil Boyd Profile
Phil Boyd
2021-06-03 17:31
I do, thanks, Darren.
Mr. MacGregor, I have a couple of points I can offer really quickly.
One, our programs—and they're probably similar to the other programs you've heard discussed at this committee—all have a training component for the farmer and for farm employees. They're mandatory programs, so that training has to happen. There's continuous improvement as far as farm labour is concerned, at least within our sector, as I hear from talking to any of the farmers who have hired employees.
The second thing that's interesting is that we have CFIA accreditation of our on-farm food safety program through an FPT process. We have also asked for that accreditation on our animal care program, but haven't received it yet. That would really reinforce the kinds of things we're trying to address through our testimony on this bill.
As well, Mr. Barlow, the TFC appreciates the work you've put into this and the leadership you've shown on it.
I don't know if that answers your question entirely, but by way of context, training and that kind of accreditation and recognition for the animal welfare component of our programs—it's the same in other sectors—would be meaningful steps.
View Robert Morrissey Profile
Lib. (PE)
View Robert Morrissey Profile
2021-06-02 17:38
Thank you, Chair.
I'll begin by thanking and congratulating the minister for ensuring that DFO got a significant budget increase in this budget. That is no simple feat and, Minister, I want to acknowledge your work on that.
Minister, the lobster and crab fishery has been very beneficial for commercial and first nation fishers in Atlantic Canada, and I have always focused on policies that protect the value and future of these important fisheries. My concern today, and my question to you, stems from testimony that was given in the fisheries committee and directly from fishers about the growing practice of unrecorded sales for cash in the lobster and crab fisheries. These sales are used to influence who gets the product. This practice will hurt the industry, as it has a destabilizing effect on the fishery.
What enforcement measures are in place and what steps is your department taking to identify this practice, document it, prosecute where necessary and eliminate it, Madam Minister?
View Bernadette Jordan Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you for the question, Mr. Morrissey.
One of the things that we all hear about is the unreported sales of fish. This is a challenge. Of course, as you know, DFO regulates the fishery, but once it hits the wharf, it becomes provincial jurisdiction with regard to processing and to who's buying it.
I will say that we are working collaboratively with the province on this issue. Also, of course, RCMP officers have a number of different tools that they use to address the concerns and do investigative work. We do not direct them. They are independent.
I think it's also important to note that I will be meeting with my eastern fisheries ministers very shortly, in the coming weeks, and this will br a topic of discussion, because it is a concern. When people are selling outside of the boundaries of the law, it impacts all of us. It impacts the price; it impacts the data we have, and it impacts our exports, so we want to make sure that this is done in an above board fashion.
View Sylvie Bérubé Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am on the territory of the Cree and Anishinabe of Abitibi—Baie‑James—Nunavik—Eeyou in Quebec.
My question is for Ms. Van De Bogart.
Ms. Van De Bogart, you mentioned a hotline earlier. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this hotline that people can use to report cases of human trafficking?
Michelle Van De Bogart
View Michelle Van De Bogart Profile
Michelle Van De Bogart
2021-06-01 12:53
Thank you for the question. I hope you can hear through the translation.
The hotline is a toll-free service. I mentioned that it's available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It refers victims to local law enforcement, to shelters and to other supports and services. Because it's available all the time—and, as I mentioned, in over 200 languages, 27 of them indigenous—it allows an opportunity for people to call and obtain all sorts of information and to have specific supports put in place that they might need.
We speak about victims, but this service allows people to find avenues for shelter or perhaps for addressing issues around sexual and physical abuse and domestic violence, and they can get information from law enforcement as well.
The hotline has trained operators, and they are trauma informed. There is an understanding and a recognition when they are speaking to these individuals of how to interact with them and how to support the victims and be able to direct them to the supports that they require.
Results: 61 - 75 of 1263 | Page: 5 of 85

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data