HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2012

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

 

5:35 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will begin the estimates for 2012-13, starting with the Department of Agriculture.

 

Resolution E1 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $63,949,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Agriculture, pursuant to the Estimate, and the business plans of the Nova Scotia Crop and Livestock Insurance Commission and the Nova Scotia Farm Loan Board be approved.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister has as much time as he wants to take to do his introduction.

 

The honourable Minister of Agriculture.

 

HON. JOHN MACDONELL: Thank you. To my right is Paul LaFleche, the Deputy Minister of Agriculture, and Weldon Myers is on my left. Behind me is Scott Hosking, Linda MacDonald, and Brett Loney is our communications director.

 

I probably look forward to estimates, I think. It's one of those things I'm not sure that ministers are supposed to, but it usually gives a good place to give an overview of what the department is doing, and on occasion I may vary from this speech a bit, depending on what particular area I might want to expand. Anyway, it's nice to see members of the committee and I look forward to questions from my colleagues a little later on.

 

 

1

 

As you know, agriculture is an important industry in Nova Scotia. In 2011, farm cash receipts totalled more than $538 million with well over $300 million exported internationally. Agriculture and agri-food make up about 2 per cent of the provincial economy. I think at the Federation of Agriculture's meeting at the end of November that somebody made the comment that we used to feed the world. If you think about $538 million in farm gate receipts and over $300 million of that is export, then we still do feed the world.

 

I think if people can think about the apple industry, a $30 million industry, they would know there's no way that Nova Scotians will consume all the apples produced in the province. It's the same with the blueberry industry, the major horticultural crop in the province. This is one that unless every Nova Scotian is going to eat 30-plus pounds of blueberries, it's not going to happen. These are the things that we're known to be exporters of and I think the supply-managed sector would be the ones - I think we would all realize that doesn't happen.

 

We have 3,795 farms employing 5,800 people. Food and beverage manufacturing employs another 4,800 people. In total, primary and secondary agriculture accounts for more than 10,500 jobs or 2.3 per cent of the total provincial employment. As you can see, agriculture is an important industry to our province, but the fact is, the world is changing and we have to change with it to ensure our agricultural industry remains strong and continues to grow. Businesses in every sector of our economy have challenges they need to address and this is true of agriculture.

 

While we recognize the challenges that our agri-producers face, we also know that if we manage them right, we can seize opportunities. As we have clearly indicated, our government is committed to getting our fiscal house in order and my colleague, Minister Steele, outlined the numbers last week when he delivered his budget address. I don't need to repeat what he said but my message is the same: our government is committed to getting back to balance, creating good jobs, growing the economy, and improving health care for Nova Scotia. That's why Nova Scotia's agriculture and agri-product industries are important because they can help us address so many of these priorities.

 

Our primary industries are still the heart of our economy; agriculture, fishing, and forestry contribute significantly to the province's exports. These are the industries that bring in new wealth, grow our economy, and help pay for services like health care. There is growth potential in agriculture if we continue to seize our competitive advantages, to know what makes us unique, and market our products accordingly. It's more important than ever that if we invest our tax dollars in the industry, we have to do it strategically.

 

I've long believed that if government is going to invest in agriculture, it should be strategic with a long-term goal and direction in mind. These goals are to create long-term growth and focus on what makes Nova Scotia agriculture strong, and that is: the emphasis on Homegrown Success, the province's 10-year plan to transition our industry to competitiveness and profitability.

Homegrown Success is all about our broad strategic approach to the long-term growth of agriculture, but the bottom line is helping Nova Scotia farmers generate greater profits. The strategy integrates with the government's broader economic development strategy - jobsHere - to ensure agriculture is a participant in the full range of development efforts across government. We are also working to support farmers and the agriculture industry through the $24.6 million, multi-year series of federal and provincial agricultural programs called Growing Forward, led by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Department of Agriculture.

 

As you know, 2012-13 is the last year of Growing Forward. My department is participating on the Growing Forward 2 coordinating committee for the development of the next multi-lateral agreement. At the department we are supporting various changes, big and small, to better support the industry. Over the past two years we've invested $1 million in upgrades to the equipment and capabilities of our labs in Truro. This includes new computer software to make reports more effective and quicker, a new machine to improve our ability to test for nitrogen and protein and to give us the ability to test for sulphur, a new automated pH meter, and a $220,000 Bactoscan analyzer to make milk and dairy-product quality testing faster and more accurate.

 

Last Fall we introduced improvements to the Agriculture and Rural Credit Act and the Animal Protection Act to better serve the industry. The amendments to the Agriculture and Rural Credit Act modernized the Farm Loan Board and its operations and improved services to clients. Other changes allow the potential size of the board to expand to broaden the range of potential business experience on the board and place a limit on members serving consecutive terms. The changes to the Animal Protection Act ensure that the department's funding is primarily focused on development activities by enabling us to recover from the owner, the cost of care and medical treatment of farm animals seized in cruelty investigations.

 

We all know it's vital to attract and encourage new faces and ideas to the agriculture industry if we want long-term success. In order to do that we know we had to do a better job understanding the challenges in meeting those needs. Early in 2011 we took a good, hard look at the Farm Loan Board's new entrant program; we wanted to make sure funds are allocated to new entrants in the most relevant, effective, and responsible way. As a result we redesigned the program to support new entrants and launched a program called FarmNEXT.

 

FarmNEXT makes it easier for people to get the necessary advice and capital they need to enter agriculture with the best chance for success but without racking up as much debt. FarmNEXT supports new farmers by helping to reduce the financial burden of loans they carry in the first year of operating their farm business. New farmers may be eligible when buying a commercial farm or other farm assets for the first time or buying an established farm business.

 

Under the farm succession stream a new farmer may qualify for up to two years of interest relief, up to a maximum of $20,000, for taking over an established farm business, and under the start-up stream a new farmer may qualify for up to four years of interest relief, to a maximum of $30,000, for starting a business from the ground up. All new farmers will receive business planning coaching and ongoing farm financial management advice from specialists in the department. This program redesign will enable the department to better meet the needs of those who want to break into the agricultural industry.

 

Speaking of support services for farmers new and old, the Department of Agriculture recently introduced a new enhancement to service delivery called AgPal. A number of recent client satisfaction surveys conducted by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada identified a need for improved access to information on agricultural programs and services. AgPal responds to that need. AgPal is a one-stop, Web-based discovery tool designed to provide clients with agricultural information on all federal and provincial programs and services. AgPal is a collaborative effort between Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Department of Agriculture. I'm pleased that Nova Scotia is the first province to sign up as an early adapter of AgPal.

 

An example of something quite new that we're investing in is grass-fed beef. As a naturally healthy food, grass-fed beef presents a significant opportunity to rejuvenate the beef industry in this province. We've been at this for over a year now. We kind of started out with a pretest, I guess you could say, a pilot. We bought six Angus or Angus-cross heifers and put them on a farm in Antigonish where we fed them haylage. I'm not sure, I'm thinking five months - maybe you could whisper in my ear if it's longer - but anyway, finished those animals there on haylage - actually five of them. It turned out one was pregnant so she was kind of taken out of the group. We had them slaughtered at O.H. Armstrong. If I'm right, and I may not be, I think there were two AAA, one AA and two A's out of the five. These animals didn't get a bit of grain and finished that well.

 

The pretence that we're going on here is that we can't compete with a grain-finished animal from the West or by hauling grain from the West to finish our cattle here in the East. The cost is too prohibitive. We have the ability to grow forages, like there would be lots of - well, certainly the West would envy what we can do. The reason that there are prairies in the West is because of the limited rainfall. We generally are not limited very much. So the notion that we have a competitive advantage in our ability to grow grass and we can finish beef cattle on grass and, more importantly, we get a health advantage from finishing those animals on grass, much better omegas - I'll say omega-3 but maybe omega-6 as well - but the preliminary testing that we did on those five carcasses was better than what the research indicated from the literature that we should get, so we were really quite pleased.

 

Along with that, we did a project in the Cape John pasture, which we refer to as the Cape John Pasture Project. We divided the pasture into six 20-acre paddocks. We did a forage analysis of what was growing there. We weighed the animals before they went in; they got weighed periodically in the summer. Thirty of those animals we kept, we bought for ourselves, to continue the next phase of this project. Am I right, Linda, there were two 30s? Yes, so we actually got 60 animals. Anyway, we're putting the first bunch through a similar process as the original five that we did last year, just to - with a bigger sample, to see whether or not we get the same result. We'll do that with the next group of 30 as well.

 

So what is all this leading to? Well, hopefully it's leading to a place where we will be able to tell Nova Scotia beef producers that they can finish cattle here on grass or haylage. I find the haylage part of this, or silage, I find the wintertime part of this more interesting than the grass, summertime grazing part of this only because what it tells us is we can store that feed and produce high-quality feed and finish cattle in the winter. That means you can supply a market all year-round. So if we're either going to go to the restaurant trade or to the retail trade, in terms of Sobeys, Superstore, they're going to want a quantity on a fairly regular basis.

 

I think that initially we cannot fill their display case, we don't have the animals. But if we can secure a price structure that producers can make money, the processor can make money and the retailer can make money, then I think we'll have that winning combination that we can say to producers, here's what you should get per pound for your animals. Then they'll know that they can invest in them. This will not happen overnight but if they make money starting out, even with a smaller number of animals, that will be the incentive they need to carry this to have a greater number of animals.

 

So are we there yet? We're not, we still probably have a couple of years of work on this, but everything that we have seen so far tells us this can be done. We're still working on the price-point work, to see what the producers and retailers would have to have. But for sure, this is only new to us. There are other jurisdictions that are doing this but I don't think necessarily in as coordinated a manner. In other words, there are people in New York State who are marketing grass-finished beef and there are a few people in Nova Scotia who are doing it. What we're trying to get to as a place, as a government, is that we'll have protocols in place that if you're going to sell your animals as grass-finished, you can do that only if you meet these protocols. That's what we're hoping because then we'll hopefully get some consistency in the product and make it easier to market. That was quite a bit longer than my speech, sorry about that.

 

This is a big deal; I think this is a very good thing. It has not been terribly expensive, and I think the upside will be enormous for Nova Scotia beef producers and for Nova Scotians generally. If it's true that we finish about 8,000 head of cattle a year in Nova Scotia and bring in somewhere around 8,000 or 9,000 a month to feed the people, we have a long way to go to grow this industry.

 

Can we hit the point where we supply 100 per cent of our need? It's kind of hard to tell, but even if we supply 30 per cent of our need or 50 per cent of our need, it would be a big beef industry. That's where we're hoping to go. We think the health advantages of grass-finished beef make it a product that Nova Scotians would buy for sure. The question is, can we do that and price it competitively? Stay tuned.

 

The mink industry is probably the fastest growing sector in the province. Last year it hit over the $100 million price tag for mink pelts sold. This is an industry that if it didn't do it last year, it will soon do it. It may have surpassed the dairy industry on farm gate. The dairy industry in Nova Scotia is worth about $100 million at farm gate, the mink industry is worth about $100 million at farm gate. This is one that certainly is rocketing skyward, which is great for the producers who are in it. We hope that will continue; it has been a success story. Part of that is due to the high-quality breeding stock that we have in Nova Scotia, well-known for the quality of the pelts; I would say probably partly due to the management regime that we have here and the feeding, along with good genetics; plus, probably the school of hard knocks, the things that people learn along the way when it comes to the marketing and rearing of these animals.

 

Personally, I do not know much about raising mink or most of the domestic fur industry - foxes, et cetera - but right now it's a good place to be and certainly we wish them well. This is probably as good a place to talk about the regulations for a minute. That is moving along, I'm certainly hoping that by late Spring that will be done.

 

The industry and the community in the southwestern end of the province have been fairly good to deal with on this. We've done lots of consultation; I have to give credit to my staff for their hard work on this. When they mentioned to me two years ago when I asked how long it would take us to get the regulations written, they said three years. And I said one, and now we're at two, so we're splitting the difference. It has been an enormous amount of work. I have to say I don't think I realized when they said three, they probably needed three. Good on them for all their hard work.

 

The Atlantic Centre for Agricultural Innovation in AgriTECH Park in Bible Hill is a $7 million, 20,000-square-foot, state-of-the-art facility. It will bring inventors and innovators to work with business development professionals to create new business opportunities in agriculture and the agri-food industry. So that building is up. We haven't done the formal opening yet, but certainly we're really hoping for good things to happen there.

 

It's no secret that probably the biggest change in the department is around the NSAC moving to Dalhousie. This partnership will position NSAC as an enhanced centre of excellence for applied research and a national leader in agricultural education. This is a permanent solution that will strengthen NSAC, benefit students, and improve the economy of Truro-Bible Hill and the rest of rural Nova Scotia. The effective date of the merger is July 1^st, and at that time NSAC faculty and staff will officially become employees of Dalhousie. Students will enter the merged institution in the Fall.

 

As you know, the Department of Agriculture and NSAC have always had a unique and special relationship, one that our department has always treasured. It's a relationship that we feel is critical to the development of agriculture in Nova Scotia. The merger is a sign that that special relationship is evolving and we will continue to help financially support NSAC, but governance of that fine institution is transferring to Dalhousie.

 

One of the things that has been identified in the Nova Scotia agricultural sector has been the diversified agriculture that we have. That has been linked to the Nova Scotia Agricultural College that we have one of the best educated farming communities anywhere in the country and the Nova Scotia Agricultural College - that has been its legacy to the province and to the people of Nova Scotia. When it comes to an industry that in the early days of the 21^st Century keeps morphing into something else, one in which most of the people and the politicians seem to come from more urban centres, agriculture still requires a voice. So it has been that commitment to funding that governments have made in the past, but certainly that we intend to make into the future, that hopefully we can still participate in the development of agriculture education for the province in the future and for the industry.

 

Now and then - and not often - I get comments about trade negotiations between Canada and the European Union to ensure that Nova Scotia's interests are well represented. I have to say the province takes every opportunity it can to be a voice. I think that we haven't seen anything in particular - although the federal government is kind of the lead agency when it comes to these talks. It certainly looks as though - and I think the flag that goes up for us is always around supply management - it looks as though there is good protection there. I think the biggest advantage will probably come in the fishery side. Certainly we don't see any significant downside at all in terms of agriculture, so I'm kind of pleased that those negotiations have not impacted us negatively as much as we can tell from what we get. Hopefully that will be the story, that Nova Scotia will come out of it a little better than we went into it.

 

We still go forward with Select Nova Scotia and I probably would be remiss if I don't give some credit to the previous administration for going down that road, for adopting our policy on Select Nova Scotia. It was a very good thing, I have to say. I didn't realize when I walked into the minister's office that the impact of the "buy local" consciousness of Nova Scotians was as strong as it was and that you only need to scratch a little bit under the surface to find out that this is a really important issue for Nova Scotians. They're engaged in it, and they talk to store managers and produce managers and have created a real interest at the retail level - and I think probably not just retail of groceries, but in the restaurant industry as well where there's a real desire to try to put as much local content on the plate when they serve their clientele.

 

I encourage everyone, whenever you get an opportunity, when the waitress comes to your table, to ask have you got any local this, or if you see something on the menu - every now and then I do have to ask if the lamb on the menu is local, and quite often it is.

 

An annual signature event for the department is the IncrEDIBLE Picnic and held in communities across the province every August. They are a chance for producers, chefs, and other vendors to showcase local foods and promote greater consumer awareness. These are usually very well attended. You can pick the date but you can't always pick the weather, it's a bit of an issue. I know my colleague, the member for Kings West, had indicated one time it was possible to have those on exhibition grounds or in a building and plan for them that way which is, if it happens in the middle of a downpour, it would seem like a really good idea. It does take away from kind of a picnic aspect which we're trying to emphasize but it's a hard one to call, I have to say.

 

We've been really impressed. Twelve picnics were held last summer and an estimated more than 10,000 people came out to meet more than 100 producers, wineries, restaurants and farm organizations. Each event was led by a local planning group armed with tools and assistance from the Department of Agriculture, and they were great successes.

 

Over the winter months the staff came up with a great way to promote the wide variety of fresh, local food available this time of the year and that was with Winter Fresh and the incredible February campaign. The winter food campaign extended Select Nova Scotia's presence by providing mid-winter community events in the spirit of the IncrEDIBLE Picnic. Those events reinforced existing grassroots and community interest in local food and supported Nova Scotia producers. Twelve community suppers were held and each featured local ingredients and educational activities that promote the "buy local" concept. Suppers were held in all corners of Nova Scotia, from Annapolis Royal to Tatamagouche to Sydney.

 

In February, Select Nova Scotia also supported sampling events at local grocery stores and farmers' markets across the province that enabled consumers to try free samples of Nova Scotia foods. These tastings raise consumer awareness about locally grown food and to help support a more competitive and profitable agricultural industry. I got an invite the other day for an event for Taste Nova Scotia which I think is being held here. I don't have the date off the top of my head but (Interruption) Yes, it got cancelled because of the weather or whatever. So, anyway, I encourage everybody if they can to (Interruption) The 18^th, all right, thank you, I appreciate that.

 

Another fine-tuning the department has taken over the past year is to clarify which services AgraPoint provides to farmers for free and which are charged as there has been some confusion in the past. As of last November, AgraPoint extension services that were free are the following: access to specialists for farm calls; advice from specialists; access to fact sheets and manuals; specialist presentations to commodity groups; attendance at work shops, field days, and tours; specialist assistance to interpret analysis reports; and special assistance in weed, insect, and disease identification.

 

To ensure department funding is targeted toward development efforts, AgraPoint will continue to recover costs through fees for consulting services such as nutrient management plans, daily nutritional services, product testing, farm visits on retainer, comprehensive site assessment, and food safety services for processors. One thing is clear - strong extension services are critical to the success of what we're creating. It's the foundation for producers moving up the value chain, and it's the foundation for the growth into new product areas and new varieties.

 

I think sometimes people forget the value of taking a raw primary resource, value adding to it, and creating jobs that way. It's one thing to grow a carrot and sell it, or a turnip, but something else to grow it and slice it and package it in a way that makes it convenient for somebody at home to pick that up in a rush and be able to prepare it quite readily.

 

Probably what we think about the primary role of agriculture - and it's not just to grow food because I already mentioned about the mink industry - we're hoping that actually we'll have in one or two places in the province that will actually have some facilities that will be heated with grass pellets. We've been moving that initiative, and the ACAI centre at AgriTECH Park is a facility that we own and it's one that has been my intention will be heated with grass pellets.

 

I know we think mostly about growing food and knowing where our food comes from, and the whole issue about lessening our environmental footprint on the planet and doing what we can. If you relate agriculture to the mining sector - somebody discovers gold and wants to open up a mine - well, then, they attract a workforce, they need housing for that workforce, and they're probably going to need a clinic. If those people have families, they'll need a school; then there will be teachers' salaries; and you'll need a gas station and grocery store plus all those jobs that come along with it - but they don't realize that when the gold is gone, the town does not exist.

 

The wealth that's created in rural Nova Scotia from primary resources quite often winds up in places like this, it winds up in large urban centres. It's difficult to see from the tallest building where that came from if you look in all directions. I think we have to remind people that what goes on in rural Nova Scotia is the wealth generator that allows us to pay for all these services, and that quite often is a message that's not readily picked up by people. Agriculture is a tool that we can use to generate wealth in rural Nova Scotia and keep people there, keep a school open there, and maybe a health clinic and attract a doctor because there's a school.

 

I think in my role as the minister, but certainly as a member of the Cabinet that's a member of a caucus for a government that's looking to make life a little better for Nova Scotians, agriculture has the ability to be one of the tools in the tool chest that can do that. We like to do it in as big a way as we are able.

 

So there's lots of really good things happening in agriculture: some new things and some old things that have been modified to be better, but some really innovative things that people have seen as a possible opportunity and that they are willing to invest in because they're attached to the land or attached to a community and want to raise their kids and are looking for a way to do it.

 

With that, I'll say quite a bit less and wait for questions from the Opposition.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. The minister's time was 40 minutes even so we are starting at 6:15 p.m. for one hour for the Liberal caucus.

 

The honourable member for Kings West.

 

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the minister, deputy, and staff for the opportunity to ask a number of questions over the next hour. I guess I reflect the comments of a few from the farm community in my area that actually did take a look or at least perused the Minister of Finance's address to Nova Scotians and were disappointed that agriculture was only referenced in terms of the merger. I guess that was probably much the same, as well, with the Speech from the Throne. So I guess we're still struggling to see it in the lights as much as farmers would like to see it. I guess that's where we are.

 

For the first part, usually there are lots of issues that are brought to a critic's attention over the course of a year, we get the opportunity to ask a few questions and I do appreciate that the minister makes himself available and staff, especially his assistant who isn't here today, who is one of my conduits to get program information, in particular, answered.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'll have to take care of that. (Laughter)

 

MR. GLAVINE: So I'm going to just look at some of the things in the budget. Could you generally speak to reductions and changes that this year's budget has compared to last year's budget?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Actually, I think there aren't any. I thought we were a little bit up, I was thinking, in programs. (Interruptions) We're up over last year about $2.5 million, and most of that is money that's connected to AgriFlex, the federal program; we have a 60-40 funding agreement with the federal government. It was a while getting that to a place that we were happy with. Some of that funding would be recoverable, we're going to spend, but we'll get back through that agreement.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So no other distinct investments as far as programs go? I know you gave quite a lengthy commentary on the grass-fed beef program and I'm wondering, is there anything along those lines that we'll actually see take place that aren't so much registered in the line items of the department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Some of the new things will be in the AgriFlex. A grass pellet - the western Valley grain co-operative . . .

 

MR. GLAVINE: The flax?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No, the facility in Lawrencetown. We're helping them fund a project with grass pellets. That's out of the AgriFlex funding. The operating cost of the ACAI Building is funded there. The beef project that we have - as well, we have two facilities that are moving from provincial inspection to federal inspection and those are out of a pilot that's from the federal government, CFIA. Initially it was going to be 19 projects across the country; I don't think it turned out to be quite that many. I think the number is 13, but in Nova Scotia the call went out and anybody interested in doing this, it turned out that two facilities - Northumberlamb in Brookside, outside of Truro, and O.H. Armstrong - were interested in moving their plant from provincial inspection to a federal designation. So that funding is included in the AgriFlex funding.

 

The animal welfare piece that we talked about - or I talked about in my speech - $150,000 toward that, and we're looking at a new pollenization program which is $150,000. So that funding is there.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So no dramatic shifts obviously than, you know, a slight change in the total amount of the budget?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. GLAVINE: What about in terms of any staff reductions or additions that the department may be looking at in this budgetary year?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We redesigned the department. At one point, I think when I first became minister, we had four executive directors. We've gone to three. I think for Leo Muise, the actual move to Fisheries, you'll find Linda MacDonald's branch that - I think the budget line item will be zero, in the old line item. As far as staff people, I don't think you're going to see any different - industry development. So basically there will be some moving of staff but staff is basically the same. But we've gone from what were originally four executive directors down to two really in Agriculture, because Leo Muise will go to Fisheries and you're going to see about 280 people leave with the Dalhousie merger.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So in terms now of the Agricultural College and Dalhousie, I guess there's only final pieces of that to work out, and also, will research dollars be channelled now just through Dalhousie, is that how that is going to unfold? I'm just wondering again if that will have any impact on staffing at the Agricultural College?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, really anybody whose department at the Agricultural College, in the sense of the department - people from the department have offices at the college. Those people will still turn out to be - you know, they're not leaving our department but people connected with the college in terms of professors, the academic side, obviously will go with Dalhousie, and there was another part of your question?

 

MR. GLAVINE: In terms of the research, will that be just now channelled through Dalhousie?

MR. MACDONELL: Part of that research budget will go with the funding to Dalhousie; the larger part of that is going to stay with the department. I think our thought is into the future that we'll want to have a say in research and we'll want to see that it kind of takes us in the direction of what our 10-year homegrown success - you know, what our thoughts are. So we'll certainly be able to, I think, incent research; that is, the research that we want to do or that we want to see done.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes. I asked that question because that, to me, is one area where that merging and that blending and knowing the capacity that Dalhousie has and is the primary recipient of research dollars in Nova Scotia that, in fact, Dal itself could end up with some aspects of the science of agriculture and not go as strongly to the Agricultural College, which has been the focus of trying to move research and its application to the actual farm gate.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think that from everything we've been able to see in our discussions, this is going to be an agricultural campus of Dalhousie University, which they do not have and lots - actually, I shouldn't say lots - three other universities in the country do have. This was a direction they wanted to go, as well, and they saw real potential in growing their university by having this agricultural component. They're the people who certainly have a reputation for being able to do research and applied research. We would see them as that institution that can get dollars other than government dollars to make research happen, because they've been doing it certainly before this merger.

 

We're not really worried that they're going to take over the Agricultural College and then not do as much agricultural research. We think that's exactly why they took it and we're hoping it will grow to be a much bigger entity under them than it could be under the government. There was a contract that ties them to that for the first three years.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Just before I leave that area of budget, which today seemed to get a bit more scrutiny - in terms of communications officers and policy analysts - in at least one department we see the addition of an associate deputy and so on. Has the structure changed any? You talked about now only two executive directors but in next levels, are there any changes in the Department of Agriculture?

 

MR. MACDONELL: A few months ago the associate deputy also took over Agriculture's part of his responsibility. It's the same person, same salary. Although I'm thinking that he probably thought Agriculture was a benefit, like add that workload to him, I think he was probably looking forward to that bump in his status. Everybody wants Agriculture.

 

As far as communications, we only tended to burden our director by the fact that he has lost two staff people recently so we haven't really expanded there. No, I think you'll find we're getting to be a pretty lean machine.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I agree with you. Everybody does want Agriculture. We'd love to have the department down in the Valley. There was some acknowledgement in the Speech from the Throne that maybe some members of departments or whole departments - I don't expect an answer to be too direct, but would Agriculture be one that could be looked at for at least some transfer of its department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think there probably are a number of departments that could but I could go so far as to say it could be. That's about as direct as I can be.

 

You mentioned about the Valley, we have put staff in the Kentville Research Station. I think we kind of see that trying to keep some dollars going there, some research happening there is in the best interest of the province. They have a really good facility there and we are a little worried about what the federal government might be thinking around that. If we can be helpful there, I think we'd be very interested in trying.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I appreciate that knowing how valuable, of course, the research station is to the Valley, and actually beyond, in some of the work that they do there. In the Estimates Book, on Page 3.2, the total funded staff in 2011 was estimated at 504 but it actually came in at 488. Were there some programs that weren't kept up to the same level? I'm wondering why that differential actually, or was that part of a cutback in staffing and dollars went into programs? How did that work itself out?

 

MR. MACDONELL: That number is mostly connected to the Agricultural College. So it's difficult for us to predict how much research dollars they might get from other sources and how many research assistants, or whatever, they might require or turn out that they actually will hire. So that's why there's just a variation in that number - only because it's a little more difficult for us to nail that down. So that's really the reason for the difference.

 

MR. GLAVINE: On Page 3.3, under Office of Minister and Deputy Minister, the 2011-12 estimate was $591,000, the forecast states $490,000, and so the estimate came in under by more than $100,000 but yet the estimate for 2012-13 is $593,000. So I'm wondering why it is estimated so high if you came in so low this year, what would be the explanation for that? So we had a $591,000 estimate, it came in under by $100,000 but yet re-estimated at $593,000. So I'm wondering what the explanation for that is.

 

MR. MACDONELL: If you look down below those columns, it says "Funded Staff (# of FTEs)," do you see that?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes.

 

MR. MACDONELL: It went from 2011-12 to here? Yes, it went from - I'm trying to think of (Interruption) The estimates didn't change but if you look at the forecast, the costs were down. We didn't travel.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So basically cost savings within the office?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I know what's coming next, put it on the record. Yes, we can talk about that if you wish, it was very beneficial.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I can't even seem to do that.

 

MR. GLAVINE: On Page 3.3, Communications was budgeted at $129,000 and the forecast came in at $422,000, so it was off by nearly $300,000 - quite a bit to be off by - so I'm wondering, what kinds of things developed during the year to require an additional $300,000 in terms of Communications?

 

MR. MACDONELL: There was an addition of two Communications staff, it went from four to six, if you look down below. That was the change in Communications staff there, an increase.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So basically, then, they will not necessarily stay in place because the estimate is for $228,000 this year? So we're going back down to $228,000 which is considerably less, of course, this year.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think when I indicated that my communications director has lost some help, so there are a couple of communications people we lost but we also moved people from policy. It's probably the reason it didn't go down to the 129 that you see on the far side there for 2011-12.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So it is estimated at $228,000 this year but there will actually be two less people working on communications.

 

MR. MACDONELL: At least for a while, I'm not sure what the plan is.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One of the areas that got a significant increase was Agriculture and Food Services, estimated for an increase of about $1.1 million. I'm wondering what the reason behind that large increase would be. That's on Page 3.4, Agriculture and Food Services.

 

MR. MACDONELL: That's because restaurant inspection moved to Agriculture and Food Operations, which is the new name in the reorganization, so restaurant inspections went there.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Still on Page 3.4, Legislation and Compliance Services is being eliminated or moved, I guess it looks like. I'm just wondering again, what has happened to this sector of the department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Part of that went to Agriculture and Food Services, part of it went to fish and food services, and that's why it disappeared over that item.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So it was just some organizational changes?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes. When I mentioned about two executive directors - actually, I think we had four originally, when I first became minister, then we went to three. Now one of those three has gone to Fisheries - the other two are Alan Grant and Linda MacDonald - and that has caused a significant reorganization within the department.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, minister and deputy, for those explanations. I wanted to take a look at some of the grants and, just again, what the grant was for, what program the money was granted under, requirements, and some things like that. There were a few in particular - this is in the supplemental documents, in the Public Accounts - this company, 3101126 Nova Scotia Ltd., a $10,000 grant.

 

MR. MACDONELL: You want to know what that company is?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes.

 

MR. MACDONELL: What is it, $10,000?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes, and then there are a couple of others as well.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't think the Opposition are allowed to write their own documents. (Laughter)

 

MR. GLAVINE: We can move on and give you that information to look into.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Or we can get back to you. What's your question, at least we'll have it?

 

MR. GLAVINE: What was the grant for, what program was this money granted under, and what were the requirements?

 

MR. MACDONELL: What's the line item you're looking at?

 

MR. GLAVINE: I'll have to check and give you the line item, because we just pulled it out of the supplemental. We can move on then.

 

The Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program was given $2.807 million, I guess. It looks like a federal program.

 

MR. MACDONELL: That doesn't exist.

 

MR. GLAVINE: That doesn't exist now? So that has changed over to . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: It has been gone for years.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Okay. I'm not sure where that question actually came from then if it doesn't exist.

 

MR. MACDONELL: You thought you'd ask just in case.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Well, it came out of one of the documents, I guess.

 

MR. MACDONELL: It hasn't been around for a while.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Just to look at monies that go to the World Trade and Convention Centre, would this be in terms of the Exhibition - $100,000 went to the World Trade and Convention Centre? I'm wondering, again, what the purpose of that grant or investment is.

 

MR. MACDONELL: There was a five-year deal, I think, to give them $100,000 a year and that has been over for two years. Last year we gave them $50,000.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Looking again at a few of the other expenditures - Atlantic Building Cleaning Ltd. received $145,000 from the department. Is that based on one contract, multiple contracts? I'm just wondering where that money would be going.

 

MR. MACDONELL: We'll have to get back to you on that. I'm not sure if that's the Agricultural College or what.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Communications Nova Scotia received $164,000 for advertising. Would this have been related to Select Nova Scotia or some other advertising that the department carries out on an annual basis?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We'll have to check on that. My deputy says we do reimburse them for staff costs, but I can't tell you for sure if that's what it is. We have someone who is a secondment, who has been working on the merger issue and we've been paying her, so that could possibly be it, but I don't have that for sure.

 

MR. GLAVINE: That would be very similar for Communications Technology - there's a whole list of expenditures there. Would that be in the same kind of category? There's Graphic, there's Print, and so forth.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Possibly, but I wouldn't want to tell you for sure if I can't be sure.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I may have to send a few of those particulars over, just to have an understanding as to where those monies are being expended.

There was also Video Production worth $14,073, and again no reference to that particular expenditure so I'm wondering what that was for.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't know whether it's what I'm thinking about. Wasn't there a Select - didn't we do a video last winter? I thought we did, actually, but I don't know. It might be the Agricultural College - Marketing might have done that. You don't have any more information on that?

 

MR. GLAVINE: I was looking at the total expenditure. CNS received $666,000 from the Department of Agriculture. I was just getting a general sense of how much CNS receives from each department - in this case, obviously, Agriculture. How is that money spent, and what are the benefits of that kind of expenditure of $666,000?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Printing for the Agricultural College, if they do that it might show up that way, but I can't say that for sure so we'll find that out for you.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Compass Group Canada received $931,000 from the department. What would that funding be for?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm told it's thought to be a household survey - done through the Fisheries side but shown on a line item for Agriculture. Agriculture funds all the corporate services for Fisheries.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Just a few others - so it was done for Agriculture through the department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Agriculture funds corporate services for Fisheries but it was done by Fisheries.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Homco Realty Fund (20) Ltd. received $357,000 from the department - what was that expenditure for?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We'll just add that to the list.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Okay. One other, Landry and Associates Management Consulting received $483,000 from the department. What consulting would they have done for the department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: That was the group that put together the documents around - I think it spelled out the particulars for us to negotiate the merger. It was done some time ago but booked last year.

 

MR. GLAVINE: This is an interesting one; I'm sure there's an explanation, being the good minister you are. Why did the Manitoba Minister of Finance receive a sum of $8,765?

MR. MACDONELL: The Manitoba Minister of Finance?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes, in other words, monies that were transferred from the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture to the Manitoba Minister of Finance. It's one of those ones that catch your eye as to why we would be paying a sum to the Province of Manitoba.

 

MR. MACDONELL: We'll check. If we bought some intellectual property or whatever from the Province of Manitoba - we'll find out what that item is.

 

MR. GLAVINE: North-Lumber-Land Resources received a sum of $399,000. I'm wondering what that expenditure from the Department of Agriculture is.

 

MR. MACDONELL: We'll find out for you.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Okay, in terms of looking at some of the policy areas which are the ones that I'm generally a lot more interested in - and you did mention and talk about the mink industry which is one of the success stories in terms of the growth of agriculture and a huge benefit, of course, to Nova Scotia's economy. There still remains, however, to get the regulations in place and the one area that really has come to light again in Kings County, and I guess in other areas where we're likely to see some expansion of the industry, and I'm wondering if, as you bring the regulations to a close here very, very quickly - and this really became apparent in one of the last approvals in Kings County, and that is the farm gets the approval but it required no environmental assessment beforehand.

 

I'm wondering if the regulations are heading towards, you know, making sure, and we know these farms can operate well in terms of environment, in terms of animal welfare, but yet having the regulations provides, I think, such a good, strong measure and safeguard so that things don't get off-track. We now know that the industry has had problems in western Nova Scotia, it's undeniable. So I'm just wondering if again, you know, the industry and those who invest in it and just in that whole name around the industry we could do a better job if you simply had a strong environmental assessment before any buildings were put up and any farm expanded, and so on, to take a look at anything precarious about an area such as a possible recharge water area and so forth.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I might have to defer to one of my staff but I'm thinking that it's difficult, I think, because we're going to inspect the site, you know, the Department of Agriculture - somebody is going to go there before they can do anything. They're going to need an engineer or a qualified - I think we'll have a list of who the qualified people would be who actually have to design your manure storage, water control, whatever, because you won't get a licence from us to operate your farm until that's done, and presently, when you put the animals in the cages, that's when we go and give you a permit. Under the new regulations we'll go before there's anything there.

 

So my thought is, like if it's a greenfield site - I mean I think the Department of Environment has their own regulations where you can't infill a wetland and, you know, whatever. So we think they probably have laws in place now that would prevent - I don't see the need and actually I think the thing we're trying to keep in mind, because this is a major league, all the rest of agriculture is not regulated on manure storage, so we are doing this for one sector. So I would say that as much as all the consultation with the stakeholders - and I mean the non-mink farmers, as well, because on those sites they're going to have to have water monitoring and so on.

 

I'm not sure that I would see an environmental assessment as giving something on a new site, and if it's an old site, you still can't break the law. In other words, they'll have three years to come into compliance on these new regulations after we get them passed, so all those issues around manure storage on these older sites will have to be addressed as well. If they're breaking the law - in other words, if they're contaminating a watercourse - the Department of Environment has that power now to go in there and do something.

 

I don't see any gain for that effort and I'm a little concerned because we don't do environmental assessments on any other farms. As a matter of fact, we don't even regulate them - they just have manure guidelines. I would say I don't see the need - that's what the regulations are about: we're actually going to clean these places up. To go to a completely clean site and say you need an environmental assessment, I just don't see it.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I asked the question because I look at the way this community looked at a new site and set up an environmental stewardship group and so forth and I think you'll see them, perhaps, doing their own monitoring of the area, if you wish. I guess I'm asking the question from the point of view that I'm a very strong supporter of the industry. I see farms where it's done very well. I've now toured about 10 farms in the province and I see some not doing it so well.

 

The industry is going to be under, perhaps, even more scrutiny and so I'm just wondering if all those safeguards are taken right from the get-go and maybe as you permit that, in fact, it will be part of giving a good degree of assurance that, yes, the permit should be given. That's why I was asking about that, because we all know that soil types, the relief of the land, any small streams, anything close by, all of these can be impacted. I'm just wondering if you had that, I think it would give that strong degree of assurance that this is the right place for this industry, rather than cleaning up a problem later.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, the reason we're writing the regulations is there shouldn't be a problem to clean up. That's why we're doing it.

 

MR. GLAVINE: In terms of when the draft regulations came out last summer, there was obviously some critiquing of the regulations when they came forward, and some people see the need for both groundwater and surface water being monitored and tested. I'm wondering, are you moving in that direction?

 

MR. MACDONELL: The way it came forward originally was there was the expression that we needed groundwater testing. Then it seemed that the stakeholders indicated groundwater is not the problem, surface water is the problem. Then it came back that you need groundwater testing. I think what we did was said, look, when you have your analysis by your specialist who says what you need to make this farm compliant, if they deem that groundwater testing is necessary, your plan will require groundwater testing. Maybe not all farms will have groundwater testing, but if it's deemed by the professional person who lays out your environmental plan, really, if they deem that's a component that your farm on this site should have it, then that will be part of their plan.

 

MR. GLAVINE: As you explain it then, it will be very much individualized to that particular area, because I know there are sites where surface water is what's needed to be tested and that's it.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, it will depend on the site and that professional engineer - whoever - draws up your layout, if they say this site requires groundwater testing it will be part of your approval.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So, just for clarification, when a county provides a building permit to put up the barns, is that also the stage when the department is providing the permit for a fur farm?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No, I don't think that but I think one of the issues - I'm not sure if all municipalities have the same bylaws because some will have bylaws around setbacks for mink farms which might be different from another municipality. I don't think we can supersede that, as far as I know. So that's something that the landowner will have to come to grips with his municipal unit.

 

The spot they find for their buildings or whatever, and supposedly manure storage, I think, number one, we couldn't approve this particular spot if it didn't comply with the municipal bylaws. I would find that hard to believe. If they said you had to be set back 500 metres or 500 feet from a stream and he was within 300, I can't believe we could say that's fine.

 

I think we have to do a site visit before, because presently we only give the permit when the animals go in the cages. We want to be ahead of that so we actually are going to go to the site before anything is built, is what I understand. At what point you're fully licensed to go, I don't have that on the tip of my tongue. Certainly we're not waiting until you have the buildings up and you have the animals in the cages and you're ready to go, we're not waiting for that stage. We're going to be there at the front end to see what this site looks like, and at what point the engineering and that is around the licensing, I don't have an answer for you there.

 

MR. GLAVINE: It's not a managed commodity, obviously. There still seem to be some possibilities of growth. I wonder, is the department monitoring how much further growth can take place? I know it's difficult to safeguard against the highs and lows of the industry, the cyclical nature of this particular industry. Is there at least some monitoring for Nova Scotia that these are production levels that are probably the target we should be looking at and can sustain, obviously?

 

MR. MACDONELL: That's a really good question; I hope I have a really good answer. My thought is that there will be factors within the industry that will curtail the growth. When that will happen, I don't know. We have half of Canada's production in Nova Scotia so you think if there was some point that would be curtailed, it would be by now.

 

The fact that it's particularly lucrative at this point in time, the issues around food kitchens or the feed for the mink, I think will be a limiting factor. I know the people in the industry work hard on this because if you have mink, you have to feed them. This was something that originated out of by-product from the fishing industry years ago, that's what it was, we had fish plants that had offal or waste, and this was a place for that to go. It has become pretty specialized in recent years, that diet now is supplemented - vitamins - and now the chicken industry, a lot of waste from the slaughtering of chickens goes into mink feed. Between the fishery and the agricultural offal, plus now they bring in frozen - I'll bet it's horse meat, but I don't know that for sure, from Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec, and make up kind of a ration of this mixture. I would see that as perhaps a limiting factor in how much you can grow the industry.

 

If it was possible to incent, if I could put eight mink farms in Cumberland County, I might consider that to be kind of a better way to try to - although the food supply might be an issue, transport and whatever. But certainly, I think part of the reason that we're writing the regulations is if you're going to have a significant population you have to have a place to put the waste. There are probably lots of farmers in the Valley or across the province who would love to have that composted mink manure on their fields, but distance is - so if you could actually locate more of those farms in other agricultural areas where they could make use of that waste, we'd eliminate two problems.

 

I don't think you're going to see a government try to intervene in terms of limiting the growth in the industry. The fact that we're trying to regulate the environmental issues around it so that water is not contaminated, and so on, will be the step that you'll see government do which is what we're doing. If it requires something in the future then that is something either this government or some other government will have to think about what the impacts are and whether they should intervene and do something but otherwise, no, I don't think you'll see any change.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: As a point of courtesy, or a point of notice, there are about seven minutes remaining in the Liberal caucus time. It has been suggested that we have a five-minute break following the Liberal caucus and then we will have an hour for the Progressive Conservative caucus.

MR. MACDONELL: And I'll try to come up with a seven-minute answer for the next question.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, you're conducting a strong meeting, giving us advanced warning here - thank you very much.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Always do.

 

MR. GLAVINE: You were talking about the value now of the industry. Do you have a figure for last year's since some of the sales are still taking place - I know the prices are up some this year but that total value is not with us yet - what about for last year, do you have a figure?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'll take a stab at that. I think in the province - there are about 1.2 million mink pelted every year, somewhere in that range. The average price last year was $106 a pelt, so at a million of them that's $106 million, and whatever the 0.2 works out to. So I'd say $1.20 million or $1.25 million, somewhere in that ballpark - I mean $100 million, excuse me, $120 million.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Probably a final question here - it will have a couple of parts - since the Act was proclaimed, how many permits have been granted over the last couple of years as the regulations are being developed?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't have that exact number, I'm thinking a couple.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Not a big number.

 

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So there's no race to . . .

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Because in effect the regulations, as I've alluded to, are there to safeguard the industry so there will be no grandfathering in terms of - that's the plan?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No. Anyone who was thinking of spending the money on a new operation, which occurred between the time we put the Act through - and still don't have the regulations finished but soon will - I'm quite sure that they were not going to spend that amount of money only to find out they would have to re-spend it, or a significant amount, to come in compliance with the regulations. So those people who were interested, they stayed in fairly close contact with the department about what do you think and so I think for them, you'll probably find that they'll be close or, you know, they wanted to spend a big pile of money to be close, to be within the regulations. So I don't think there was any great desire, oh, we better go out and do this now because, you know, they're going to bring in these regulations. Everybody, whether their farm is 40 years old or 40 weeks old, is going to have to comply with what the regulations say and they'll have three years to do it if they're not already here.

MR. GLAVINE: The last area that I'll get started on and probably come back to is the Halifax Seaport Farmers' Market and, again, it has the potential to be a very important face of the local food movement and the diversity that there is within local food production and associated value-added products. At the current time it is struggling and I'm wondering if the Department of Agriculture, in wanting to make sure that it remains a fixture not just on the waterfront and an outlet for HRM, and maybe a little beyond of people who visit across the province, but an important outlet for the farm community. So I'm wondering, where does the minister see a possible role here?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm not seeing a big role. I think if anybody has a major role, it possibly could be ERDT as the economic lender, because although the lines do get blurred between primary agriculture - you know, for us to have a program either to lend to a farm, or money to buy a farm and develop it, or to a renewal program where you're growing apples, taking out an old orchard and putting in a new orchard - that actual primary production is where I see our role.

 

Now, that's not to say that we don't cross lines because I think we had a program where we gave funding (Interruption) So we did have a program, I think, where we helped out some small farmers' markets, but in terms of this farmers' market we gave $1 million, Environment gave $1 million, and Energy gave $250,000 or somewhere in that range. So I think we would like people to think that this is actually an asset of the federal government. It's the Port Authority. That's who owns the building, you know, and so that money went into renovating a federal building. So we would think that, you know, they may want to knock in that direction. (Interruption) Yes, and the outstanding debt is federal. So, anyway, that's . . .

 

MR. GLAVINE: How are we doing, Mr. Chairman?

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would say about 25 seconds so it's not worth another question.

 

MR. GLAVINE: That's fine.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will have a five-minute break and let's keep it to five minutes, please.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Sure, five minutes.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

 

[7:14 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[7:23 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Progressive Conservative caucus will have one hour and we will begin with Mr. Porter.

 

The honourable member for Hants West.

 

MR. CHUCK PORTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, minister and staff, for being with us this evening. I can assure you one of the things I'm not going to do is duplicate the questions that were already asked. I know that I've heard that in the past and why we do that, I'm not really sure, but we're not going to do that today. We are going to get to a couple of things of interest though.

 

You spoke in your opening comments about Select Nova Scotia. I agree that has been a good program by way of the picnics and the suppers and those taking part in it. I attended the one this winter in February at the Brooklyn Fire Department, and there were a number of different farmers that supply different meats and so on, every variety, and very, very well attended there. To say that the locals do understand the meaning of "local" is probably fair but if you looked around that room, there would definitely be an age group there that's probably my age and up. It's not that younger group and you probably heard me rant about this on the other side in the Chamber over there about the education piece and so on, but I do think that there is a certain age group there, you know, from maybe that 40-plus onward, who do have an understanding and who are getting to understand the importance, and you need only look around the room at those kinds of events, whether they're the picnics or the suppers and such that we saw in our area.

 

So I think that that's good, I think we need to keep building on that somehow, and certainly whatever funding we're putting into that, I hope it remains for a good, long time. I know it's tight at budget times but if there are places to grow - pardon the pun - that would be one of those areas that I think is very valuable.

 

Moving on, I know there were some questions about grants from the honourable member for Kings West and I'm not sure, I think I explained to the deputy, they were from the Supplementary Information of Public Accounts, Volume 3, and those would have been year ending actually - and he was coming from the same place - March 2011. I'm not sure I know that the - I think the deputy said you didn't have that specific documentation with you but they are certainly not available yet for this year.

 

There are a couple ones of interest that I want to bring up, though, just to see if you know anything by way of even being able to explain them out. One of them is the Exhibitions Association of Nova Scotia, which I'm sure you're familiar with, $226,000, and I was wondering if you can break down how that formula goes. How do you base that?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Actually, we don't control the formula. We give them a lump, as far as I know, and they have a formula that would be Class A and Class B exhibitions . . .

 

MR. PORTER: Loan or grant?

 

MR. MACDONELL: It's a grant.

 

MR. PORTER: That's what I was wondering. They do that themselves?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We give it to the association, we don't really tell them how to divide it up, they have their own categories of - I think there are three. There are two that are Class A, the larger ones, I think. Mostly are the Class A category, three are the Class B category. One group gets a larger part of the pie than the other.

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, thank you for that. One of the other ones was the Atlantic Standardbred Breeders Association. This is a high number that I see here, nearly $179 million.

 

MR. MACDONELL: $179 million?

 

MR. PORTER: That's the number that I have in front of me that came from that document.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Our budget is only $63 million.

 

MR. PORTER: I know and that's why I'm asking, would it be fair to say it's probably $179,000? You don't know? That's why I'm asking because when I see these numbers, I'm going, how could that be possibly be related back to this department?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I can't explain that without - the grant to harness racing is about $1 million. We're just a flow-through for Minister Wilson's department. It comes to Agriculture and it goes through us. (Interruption) No, not this year coming, it will be direct from him; it's not going to come through us.

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, that makes more sense.

 

MR. MACDONELL: But that number, I have no idea what that number is.

 

MR. PORTER: We'll go back and do some digging on that. That's why I asked that question because it seemed rather strange, again, are we flowing money through your department which is a very large number and I'm going, wow, this is interesting. That's fine, we'll go back and have a closer look at that just to see, but it could be an error; obviously it's an error somewhere.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Would you like us to get back to you on that number?

 

MR. PORTER: I'll tell you what, that specific one we'll have a look at ourselves and try to figure that out, and I know I'm going to have lots of opportunities in the coming weeks and so on to ask that question if I need to.

 

One of the others was Big Kahuna Sport Co., nearly $14,000. Are there any thoughts on what we're doing in the sport business again?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think it may be a tournament that students from the AC went to. I saw that recently. We can confirm that for you.

 

MR. PORTER: I know there was a question about another provincial - it may have been the Manitoba Minister of Finance - but also listed is the British Columbia Minister of Finance and that was just shy $64,000. You weren't sure why that would be?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. PORTER: Is there an interprovincial agreement somewhere that . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't know for sure. I can't think of an agreement because we actually do sign agreements. I seem to have a number or more of them at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations licensing, and whatever, with other jurisdictions, although they don't cost money generally. That actually may be something that is out of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture but funded through the Department of Agriculture, but we'll find that out for you.

 

MR. PORTER: I'm just thinking, would the province - and we'll just use British Columbia in this case - host an event for all ministers across the country to attend and then bill you back for a portion of costs - something like that?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No. I don't think it has since I've been here.

 

MR. PORTER: I don't know - I'm just kind of curious.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't think so and that would be a big bill.

 

MR. PORTER: Just one other that stood out a bit - there are quite a few of them there, but I'll just go to one more. You mentioned a tournament on the Big Kahuna Sport one. Ken-Wo Country Club, which is of course down my way, nearly $16,000 - just a couple of bucks short of $16,000 - I didn't think we were investing in golf, but perhaps I'm wrong.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Annual fundraising tournament for the alumni of the Agricultural College.

 

MR. PORTER: So we cover the cost of that, I guess, as a province to put on?

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, we would have collected revenue from that, like made money on it. The Minister of Finance gets the revenue.

 

MR. PORTER: Of course he does. For the 2012-13 fiscal year, the department is forecasting an additional $42,000 in spending. The department has been almost - I think it was $2.7 million, nearly $3 million more than was forecast the previous year. It's interesting you go $2.7 million run over last year and you're only looking for an increase of $42,000. Do you want to break that down a bit? How do we know we're not going to be back up to $2.5 million?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, that - I'll say practically all of that - was increased costs at the Agricultural College because enrolment was up. But there's increased revenue because enrolment is up, but we don't get that. You can't see in our books that we offset that increase in costs with an increase in revenue. The Minister of Finance gets the increase in revenue and we have to book the increased costs, so additional students have a cost but they also have an increase in revenue.

 

MR. PORTER: So is the increase in revenue reflected anywhere, that these numbers jibe because of that? It seems odd that you're in one department; you're showing the loss in this case and Finance is showing the gain, but there's no reflection in the books.

 

MR. MACDONELL: All revenues go to Finance, so it doesn't matter whether it's licensing or . . .

 

MR. PORTER: Sure, but is there a line item in there, just for clarity? Is there a line item in the Minister of Finance's books that says this came from Agriculture revenue sources?

 

MR. MACDONELL: You'll have to ask him.

 

MR. PORTER: If we ever get to him, I might.

 

MR. MACDONELL: In the Estimates Book under Ordinary Revenue, it does have a line item for Agriculture, so it would show a revenue increase.

 

MR. PORTER: . . . reflected in multiple areas coming in, any kind of revenue would just fall in there.

 

MR. MACDONELL: When we do an appropriations increase - would it be every three months? It would have to be; it depends on when you need it - quarterly, then we put that in the document to explain it to the media whenever we have a requirement for more money.

 

MR. PORTER: For salaries and employee benefits, the Department of Agriculture overspent by almost $850,000 in 2011-12, with spending coming in at $35.9 million. Salary and Employee Benefits for 2012-13 are estimated to be $35.3 million - $261,000 above the 2011-12 estimate. Would you see this as accurate or is this - again, how do you get to that number? How do you trust that's the right number, I guess, is what it comes down to?

 

MR. MACDONELL: If I'm in the right place here, those are payments for collective agreements that went back three years. (Interruption) Increments, yes.

 

MR. PORTER: Food Safety and Protection division of your department forecasts to spend an additional $171,000 this year. Can you provide me with some details on why we are spending an extra $171,000?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think it was a transfer of staff from another division to Food Safety and Protection, and I think that was the reason for the increase.

 

MR. PORTER: So staff was transferred into that division from elsewhere?

 

MR. MACDONELL: From elsewhere to . . .

 

MR. PORTER: Out of another area of your department . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: Of the department, yes.

 

MR. PORTER: So I guess they're not additional staff then, they would have been on staff and just transferring into - okay, 496 staff funded for 2012-13, 20 less if you factor in what is described as external agencies. I'm just wondering, how much provincial funding is used to fund the external agencies and do you have a list of those external agencies? Who are they?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Those are all recoveries from NSAC funding research. My deputy tells me we get funded for a few staff from the Growing Forward agreement with the federal government. So we get a little bit of funding from there.

 

MR. PORTER: Now I want to move on to the Agricultural College and talk about that a bit. I had an opportunity to meet some of the folks there recently and part of that discussion, obviously, was the transition into Dalhousie. Certainly that's not something new; they've been working with them for some time. Of course, it's going to have a new flavour to it with regard to documentation and where they fall in under the school, and I can certainly understand Dal's reasoning for wanting to be part of that. I think it's a good extension for them and, generally speaking, from the folks that I spoke to there, they seem to be somewhat comfortable with how that is rolling out, as well, given they've had a relationship for some time.

 

With the merger with Dalhousie University, $64 million of agricultural budget, employees at the Agricultural College have expressed some concern about their salary levels and how they might change in the merger. You know, I understand that Dal professors are making one figure, as an example, I know you're aware of that, and how is that going to affect the bottom line? Have you any real idea given that it's not done yet? There will probably be some union merger and stuff take place, there will likely be some contract negotiation. They are - and I'll be clear from what I learned from this minister - the staff there feel this is going to be quite easy, we're just going to go up to whatever the levels the professors are making at Dal and, you know, all will be great, and they can probably live with that. Are they on the right track here, you know, I was led to believe that?

 

MR. MACDONELL: The only thing we can know that's etched in stone is the contract under which they work for us. In this agreement they take their contract with them, so at some point they'll have to negotiate with their new employer. So leaving us, they don't lose anything they've had under their contract, but not really any different than if they stayed with us and negotiated a new contract with us. The question of what gains they might make or not is kind of out there in the negotiation process. So what they negotiate with their new employer is part of that process, and their new employer will be paying. All we can say is you take your contract with you, that's about the only guarantee we give them, and then when they negotiate their next one, it's between them and their new employer.

 

MR. PORTER: So then are you saying, if I'm hearing you right, there are savings down the road that you're not going to be responsible for under the Department of Agriculture budget, when it comes to those salaries, and whatever it's costing you right now?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, they take - not necessarily have it come out of the Department of Agriculture, but their pension, I think, is something they do take with them when they go. Beyond that, we're not guaranteeing salaries. We only guarantee them under our agreement with them. After that, when they negotiate their new . . .

 

MR. PORTER: I guess that's why I ask the question, for the clarity of thinking exactly that.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Right.

 

MR. PORTER: Is there some expectation that the Government of Nova Scotia, specifically the Department of Agriculture, is going to be at the table in some mechanism, to make sure that they are compensated the way . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. PORTER: . . . that they are going to be brought up and feel that they should be - this will solely be the property of Dal and the problem for Dal to meet those negotiated requirements?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We're not negotiating their next contract with Dalhousie; they'll have to do that. So there is no next requirement on the contract on their employment side. Whenever they sit at the bargaining table across from Dal, and of course that will be their union rep doing that, then they'll get to vote on whatever their rep brings back to them and decide whether or not that's acceptable or whatever. We're not going to be in that room with them; once they leave us, they're not our employees.

 

MR. PORTER: Knowing how contracts work that could take some time or it could go very quickly. I know that's a tough question but with the - I guess the thought is that people seem quite content, everybody appears to be happy, if I could use that word. Any thoughts on how long it would take to get them to the table and then it would no longer be the responsibility - I guess it's the closer to where we are now with the government looking after the Agricultural College financially. It's being handed over and it's going to become part of Dal, so I'm just kind of curious about time frames and what you . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: July 1^st, NSAC is gone from us, so at whatever point negotiations carry on, it seems to me that the union that represents the employees now - or unions, there's more than one perhaps . . .

 

MR. PORTER: Unions, yes.

 

MR. MACDONELL: . . . are similar. I think the same unions are at Dalhousie, and I might be wrong in terms of whether there are three or there might be two at NSAC, or whatever. The union that they're under is also a union that represents employees at Dalhousie now, certainly as far as NSGEU is concerned. So anyway, no, they'll take up negotiations with Dalhousie at that point.

 

MR. PORTER: So July 1^st being the key date here, and again just for clarity, on July 1^st the responsibility of the province no longer has anything financially to do with - you will not be supporting the Agricultural College.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, not in terms of salaries. We'll have an agreement with Dalhousie. We're still going to continue to fund Dalhousie in this transition period but we're not going to negotiate contracts.

 

MR. PORTER: Thank you, minister, for that clarity.

 

I want to go to 4-H. Here in Nova Scotia 4-H has the largest independent show in Canada, the Pro Show, and they hire someone annually to run the Pro Show. The government at the present time - and I'm aware of this and I'm told by the 4-H that they have $1 million worth of administration available to them.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Could you say that again, please, they have what?

 

MR. PORTER: They've got $1 million, if I understand this correctly - and please clarify it to me if it's wrong - $1 million worth of administration available to them. When you ask them about a budget - and there's a bit of uncertainty and clarity around this, as well, and that's why I'm asking - we have 4-H, and my understanding is that there is money that's allotted toward 4-H from your department but they don't see any of it in-hand. They go out, they hire somebody. There's a feeling, I would say, that they are not well supported in their group because they have to go out and hire somebody. Can you provide details, you know, how does that break down? What's the percentage of dollars that go to 4-H directly from the province?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm told that there's more 4-H funding here than in Alberta and Ontario combined from government. In the other provinces - actually there are very few provinces that do any government funding of 4-H and that those local organizations do their own fundraising.

 

The biggest part of our budget is funding staff that help with organization and activities and whatever for 4-H. I think we're in the range of $750,000, am I right? (Interruption) I was thinking we took money from other (Interruptions) Yes, anyway, my deputy tells me the 4-H budget has only gone up; it has never gone down. I'm not sure why they would think - I think we said because the budget has gone up, and my understanding is that sometimes we kind of rob other areas to keep putting more money toward it, and we said things like their membership fee, I think insurance, they had to cover themselves. I think that caused a bit of - you know, didn't like that.

 

So, yes, we are kind of sensitive to it but I think that the province - I think we're funding it certainly at the same level that the previous administration funded it and more than most jurisdictions fund it. I think the place we've been trying to take the 4-H organization is you have to take on more of this responsibility yourself and think about, you know, if you need other funding, think about going out to other organizations, businesses, whatever, because - I think more in the way that other 4-H organizations do in other provinces that are not funded in any way by the province.

 

So, anyway, we're concerned about the sustainability of it and the inability of the province to keep growing that budget. So I think we're looking for them to step up and do more in that regard, because if you look at a youth leadership program, we give no funding to cadets or Scouts, you know, or Guides. This is the only one that we help in that way, so I think we're concerned that it remains strong with our inability to keep growing the budget of it. So we'd like them to think about how they can fundraise and bring in more to help.

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, that's fine, if $750,000 is the figure, and I understand what you're saying about you're not funding cadets and you're not funding other organizations. But 4-H does have, for the most part, a direct correlation with agriculture, no question about that, in its early years, and it's certainly strong today.

 

MR. MACDONELL: It has a direct correlation in the other provinces, too, but other governments don't fund it.

 

MR. PORTER: That's correct. So with the money that's earmarked for 4-H, can you tell me how they access it? Where's that money being spent?

 

MR. MACDONELL: It's mostly staff and travel, and that's staff in our department that work with 4-H.

 

MR. PORTER: Great. So can you tell me then, for the staff in your department who work with 4-H, what they are doing on behalf of 4-H?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I can get that for you, I guess; I don't know if I have it.

 

MR. PORTER: If you can, at some point I would like you to provide that - that would be fine.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I mean the Pro Show would be the biggest thing but there would be regional level competitions that they would do with their projects, having those judged so they could move on to the next level.

 

We have a manager for 4-H and a director in every area of the province; actually, I think there are six 4-H regions and we have someone in five of them; and a director of communications for 4-H.

 

MR. PORTER: Are all those people paid, is that what you're telling me - a salary?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, they're paid a salary - salary, benefits, travel.

 

MR. PORTER: I want to talk a bit about the Antigonish Farmers' Market. They operate, I'm sure you're aware, in the late Spring, the summer, and the early Fall in the 4-H barn behind the Antigonish arena. When the weather gets colder, they relocate to the Antigonish Education Centre. However, space is somewhat of a problem at the Education Centre.

 

To make the 4-H barn useful year-round - and that's what they'd like to do, in discussions I've had with them - is there any kind of funding that the department has to consider if they were to provide estimates, how do they make that happen? This is a pretty successful operation down there. They do well, they get good crowds, they've got lots of vendors, and they're looking to keep this thing through the colder months. They'd like to be there, they'd like to be in the 4-H barn, is my understanding.

 

MR. MACDONELL: So it's the 4-H barn of the exhibition - who owns it?

 

MR. PORTER: That's a great question; I believe that is also owned by 4-H and solely owned by 4-H.

 

MR. MACDONELL: But not owned by the exhibition?

 

MR. PORTER: Not owned by the exhibition that I'm aware of. Now, we were down there, I had a meeting with a couple of ladies from 4-H, and the understanding that I have from them is that it is solely their responsibility and owned by 4-H.

 

MR. MACDONELL: So they would want it insulated and heated . . .

 

MR. PORTER: They want to winterize it so they could use it for the purpose of carrying on year-round what they do there, by way of the farmers' market, and knowing - and them knowing as well, I guess - that we are promoting, and have for some years now, the farmers' market when it comes to buying local and all the things that go along with that, so they're saying, what's out there for groups like that? Is there anything?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Do they charge for the booths - if I was a farmer and I wanted to sell lamb out of there or produce?

 

MR. PORTER: I'm going to assume that they do but I can't confirm that for you, I don't know.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm thinking that we don't have a program. The Community Development Trust money, which you probably remember from when you guys were in government, is gone, so I'm thinking no, we don't.

 

The only thing that I can think of, if they own the building, they might want to go and see the bank, if they have an asset. If they're going to charge the people who are the vendors, who go into their building, and see whether or not they could upgrade it to where they would like to have it, they're going to need a business plan, I would think, to show that they could have revenue to make this worth doing.

 

MR. PORTER: I think probably, like most of those organizations - no, not like most. They are successful; a lot of these farm markets are not. I have one in Windsor that continues to struggle and I'm surprised that it still continues to operate because you have the same handful of people who attend there on Friday night and Saturday with no charge coming in the door or anything like that.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think you answered your own question.

 

MR. PORTER: But I would say in all areas that is not the case, though, and Antigonish being one of the more successful, I don't know that they charge, as I said, coming in the door, but they wouldn't be a group that made a whole lot of money. They may make enough to keep up the basic maintenance, and that's why they're wondering what may be available and are they worthy through the Department of Agriculture when it comes to success to continue on, would there be programs? Obviously, there aren't any programs at the present time. So would it not be practical to apply for grants or whatever through government into these, you know, Economic Development or others?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I would say, because I'm not sure if the issue is the fact that it's a 4-H building and because it's 4-H, have you got a grant? The fact that it's a farmers' market is a completely different creature and I really don't want to see us putting lots of money - we have put money into some farmers' markets to kind of help, I guess, with the building, I'm just not sure. I don't think that's an ongoing program but I remember, I think two years ago we did, a little bit of money to a number - I'm trying to think of that program. (Interruption)

 

Yes, I think we had a committee that analyzed those and that was the Community Development Trust money. So, to me, if it's a farmers' market - and I'm assuming they're doing this, even if they wanted to do it as a non-profit but they want to cover their costs, you know, they might want to think about ERDT as a possible place to go to see what's available through them.

 

MR. PORTER: Last year $3.3 million was spent on Industry Development and Business Services, $88,000 over budget, and yet the funding has been eliminated this year. Can you tell me, what details can you provide for me, such as what kind of impact it could have on the farming community?

 

MR. MACDONELL: That money is still there. That has been transferred to other departments - Select Nova Scotia, Taste of Nova Scotia - because of the reorganization that we had within the department. Those things still go on. It's just that those dollars went to different places. The programs branch is where you should find that.

 

MR. PORTER: The same figure, the $3.3 million - or a little more, as it was over budget last year - if you include the other programs that you've moved it around into - or would it be less?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Would you say that again?

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, I'll clarify. If I understood you correctly, you said that that program has not gone away, it's still there and transferred to other departments or programs within the department. So my question was just, okay, if it was transferred around into other programs within the department, is it still of the same value or more, or has it been cut? So at the end of the day does it still equate to, and all the transfers around departments, $3.3 million or more or less?

 

MR. MACDONELL: So are you looking at the forecast line - $3.377? Is that the one you're looking at?

 

MR. PORTER: No, I'm not. Actually I have it here, I can look; it's Page 3.2 in the Estimates Book.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, that's where I'm looking. And it's Industry Development and Business Services?

 

MR. PORTER: Up at the top.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, from the estimate . . .

 

MR. PORTER: Is that an increase in that then?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, it's a little bit of - it's less than $100,000.

 

MR. PORTER: Yes, $77,000. (Interruption)

 

MR. MACDONELL: It might have been an extra staff person.

 

MR. PORTER: The only difference is that it has shifted around throughout other programs, by way of actually putting it out the door and how you're spending it?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, the branch is gone. So those funds are moved through Agriculture and Food Operations to Policy and Corporate Services, and they went to the Fisheries branch.

 

MR. PORTER: Time goes by pretty quick here. I want to bounce around to just a couple things, minister, I'm going to try to get in before I wrap up, and one of those is the Christmas tree industry. I had some great conversations over the last number of months with these folks and they do a lot of great work. It's a big business in this province, as you know, for all those that are involved in this industry, it's huge. But we're competing, obviously, with those in the States now. We're also competing with - what do you call them? - the artificial trees; those sales are up and things like that.

 

There is a lot of research that has gone into this thing and I had a chance to tour the facility a couple of weeks ago and see some of the great work they're doing with the needle drop and all of those things that really affect this business and how Nova Scotia is able to cut a tree in late October, or whenever it might be, and send it down to New York City and other places, and to continue to do that and grow that and grow the industry, and it's a big thing.

 

There has been money that has been invested in this research, will that continue and will it continue at the same or greater funds, or do you see - what's the long-term vision here for this? I think there are a couple of years left, maybe, in an agreement, minister, that exists.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Most of that, on the tree research facility at AgriTECH Park is through the Atlantic Innovation Fund, which is a federal fund. We have some money in that facility but that ongoing funding for that project will kind of be, I think, determined by the success of the project and kind of what it shows from its research. I'm thinking that's kind of an ongoing reapply, and so on, for federal funding for that.

 

MR. PORTER: Just for a little bit of clarity, then, if things go well, if the feds stay involved, the province will consider staying involved?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'm not sure what the criteria are that the project qualified for funding, but I'm thinking if that maintains itself, I can't speak for the federal funding agency, whether or not in two weeks we'll find out that the feds cut the funding to those programs. I don't know if we have money specifically in that project - a little bit - but we're not thinking about backing out of what we're contributing.

 

MR. PORTER: Do you know what a little bit is, minister, can you clarify what that little bit is?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We pay Dr. Lada's salary, and we pay the salary of some of the people there - or maybe all of them, I'm not sure - but that's what our contribution is.

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, and obviously the reason I ask that question is it's a big industry in this province and it's certainly nothing that we want to lose, and we want to continue to get better at. I think that's good investment from what I've seen there. They're doing great stuff and it's amazing what they can do with a Christmas tree, so we hope that continues.

 

I know that time goes by here pretty quickly, as I said. I have a few minutes left yet and I want to talk about the beekeepers and the blueberry industry. I know you and I have had sort of a sidebar chat on this and I had some thoughts on this. The belief, I guess, from the beekeepers for the longest while seemed to be that the border was closed but I know there has been a discovery as of late that not quite, there is a regulation in place that states if you have a permit, bees can come in.

 

MR. MACDONELL: A health certificate basically. They have to be inspected. I was basically of the same view, although I did know that some producers were bringing in queens; that was kind of a regular thing from various locations, so it was obvious that it wasn't a total ban on importation. But I think we were kind of thinking on kind of a bigger scale than that, so I was of the view that wasn't possible.

 

I asked my staff, can you show me the regulations, what they actually say? So the regulations said bees could come in with a health certificate saying they were a certain level of health compliance or whatever, that it was possible to bring bees in, so you couldn't bring them in without that. So that was a slightly different consideration. There is certainly an interest on the blueberry side of the industry to have more bees because it's deemed that there's a lack of pollination. With greater numbers of bees, you get better pollination and you get a better crop. So that's where we are with that.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Porter, you mentioned a couple of times about your time slipping by. You do have almost 20 minutes left so you've got more time than you think.

 

MR. PORTER: Oh, do I? More than I thought - thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 

The bee industry, this is really interesting because some people think, what do you mean the border is closed to bees? Well, maybe they just fly over from Sackville for the day and they see this big sign, you know, "No Imported Bees," so they turn around and go home. You hear all these silly stories about things but obviously the inspection is an important piece of this. Can you speak to how that happens? Do we have someone - obviously they're permitted so you know that they're coming in and, yes, there are industries that do need more bees. We know from talking to the beekeepers that there's not enough to do what's required - and we'll get to that in a few minutes - but what happens at the border? It's scheduled, there's an inspector there, they go through, they do their thing, how does that work?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No, I don't think so. I think that they're inspected at the site before they leave. So if they're coming from Ontario, that's where they're inspected. They're not going to come to Amherst and be inspected, so they'll have to come with a health certificate that they've been inspected from wherever they were loaded on the truck or whatever. At least that's my understanding. I'll probably have to tell you that I should get you more particulars on that because I've only really been briefed one time and had some discussion on this, and I've kind of generated a few more questions in my own head around some of this process, but I don't think they're going to get to the border in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and be inspected. (Interruption) My deputy says that we'll be releasing the details of the process at the end of the week to the public. So we'll have more for you later.

 

MR. PORTER: Yes, that's fine. There has been, you know, quite a bit of discussion within the beekeepers group themselves in the province and their concern obviously of what they're bringing in. I know there's a health certificate and I'm not sure, I don't want to use the word "trust" - they trust or they don't trust, you never really know. I mean you're talking about a lot of bees here, thousands upon thousands - how do you ever know for certain? I guess there's some mechanism that they only circulate within a kilometre, a mile, or whatever that radius is of their home, and they measure scientifically whether they're diseased or not diseased and through various . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, it's really managing risk and as much as we can do that, I don't think we can say, you know, it will be zero risk. We couldn't reasonably say that. So I think it is to try to assure people that we manage the risk to the lowest level that we could possibly do that.

 

MR. PORTER: Yes, I would agree, it would be awfully hard to do any better than that in that kind of circumstance.

 

There are, from what I'm told, somewhere in the vicinity of around 25,000 hives that exist in the province - I don't know if that number is right or not. Part of that figure was what the Bragg organization has, of course, but nobody really knows. There's an estimated 13,000 they claim there by way of, however they gather that information, I don't know, but they come in, they've been brought in. They go back out, and you and I have sort of talked about this in the past that it's an issue for them; obviously they have to have the bees to do the pollination for the blueberries. It's an important piece of Nova Scotia's economic stability. Nobody wants to see anything happen to that except that it continue to excel, including the beekeepers and growers.

 

Would there ever be, or have there been any ideas, thoughts, or discussions around support for partnerships with - and we'll use the Bragg industry as an example. He has this assumed large number that, unlike the beekeepers, don't take the honey and such like that - I mean it's a small value-added piece. I don't know what the figures are annually that they would bring but I don't think they're that big. I know that there are a number of them in it.

 

Would the department ever be interested in being at the table for a discussion that says, look, here are these other thousands upon thousands of bees that are just sitting where no honey is coming from it? It's an issue for Mr. Bragg and his organization. Obviously we want to be able to rectify that somehow, again trying to mitigate the risks to some degree with not opening the border, really, and letting them flow.

 

I think that's a matter of time, however, but do we get there or hold that off by protecting the industry, by thinking about a future partnership, a business arrangement of some kind that could be supported whereby the beekeeper would say, let us manage the bees for you, we'll get the honey from that, you don't have to worry about it, we'll have the numbers that you want, we'll supply you, it's a non-issue, and we'll look after it the rest of the time. The issue with that, of course, is always money. You talk to them - where are we going to get the money to assume these bees or buy them or whatever? I don't know what that is. I know that there has been a bit of discussion around it with the beekeepers, myself, and others maybe. I'm just curious about the department's take on all of that.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, look, there's nothing to stop any single beekeeper or any group to approach Bragg or any other business and say, we'd like to partner with you and we think that we can offer this service to you cheaper than what it's costing you to do it. That's a possibility in any world that they could do that. They don't have to have government intervention in that regard.

 

The way it was brought to me was that the beekeepers had thought about partnering, I think, with the blueberry industry, and some of the blueberry growers might fund them to bring in queens to develop a few more hives. I don't think the growers were interested in the seed money part. When I asked, well, how many hives do you think you could generate if you could have done that? They said about 800. That just wasn't going to cut it. Right now we need - the number I've heard is 4,000 hives, anyway. We did a little questioning of the industry because 4,000 hives is eight producers at 500 hives, so we were curious as to whether there were eight new people, young people, interested people who might be at a place where they could take on that challenge. They didn't exist.

 

One producer we talked to who has 1,000 hives, even to move up to 1,500 was doable, it was in the realm, but they weren't necessarily interested. But one person to do it for 500 hives still wasn't getting us to where we needed to go. When I pushed the person who talked to me from the Beekeepers Association - and I kind of pursued the notion of them getting more involved with the blueberry industry, kind of made a request to them that, look, give us the opportunity to come up with X number of hives if you can negotiate a price. The industry bases its income on honey and renting hives so the idea that they could say we'll develop the hives, we'll rent them to you for this much, and kind of a strategy around that direction, the person said, well, I'm 60-something and I'm not interested in taking on more of that. I said to him, well, you're shooting your argument in the foot. You need to grow the industry. If you don't want these hives to come in, you have to grow enough to replace them.

 

From his comments - and maybe if I had talked to somebody else I might have gotten a different answer, but there just didn't seem to be the capacity. From my staff people doing some reconnaissance on this, there didn't seem to be enough within the beekeepers to take that number of hives on themselves. So that doesn't leave very many options - if you need X number, and they're bringing them in, it looks like it's possibly the only way.

 

The other wrinkle in this is that the regulation actually says if the person bringing them in meets the criteria of the regulation, I don't think I can stop them if they come with a health certificate and do what the regulations ask, and I think they're going to bring their bees in.

 

I think there have been three different blueberry growers who have contacted me - no, four - to say that they would like to see hives brought in from outside the province.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Porter, about eight minutes remaining in your time, the Progressive Conservative caucus' time.

 

MR. PORTER: Thank you, minister, for that. I agree, the issue here is that a lot of these folks are older. I ask those questions as well, there just doesn't seem to be much interest in the younger generation to get into the beehive business and beekeeping. But at the same time, it is a large issue for the blueberry growers in this province who need the bees. To me that says that we're probably looking towards the border being more open. I guess the biggest thing is to mitigate that risk, to make sure that the bees coming in are as healthy as you could possibly make them, and certainly going back out with proper inspections and such like that.

I think at the end of the day - you mentioned it as well - the argument was shot in the foot, at the same time knowing that the reality is likely that they're going to need to bring it in and we cannot see, in any way, shape, or form the blueberry industry going downhill. This is a big business in this province, doing wonderful things worldwide with products. It's amazing what they're doing there. That's all good and we certainly want to see that continue.

 

Just in finishing up, minister, I want to ask you a question about the losses - I see you wrote off $5.1 million in losses which are deemed uncollectable. I appreciate that some of these loans are probably from the hog farm industry that simply couldn't pay back outstanding loans. Can you tell me whether the $5.1 million in losses were all Farm Loan Board type losses, or were they other monies that might still potentially be collected? Is there any hope there at all for that? It's certainly a lot of money in a department your size and the issues that we have in agriculture in this province. I know you appreciate that as well.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, $4.4 million of that was hog, and the rest I'm not positive - I don't know if you would remember, I'm not sure if you were in the House at the time - I guess you weren't because it was back in 1998-99 - East Coast Commodities took over the grain centres that were in the province and there was some debt related to that, I think that got written off.

 

MR. PORTER: That far back? Wow.

 

MR. MACDONELL: This $4.4 million - I won't say how close to yesterday that was, but that amount was reserved by the government some years ago but written off.

 

MR. PORTER: So of the $5.1 million that's noted . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, $4.4 million was hog.

 

MR. PORTER: What's the balance of that?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, it's $600,000. I think that was the East Coast Commodities part, or most of it.

 

MR. PORTER: Okay, so it's those two combinations that make up that $5.1 million over that amount of time, many years.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, quite a few years ago.

 

MR. PORTER: A long time. Can you tell me - I've got a few questions here and I've probably only got time for one more. The Annapolis County Federation of Agriculture, through a recent resolution, asked why sheep producers must pay HST on lamb milk replacers while the dairy industry pays no HST on a calf milk replacer. Why is this and is it something that you're looking at changing?

 

MR. MACDONELL: That's a good question. I must have paid it on a bag of lamb milk replacer I bought this Spring. I don't know. If you don't have to pay it for calf milk replacer, it does strike me as an odd thing that you would pay it for a lamb. Maybe that's one I can raise with the Minister of Finance.

 

MR. PORTER: Perhaps. It was a resolution that was put forward by those sheep producers. You touched on mink a bit - I know I'm getting close on time. What do I have left?

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: You have about three and a half minutes.

 

MR. PORTER: Good, I have time for a little bit on the mink here. You've talked about the mink in a fair bit of detail. I don't want to get into a whole lot because I don't have much time, but obviously it is a huge economic driver in this province. There have been some issues in the Yarmouth County area, obviously, with this alga thing in the water. Can you tell me where your department is and how they're involved in this, or are they? Is this totally left to the environment now or are you, as the minister, involved in helping cure this problem?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Are you talking about the regulations or - I'm just not sure, you're saying about the mink industry?

 

MR. PORTER: I know that there are regulations that have been ongoing for some time and I know the mink producers, mink farmers have been involved in helping to draft that and so on. I'm curious, is there a way to - to me, this is a big industry, people put a lot of time, effort, and money into this, but yet we have people out there who are obviously - and rightfully so - concerned about the water issue that goes along with that. How are we going to clean that up, from your perspective as Minister of Agriculture?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Presently, if somebody is found to be doing something deleterious to the environment, the Minister of Environment's department can act on those individuals at any time, whether we have regulations or not.

 

The issue for us is that we want the regulations to indicate what it is that producers have to do to make their farms non-polluting. This is really around manure storage and water, control of water, where it goes.

 

MR. PORTER: This will be strictly going forward as you're building into the regulations, what you will do to try to solve or at least restrict the issue?

 

MR. MACDONELL: It's to prevent problems as far as contamination of water, and nobody is excused. In other words, existing farms today, or when the regulations go through Cabinet or whatever, those farms will have three years to come into compliance with the regulations.

 

MR. PORTER: Are they happy with that - I mean they've been involved in some of the discussions, three years - you know, a time frame that they say, look, I think we can fit into that and get where we need to be, in the discussions you've had with those folks?

 

MR. MACDONELL: They've been great. Actually, this will be the only sector of agriculture that manure storage will be regulated. They've been great to work with.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: That concludes the time for the Progressive Conservative caucus for now.

 

MR. PORTER: Can I just add one thing, Mr. Chairman? It's just to very quickly thank the minister.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sure, by all means.

 

MR. PORTER: I thank the minister and his department for their input and whatever documentation coming forward. This will conclude our portion for Agriculture.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, to get four hours in tonight, we would have 60 more minutes from the Liberal caucus and then another 20 minutes from the Progressive Conservative caucus. Is that agreeable?

 

MR. LEO GLAVINE: I think we'll just be taking a short period and then moving on to Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Moving on to Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations tonight?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Correct, yes.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We will now turn it over to the Liberal caucus for as long as it takes.

 

The honourable member for Kings West.

 

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Just to go back to where I finished off on the Halifax Seaport Farmers' Market. The province, through about three departments, has invested - I know they're doing major consulting with a New York firm to try to perhaps do some further organization, marketing, and so forth. Are you prepared to make a recommendation or would that be out of your purview in terms of a weekend market, seasonal market, whatever, because they do have big dollars owing on the books?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm not sure that what we gave them was a loan. I don't think it was. It was a grant, so there's no requirement that they give it back. As much as I would like to see them be successful, I don't think I have any responsibility or place to be telling them what to do. If they wanted to ask our marketing people, the resources from the department about any advice, I'm sure we would still be glad to offer that.

 

I don't want to blur the line between primary agriculture and the retail part. If Sobeys came to the Department of Agriculture looking for funding to expand their operation, we would say you're in the wrong department. But farmers' markets, which are a retail outlet for farmers or for - sometimes they're not farmers but we'd like to think they're farmers. So because its title is "farmers' market," people think you have to go to the Department of Agriculture. I would rather see them think about going to ERDT because they should have a business plan and they're in the retail business of agriculture and that's not our biggest place. That's not to say there hasn't been a little - when I think about the cheese sector, I know we've helped. That's certainly on the processing side, maybe not so necessarily on the retailing side.

 

I wouldn't be the guy at the back of the crowd waving my arms, saying come to me for money. I wouldn't be that person, but we definitely would like to see this operation be successful. I think the fact that this real estate happens to belong to the federal government would indicate that they have some responsibility, if anybody does. I mean, they had their building renovated, $2.2 million of which we paid for.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Generally, the farm market outlets continue to do well. I'm just wondering if you have any tracking on trending over the past year or have we now kind of reached a stabilizing in terms of the numbers of farm markets?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't think we necessarily track it, because I think there are communities that are still at a place that they're trying to decide - they like the idea of farmers' markets and actually there was a group in my own constituency in Enfield, they tried in Elmsdale at the Elmsdale Legion; they moved down behind the Elmsdale Legion. I think for three or four years they tried to generate this farmers' market and last year they didn't do it. So I think that as much as there are communities that think they'd like to have one, there are communities that have one but are having trouble maintaining it. Then there are communities that have one that is going gangbusters; it's really successful. Certainly there would be components of success that you would say if you have this, this, and this, you would probably be successful.

 

I think where I am, the corridor area in my constituency is a fairly large population and would be one that I would think would cater to that model. I think one of the downfalls of the market that was there - it didn't attract a lot of farmers. We have a large dairy industry but not a large vegetable industry, so we didn't have a big amount of vendors who were independent farmers going there to sell their product. I think it became more of a crafts and whatever, which I think people who were interested in the farmer thing, when they got there, they just weren't finding it. So there are components of success that you'll need in any location.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Are there any singular promotions in terms of the farm markets from the Department of Agriculture's perspective? It seems that while we may not be getting quite the shelf space in our major retail stores, many farmers see the farm market as an outlet. There are some great success stories, as we all know. You go into Meadowbrook Farm, for example, and it's probably 90 per cent Nova Scotia product; the other 10 per cent is Maritime. Because they've made that huge commitment to local farmers and products, it's now identified as the place for local or Maritime products.

 

Select Nova Scotia is obviously doing some very good work that's bringing dividends for the farmer, but as we work towards having more year-round products, we all know that there's a whole list of products we could have in our diet year-round. To me, the farm market could be one of those important outlets.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, Select Nova Scotia, which you have identified, does help. They have a Web site that people can visit, which farmers' markets are on. The Farmers' Market Association, there's some help there. Through the AgriFood Industry Development Fund, which is part of Growing Forward, a federal support - it's a 60-40 program between the federal government and us - they can apply for grants through that program.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One of the areas I wanted to drill down a little bit before I finish up is the farm succession plan and the interest relief. What year did the interest relief program start? There was a year in which there was a holiday, I've had some farmers asking questions about that because they were under the understanding that they had approval for one year but then there was a year holiday. When did it start, what was the year holiday, and can people still apply for that going forward?

 

MR. MACDONELL: The new program starts April 1, 2012, so it's in effect now. The year holiday was the previous year because we didn't want people caught in - it's generally two years' funding on the old - well, even on this one - to a maximum of $20,000 or $30,000. On the old program it was $20,000 over two years. We didn't want people caught in one year and then the program changed. We basically didn't accept applications in that last fiscal.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Of course, one of the other major issues is that its application is for the Farm Loan Board, not for Farm Credit Canada.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Or banks.

 

MR. GLAVINE: In our area, I think of how - sure, they're in a competitive business, RBC, but people like Joe McGrath have done a marvellous job with the local farm community in the Annapolis Valley, and because it only applied to the Farm Loan Board and some farms have a history where they've dealt with the Royal Bank through two or three generations of farmers and felt that they had taken out a loan, they had taken out the risk, they modernized, $1.4 million into a dairy farm is one example I have in mind, and yet they get no break on the investment that they've made.

 

Why not have the program a little bit more global, to be able to accommodate some of the other farmers who, as well, have made strong investment?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I guess the reason is probably me. It's one that we made a commitment that we would look at. I am somewhat resistant to the notion - I want to be upfront - because I don't find that the banks are hurting themselves helping farmers, so why would we help them by having the taxpayers of Nova Scotia pay the interest? I mean if the banks want to step up and offer something for new entrants, they can do that, and if people want to go to the banks when they don't offer that, that's entirely up to them.

 

For me, I have a real problem with the fact that they are not stepping forward to offer something to new entrants and if farmers are going to keep going to them when they don't, they don't have to, they'll collect their interest. So the issue for me is that we're trying to expand the portfolio at the Farm Loan Board, it's a lending agency. So this is an offering that we make to try to attract business to us.

 

So you're probably thinking, well, if the minister is that strong on it, it sure doesn't sound like it's going to see the light of day going to another institution but I made a commitment to the federation that we would look at it. I am not easily taken there, I'll be clear, they might take me kicking and screaming. I just feel that the banks, which are multi-million/multi-billion dollar - you look at their quarterly returns; what are they offering? Not a lot, so that's the thing that grates me to no end. Anyway, how do I really feel? (Laughter) So with that said, I'm considering it. Can I swallow a lump that big? I don't know, but anyway, I really would like to see them offer more.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I guess I look at it from the point of view as I go down Route 221 and I see three or four major investments, and two went to the Farm Loan Board, one went to Farm Credit Canada, and one went to RBC. But it's that young farmer who has taken on $1.4 million debt that you're actually helping, not the bank.

 

The bank, indirectly, yes, and obviously some but still to help that farmer, you know, move along on his path to success, hopefully, then that is a significant help where one farmer will receive it and the other won't. But I appreciate that you're considering a review . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: If they want to pay out the bank - borrow from us and pay out the bank - they could get their interest forgiveness, that's possible. They don't necessarily have to stay with the bank. So if they wanted to come to us, borrow, pay out the bank, then that's in the realm of possibilities - that money is a possibility for them.

 

The way this works - well, I think there's maybe three or four different possibilities of how it could work, but the original program that we used to run was $20,000 over two years interest forgiveness. Correct me if I'm wrong on this - that now will apply the $20,000 to your loan, so that amortized over 25 years, or whatever, the advantage of the interest relief over that amortized period is far greater than the $20,000. So you get a bigger bang, am I right on that?

 

MR. GLAVINE: I understand, yes.

 

MR. MACDONELL: So our envelope is really only $600,000 - which was the same as the old program - and at $600,000 you're talking about a $1.4 million operation that somebody buys - $20,000 is no great, big pile of money. So that was the reason we kind of changed the way we apply it so you would get a bigger advantage in the long term but that doesn't preclude, like I said earlier, for people to move to us and get that advantage if they think it's worth it. Obviously, some people aren't thinking it's worth it but if they qualify to be a new entrant, you know, if they meet that criteria.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One of the realities with agriculture in the province remains the fact that, you know, the average age of a farmer is 54 or 55 years of age. Many of our farms carry enormous debt, an enormous debt load, and the number of new entrants to actually help is very minimal.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Again, there are some heartening signs and one of them is CSA - Community Supported Agriculture, and I'm wondering - it seems to be a very independent kind of view of farming, away from connections to the department and so forth - do you know if any of them tap into the research station, AgraPoint, or are they making some overtures there? Some of them now have expanded quite significantly and I'm just wondering, is the department looking at any possible tie-in as part of increasing local food production in the province, still kind of around 12 per cent or 13 per cent? I think CSA does have some potential to actually see local food production expand quite significantly but yet it seems divorced from the department. I'm wondering how you see it, minister.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'm not sure about your question to be honest. So CSA, is that an organization, is that a movement?

 

MR. GLAVINE: It's really a movement. Perhaps one of the best known is TapRoot Farms, which is pretty well organic, and they supply about 200 families in the metro area with a food basket, let's say, for 15 or 16 weeks of the year. So we see some strong overtures like that but it doesn't seem to be connected to work that goes on with the department, yet it's an important part of local food production.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, it's a retail marketing system, really. I mean some farmers choose that and I think it works well. As a matter of fact, it may work well for 25 per cent of their operation or 75 per cent of their operation, and then they may retail the other 25 per cent through Sobeys. So I don't see it any more of an issue that we would highlight or raise more than - you know, if they wanted to be a farmer and have a business plan and they say part of our revenue or all of our revenue, we'll get through this method and as long as they can get a cash flow - if we're a lender to them, you know, fill your boots as far as I'm concerned. If that works, if that model works for them, we're fine with it.

 

The resources that are available to the rest of the industry are available to them. We help them through promotion on our Web site, we help them with business counselling and marketing, AgraPoint. Whatever other resources would be to any farmer or anybody trying to market their product, we have people who would help to advise them. (Interruption)

 

MR. GLAVINE: With able assistance, I got my answer there, minister. I was just wondering, what are some formal connections? They seem to be very independent people but they're producing an excellent product and so obviously there are some connections there.

 

MR. MACDONELL: One of the things I think you have to realize, there are people who try things and do things and spend money who don't call us. There are people who try things and do things who always call us. In other words, they're into every program. I think the people you're talking about are people who are well advised of what's out there that the department has to offer, and I think for us it's trying to get those other people to use it.

 

It's not that we have any different programs for CSAs, we have those programs for everybody. If they come with that model and say here's what we'd like to do, then we'd be glad to offer whatever expertise we can give to them or we might direct them to someone who's doing it and say you should talk to them about the pitfalls they have encountered and what you might want to look out for. There's a fair amount of resources around through the department and through the industry generally that if we can't give you the answer, we can get the links to help you find someone who can.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One final question, I think this change of eating more locally produced and grown product really has to not just start - because I think there are starts there - but continue strongly in the school system. I think as you and I know, as educators, those kinds of pathways that young children and young people take in their growing-up years can make a huge difference.

 

I've actually had in my area two principals call my office and the observation is that the healthy snack is more expensive and getting children to be able to afford the healthy snack of fruit and vegetables is a hard sell, perhaps more around cost than even having the information and the education value of having those carrot sticks, and so on, at recess.

 

Some smaller schools have been able to subsidize. They've been able to find ways through community partnerships. I'm just wondering if there's anything directed or can be directed or will be directed from the department to assist schools in making a healthy snack with fruit and vegetables as a more significant part of eating healthy while at school. Some jurisdictions have really gone hard at this area and have had some really good successes, and I like the B.C. model myself and some of the things they have been able to do. So I'm just wondering, has the department had a strong look and is generating a concerted effort to do something here?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We spent $400,000 on school milk. If we can convince the dairy industry to take that cost themselves and maybe we'll have $400,000 to do something else with. We promote the school gardens and we try to help direct them on local procurement, and actually we have found it isn't more expensive compared to other less healthy treats; it's quite reasonably priced. So I'm surprised that the principal may want to look at where they're getting it if that's an issue, but that isn't necessarily the case. So we do what we can and hope it would be great to possibly expand that and if we're able, we'll do that.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So at the moment it's primarily subsidy or support with the milk program.

 

MR. MACDONELL: As far as you want to see an actual lump, yes.

 

MR. GLAVINE: The principal who actually - the main one who brought it to my attention was Mr. Karl West, principal at Annapolis East Elementary, a school of about 500 students, I think, so they would have a fair amount of procurement. So anyway, I'll double back with him and just look at if he's going to one provider or several or whatever, so thank you.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Are you finished with your time, member?

 

MR. GLAVINE: Yes, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, minister and staff, for your responses tonight.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: There's a shade over 30 minutes remaining for the Liberal caucus. Is the Progressive Conservative caucus still ready to go on Agriculture?

 

The honourable member for Inverness.

 

MR. ALLAN MACMASTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, we're ready to proceed to Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. The NDP caucus has questions in relation to Agriculture.

 

The honourable member for Lunenburg.

 

MS. PAM BIRDSALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman; thank you, minister. I find it very interesting that the Opposition often says that we're not interested in rural Nova Scotia and hasn't been able to fill the full time asking questions about agriculture.

 

I would like to ask - I know you're very enthusiastic about grain-fed beef and can you talk to us about what we're doing with chickens in the province and how that whole thing is rolling out and plans for future development in the industry?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Thank you for the question. The chicken industry, and you can nod if we're talking chicken in terms of meat or eggs - meat?

 

MS. BIRDSALL: If you could talk to both, it would be wonderful, thank you.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Okay. The issues around the meat side, the poultry side of the industry, I think in the past year have had a real light shone on it. It's one that hopefully I think the first of June, or sometime there, ACA and Maple Lodge will open their new plant in the Valley. The problem that I think they're trying to extinguish is the fact that in the history of chicken production in the province, there were two camps: there was the Maple Leaf or Canard group producers and the ACA group producers.

 

By and large with this new company, they've come together, which should make for a much more viable operation because they'll have 80 per cent of the possible chicken going into one plant, rather than each having 50 per cent, so that's good news.

 

If there's another good-news side to this, I guess it's the fact that they've made this investment with no government money. I mean a $30 million or $35 million investment that they've done on their own, I think is quite impressive.

 

There is no kind of unique component of this - you mentioned about the grass-fed beef - there's no unique component around the feeding of these chickens. This is basically a commodity product.

 

There is some interest in - there are a few producers, they wouldn't have 0.5 per cent of the market, which are the organic, free-range types but not a big part of the chicken industry. So good Lord willing, everything will be in place for around the first of June so this plant will operate.

 

Now there are some other things happening in the world and presently these chickens are being hauled to Quebec and, I think, with a plant opening in the Annapolis Valley that CFIA would certainly be encouraging producers to go there. I'm sure they've been keeping an eye on the number of dead-on-arrivals when they get to Quebec, they think about birds being hauled in the winter or birds being hauled in the summer in the heat. These are all factors that play into the way the federal government would look at humane transport issues, so this should be a good-news story all the way around.

 

As far as the egg industry it's business as usual, there have been very few wrinkles. If there's an issue on both of these sectors it's around the kind of closed-shop nature of them; there are very few new people entering this sector who are not connected to the farm in some way. It seems the expansion basically goes to the families that are in it. That is something that - it's probably because the national allocation as consumption goes up, I'll say Chicken Farmers of Canada is probably the body that does this but I could stand to be corrected, that allocate quota to the rest of the provinces. That doesn't mean that every province has quota - I don't think there is turkey quota in P.E.I., if I'm not mistaken. There is turkey quota in Nova Scotia but we don't produce 100 per cent of our consumption, which is kind of odd for the marketing board, the supply-managed commodities pretty much always max out.

 

We produce all the chicken we consume, we produce all the eggs we consume, we produce all the milk we consume, so the fact that we don't produce all the turkey we consume is an oddity, but that has been an issue around a slaughter facility that would take the larger turkeys, I think, rather than the smaller ones. There are parts of this I'm not sure that I actually understand all of it.

 

Both of these - well, I'll say both of these and I won't include turkeys, but I'll say certainly on the meat production side and the egg production side - we have extremely healthy sectors in this province, they are money-makers. It would be nice if we could come up with another, snap our fingers, but under - I'm going to say NAFTA but I might be wrong - under WTO you cannot create more supply-managed commodities. Milk, chicken, eggs, and turkeys are it and when supply-managed came out in the 1960s, I think it was under the Liberal Government, Pierre Trudeau - was Pierre Trudeau (Interruptions) He was the minister, Eugene Whelan was the minister, so it must have been the 1970s.

 

He offered the system to all the sectors, the beef industry and the hog industry said we are going to be exporters and we will not be tied to just our domestic market. It has probably been great for Alberta, but it hasn't been great for us in terms of beef, number one, or hogs, number two. I might be going out on a limb to say this because the components that you use to raise a chicken, which is grain imported from the West, by and large - there is some grain grown here - is the same thing for growing a hog. A hog is really a four-legged chicken, but they've never been able to get their price out of the marketplace the way they can with chicken. Structurally, on the cost-production side, maybe it couldn't work. I don't know if anybody has ever really analyzed it but if we look at chicken production in this province, it's based like an imported feed that we grow those birds with and the consumer, when they go to the display case, has been able to pick up that product and pay for it at the cash register, and the farmer gets enough money to make money.

 

Whether I'm just naive on the components of that marketing, that still couldn't apply to hogs, I'm not sure. But the inputs come from away and we grow the product here, and they have not been able to make any money. With that said, the two sectors that you have identified presently in Nova Scotia are in very good shape and their contribution to agricultural infrastructure - feed mills and so on - is significant, as with dairy too.

If we ever lost the supply-managed sector in this province which is about $100 million in dairy, the other two together are maybe $50 million each, so $200 million out of our $500 million farm gate receipts would be the supply-managed sector - I stand to be corrected if it turns out it's bigger. It would be disastrous for us to lose that and that's why last week I sent a letter to federal Minister Ritz. I read an article in The ChronicleHerald about pan-Pacific negotiations, Canada wanting to enter the free trade talks in that area, and it sounded as though supply-management was one of the things that was on the table or could possibly be on the table. I wrote the federal minister to say as far as we're concerned, that's not on. On April 20^th I go to Ottawa for a federal-provincial-territorial ministers meeting to meet the federal minister for a day. It may be a chance to chat about that and many other things.

 

MS. BIRDSALL: When you're talking about the plant reopening in June, how many people are we talking about, full-time employees, do you know?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm thinking 200; 170 my deputy tells me. I was thinking in the 200 range.

 

MS. BIRDSALL: Those plants, what are they actually doing? Are they value added? How does that play out?

 

MR. MACDONELL: They're obviously taking live birds that come to the plant and when they come out the other end - I'm not entirely sure if they come out as a whole bird product or if other - breast, legs (Interruption) Whole bird, for starts. It'll be a whole bird product - whether it goes to another facility for more processing or if it goes to retail from there as a whole bird.

 

MS. BIRDSALL: Just one more quick question. When you're talking about the chickens - and you spoke very briefly about that whole organic component - is there a need or desire out there to really grow that particular sector? There certainly is a demand.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't think I have an answer. There is an interest - I'm not sure. On the organic side it seems to be that sector of agriculture that has always been said to grow by 30 per cent per year. I don't know that we're seeing that from that free range/organic that they're growing by 30 per cent per year.

 

There is an issue and it's one of the things we've been discussing in my department recently. The present system requires the people who are non-quota holders that they go to the chicken producers of Nova Scotia and request a licence for X birds or X kilograms, I'm just not sure which, and I think they do that every year. So it makes it particularly difficult to make investment in your operation because you can't go to the banks and say I can produce this year in, year out for 10 years. So I think there would be a little more growth in that sector if there was more flexibility in the licensing, but that's just something that we've been doing some investigation in recently and I have a lot more work to do there on that.

 

MS. BIRDSALL: Thank you.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings North.

 

MR. JIM MORTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for what you've been saying so far, minister. I have a few questions I'd like to touch on, and maybe just a comment to begin with. I think as a representative for Kings North, it's exciting to know that there's a new plant opening in Berwick. That's something that will be important to all of Kings County and it's a plant that has a long history. I happened to have grown up on a farm within a kilometre of that plant when it killed hogs, and often my early Wednesday mornings were started by the sound of hogs on a conveyor belt, I guess, but it will be good to hear activity happening there again. I think it does speak a whole lot to how important value added is, that when we're talking about the numbers of jobs that will be there, it speaks to agriculture being something more than simply producing, it's a much more comprehensive industry.

 

I guess I wanted to go back a little bit on grass-fed beef which might lead me a little bit to abattoirs again, but I was interested in what you had to say. You talked quite a bit about the process, but I don't think you talked so much about consumer reactions to grass-fed beef. I know from a small meeting, a workshop that I attended at Kingstec in Kentville, that one aspect of this work has been to look at how to prepare grass-fed beef and how it may be helping, I guess, prepare consumers for the differences. Is that something you're able to talk about? Is that an aspect of the work that you're able to speak to?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think I can talk about it. I think the first thing is similar to the chicken, you take it there alive. Well, what can I tell you - I should probably have Linda here - I know that one of the things that was done in this process was around sensory testing which was smell, sight, taste, texture, appearance. I guess sight and appearance would probably be the same thing. So what we found in the taste side, taste/texture side, was that for the people who didn't know which they were eating, whether it was grass-finished or grain-finished, they all picked the grass-finished as better, they liked it better. So I can tell you that.

 

The issue - I'm just trying to think of where you're going. Are you thinking that, are we helping to educate people on how to prepare?

 

MR. MORTON: Well, I guess that's part of what I'm asking about, is to what extent is . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, we are. Peter Dewar at Kingstec is helping with developing recipes and cooking techniques and so on.

 

MR. MORTON: Is it your sense that there will be generally good acceptance of a product that's not finished on grain, or is that something that we'll have to do more work with to make it successful?

MR. MACDONELL: Can you repeat your question?

 

MR. MORTON: I guess I'm wondering to what extent maybe Nova Scotians are ready for grass-fed beef or whether they would need, I suppose, a degree of education of preparation for seeing it as an appropriate choice.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I think you might be a bit surprised to find out how savvy a lot of consumers are. I was surprised to find out that there were people talking and knowing a lot about grass-finished beef that I didn't know about, you know, that it was seen as the direction that the industry should go, or the producer should go, and there were some producers who actually were doing that - a few of them here, but there seemed to be more in other jurisdictions. I think if it looks good and tastes good and it's reasonably priced, I think that will sell the day.

 

I mean your comment around preparation is a good one because we would really hate to put all this effort into producing good-quality beef and have it ruined at the oven but, no, I think Nova Scotians will - if there's one thing that I've heard, and this is from that generation that really believed in grain-finishing cattle, was that they would say it will have yellow fat and that won't sell well with the consumer. But there has been no indication - the animals that we killed at O.H. Armstrong, the five animals, that wasn't an issue.

 

I don't know how much I want to disclose. I was told this story, and I'll tell it, that Dr. Ralph Martin who was in charge of the organic institute for Canada, which was in Truro, told me about a project that he was involved in with two farmers, a father and a daughter, and that they were raising 24 head of cattle; 12 were grain-finished and 12 were grass-finished. Now, I'm not sure how long ago this was. So the day came to, the next day they were to be shipped to be slaughtered and the daughter called him to say my father has big concerns about the grass-finished animals, he's worried they won't grade the same as the grain-fed ones and he's a little leery about sending them. Dr. Martin said, look, these are your cattle. As much as we appreciate your support for being involved in this project, in the final analysis you have to make the decision, I can't make that for you, but all I can say is thanks. If you decide you're not shipping them, thanks very much for everything that you've contributed to this stage.

 

They shipped the 24 animals - they graded the same. When you walked in the cooler, you couldn't pick the grass-fed ones from the grain-fed ones. They were really impressed with how the grass-finished animals turned out and that wasn't our project, that was just something he confided in me a couple of years ago because I had raised this issue and was just interested in bouncing it off of him around grass-finished beef, and then he told me this story.

 

So everything that we've seen so far points us in this direction. It has been very favourable to what we thought or read or assumed, but we're not done yet. So, you know, as much as we feel like screaming from the tallest hill, we're just holding a little bit in reserve because we want to complete what we're doing and if at the end we say, okay, everything kind of indicates this is the way we should go and people can make money at this, then we'll have something for Nova Scotia beef producers, for those who are interested in doing this.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Minister and members, from a procedural perspective we certainly have a time allocation of a full hour to the NDP caucus. However, there was only 50 minutes remaining in the allocation for four hours for tonight, of which 20 minutes has gone by. So we have approximately 30 minutes left and I'm wondering how much time the minister would want for a closing statement - not that I expect you to take 30 minutes, because there are more questions.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Well, whatever my colleagues leave me. If my colleagues leave me five minutes, I'll take five minutes.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: There are more questions, I'm just asking . . .

 

MR. MACDONELL: I'm good.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, please proceed - it's just from a procedural point of view - please continue, Mr. Morton.

 

MR. MORTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You were focused in your last remarks, at least towards the end of your last remarks on the slaughtering process, and that's where I want to go next. Earlier, as you were talking about the work that has been done on grass-fed you certainly talked about the potential should the project prove to be something that should proceed, the potential to serve more of the market in Nova Scotia.

 

In terms of slaughtering facilities in the province, in terms of federal and provincial inspections, which I don't understand the differences probably well enough, what's our capacity to deal with an expanded industry and would there be a need to make any adjustments in inspection processes, or is that something you can speak to?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't see that we have a problem; I think from the meat inspection and food safety side we're in quite good shape. The fact that we have 13 or 14 provincially-inspected plants - now, of course, Northumberlamb doesn't kill beef and O.H. Armstrong is moving to a federal designation, so all those plants that have presently killed cattle that are provincially inspected could still do that, but that product could only stay within Nova Scotia's border. I think the advantage, if O.H. Armstrong gets its federal designation, would be it could actually supply - and I think it has a facility in Dartmouth, Eastern Meat, so that plant is actually federally inspected. But they can't take beef from their provincial abattoir into their plant in Dartmouth. What they'll be able to do is complete that link with a federally-inspected facility so they'll be able to take that product into their plant in Dartmouth, and whatever processing they're doing there they can do with Nova Scotia products. That's certainly an advantage that we presently don't have.

 

We have no federal capacity in Nova Scotia for killing beef. Tony's Meats in Antigonish, or Antigonish Abattoir, they kill hogs, they kill lambs, and they had a beef kill line which ended, I think, before the present owners bought the facility. After Larsen's stopped killing beef we had no federal capacity so now, hopefully, if O.H. Armstrong completes this program and gets a federal designation, then we'll have a plant in the province that can do that.

 

I don't know if I can be so pointed in an answer to your question only because probably O.H. Armstrong may be able to give you a better answer of what their ability - I saw a hundred animals a week, or some such thing, is what they could probably take on, and then we have the other provincially-inspected abattoirs that kill beef that would supply the local Nova Scotia market. Linda says they're all under capacity right now and could all take more.

 

MR. MORTON: If I could move to just another question area, I was interested in your earlier remarks on the Kentville Agricultural Centre, you talked a little bit about that in passing, but you mentioned that some provincial employees have been located there. Could you speak a bit as to what the Department of Agriculture has done, is doing, to support that centre of research? I know there are some involvements there.

 

MR. MACDONELL: That's part of the agreement with Dalhousie that they maintain the work that we're doing. (Interruption) I think I'm going to let the deputy answer that question only because - just in the flow back and forth, if that's . . .

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't think that's a norm by any means. He can whisper in your ear.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Okay. We have a partnership working on it and that includes Acadia, Kingstec, Eastern Kings Chamber of Commerce, the regional development authority, and the federal government. With all of that, I don't know if we can speak more specifically about who we have or how we're helping with the Kentville Research Station. We're hoping to re-energize the food technology laboratory there which is actually kind of world-class, it's a great facility. We have the AgraPoint staff working out of the research station. We have over 30 staff there.

 

MR. MORTON: Is that the number of provincially-related staff you would expect to continue to be there or do you see that changing in any way in the foreseeable future?

 

MR. MACDONELL: We're hoping to increase it. That's what the hope is in the future.

 

Just to the comment, when I was in Opposition I asked a question to a minister who let Mr. LaFleche answer the question. That's why I was thinking I could do that.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I've chaired here in the past and I don't think it has occurred. I could get a ruling on that but I would certainly bar it for now until there was a ruling, because I've never heard of it in the past. I have six years in and I haven't heard that. You always do quite well, minister, even with the whispers it's fine. Please continue.

 

MR. MORTON: I think I'd just like to move to grass pellets. You also mentioned in some of your earlier responses that area of development and I know that quite a few things have been happening throughout Nova Scotia around grass pellets, some of which relate to the ability in the province to grow the right kind of grass for pellets. I think there are probably issues around having the right apparatus or furnace to burn those pellets. Maybe there are some issues around actually making the pellets. I wonder if you could speak a bit more to what has been happening in the province in terms of moving to a place where maybe there could be some viability in terms of an industry around grass pellet production.

 

MR. MACDONELL: I think the best we can do, because if this is not really picked up by the private sector, I'm thinking it's probably not going to fly. Prior to the 2009 election, I remember going to a seminar, there were a number of people there who showed a lot of interest in the grass pellet industry. There has been a fair bit of work, not necessarily by us but by private entrepreneurs, around developing a furnace. The issue with the furnace, I think lots of pellet stoves would burn grass pellets, the issue seemed to be around the clinkers that are formed from the minerals that are in the grass. I have to say, people like convenience. They don't really want to be emptying an ashtray under a stove too often, so these clinkers were a bit of an issue.

 

Gus Swanson from Pictou has developed something that would break those clinkers. I think he's actually got it patented. There didn't seem to be any more "bump." I think two or three of the organizations or individuals that approached me that said they were interested in buying a pellet mill, it just never happened. When we were funding the ACAI Centre at AgriTECH Park, I said, this is a research facility; we should try to have it heated with a stove or furnace that would burn grass pellets. I thought that would be the initial one that would help kick this off. The Western Valley grain centre applied through the AgriFlex funding and got approved. I think they're getting the mill. I think they're actually going to come out ahead of us in getting something together as far as pellet production and a furnace. So we're really kind of keen to see that be successful. The college has a research furnace in the engineering building at NSAC.

 

There has been some talk around how you actually go about this. I think probably in Ontario - I don't know if it's exclusively there or other people are doing a similar thing of growing particular cultivars of grasses that you would make pellets with. Miscanthus is the one that I hear the most about. If we get a demand - in other words, if we have a furnace then we've got to feed it - and somebody is willing to say to producers, grow me X acres of miscanthus or grass or whatever, and I'll pay you so much a ton, then that's when it really becomes a private sector thing. If the person willing to buy it isn't willing to pay enough, then the farmers aren't going to produce it, and we're not going to have a grass pellet industry as far as I can see.

Although some people kind of look at it in terms of - if you had your hay cropped down and it got wet and you dry it out again, maybe you could sell that for pellets and the better feed you could feed the livestock, and some people will just grow grass for pellets. I think I was kind of leaning in the direction that because farmers who are growing hay have the equipment already, that this could just be an additional income component that they hadn't thought about before. If they use, say, reed canarygrass, which is forage that's generally grown - that's what I grow in my hayfield. Although people tell me it's not the best thing for sheep, they seem to be quite pleased with it. But at least those cultivars had more options; in other words, if you couldn't feed it to livestock, you could make pellets out of it.

 

If you do something like miscanthus, you're pretty limited. In other words, you're either going to make pellets out of it or - I don't know what else you'd do with it. I didn't see that as offering as much flexibility as I was thinking grass pellet production would on a regular farming operation.

 

With that said, that's not the world I need to enter. In other words, if somebody wants to grow 500 acres of miscanthus and someone is willing to pay them and they can make money at it, more power to you. That's what we want to see happen in terms of rural Nova Scotia and agriculture.

 

So we are eager to see this group in Annapolis County get this operation going to see what it develops into. It's a possibility of many more of these, I think. I talk to a lot of municipal units through my other portfolio. A couple of the mayors or wardens have raised this issue. I've said to them, well, how are you heating your municipal building, are you interested in converting it to a furnace that would burn pellets? So, you know, they were looking for ways that they could enhance agriculture in their area, and I said this is certainly within the realm of possibilities and you might want to consider it.

 

You can't really haul the hay more than 50 kilometres to a pellet plant. Beyond that it starts to not be cost effective; now, you can haul the pellets probably a fair distance. So every 100 kilometres or so you could have another one of these plants, depending on who they were servicing, but at some point economics is going to take over. I mean it doesn't really matter what I say as Minister of Agriculture. If the price of the pellets is not competitive with other pellets, like wood pellets, or if the people supplying them aren't paying farmers enough for them, there are lots of places where this could fall down, but it does have potential because of the acreage in Nova Scotia that has grown up in bushes that could grow grass. I'm kind of hoping that we're actually going to have a beef industry that's going to be the other part of kind of the higher value for this, but this will be another component of a possible way to supplement cash flow for a farm operation.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister and members, there's a shade less than 15 minutes remaining in the target of four hours that we had for this evening, and Mr. Ramey caught my eye a few minutes ago and I think he has a couple of questions, and Mr. Smith as well. The minister needs a little bit of time, a couple of minutes, to wrap up with his closing remarks, so perhaps the questions could be quite brief and the minister's closing remarks perhaps the same.

 

The honourable member for Lunenburg West.

 

MR. GARY RAMEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, minister. I'll try - if you'll excuse a bad pun - not to hog all the time that's left. My first question is about the percentage of arable land in the province, like approximately how much land in the province is suitable for farming?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I don't think I have an answer for you. The world is slightly changing in the sense that we're doing things on land that we never would have grown anything on - like blueberries. They'll grow in a relatively rocky environment - sites that farmers avoided. So, you know, you're getting fair acreages of agricultural production that we didn't consider as land that we would have done anything with. As much as there is a fair bit of blueberry production on old fields that were cultivated and grew grass or hay, that have been abandoned or at least that farming operation stopped and they infilled with blueberry plants, they've become kind of significant acreages.

 

I guess probably the better way to answer your question would be if I could have told you how much number two soil or number three soil or number four soil, and there are some old maps that I think should be updated. They'll tell you county by county how much number two soil or number three soil or number four soil, and I think the way those maps were created was such a broad sampling that we have better techniques today and those should probably all be updated. Then we have forested land that's number two soil. We have places that are growing trees, not growing food, and we have farmland that's probably number five soil. I'm giving you a really long answer to a very short question, so I'm going to say I don't know.

 

MR. RAMEY: I'll move on then. Is it correct for me to say that there are significantly less farmers in Nova Scotia now than there were 40 years ago?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Oh, yes.

 

MR. RAMEY: Okay, so my next question relates to Mr. Glavine's area and Mr. Morton's area which is some of the best soil we have, I'm assuming, in the Annapolis Valley. It was my understanding listening to the media, and also by doing what I'm doing, that there were some real controversies about farmland being sold to developers, as an example. I was wondering if there's a current plan in place - I thought there was talk about this at one time - is there a current plan in place to try to recruit farmers to buy these lands now, or was that an idea that didn't come to fruition?

 

MR. MACDONELL: There are probably lots of plans. A year or so ago the Minister of Immigration - which at that time was Minister Jennex; I'm thinking it's Minister More now - announced a program that we were putting, I think, $250,000 towards which was basically to send people to - I'm going to say a trade mission, but that's probably not the right term - we were sending people to the U.K. and to Europe to look at attracting people who might be interested in farming in Nova Scotia. So that was that program. Now, obviously, if there's anybody anywhere in the world who thinks they might like to come to Canada, to Nova Scotia, that's always an option.

 

Then we do try to encourage people who are born and raised in Nova Scotia. I can only think of one person that I know of - well, I might say two - who actually didn't grow up on a farm but became a dairy farmer, so generally those people come from the industry anyway, but the odd time they don't. We do work hard at trying to encourage people to go into agriculture.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Minister and members, there are eight minutes remaining for questions, answers, and the minister's closing remarks.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Two minutes is what I need.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ramey, and then Mr. Smith.

 

MR. RAMEY: This will be my last one and it's about a subject dear to my heart which is wine. I would like to know what the value of the wine industry currently is to the Province of Nova Scotia because I don't think we talked about that in the other questions - roughly.

 

MR. MACDONELL: $14 million.

 

MR. RAMEY: How many wineries - do we know?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Thirteen grape and one fruit.

 

MR. RAMEY: Thank you very much.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Antigonish.

 

MR. MAURICE SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank my colleagues across the way for giving us the opportunity to ask some questions because on this side we don't often get that opportunity. I'm slightly less happy with my own colleagues who used most of the time. I also had some questions around the biomass pellets and just for a point of information, I won't go there because I have another question I want to ask. I read recently in the paper that there are two women in Cape Breton who have developed a prototype for these biomass pellets that they can actually bring the machine to the farm and create the biopellets there. So I don't think this issue is going to go away; it's devolving, I think, and evolving.

 

As I said, I had some other questions. I particular wanted to go to FarmNEXT, as well, but I'll go to the question that hasn't been asked yet, I don't think. Can you talk a little bit, minister, about the genetic enhancement program for beef and sheep?

 

MR. MACDONELL: I can talk a little bit about them. Actually, I think we just increased the caps on those programs. The programs were designed really to improve the quality of the genetics in both those species, bovines and ovines. The way that was done is we would offer assistance on purchasing a bull, heifers, and I think retaining animals, but they had to hit a standard of a record of performance. For sheep production it's GenOvis, which is a record of performance program that is run out of Quebec and pretty much, I think, the national standard across the country. There may be a province that does its own ROP, a record of performance program. We used to have one here many years ago but no longer do.

 

The cattle one - I'm just looking for someone who might tell me what that's called - bioTrack, but I can't tell you all the components of how that actually works. We move the caps on the cattle, I think, from $3,500 to $5,000, and I think for sheep we moved to $3,500. So that means $300 on a ram, X dollars, and I don't even know off the top of my head how much for a ewe but overall, in your flock, in one year you couldn't get more than $3,500 - or $3,000, I might be wrong. I know we just recently enhanced that genetic enhancement program. I think off the top of my head that's about as good as I can give you.

 

MR. SMITH: All right, I think that uses up my time so thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Minister.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, minister. Closing remarks, if you so wish. I suppose you could carry it over to another day but I don't think too many people would be happy with that, so would you begin.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I don't think we want to get carried away. I want to thank my colleagues on all sides. I appreciate your questions and your input, and we'll get back to those issues that we couldn't get you an answer for. So anyway, I also want to thank my staff for their help.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you and, minister, you have about two minutes left to make the full four hours. Do you have any other thank-yous or anything else?

 

MR. MACDONELL: No.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll consider it the four hours then.

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, I'm good, unless somebody has something they want to squeeze out of the minister. (Interruption)

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Inverness, two minutes.

MR. ALLAN MACMASTER: Minister, I believe the funding for harness racing to the province comes through your department, is everything the same there this year?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Other than the fact that it doesn't come through my department anymore. Minister Wilson just deals direct - there used to be a flow-through but it doesn't flow through to me anymore.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Is it your understanding that it's the same?

 

MR. MACDONELL: Yes. The Maritime Provinces Harness Racing Commission Act is still under me, so the animal care side is still with us. It's just that the money that came from gaming flowed through us and we gave out the cheque; that's not going to happen.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Okay, I'll have to ask him, I guess, when he comes here.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, minister and members.

 

Shall Resolution E1 stand?

 

Resolution E1 stands.

 

We have gone four hours and 10 minutes, with a 10-minute break, so it's exactly, right to the second, four hours. Thank you very much, that concludes the estimates for today.

 

[The subcommittee adjourned at 9:45 p.m.]