My name is Benoit Legault, and I am the general manager of the Producteurs de grains du Québec, or PGQ. We appreciate being invited to appear before the committee today.
By way of background, the PGQ is a provincial organization that represents some 9,500 grain producers in Quebec, who grow five million tonnes of grain on a million hectares of land. They sell two billion dollars worth of grain, around $500 million of which is exported. It's worth noting that about $500 million of the grain we sell supports the pork industry, which exports the vast majority of its production.
I would like to share our findings and recommendations regarding the border carbon adjustments. It's important to keep in mind a few principles the PGQ sees as key. We are in favour of policies that help Quebec's grain growers compete and be profitable. That is a prerequisite for the survival and, of course, sustainability of their businesses. As I said, Quebec's grain farmers rely heavily on international trade, and thus support preserving open and fair trade.
In terms of carbon pricing, Quebec has the carbon exchange system. I must say, it's having a very negative impact on grain growers currently, and it will only get worse with the cost of the credits going up. In no way does the money accumulated under the current system help the grain sector adapt or meet the challenges of reducing its carbon footprint. As you know, these costs can't be passed on to grain purchasers.
Now I will turn to the border carbon adjustments, specifically. We aren't experts on the adjustments previously announced by the government when the carbon policy was introduced. We really have no idea how all this is going to play out when it comes to measuring the carbon footprint of products from various countries, ensuring fairness under international climate agreements—which place more responsibility on certain countries—or managing the revenues associated with the adjustments.
Our observations at this point lead us to believe that the policy will apply mainly to products with a larger carbon footprint. In theory, it won't apply to imported agriculture and agri-food products, and certainly not those we're competing with in export markets. We are therefore calling on the government to be very careful in order to avoid, one, destabilizing international trade with our partners and, two, increasing input costs or access to imported inputs under any policy being considered. As you know, Quebec is extremely reliant on imported agricultural inputs, and we are still dealing with the hardship and costs stemming from the import restrictions on Russian agricultural inputs.
In closing, I want to leave you with another important point. Any border carbon adjustment mechanism should be developed in a multilateral way, in keeping with WTO obligations—which is very important—and rules-based trade principles. In the PGQ's view, that should have been the case when the carbon policy was introduced.
Overall, that is what I wanted to convey at this initial phase. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My name is Benoit Legault, and I am the general manager of the Producteurs de grains du Québec, or PGQ. We appreciate being invited to appear before the committee today.
By way of background, the PGQ is a provincial organization that represents some 9,500 grain producers in Quebec, who grow five million tonnes of grain on a million hectares of land. They sell two billion dollars worth of grain, around $500 million of which is exported. It's worth noting that about $500 million of the grain we sell supports the pork industry, which exports the vast majority of its production.
I would like to share our findings and recommendations regarding the border carbon adjustments. It's important to keep in mind a few principles the PGQ sees as key. We are in favour of policies that help Quebec's grain growers compete and be profitable. That is a prerequisite for the survival and, of course, sustainability of their businesses. As I said, Quebec's grain farmers rely heavily on international trade, and thus support preserving open and fair trade.
In terms of carbon pricing, Quebec has the carbon exchange system. I must say, it's having a very negative impact on grain growers currently, and it will only get worse with the cost of the credits going up. In no way does the money accumulated under the current system help the grain sector adapt or meet the challenges of reducing its carbon footprint. As you know, these costs can't be passed on to grain purchasers.
Now I will turn to the border carbon adjustments, specifically. We aren't experts on the adjustments previously announced by the government when the carbon policy was introduced. We really have no idea how all this is going to play out when it comes to measuring the carbon footprint of products from various countries, ensuring fairness under international climate agreements—which place more responsibility on certain countries—or managing the revenues associated with the adjustments.
Our observations at this point lead us to believe that the policy will apply mainly to products with a larger carbon footprint. In theory, it won't apply to imported agriculture and agri-food products, and certainly not those we're competing with in export markets. We are therefore calling on the government to be very careful in order to avoid, one, destabilizing international trade with our partners and, two, increasing input costs or access to imported inputs under any policy being considered. As you know, Quebec is extremely reliant on imported agricultural inputs, and we are still dealing with the hardship and costs stemming from the import restrictions on Russian agricultural inputs.
In closing, I want to leave you with another important point. Any border carbon adjustment mechanism should be developed in a multilateral way, in keeping with WTO obligations—which is very important—and rules-based trade principles. In the PGQ's view, that should have been the case when the carbon policy was introduced.
Overall, that is what I wanted to convey at this initial phase. Thank you.