Skip to content
AGFO - Standing Committee

Agriculture and Forestry


THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

EVIDENCE


OTTAWA, Thursday, April 7, 2022

The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met with videoconference this day at 9 a.m. [ET]; and, in camera,, to consider Bill S-227, An Act to establish Food Day in Canada; and for consideration of a draft agenda (future business).

Senator Paula Simons (The Deputy Chair) in the chair.

[English]

The Deputy Chair: Honourable senators, I call to order this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

[Translation]

Before we begin, I would like to remind senators and witnesses that they are asked to mute their microphones at all times, unless they are recognized by the chair.

[English]

Should any technical challenges arise, particularly in relation to interpretation, please signal this to the chair or clerk, and we will work to resolve this issue. If you experience other technical challenges, please contact the ISD service desk with the technical assistance number provided.

The use of online platforms does not guarantee speech privacy or that eavesdropping won’t be conducted. As such, while conducting committee meetings, all participants should be aware of such limitations and restrict the possible disclosure of sensitive, private and privileged Senate information.

[Translation]

Participants should be aware that they must participate in the meeting in a private area and be aware of their surroundings.

[English]

Good morning, everyone. I would like to begin by welcoming members of the committee and those watching this meeting on the web. My name is Paula Simons, I’m a senator from Alberta and the deputy chair of this committee.

[Translation]

I would now like to introduce the committee members taking part in this meeting.

[English]

We have Senator Black from Ontario; Senator Cotter from Saskatchewan; Senator Deacon from Nova Scotia; Senator Klyne from Saskatchewan; Senator Marwah from Ontario; Senator Mercer from Nova Scotia, north end of Halifax; Senator Oh from Mississauga, Ontario; Senator Petitclerc from Quebec; Senator Plett from Manitoba-Landmark; and Senator Wetston from Ontario.

[Translation]

Welcome to everyone, as well as to all the viewers watching on sencanada.ca.

[English]

Honourable senators, the committee is convened today for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-227, An Act to establish Food Day in Canada.

Senators, is it agreed that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-227, An Act to establish Food Day in Canada? Is it agreed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Shall the preamble stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

[Translation]

The Deputy Chair: Shall the preamble carry?

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

[English]

The Deputy Chair: Shall the title carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: We get to the very exciting moment. Shall the bill carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: The bill is carried.

Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report?

Senator C. Deacon: Thank you, chair. I have one suggested observation, and it’s something that I sent to the chair and deputy chair following the last meeting.

In the testimonies of the Food Day Canada volunteers, I thought that Food Day Canada and food day in Canada might be very closely associated. I felt there was a need to ensure appropriate governance over the Food Day Canada brand, as such, and that would be very much in the best interests of agriculture and agri-food industries in Canada.

I have proposed an observation, having spoken with the chair about this. I’ll read it, if you would like.

Senator Simons: I was just about to ask you to do so. Would you be so kind as to read your observation into the record, Senator Deacon.

Senator C. Deacon: I would be happy to do so. The observation is as follows:

Following the testimonies of Food Day Canada volunteers, the committee recognizes the need for an appropriate governance structure of the Food Day Canada brand. In addition, the committee would like to note the benefits such a structure would provide to further engage and support the Canadian agriculture and agri-food industry in the future. The committee would welcome an update on their progress when governance efforts are finalized.

The Deputy Chair: Are there any questions or comments about the observations?

Senator Cotter: I was going to speak — although I didn’t intend to go first — and I have to find a way of avoiding that.

Senator Deacon, the suggestion is with respect to an observation concerning a governance structure. Could you say more about what your thinking is on that? I guess I’m interested in ways in which we might encourage a more structured collaboration. Governance structure sounds a bit like a bureaucracy to me. Can you say a bit more?

Senator C. Deacon: Right now, the Food Day Canada brand, I think, is managed by a group of volunteers without any structure. How that brand is managed then falls under the estate of the late Anita Stewart.

I think it’s very much the intention of this group to make sure that this brand, which is very closely associated with the bill and the day that is being recommended, be managed in a way that makes sure that it doesn’t follow the interests of, perhaps, one estate or group but is more broadly governed into the future.

Senator Cotter: Thanks.

Senator Simons: Are there any comments from anyone else?

Senator Black: I have no comments. I’m aware that this small group of volunteers are working towards a structure, and it’s going through the various estate processes at this time.

The Deputy Chair: I have a question. I don’t know if Senator Black is better prepared to answer this or Senator Deacon. Presumably, we are not proclaiming food day in Canada just for the sake of one not-for-profit group. I’m imagining that if you make it an official day, that other groups all across the country could have their own food day events that are separate from this progenitor group.

Senator Black: From my perspective, absolutely. It’s a food day in Canada act, which is a day proclaimed to acknowledge the processors, the primary producers, the restaurateurs, the chefs and the whole value chain. You and I can do it. We can recognize it as well. So I believe you’re absolutely right.

The Deputy Chair: Are there other questions?

Senator C. Deacon: My only point is that I think it would be very easy for the average Canadian to not notice a distinction between food day in Canada and Food Day Canada. Certainly, one of the biggest proponents of this bill is the volunteers around Food Day Canada. I’m a big believer in good governance, especially as it relates to how national day efforts go forward because of that potential for confusion that we just saw.

The Deputy Chair: Are there comments from anyone else about the observation?

Senator Wetston: Chair, may I make a quick comment? The intention is a good one, and clearly, what Senator Deacon is suggesting in the observation is more of an approach which we might [Technical difficulties] to avoid confusion with the other food day that he’s describing. That makes a lot of sense to me. At the same time, if I hear what he’s saying or suggesting, he wants to ensure that the committee recognizes that the group needs to be well organized in order to achieve the goals associated with this particular bill.

The word “governance” is okay, but it’s not quite capturing the essence of these particular goals, in my opinion. It’s not that it necessarily affects it adversely, but it doesn’t quite capture what Senator Deacon is suggesting. I can’t simply say what would be a better word or a better approach, because it’s difficult to find that in the terms of the observation, but I raise with the committee whether or not it’s more of an organizational and almost a trademark kind of consideration that we’re looking at here from the point of view of distinguishing it from the other food day.

I recognize I’m babbling on a little bit because I’m searching for a word that I think would recognize it more specifically, giving motivation to the individuals who have been very much a part of this, as well as to Senator Black’s bill. I’ll stop there, because I think what I’m doing is simply creating more uncertainty rather than certainty around what Senator Deacon is attempting to bring forward.

The Deputy Chair: Senator Deacon, did you wish to respond to that?

Senator C. Deacon: Senator Wetston has captured the essence of what I’m trying to propose and the complexity of it. It’s about the potential for these two to become intermingled and to make sure that, if that is the case, we are ensuring that we prevent problems in the future that might come from that. I’ll leave it at that.

Senator Klyne: Senator Deacon, that group and some of the witnesses we talked to, especially those already engaged around Canada Food Day, see it as another level of platform for them to continue to do their promotions, their awareness campaigns and so on. I think I understand what you’re proposing. I want to understand your aim and objective in terms of why, and then I can turn my mind to the idea of how.

Senator C. Deacon: I have seen, in the past, trademark disputes and how different groups can head in different directions over time as it relates to how an idea is implemented in reality and who garners value from that idea. What we really want to see in the food day in Canada act implementation, if it, in fact, passes in the House of Commons, is a national, voluntary, not-for-profit effort to ensure that agriculture and food in Canada are celebrated, and that the group closely associated with it is — and I do not in any way question their intentions or motive — fulfilling that motivation that we were all impressed by as a group — certainly, reading the room, that was my impression — that it is maintained into the future and that an individual private interest doesn’t somehow disrupt that. That is my thinking, and I hope that helps to give you some background.

Senator Black: The bill was drafted differently from Food Day Canada with the words “in Canada” to allow for a day to acknowledge the benefits of local food and strengthen the connections from farm to table.

Prior to Anita Stewart’s passing, she drove the initiative. This group of volunteers is currently driving the initiative of Food Day Canada. I can tell you with great certainty that they are working towards a model of governance where this brand will fall under another organization of some sort. It will be an organization that has the same goals and vision in mind for Ms. Stewart’s brand, Food Day Canada, that she envisioned and, since 2003, had worked towards strengthening that connection between farmer and consumer across Canada. This just solidifies it, and I will assure you with all certainty that the small group of volunteers is working on that. It’s just taking time because of the estate process.

The Deputy Chair: It’s worth noting, of course, that an observation is not binding. It’s our helpful suggestion.

Senator Klyne: What Senator Black just said was helpful.

I believe what we’re doing is facilitating breathing some life into this, which others will continue to preside over. I appreciate the comment that the chair just made in terms that this is an observation. It’s not binding. It’s an observation, but hopefully, it’s one that they pick up on and regard their responsibility in this, because you raise a good point, which is that we’ve given rise to this, and if it gets through the House of Commons, and I’m sure it will, it becomes something. It could result in being a brand. The question, then, is who owns the brand, or who is going to police the brand policies around this and protect and not sully it?

From my understanding, we need them to sign on the statutory declaration line that Senator Black gives us his word that this will all be in good hands and we just need to let the baby out, but I think we need to be careful that we’re not suggesting we might provide some oversight, or as Senator Wetston suggested, some governance. We need to make the observation that maybe they recognize or pick up the challenge, if you will. Thank you. It’s a good point.

The Deputy Chair: We don’t want to end up with Canadian egg on our face.

Senator Petitclerc: I’m in support of this observation. It’s not binding, as you said, but I think it can be helpful for this bill to get to its optimal impact.

Senator Wetston: I just would make a quick comment, given Senator Black’s comments about where this is heading. I think I can support the observation given the comments, but I would also just suggest to the committee — and I’m not providing any legal opinions here — that in the event this materializes in the way that Senator Black is suggesting, we are going to definitely be facing trademark branding issues. There will probably be the need to register the name. When you register the name, then you start getting into the kinds of governance structures that Senator Deacon is suggesting, because that will occur. I’m only mentioning that what seems to be quite straightforward can very well become very complicated, but I’m not seeing that necessarily occurring.

As Senator Petitclerc has indicated, I would support the observation. I’m not attempting to think there are going to be rabbit holes everywhere, and we’ll fall into them by making this observation. On balance, I would support and appreciate the comments other senators have made.

The Deputy Chair: At this point, do we have consensus on adopting the observation?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Is it agreed that I report this bill, with observations, to the Senate?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Deputy Chair: Senators, is it agreed we suspend for two minutes to end the public portion and proceed in camera with the rest of our business, at which point I will turn the chair back over to Senator Black?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(The committee continued in camera.)

Back to top