Sales tax on top of it.

You know, the chuckling that I’m hearing coming from the opposition really points to the fact that they are completely disconnected, so I so look forward to sharing my next comment.

Interjection.

With that said, I want to continue talking specifically as to why we need to continue to do everything we can to advance the agri-food industry in Ontario, because we’re getting handcuffed by federal and provincial Liberals on carbon tax. Clearly, the NDP have no clue what it’s really like to actually produce quality crops on farms, and they don’t understand the costs of production. That was just proven moments ago.

The fact of the matter is, when we developed our Grow Ontario Strategy, we made a commitment to listen to everyone, and I’m so proud of the feedback that was facilitated, not only by fellow MPPs in government but also by the team at OMAFRA, because they too understand that for a prosperous overall industry we needed to get out, hit the road and seek input, so that the proposed changes in Bill 155 are well informed. And we’ve done just that.

Some industry organizations that have participated—I know that my colleagues mentioned some of them, but I want to give a shout-out and give you a sampling of the individuals and organizations, commodity organizations and businesses that have participated: the Beef Farmers of Ontario, Dairy Farmers of Ontario, Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers, Livestock Research Innovation Corp., Ontario Apple Growers and Ontario Tender Fruit Growers. That’s just a handful of everyone who gave of their time to make sure we got it right. And as we heard from my colleagues, we did get it right, Madam Speaker, because we took time to be informed. Everyone has supported this, and we have moved through in a very thoughtful manner.

During our extensive stakeholder engagement, it was clear that the industry was aligned for the need of research that is forward-thinking, forward-looking, all the while addressing the realities and the goals that we have today. Again, it makes me so incredibly proud of how far we’ve come with this particular piece of legislation, and just like my colleagues, I want to share some experts’ written feedback that we received.

The Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the province’s largest general farm organization with 38,000 members, said this, and I’m quoting President Drew Spoelstra. He said, “OFA supports the updated language in Bill 155. The modernized definition of research removes the previous narrow focus and provides scope. The addition of innovation in the ARIO name, and as a defined team, is reflective of current research and innovation initiatives and aligns with the focus of the Grow Ontario Strategy to strengthen the agri-food sector.”

In addition to this, during our committee hearings OFA had a deputation and OFA’s very own and ARIO board member, Jennifer Doelman, comes from eastern Ontario, and we’re so lucky to have her around.

Interjections.

The Beef Farmers of Ontario also supported written feedback. Executive director Richard Horne wrote, “With respect to Bill 155, BFO is broadly supportive of the proposed modernization of the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario Act, and would like to commend the government of Ontario for initiating this long-overdue process.”

As you can hear, Speaker—and our committee heard this loud and clear as well, I would dare say. Thank you to the members who are here today who participated on that committee. I appreciated it very much.

At the end of the day, what the committee members heard was enthusiasm about modernizing the ARIO Act. All in all, stakeholder reaction has been very positive to the modernization effort that we’ve facilitated, and again, it’s a demonstration and a proof point that our government takes time to consult and to listen, because we need to get it right.

As we did that, industry stakeholders relayed that they see the proposed modernization of the ARIO Act as an opportunity for the organization itself, ARIO, to play a larger, more high-profile role in the advancement of agri-food research in Ontario. We heard about the 14 research stations we have across Ontario moments ago, and I’m really proud of the corridor of excellence that we’re growing and fostering near Elora. I would dare say, not only are we going to be setting the tone in terms of advanced research and innovation for Ontario, but the rest of Canada and jurisdictions around the world will be looking to what we’re doing in Ontario when it comes to thoughtfully growing our agri-food industry.

Stakeholders also expressed that ARIO can help to shape a stronger industry and, more importantly, supply chain. If ever before, and on the heels of the pandemic, did we come to realize how important a robust, secure supply chain is, and I would dare say—and I think the farmers across the province, our commodity organizations, and our food and beverage organization would echo this—our sector worked so incredibly hard to ensure that the pandemic had minimal impact on the production of good-quality, safe food, not only grown but processed and manufactured right here in Ontario. That speaks to our Grow Ontario Strategy as well, because it’s our plan to strengthen the agri-food industry and ensure an efficient, reliable and responsive food supply chain to address ongoing vulnerabilities through new innovations.

Just yesterday, I visited the port of Hamilton, and it’s amazing what’s happening there. Overall, HOPA understands and values the prominent role that agriculture has in that particular port. There are hundreds of value-added businesses that are processing in the Hamilton area.

We visited Bunge in particular. They take truckloads of soybeans from across Ontario and a little bit of canola, but they also, by boat and truck and rail, bring in canola from western Canada. At that port, right on site, to minimize the cost of production, Bunge receives the raw commodity and processes it so that, ultimately, not only oil for livestock feed but edible oil is processed right there in the port lands. That’s a thriving, prosperous, thoughtful connection within the supply chain. Then, once it’s processed, that oil makes its way to Oakville and makes its way into what has been deemed the food and beverage manufacturing hub of all of Canada, which is the GTHA. I would dare say—I’ll give a plug, because they deserve it. How many people enjoy a nice, crispy French fry from McDonald’s? Okay, there are hands going up.

That said, I can tell you that I learned that edible oil that Bunge produces right there, after receiving the raw commodity in the port lands in Hamilton, actually is used by McDonald’s across Canada to fry those french fries. That’s something that soybean producers in Bruce county and Huron county and counties all over Ontario can be really proud of.

That’s why we work 365 days a year to produce raw commodities that can be realized, and that realization is something we can all be so incredibly proud of.

Interjections.

I’ll applaud food any time.

Tell us more.

Thank you for that.

We have very aggressive goals in our Grow Ontario Strategy, and we’re not going to apologize for it; we’re not going to make any excuses. We’re going to continue to keep our foot on the accelerator to make sure that we meet these goals by 2032, because not only do farmers, food processors, beverage manufacturers and processors need us to continue to increase our production, but the rest of the world is looking to us, as well.

It’s interesting. I visited another company in Port Colborne yesterday. They’re right along the canal: London Agricultural Commodities. They have the old Robin Hood facility. They receive and move tens of thousands of metric tonnes of crop every year. Historically, though, that particular elevator was set up by Robin Hood in 1939, where they received locally grown grains and, again, immediately milled it into flour that could be used not only to feed Ontario and other jurisdictions, but—did you notice the year I used? 1939. A lot of that flour was geared toward going over the Atlantic to support our troops. Being there was somewhat surreal, given that it was Vimy Ridge Day. I know that Vimy Ridge represents the Great War, but knowing how the agri-food industry, throughout the years, throughout the decades, has stood tall and supported really important efforts made by Canadians is just remarkable.

Interjections.

I jump around in my remarks—and I just saw, “Oh, talk about your farm here.” Well, I already did a bit.

It’s interesting—

I grew up on a cash crop, beef feedlot operation. My husband grew up—and it’s the farm I’m proud to call home now—on a cash crop, dairy hog operation. We work really hard.

I have to give a shout-out—

Interjections.

My husband has not been well for a number of months, and many of you know that in this House. He grew up in a family of seven. We could not have operated—oh, dear. They’re going to owe me a beer, because I’m going to bring them up in topic. We couldn’t keep doing what we’re doing. We were ready to disperse our herd, because we knew Dennis would be spending a lot of time in the hospital, but my brother-in-law and sister-in-law took our animals in. The animals spoke loud and clear, because clearly, by their progeny that they produced this winter, they’re saying, “You’re not getting out of the business anytime soon, because we just gave you a whole lot of young stock that you need to bring back to the farm.”

I can tell you, my husband is rehabilitating in London right now, and he’s starting to get really itchy—because people are going to want to get on the land. That’s who we are. You feel the need to be on the land. You want to get home. You want to get into that barn and see that young stock thriving. Again, you work together to get it done.

My example that I just shared with you is indicative of the type of spirit that we have throughout all of Ontario, and I’m sure the member from Temiskaming Shores can speak to his own examples of how farmers help farmers. Why? Because we love what we do, we’re proud of what we do, but we never, ever take for granted the responsibility we have and the honour we have to be producing good-quality food 365 days of the year.

So that’s why, as Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, I am absolutely committed to working as closely as we can with industry to make sure we get things right and that we’re looking ahead and that we’re laying down the cornerstones for the next generation of farmers who want to carry on a family legacy, to do what they can to continue to move that ball down the field.

We’re going to really, as I said, be aggressive in our strategy. We want to increase our exports of Ontario grown and manufactured processed food and beverage 8% year over year through to the year 2032. And, ladies and gentlemen, just by taking a look at some data that’s come in, looking at the year 2022-23 already, we’re already at 20%.

Again, I want to give kudos where it’s due. I want to give a shout-out to Premier Ford and our entire team at this government because we’re setting the climate, we’re creating the environment for which business can excel. We’re getting government out of their way as well.

Can we do more, faster? Absolutely we can, but what we’ve done to date is really making a difference for all of our sectors throughout this province, and just this case alone—I’m talking about the agri-food one but, again, I want to repeat: We’re increasing our exports and we’ve surpassed our initial goal, but that gives me every confidence that we will, by 2032, be in a position to not only celebrate a little bit but look ahead again and say, “Okay, how can we continue to increase exports?” Because, ladies and gentlemen, countries around the world are looking for food, beverage and primary commodities and, you know, I hear about it day in and day out.

I had the honour of taking some people to Mexico to see what kind of interest we could drum up in our grain industry as well as our value-added chain leading right to bakeries. The team that we took was amazing: grain farmers, millers, commodity traders, bakers and even the port of Hamilton was represented. We told such an amazing, solid story—

Interjections.

With all that said, I can tell you the port is ready to grow with us as well. Ladies and gentlemen, the fact of the matter is, people look to Ontario because they trust the quality and they trust the standard that goes into food production that happens here. And with that—I can tell.

We were just at Restaurants Canada, which was hosted here in Toronto over the last three days, and one of the exhibitors was a participant in our trade mission to Mexico. And she’s continuing to build relationships, to secure more sales because, again, that particular bakery is diversifying: Not only are they looking at food service but they’re looking at the opportunity to export their baked goods as well. That’s just one of so many examples, you know.

The other thing is, I was at LAC yesterday in Port Colborne. We’re in their facility and they were talking about the relationships that they’ve realized as a result of participating in that trade mission. That’s what we need to be doing as a government: opening the window and letting business dive through to take up every opportunity that they can realize. All of that is for naught if we don’t have the right foundation. And that foundation is based on research and, more importantly, innovation, to make sure that we are driving efficiencies, driving increased yields and, more importantly, driving good-quality, nutritious production of food.

I think it’s safe to say that this particular legislation has really hit the mark. You know, I enjoy hearing and listening to everyone with regard to their comments.

I just realized I talked about my brother and sister-in-law to make sure that their name gets into Hansard. I want to give a shout-out to Teresa and Al Detzler, there. Thank you for all that you have done, and all the rest of Dennis’s family as well. You guys have been amazing. I can give a shout-out to my own immediate family, too.

But moving on, because it’s important that people hear this, I want to note that everybody has been supportive of updating this important piece of legislation. It’s forward- and thoughtful-thinking, and I want to give a little nod to the member from Temiskaming Shores. I enjoy his comments and his approach to things.

He was talking about a research station in the north, Emo. He’s going, “Maybe people don’t even know where it is,” but I can tell you, one of the first trips I took as Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs was to northwestern Ontario with the Minister of Northern Development, and we went to that research station at Emo. It was in the fall, and to give you an idea of how important research is, they were harvesting hops.

Who would have thought even three or four years ago that hops could grow in northwestern Ontario? That’s why research matters, because ladies and gentlemen, not only do we want to focus research on increasing production, introducing more efficiencies, introducing innovations that will help offset the lack of labour that we have, quite frankly, not only in processing manufacturing but on the farm as well, and further to that, I think it’s very important that we also recognize that there’s so much opportunity in northern Ontario.

I’m so glad that our member is visiting the Earlton Farm Show and our station in New Liskeard in the next couple of days. I appreciate that so very much because the fact of the matter is, there is so much more we can do when we all collaborate, identify what’s working and what’s not, how we can improve, why research matters, and then we filter that all down and take it back to the board at ARIO so that we can identify priorities.

I’m so proud of the team at OMAFRA for absolutely being dedicated to making sure that these research priorities are heard loud and clear, and I’d be remiss though—I’d like to give a call-out to the federal government as well, to make sure that they understand the importance of investing, not only in certain agricultural commodities, but the pork industry in Ontario just asked for a meagre $2 million of investment in their research centre in Elora and, unfortunately, they haven’t had a positive response yet from the federal government.

So I would like to say to the Liberal government in Ottawa: Please, I hope you embrace the importance of research and innovation as much as our government has, here in Ontario.

We all should be investing in forwarding our food industry here, not only in this province, but it benefits all of Canada as well.

Leave it to the NDP to never leave a chance to absolutely go off the page and talk about something that is not being debated today in Bill 155. What the member opposite was referencing was actually a decision that needs to be made at the regional level.

But let me tell you, as we continue to move forward, we’re going to continue to be dedicated to modernizing everything that we do in support of Ontario farmers right across this province. With Bill 155, we’re going to continue to drive innovation—innovation based on solid research—because that, at the end of the day, is going to generate a return on investment for all of Ontario.

With that, I’d also like to give a shout-out—and why we’ve landed it well—to the officials at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. They too see the opportunities that this industry has when it’s supported by a government that understands, listens and gets the job done on their behalf.

At this time, I’d like to give a shout-out to Christine Dukelow, Carm Hamilton and an amazing agricultural representative from the Lindsay area, Don Pullen, my home agricultural representative as well. They demonstrated to me time and again how important it is to take time to meet with people, to really clearly research and understand an issue or a situation. I think it was inherent when I had this opportunity—it was almost surreal in one way—to come into this chair as Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, to be able to, on their shoulders, effect change. We’re doing it with a team from across Ontario. We have a tremendous number of MPPs from rural Ontario who themselves take time to understand, because they meet with constituents and—

Questions?

I recognize the Minister of Agriculture.

I recognize the member from Kitchener–Conestoga.

I want to thank the minister not only for speaking on the bill today, but also, I had the opportunity at committee to hear what you had to say as well. What was really remarkable about this bill—as you say, it’s something that hasn’t been addressed since 1962. The opposition are bringing up something that has nothing to do with this bill. They actually support this bill, and it essentially went through committee without amendment as well, which is really remarkable in this House, so I want to say what a great job of the preparation, the consultation, going to the people across the board in Ontario to see what will work as we update this act. Maybe you could expand a little bit on some of those consultations that took place so that we could bring a bill that everybody supports without amendment—great job.

I want to thank the members for their contribution to the debate this afternoon, third reading of this bill. Actually, I want to commend the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, as well as her parliamentary assistants the members from Elgin–Middlesex–London and Chatham-Kent–Leamington. I think that it is unfortunately rare when a bill comes forward that has all-party support.

We have seen through committee work and, of course, through the advice of our in-house expert on rural and agriculture issues, the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane, who is part of our caucus, and everything I’ve heard, everything I’ve read and learned—this is a piece of legislation where I believe the process of good, solid public consultation was done before bringing the bill. I think that’s very important. I want to thank you for doing that.

I was wondering if you would share with the House a little bit more about that process, how much work went into the consultation. I ask this because it is so important—

I’ve had the pleasure of knowing the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs for many years now, pre-politics. I just wanted to thank her for her continued advocacy for rural Ontario, because she truly embodies it, lives and breathes it every day, and is a huge champion.

I know that one of the things that we’ve talked about a little bit—and I know the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane, in second reading, was very much in favour of the new veterinary pieces that are in this bill and looking at some of the ways that we can incentivize new vets to get involved and serve underserved communities, like parts of northern Ontario and, certainly, more rural areas near yourself and myself as well, eastern Ontario. I wondered if you could talk a little bit more about what those grants look like and how you think that they’ll impact the industry and communities.

Absolutely. I appreciate that question from the amazing member who’s working so hard in the Kitchener–Conestoga area. When we were in consultation around ARIO, we also heard about the need to increase the number of, particularly, large animal vets in areas of Ontario that were underserviced. Because of that, we spun off an entirely different act, Bill 171, to address that very thing. So again, to the member opposite, thank you for recognizing that.

During consultation, we also heard about the need to make sure that rural communities, remote communities were well served.

Interjection.

But long story short, by being out there and consulting with ARIO, the agricultural research innovation, if it should pass, has led us to introducing and debating and going to committee very soon with another act, Bill 171, and that’s—

In short, I think this particular bill demonstrates that farmers are more than—

Thank you.

Further questions?

Further debate?

I too grew up on a farm where I saw miracles grow before my eyes and learned the appreciation for new life. I grew pumpkins as well. I grew cucumbers and flowers. I think that the member for Essex painted us a very nice picture in that regard. That’s why we should be most proud of those who work the fields every day, in various weather, various storms, to produce the very best food for us—the very best food in the world.

I do support this bill, modernizing ARIO to reflect the current agri-food research environment as well as the research and innovation needs of the agri-food sector. My question, however, is to the minister. I just would like to know how Bill 155 will ensure farmers are recognized and included as key participants and not merely as stakeholders.

It’s always an honour to be able to speak in the House on behalf of the residents of Timiskaming–Cochrane and on behalf of my colleagues in the NDP, and today on the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario Act. Before I get into the remarks too far, I’d like to congratulate the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston and the member from Essex on their new roles as parliamentary assistants.

I’d like recognize the minister and her remarks, and I’d like to extend our heartfelt appreciation for her talking about the challenges in her personal life. It’s never easy. We all know what it takes to give up what you give up. I felt it too, the pain. What I was thinking about as the minister was speaking was the last time I drove out the driveway of my dairy farm, the last time I milked the cows. I know that feeling.

We wish your husband well. We certainly hope that your herd comes back. Goats—are they are herd or a flock?

Anyway, in your personal endeavours, we wish you well.

Actually, politically, agriculturally, we usually work together very well. There are issues that we disagree on vehemently, but there’s a way to work in the country, and I think we exemplify that in the House as well. We can agree to disagree vehemently, but still, at the end of the day, we can also agree to work together where we can work together.

I heard a couple of mentions of the Earlton Farm Show. I’m glad that the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston is coming.

I have to relay a personal story. As most of us are aware, the one event that the Legislature stops for is the International Plowing Match. We all have history with the International Plowing Match; I know the minister does. The minister and I have some shared history with the International Plowing Match. One day, I was in the cafeteria—I love the cafeteria in this place, by the way; everybody knows that it’s my favourite spot—and one of the cafeteria staff members asked me, “Mr. Vanthof, I know you go to this International Plowing Match every year and the Legislature stops, but what exactly happens there? Should I be interested in going there?” He had worked here a long time, and he didn’t have a clue. My explanation for the International Plowing Match is that it’s a plowing competition, something that has historical and current importance to agriculture, but it’s also a celebration of the rural lifestyle—and that’s what it has become. I said, “Do you live in a city?” He said, “No, I’ve got a couple of acres.” I said, “You will love the International Plowing Match.”

The member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston and I know exactly what a farm show is, but a lot of other people might not—millions of people in Ontario. They’re open farm shows—the one I know the best. There are 60 exhibitors, and they exhibit their wares, so, basically, their tools or seed or—the tools of the trade for agriculture, and always the most advanced ones, because as we all know, agriculture is advancing rapidly. Just as an example, there will be a booth with guidance systems. When I started farming, you would start your tractor and you would drive the tractor. Now, tractors—they’re not autonomous yet, but you’re sitting there as a troubleshooter, not necessarily as an operator. Soon, they will be autonomous. It’s things like that that you see at farm shows.

What makes the Earlton Farm Show incredible is—it’s not the biggest farm show in the province. It’s a long way away from here, and a lot of people—I see the Minister of Northern Development and Mines is here too. He’s very interested in agriculture, as well. A lot of people don’t realize how advanced agriculture is in the north. Their own farm show is an eye-opener. To anyone who is thinking about maybe looking at agriculture in northern Ontario, maybe expanding into northern Ontario: I couldn’t think of a better time to come than this weekend, this Friday and Saturday, to the Earlton Farm Show.

Not everyone may know how to get to the Earlton Farm Show, so I’ll give you a few directions. I’m hoping that everyone across Ontario, whoever is watching, can find their way to Highway 400. Ontario is a big province, but you take 400 and you go as far as 400 goes, and you take 11 and you keep going, and in the city in North Bay you take a right and you keep going up 11. That’s where 11 goes to two lanes, but you keep going. You will go through—before you get to North Bay and for about an hour, hour and a half after, you will go through Canadian Shield: old growth white pine, beautiful lakes and a lot of rock. If you’re an agri-farmer, anyone in agriculture, you are going to wonder what you are doing there. You really are.

Then you will crest a hill by the town of New Liskeard and you will see a couple of hundred thousand acres of farmland open before you. If you know where to look, you’ll see the Sollio feed mill; on the other side, you’ll see Pederson Construction. You keep going, you’ll go to the little town of Earlton, and Koch Farms is on one side, Earlton is on the other side, and there’s kind of a competition which one’s bigger. I think on certain days, Koch Farms looks a little bigger than the town of Earlton. Norm and his kids will have a big sign pointing to the farm show. It’s in the arena. The arena was recently dedicated to Wilfred and Rosaire Paiement, two very famous hockey players who were born and raised in Earlton and played in northern Ontario. That’s where the farm show will be.

Please, if you’re thinking about—that’s why I’m so glad that members from the government side come, because if you’re thinking about farming in northern Ontario or wondering what it’s like to farm in northern Ontario, and if you’ve got the itch and if you’re not quite ready to seed your own fields yet, we’ve got a couple of weeks yet in northern Ontario. Please come to the Earlton Farm Show. We will welcome you with open arms. We’re there for the whole time. We will welcome you with open arms. Thank you very much for saying you’re going to come. Thank you very much.

The Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario Act, I don’t think this act has been changed for years and years and years—60 years. Basically, the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario controls 14 sites. There are about 200 buildings, in a partnership with the University of Guelph, in most cases, and the Ontario government, where research is critical to keeping agriculture current and keeping Ontario as a leader. That’s where it’s conducted.

This is one of the few acts—it has sailed through the Legislature. For good reason. I give credit where credit’s due. I said this at the second reading, but it’s worth saying again: This act is singularly focused. There’s no poison pill in that, there’s no wedge issue in it. It’s focused. It’s well consulted. I think that showed at the committee hearings. It was well consulted. As a result, we’re having good debates. We’re actually talking about—I will bring up a couple of issues that came up in the committee. I’m not opposed to rancorous debate, but I think the debate here is constructive. We’re talking together to move an industry forward.

I would like to quote the minister, and I agree, “Consultation equals results.” This act is an example. I hope that the government uses this as a template, because I’ve got to say that not all of the government’s legislation, even regarding agriculture, has been like that. I don’t think that during the greenbelt fiasco—that bill had to be rescinded—I don’t think that anyone in agriculture is going to say that they were consulted. When it was proposed to subdivide agricultural properties into three, that never made it to the House, but no one is going to—that was not consulted well at all. As a result, I think everybody paid a price. So this is an example of: The government of the day knows how to do it, but sometimes whoever’s running the show chooses not to do it.

I commend the minister on this act. I do. I give credit where credit is due, and the Minister of Agriculture—you know how to do it. On this one, you did it, and as a result, we’re having a good conversation about it.

So, in Ontario, there are 14 sites, and I remember in my second reading debate, I did a whole tour of Ontario, where all these sites were. I don’t think I’m going to make people suffer through that again, but there’s a few sites that are special to us all.

I’ll get it yet without having to read, but the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston mentioned one that was close to his riding, and I’m going to mention one that’s very close to my riding—not close to my riding; it’s in the centre of my riding. The member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston—I’m going to get it yet—is actually going to go visit that site and specifically the SPUD unit at that site, right? And I commend him for that.

The SPUD unit is—we just say it’s the SPUD unit and then people go, “What is the SPUD unit?” It’s a tissue—and I have no science background—a tissue propagation facility. Basically, they take in seeds of plants, not just potatoes, but strawberries, garlic, asparagus. They actually create a very prolific and very popular type of asparagus at the SPUD unit, and it’s grown in many places.

An example is—so there’s something called a—and anyone scientific is going to think, “Oh, man, Vanthof, what are you talking about?” but I try to explain things in lay terms, the way I understand them. So, you take a potato and there are—in Prince Edward Island, they recently had something called potato scab, a disease on potatoes. You don’t want to grow potatoes that have potato scab. The SPUD unit can take those potatoes and somehow go down to the genetic material and the resulting seed will be virus-free, so you’re starting with pure, clean stock. That’s really important—incredibly important.

Now, the SPUD unit has been operating for 40 years in New Liskeard, and New Liskeard is very close to where—I just told you where the farm show is. I forgot to tell you that the farm show, from here, if Toronto traffic is good, is about seven hours. The SPUD unit is about six and a half hours, right? And the reason it’s so far away: Because of prevailing winds and because of—the area itself is relatively clean as well, like, the air. There’s not a lot of other things being grown around it. It’s easier to keep it sterile when the outside air isn’t full of virus, full of disease. It’s not without challenge, but it’s easier. It’s really important.

So what happened to the SPUD unit—I’m going to have to back up for a second. At one point, the research farm in New Liskeard, which is an ARIO site—it was about 10 years ago, when I was first elected. I guess it was maybe my first or second year. There was a very strong direction from the University of Guelph to close the site in northern Ontario. They were hoping to focus everything closer to Guelph, and we fought back because—and I talked about this at the committee—conditions are different in different parts of the province, and so it’s relevant to do research in an area that, in northern Ontario, is growing in importance and in size in agriculture. It’s relevant to do research there.

So we fought back, and we cut a deal with the then Minister of Agriculture—at the time, it was Ted McMeekin—to hold on that decision and give us some breathing room to come up with a solution. As a result, we cut a deal to sell half of the research stations and build new research facilities on the other side of the road.

The problem is, the SPUD unit is on the half that was sold. That’s, quite frankly, what happened. The SPUD unit is a rented facility, and it’s worn out. Quite frankly, it’s worn out. It needs to be rebuilt, and we’ve been pushing to have it rebuilt for quite a while.

Last year, at the estimates for agriculture, it came up. I brought it up to the minister, and to her credit, the minister, I believe last year, toured the SPUD unit when she came to the farm show. Everyone’s welcome at the farm show. We would love it if you came to the farm show, Speaker. We’d give you the royal treatment.

So this year at the hearings, the berry growers came to hearings on the ARIO bill. The SPUD unit is an ARIO facility. I’m going to quote directly from the representative from the Ontario berry growers. His name is Mr. Tom Heeman. I’m going to talk about what he said about the SPUD unit:

“It breaks my heart that this past fall we had to stop shipments of genetic material from New Liskeard because the HEPA filter was not replaced and there wasn’t a budget to do so.” Like, they didn’t have the budget to change the HEPA filter. “So our samples got contaminated with mould. I know that sounds like a small thing—a couple of plants had to be thrown out and started over again”—that’s what people on the outside world think—“but it takes over three years to replace those dozens of plants into millions and millions of plants. Those plants go throughout the country. They go throughout the United States. You may not buy Ontario berries all the time, but the technology in New Liskeard helps create those Florida berries that get imported during the winter as well.

“I just want you to” know “about these changes. Adding intellectual property I think would be a benefit so that you can work with the university and have a clear guideline on intellectual property.”

But the main problem here is that this facility is worn out. I’m very proud of agriculture in Ontario—extremely proud. I made my living at it most of my life. I am much more qualified as a farmer than I ever will be as a parliamentarian, I guarantee you that. But this facility is worn out. Everyone knows it, and we waited until nothing—now we’re having to import that genetic material. We can’t say we’re leaders and we can’t say we’re research leaders when facilities are breaking down.

So I asked Mr. Heeman about the challenges that we’ve had trying to get the SPUD unit rebuilt. We have a perfect site for it on the ARIO research land across the road, where the provincial government helped build a brand new research station for field crops. That is the perfect spot for it. Everyone agrees that that’s a perfect spot.

I’m not going to read my whole question; it’s not about me. So to Mr. Heeman: “You mentioned some frustration, but just how important is the tissue culture centre and where are you in the process?” And I’m going to quote exactly what he said:

“Thank you. I don’t think anything has changed. I was at this 10 years ago because we had a hard time getting contracts renewed. We’d call and call because we’re a client and we didn’t know who to talk to, and we’ve been able to expand that process up to the minister’s level.

“Again, these facilities are good but we need to have stakeholder dialogue. That whole mandate on technology transfer and expansion—OMAFRA does a tremendous job”—give credit where credit is due, “but they need to have the people in place. It all started when we lost the faculty member”—so when Guelph kind of didn’t pay attention to the SPUD unit. “The faculty member retired and was never replaced. Now we just have a technician with an overseer in Guelph, so there’s not active research being advanced at that facility” today.

“I brought an example today of what it means. I don’t know if you’ve all heard about the Ontario hazelnut story,”—so we’re going to talk about the hazelnut story, a direct quote—“but this is something that is a homegrown success story. It required the tissue culture in the New Liskeard plant in order to make sure that the varieties they were breeding and bringing into nurseries were clean of virus. Now we have delicious Ontario hazelnuts ... something we never had before.” Something we wouldn’t have had without the SPUD unit in New Liskeard.

He goes on to say, “What has been communicated to me is that the challenge is the funding for the joint partnership agreement.” And that is a challenge for this act. This act is good. We have supported this act from day one. But you also have to have funding to actually replace some of these facilities, have the funding to manage these facilities. And it was identified in there that that is not the case—so now I lost my place—“where you can have funding for the facilities, but if you don’t have the funding for the faculty to operate the facilities, then you get a shortfall. Again, you don’t have a lab director for that facility. They’re under another individual out of Guelph who doesn’t physically visit that spot, and you have a technician who is very skilled but close to retirement. She communicates with us, because she’s very exasperated at times for not being listened to. I think it’s a very difficult position, where she has all these plants to keep alive and she knows that growers are counting on her, but I don’t think that—because it’s basically an orphaned facility.”

That’s why I’m bringing it up today: because this is an ARIO facility, and someone who depends on it. We’ve all been talking about research, and someone, a group who depends on this facility is basically saying, “It’s orphaned.” And that came up at committee.

There was also, at the same committee, a representative from the University of Guelph. In response to the same question—and it’s the first time I’ve been at committee that someone answered a question that I didn’t ask—he was obviously very impacted. I give credit where credit is due. I respect, by Mr. Heeman’s comments, when he said that that facility was orphaned. It was Dr. Shayan Sharif—he was the representative from the University of Guelph. He said, “If I may just to diverge here and just point out one big important thing in regard to the SPUD unit, because it has been discussed quite significantly and very extensively: I just wanted to tell MPP Vanthof that I don’t really think that that SPUD is orphaned.... We hope to lease out to industry to have a sustainable plan for the operations of SPUD. SPUD is not forgotten; it will never be forgotten. It is really critical for the industry and for the north. We recognize that, but we need to have a sustainable plan that would ensure its viability for the future.”

I couldn’t agree more. We’re just getting frustrated. And the member from Essex—where are you from, then?

Interjection: Kent.

March or April.

Kent. He agrees, and he knows more about strawberries than me.

When you get to the point that your tissue cultures facility is falling apart and we’re still talking about that it’s time for a plan—we’ve been talking about this for a long time. We’ve known this issue, and we get it, and you get it. That’s one of the reasons I’m glad that this bill is at the table right now. I’m focusing on this because this needs to be settled. It needs to be settled.

Forty years ago, I am sure that this facility was groundbreaking, breathtaking in what it could do. Now it’s worn out. And when the minister said—and we are: in some areas, we are way ahead. We are world leaders in research. But in tissue propagation for commercial breeders? Not right now. And even the one thing we’ve learned—we’ve learned a lot of lessons from COVID, and the one thing we have also learned from COVID is that you need to be able to rely on your own facilities when things go wrong in the world. I think this is a case where, for 40 years, we’ve had that facility, and now we didn’t have the money to change the HEPA filter. Like, what is that?

I’m from northern Ontario, and I’m a bit jaded, because 10 years ago, we had to fight to keep the research station, period. We saved the research station with the University of Guelph and with the government. But this feels eerily similar. It just does.

So when you’re at the Earlton Farm Show, see the potential—and there’s way more potential in northern Ontario—but also recognize what’s there and what needs to be changed. Because if there’s one thing that needs to be changed, and actually, there’s not a lot of—there’s starting to be more potatoes and there’s a few strawberries, but most of it isn’t for local. That one—and I take the rep from the University of Guelph at his word. I take the minister at her word last year at committee when she said that there was a plan in place to rebuild it and to rebuild it in New Liskeard. She specifically said in New Liskeard. I take everyone at their word. The question is, “When?” and “How many more?” The berry growers are now—they were hurt, and for no reason. So if the act is updated, hopefully that will help speed up the decision-making process too.

I know I’m dwelling on this issue for a long time, Speaker, but it’s an issue I likely won’t get to talk about again very much. And I don’t think anyone’s specifically out to hurt the SPUD unit. We all want the industries to flourish. This is one that I hope we can get some action on as soon as possible. I think all members who have any agriculture in their heart, because it is something that’s in—and I don’t think it’s just agriculture but, for me, it’s just agriculture. There’s something about agriculture.

So with that, I’m going to switch gears. I think I’ve made my point in that. I was listening intently to the minister when she was talking about their herd. I like personal stories.

My wife hates this time of year. It’s not so much—she likes the spring, but the spring is when I start looking for tractors. Farmers love tractors. My problem is, I spend all my time here driving around the riding. I still have a farm. I sharecrop my farm with someone else—actually, with Koch Farms—and I have no real need for another tractor, but man, the pull is there.

Just one other personal: This year it’s going to be a different year for farming in northern Ontario, for a lot of things. Because we didn’t have any snow, right? So with wildfires, it could be a very different year. But most years—I’m going to give you my experience of the springtime, coming to the Legislature. Around, oh—when is the snow usually gone here? Around the end of March?

It’s warm here, and there’s no snow, and you can smell the ground. Farmers, gardeners—there’s something about it. There’s something about fresh soil. You can smell it. So you’re here for a whole week, and then you forget, so when I drive home, there’s still three feet of snow.

Week two, I drive down here. The grass is growing. It’s springtime. I’m sitting here in my seat thinking, “Oh, I’ll get home and do stuff.” I’m not selling northern Ontario now. I drive home and there is still three feet of snow.

Week three, I drive down here. I don’t know if they’ve started yet, but there’s a nice sidewalk that goes up University here, and there’s a bunch of flowerbeds. The flowers will start coming out, and then it’s really, “Oh, man. We’re going to get home and start planting.” You go home and, Speaker, in week three, there is still snow. It’s so frustrating.

Week four, I drive down here, and people are mowing their lawns. Everybody’s in shorts. It’s just beautiful down here, right? Week four, you drive home, and the grass is this tall, because your spring lasts a month; our spring is a week. So it’s hotter at home than it is here. The dust is flying off the fields. There might still be a bit of snow in the bush. But week four, I’m behind, because, I was, “Oh, there’s still snow.” The moral to the story is, that’s why it’s so important to do research in different places, because of just the difference in the physical conditions.

The fall is not quite so bad. Your falls here are a little bit—

Interjection.

Now I’m going to get back to the bill, but an hour is a long time to fill, Speaker.

The worst weather I’ve driven through since I have been elected was in London, Ontario. The Heinz plant in Leamington closed, and I had to drive down there for a presser or something. I always listen to classic rock stations. I’m driving, and the DJ goes, “Yeah, the weather is a bit gloomy.” It was in November, so fine, a little bit gloomy. “The weather is a bit gloomy and there’s a streamer coming down Commissioner Street.”

I’m from northern Ontario, used to 40 below. I’m just driving along, wondering what a streamer is. A streamer is a snowstorm, an instant snowstorm, that would shut northern Ontario down for three days. It’s just cars in the ditch on both sides, and then you go for about a kilometre or a kilometre and a half, and it’s all gone again. That’s not weather that we—our weather is much more stable. It gets cold; it snows. This year is different. This year, it’s almost like southern Ontario weather. And that’s something you have to get used to, too, when you’re overwintering crops. So some years winter wheat works great in our area, but not every year. Those are all things that make a difference, why research should be regional.

There’s a couple of other quotes here I want to read before I tell too many personal stories; just give me a second, Speaker. I want to read something that I found from the Ontario Federation of Agriculture. They made a written submission, but they also came to the board. Mr. Mark Reusser came to the board, or came to the committee. The OFA was in favour of the bill. We’re all in agreement of that; that’s why we support it. But they did have some—and I’d like to put them into the record, into the Hansard, as well—Mark called them concerns. I would call them more constructive suggestions. I would like to read some of them into the record.

From Mr. Mark Reusser: “We do have some concerns and some suggestions with regard to the bill, and I will focus on those, if I may.

“The first one has to do with the mandate. The proposed updates to the mandate or objects of the ARIO are a significant expansion of the objectives,” which is true. “The core function of providing advice to the minister remains, and OFA supports that a key objective for ARIO is to advise the minister on high-impact, transformational agri-food research and innovation....

“OFA appreciates that the mandate expansion will increase collaboration, and we support increased engagement of the agri-food sector. Engagement with agriculture organizations, industry and researchers is key for the sector to reach its full potential, and ARIO will be more effective in its role with cross-collaboration.” So that’s the purpose of the bill.

“However, to be successful in determining research needs and promoting research opportunities, farmers must be recognized and included as key participants, not merely consulted stakeholders. So OFA recommends that ARIO engage directly with farmers and producer organizations on research needs and objectives as a key priority....”

That struck me, because when we ran into the issue where ARIO and the University of Guelph were thinking about divesting the New Liskeard Agricultural Research Station, there was a breakdown between the farm community and the research done there, because farmers, agricultural stakeholders, need to see some relevance in the research to really buy into it, and that was lacking. There was very little reporting of what research was being done. There wasn’t really a connection. I think that’s what OFA is—I don’t want to put words into OFA’s—they spoke for themselves; they’re on the record. But my interpretation was that there needs to be a connection between the agriculture community and ARIO, the research organization. That connection needs to be there, and if that connection isn’t there, then not only will the agriculture community lose, but Ontario as a whole will lose. Although we may not agree with everything that the government talks about—their goals in agriculture. Where we profoundly disagree is about the importance of saving farmland. So you need to have that connection. The agriculture community in Timiskaming didn’t have that connection with the ARIO site in New Liskeard and, quite frankly, the University of Guelph didn’t either, or they wouldn’t have thought about closing. That’s why it’s so important that we need that connection.

The minister, in her comments, talked about Emo, and I think the quote she was referring to—many people can find Nemo, but not too many people could find Emo. That was my quote.

Interjection.

He’s here all week.

Everybody knows what Finding Nemo is.

Interjection.

I didn’t know that. So that points to something else: that perhaps we need to do, together, as the agriculture sector—again, agriculture and aquaculture aren’t exactly the same thing. But as a research sector, we need to do a better job of making sure that everybody else knows what we’re doing—because unless the general population knows, then you have a chance of losing it. One of the great things about this job is that we can bring this forward and, hopefully, spark someone’s attention.

Someone the members on the government side didn’t mention, who came to committee, who I thought was very interesting, and I’ll just find his—I don’t quote people very often, and that’s why I have such a hard time finding the quotes when I want to find them. Mr. Gerald Schipper chaired a dairy advisory committee at Ridgetown college. Ridgetown is also an ARIO site. In Elora, they’ve got new dairy facilities, and they are state-of-the-art, and that is where very critical research is being done. Someone on the government side, I believe, the minister or—I can’t remember which one of you said it, but it was a very good point, about methane, about where the research—so that there will be less methane coming from cattle; specifically, dairy cattle. What Mr. Schipper brought forward was also a good point. In agriculture, we are also facing a big labour shortage. So not everyone who is going to end up working in the dairy sector, in production, as an example, is going to be destined to do research at that high-end facility. Like Ridgetown also was beneficial for someone who wants to learn how to be a better herd manager, or to be—right? That not necessarily, but right now, Ridgetown is an outdated facility that, quite frankly, is pretty close to not passing for standards of care of dairy cattle. It’s an old tie-stall facility.

And he brought forward a good point. That’s something we need to look at too: So where are we going train the dairy managers? Because they are not always going to be—not everyone is destined to do high-end genetic research—it’s very important—or high-end feed research. It’s incredibly important. Right? But where are we going train the people who are going to manage herds?

And I’m focusing on dairy. I know dairy pretty well, so I’m not going to focus on the strawberry end as much. But there is a need because to be a manager of a dairy herd, it’s a very—as an example, it is not an easy job. You need a specific skill set. It’s a very skilled job and it’s a very good job.

It’s a great job, right? But you might not need to go to the best research facility in Ontario to learn how to do that. So he brought up a very good point. It didn’t 100% fit into the bill. I get that, I get that, but one of the things I miss about—and I appreciate this afternoon, because we can actually listen to each other and what we got out of the committee, because we’re actually talking about what came out of the committee.

He did that; that stuck with me. Because a lot of the people I know, if you want to learn to manage dairy, the only one left really is Ridgetown, right? Well, if Ridgetown isn’t there anymore, and okay, we’ve got this great facility in Elora, great, but not everyone is going to learn how to manage cows in Elora. That’s the point he brought forward, and it’s a good point. It’s a good point.

If you look at a modern dairy farm, a modern robotic dairy farm, it’s totally different than tie-stall. Tie-stall technology 20 years ago was even prevalent. No one builds a tie-stall now; very few build parlours now. It’s all robotic. So if you’re going to work on a robotic farm, where are you going to learn that, unless you come from that type of facility? I appreciated that he brought that forward.

I can’t be so complimentary. I can’t be complimentary all the time, so I’m going to take my last 10 minutes and not be so complimentary. I did take polite exception to the minister’s comment that the NDP doesn’t understand the cost of production. Certainly, we understand; those of us whose job it is to understand the cost of production certainly do understand the cost of production.

I hesitate to go here, but as everyone knows, the NDP are against the individual carbon tax because we think its regressive.

So the member from—where is it? Kitchener–Conestoga? We agree that neither one of us nor our parties agree with the individual carbon tax. We believe it’s regressive; you guys are just talking about politics. Because actually, do you know who invented it? It was actually the federal Conservatives who invented the carbon tax. That’s actually a Conservative policy.

So, they said, “Okay, cap-and-trade and the carbon tax are the same thing.” They’re actually not the same thing. But you never hear them talk about their industrial compliance fee on carbon. They never talk about that, and I believe they pulled in, what, $147 million, $150 million?

That’s one of the things, Speaker, that drives me crazy about this place. It drives me crazy. So let’s actually, you know, talk about what the province can do, talk about what you’re doing. Yes, the Conservative government, the Ford government, has got a compliance fee for carbon, basically an industrial carbon tax—not an individual one, an industrial carbon—

We all disagree with the carbon tax—at least two sides.

What I really want to know is, if we have an industrial system in Ontario—which we do; the Ford government instituted it—what can we do to make sure that the system that you have complies so people don’t have to pay the carbon tax? Because actually, we’re paying double because of the Conservative government. We’re paying the backstop carbon tax and, indirectly, people are paying the compliance fee.

Interjections.

Yes, let’s talk about reality. The Conservative industrial compliance fee for carbon—you charge it. You charge it. That’s reality. So what can you do so people don’t have to pay the carbon tax? Is there something you can do with that fee, or is it just because you don’t want to talk about that you’re forcing Ontarians to pay it, to pay the individual carbon tax? I don’t know. I’m asking the question.

Anyway, getting back to the bill, this bill is an example of, if you consult extensively, you consult carefully, legislation will go through the House, it won’t be held back and the opposition won’t do deleterious things. Good legislation, if it’s consulted on, will pass through the House very quickly, as opposed to legislation like the greenbelt legislation, which didn’t pass very easily through the House—but because of the rules, it did. What happened is, the government ended up—actually, no, the people of Ontario ended up paying the price, because the government had to end up rescinding the bill and now are mired in investigations. That’s the example of legislation that isn’t consulted on at all, isn’t for the benefit of Ontarians, and Ontarians lose. This is an example of a bill that was done for Ontarians, for people in agriculture and for people who eat the wonderful food that’s grown in Ontario.

And my last minute: There is a reception tonight for Farm Fresh Ontario starting at 4 o’clock. I believe it’s in the—just wait a sec.