ARCHIVED - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.

2007-08
Departmental Performance Report

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Supplementary Information (Tables)

Table 3: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue

Respendable Revenue
($ millions)	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
	Actual Revenue	Actual Revenue	Main Estimates	Planned Revenue	Authorities	Actual Revenue
Business Risk Management
Collaborative research agreements and research services	-	0.0	-	-	-	-
Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) - Admin. Fees	4.7	4.4	5.5	5.5	5.5	3.8
Total – Business Risk Management	4.7	4.4	5.5	5.5	5.5	3.8
Food Safety and Food Quality
Collaborative research agreements and research services	0.0	1.0	1.5	1.5	1.5	0.1
Total – Food Safety and Food Quality	0.0	1.0	1.5	1.5	1.5	0.1
Markets and International
Collaborative research agreements and research services	-	0.0	-	-	-	-
Total – Markets and International	-	0.0	-	-	-	-
Environment
Collaborative research agreements and research services	-	0.7	5.5	5.5	5.5	0.1
Community Pastures	12.9	17.0	18.0	18.0	18.0	18.0
Total – Environment	12.9	17.7	23.5	23.5	23.5	18.1
Innovation and Renewal
Collaborative research agreements and research services	2.6	5.1	15.0	15.0	15.0	9.8
Total – Innovation and Renewal	2.6	5.1	15.0	15.0	15.0	9.8
Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency
Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency Revolving Fund	13.8	14.0	15.0	15.0	15.0	13.9
Total – Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency	13.8	14.0	15.0	15.0	15.0	13.9
Total Respendable Revenue	34.1	42.1	60.5	60.5	60.5	45.7

Non-Respendable Revenue
($ millions)	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
	Actual Revenue	Actual Revenue	Main Estimates	Planned Revenue	Authorities	Actual Revenue
Business Risk Management
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	3.7	0.9	N/A	1.3	N/A	0.4
Service and Service Fees	1.0	0.9	N/A	0.8	N/A	0.9
Privileges, Licences and Permits	0.4	0.5	N/A	0.4	N/A	0.3
Return on Investments	1.4	1.5	N/A	0.4	N/A	1.0
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	0.6	0.3	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.5
Other non-tax revenues	29.1	47.9	N/A	1.9	N/A	14.3
Total Business Risk Management	36.2	52.0	N/A	4.9	N/A	17.4
Food Safety and Food Quality
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	0.1	0.0	N/A	0.3	N/A	0.0
Service and Service Fees	0.3	0.0	N/A	0.3	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	0.3	0.3	N/A	0.4	N/A	0.4
Return on Investments	0.5	0.6	N/A	0.2	N/A	0.5
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	0.2	0.1	N/A	0.1	N/A	0.2
Other non-tax revenues	0.0	0.7	N/A	0.3	N/A	0.7
Total Food Safety and Food Quality	1.3	1.7	N/A	1.6	N/A	1.9
Markets and International
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	0.3	0.0	N/A	0.5	N/A	0.4
Service and Service Fees	0.0	0.0	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	0.2	0.2	N/A	0.2	N/A	0.2
Return on Investments	0.8	1.1	N/A	0.5	N/A	1.0
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	0.0	0.0	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.4
Other non-tax revenues	0.0	0.9	N/A	0.5	N/A	2.9
Total Markets and International	1.4	2.3	N/A	1.7	N/A	4.5
Environment
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	0.3	0.2	N/A	1.4	N/A	0.3
Service and Service Fees	(0.0)	0.0	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	0.5	0.9	N/A	0.9	N/A	0.8
Return on Investments	2.0	3.0	N/A	1.2	N/A	2.6
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	0.6	0.5	N/A	0.6	N/A	0.6
Other non-tax revenues	0.1	2.2	N/A	1.3	N/A	3.2
Total Environment	3.4	6.9	N/A	5.3	N/A	7.7
Innovation and Renewal
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	0.4	0.1	N/A	1.2	N/A	0.4
Service and Service Fees	0.0	0.0	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	0.6	5.1	N/A	4.6	N/A	4.5
Return on Investments	2.3	2.6	N/A	1.1	N/A	2.3
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	6.1	1.8	N/A	1.7	N/A	2.0
Other non-tax revenues	0.1	2.0	N/A	1.1	N/A	2.9
Total Innovation and Renewal	9.4	11.7	N/A	9.8	N/A	12.1
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	0.0	0.0	N/A	0.1	N/A	0.0
Service and Service Fees	0.0	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Return on Investments	-	-	N/A	0.1	N/A	0.2
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Other non-tax revenues	0.0	0.1	N/A	0.1	N/A	0.3
Total Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats	0.0	0.1	N/A	0.3	N/A	0.6
National Farm Products Council
Refund of Previous Years' Expenditures	-	0.0	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Service and Service Fees	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Privileges, Licences and Permits	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Return on Investments	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Proceeds from Sales of Crown Assets	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Other non-tax revenues	-	-	N/A	0.0	N/A	0.0
Total National Farm Products Council	-	0.0	N/A	0.1	N/A	0.1
Total Non-Respendable Revenue	51.7	74.7	N/A	23.7	N/A	44.3
Total Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue	85.7	116.8	60.5	84.2	60.5	89.9

Notes:
Respendable revenues are generated by the Community Pastures Program, collaborative research agreements and research services, administration fees related to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program, and the Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency Revolving Fund. In accordance with Treasury Board policy, the Department can generate and spend up to 125 percent of its vote-netted revenue authority. Respendable revenues have increased mainly due to revenue collected under the collaborative research agreements and research services.

Non-respendable revenues include such items as refunds of previous years' expenditures, proceeds from the sales of Crown Assets, privileges, licenses and permits. Non-respendable revenues are lower this year mainly due to the fact that adjustments to prior year's payables were less in 2007-08 than in 2006-07.

The figures in the above tables have been rounded to the nearest millions of dollars. For this reason, figures that cannot be listed in millions of dollars are shown as 0.0.

Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Table 4: Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency Revolving Fund

Statement of Operations
	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
($ millions)	Actual	Actual	Main Estimates	Planned	Authorized	Actual
Respendable Revenue	13.9	13.8	15.0	15.0	15.0	13.9
Expenses
Operating:
Salaries and employee benefits	5.9	5.6	5.9	5.9	5.9	4.6
Depreciation	0.2	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.2
Administrative and support services	8.7	8.1	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.1
Utilities, materials and supplies	0.2	0.2	0.6	0.6	0.6	0.2
Total Operating	15.0	14.0	15.0	15.0	15.0	13.0
Surplus (Deficit)	(1.1)	(0.3)	-	-	-	0.8

Statement of Cash Flows
	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
($ millions)	Actual	Actual	Main Estimates	Planned	Authorized	Actual
Surplus (Deficit)	(1.1)	(0.3)	-	-	-	0.8
Add non-cash items:
Depreciation/amortisation	0.2	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.2
Other	(0.1)	0.9	-	-	-	(0.0)
Investing activities:
Acquisition of depreciable assets	(0.1)	(0.0)	(0.1)	(0.1)	(0.1)	(0.0)
Cash surplus (requirement)	(1.2)	0.8	-	-	-	0.9

Projected Use of Authority
	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
($ millions)	Actual	Actual	Main Estimates	Planned	Authorized	Actual
Authority⁽¹⁾	2.0	2.0	2.0	2.0	2.0	2.0
Drawdown:
Balance as at April 1	1.1	(0.1)	-	-	0.7	0.7
Projected Surplus (Drawdown)	(1.2)	0.8	-	-	-	0.9
Total Drawdown	(0.1)	0.7	-	-	0.7	1.6
Projected Balance at March 31	1.9	2.7	2.0	2.0	2.7	3.6

Notes:

⁽¹⁾ $2 million is the maximum amount that may be drawn down from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) at any time.

The figures in the above tables have been rounded to the nearest millions of dollars. For this reason, figures that cannot be listed in millions of dollars are shown as 0.0.

Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

**Table 5-A: User Fees Act ⁽¹⁾**

A.					2007-08				Planning Years
User Fee	Fee Type	Fee Setting Authority	Date Last Modified (B)	Forecast Revenue ($000)	Actual Revenue ($000)	Full Cost ($000)	Performance Standard	Performance Results	Fiscal Year	Forecast Revenue ($000)	Estimated Full Cost ($000)
Farm Improvement and Marketing Cooperatives Loans Act(FIMCLA) Registration Fees	R	FIMCLA Regulations	May 31, 1999	495.0	602.0	1,496.0	Loans from lenders registered within 15 business days of receipt. Target is 90%.	100% of loans were registered within 15 business days of receipt.	2008-09	671.0	1,652.0
									2009-10	n/a	n/a
									2010-11	n/a	n/a
Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA)⁽²⁾	O	Access to Information Act	1992	2.5	2.5	738.4	Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. The Access to Information Act provides fuller details.	Statutory deadlines met 94.3 % of the time	2008-09	2.5	950.0
									2009-10	2.5	950.0
									2010-11	2.5	950.0
2007-2008	Sub-total (R) Regulatory Service			495.0	602.0	1,496.0
	Sub-total (O) Other Products and Service			2.5	2.5	738.4
	Total			497.5	604.5	2,234.4
2008-2009	Sub-total (R) Regulatory Service									671.0	1,652.0
	Sub-total (O) Other Products and Service									2.5	950.0
	Total									673.5	2,602.0
2009-2010	Sub-total (R) Regulatory Service									n/a	n/a
	Sub-total (O) Other Products and Service									2.5	961.0
	Total									2.5	950.0
2010-2011	Sub-total (R) Regulatory Service									n/a	n/a
	Sub-total (O) Other Products and Service									2.5	950.0
	Total									2.5	950.0

B. Date Last Modified: N/A

C. Other Information:
(1) The DPR instructions advised that this table be used only for revenues under the User Fee Act. The preliminary advice from our legal counsel indicated that only the FIMCLA program as well as the fees charged under ATIA are subject to the User Fee Act.
(2) It is the Department's practice to waive fees where the total owing per request amounts to less than $25.

Notes:
According to prevailing legal opinion, where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004 the:

Performance standard, if provided, may not have received Parliamentary review;
Performance standard, if provided, may not respect all establishment requirements under the UFA (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address)
Performance result, if provided, is not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reduction for failed performance.

Table 5-B: Policy on Service Standards for External Fees

External Fee	Service Standard	Performance Result	Stakeholder Consultation
Farm Improvement and Marketing Cooperatives Loans Act (FIMCLA) Registration Fees	Loans from lenders registered within 15 business days of receipt. Target is 90%.	100% of loans were registered within 15 business days of receipt.	Although stakeholders were not consulted in the past, this will be done in 2008-09 for the establishment of the Performance Standard as well as for stakeholder satisfaction of the Performance Results
Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA)	Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request.	Statutory deadlines met 94.3% of the time.	The service standard is established by the Access to Information Act and the Access to Information Regulations. Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken by the Department of Justice and the Treasury Board Secretariat for amendments done in 1986 and 1992.
	The Access to Information Act provides fuller details. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/A-1/index.html
Canadian Agriculture Income Stabilization (CAIS) Program - Administrative Cost Sharing (ACS) Fee	Process interim applications within 30 days, 100% of the time. Process final applications within 75 days, 75% of the time. Program year delivery occurs in the year following an economic event. The 2007 tax/program year final performance results related to delivery of ensuing payments to producers will not be available until the 2008/09 fiscal year, once the 2007 tax/program year is complete and applications are received. Therefore, results achieved are reported for the 2006 program year.	As of July 30, 2007, where Canada delivers, all 2006 program year Interim application processing was complete, 77.5% of applications received were processed within the 30 day standard. As of March 31, 2008, where Canada delivers 91.76% of the 2006 program year final applications were processing complete, 47% were processed within the 75 day standard. Complete information has not been received from other delivery agents to calculate an accurate National standard. The Administration has made steady progress on service standard performance from 2004 to 2005 (from 26 percent within standard to 38 percent), and this trend continued into 2006 CAIS processing. The Administration anticipates continuing these trends through 2007 application processing, which is currently underway.	The ACS fee is established by Federal/Provincial/Territorial (FPT) agreement. The CAIS program service standards are communicated to producers through industry advisories and toll free speaking points. The Administration is working with provincial partners to meet the 75 day standard on a target of 75% of 2007 files. While this target has not been met in previous years, earlier system releases and preparation for 2007 processing will enable better performance for the program year.

B. Other Information:

It is the Department's practice to waive fees where the total owing per request amounts to less than $25.

Notes:

As established pursuant to the Policy on Service Standards for External Fees:

Service standards may not have received Parliamentary review;
Service standards, may not respect all performance standard establishment requirements under the UFA (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address)
Performance results are not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reduction for failed performance.

Table 6: Details on Project Spending ¹

Projects over $5 million	Current Estimated Total Cost²	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
Projects over $5 million	Current Estimated Total Cost²	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Main Estimates	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending
Ontario (Ottawa), Skyline Campus ³ (Project Close Out Phase)	14.1	1.7	1.4	1.9	1.9	1.1	1.1
Projects With Specific Program Activities:
Business Risk Management
Enhancements to the Delivery Systems for the Business Risk Management Programs under the Agricultural Policy Framework (Project Definition Phase)⁴	125.0	6.5	3.8	-	-	16.2	5.0
Total Business Risk Management	125.0	6.5	3.8	-	-	16.2	5.0

Environment
Saskatchewan (Swift Current), Duncairn Dam/Water Infrastructure Upgrades (Project Close Out Phase)⁴	10.0	1.0	0.1	-	-	0.0	0.0
National Land and Water Information Service (NLWIS) (Project Definition Phase)	100.1	14.9	21.3	28.3	28.3	25.3	25.3
Saskatchewan (Maple Creek), Junction Dam Rehabilitation (Project Construction Phase)	7.3	0.6	0.1	6.0	6.0	3.9	3.9
Manitoba (Winnipeg), St.Boniface General Hospital (Project Close Out Phase)	5.7	1.4	2.9	0.9	0.9	0.6	0.6
Total Environment	123.1	17.9	24.4	35.2	35.2	29.8	29.8

Innovation and Renewal
Quebec (Lennoxville), Dairy Research Facility (Initial Planning and Identification Phase)⁵	10.0	0.2	0.3	5.2	5.2	0.5	0.5
Ontario (Ottawa), Greenhouse and Growth Chamber Facility (Initial Planning and Identification Phase)⁶	10.9	0.7	2.1	7.3	7.3	7.6	7.6
Total Innovation and Renewal	20.9	0.9	2.4	12.5	12.5	8.1	8.1

Total for Projects over $5 million	283.1	27.0	32.0	49.6	49.6	55.2	44.1

Notes:

¹ All current approved projects with an estimated value of over $5 million are listed in this table.

² The Current Estimated Total Cost number includes both expenditures made in previous years and expenditures for 2007-2008 and beyond.

³ Skyline Campus figures reflect only those costs to be funded through AAFC reference levels. This project is corporate in nature and pertains to all Program Activities.

⁴ Project work for the Business Risk Management Program Delivery System was delayed due to uncertainty surrounding the approval of funding

⁵ Final clean-up on Duncairn dam was completed in 2007/08.

⁶ Actual spending for the Dairy Resaerch Facility is lower than planned due to delays in construction in 2007-08. Actuals costs have been incurred for plans and estimates.

The figures in the above table have been rounded to the nearest millions of dollars. For this reason, figures that cannot be listed in millions of dollars are shown as 0.0.

Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Table 7: Status Report on Major Crown Projects

Description:

The National Land and Water Information Service is an initiative of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) under the Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) to make available, to land-use decision makers, decision tools and environmental information to support and inform local and regional land-use planning and management. This supports the government's objectives for an environmentally sustainable agriculture sector.

The National Land and Water Information Service will support improved decision making in agriculture through the provision of timely and relevant geo-spatial information to land management decision makers across Canada. The Service will provide a coordinated national approach for managing, interpreting and disseminating information, by strategically linking the land, soil, water, air, climate and biodiversity capacities of federal departments, provincial and municipal governments and non-governmental organizations. The federal government's desire for promotion of technology through the Government On-Line initiative strengthens the information provision objective of NLWIS.

Project Phases:

Project Definition (2004/05);
Project Implementation (2005/09): Phase 1 (2005/06), Phase 2 (2005/07), Phase 3 (2006/08), Phase 4 (2008/09)

Leading and Participating Departments and Agencies:

Lead Department or Agency:	AAFC
Contracting Authority:	AAFC, PWGSC
Participating Departments and Agencies:	NRCan, EC, SC, DFO, HC, PWGSC, CSA, INAC, TBS, PSEPC, IC, PC, Archives

Prime and Major Sub-Contractors:

Prime Contractor:

Major Sub-Contractors:

The Halifax Group; Fujitsu Consulting Canada

Based on AAFC's existing capabilities with regard to geomatics information technology applications, AAFC will retain overall responsibility for design, development, delivery and ongoing maintenance of the National Land and Water Information Service. Private sector resources will be obtained when required to meet discrete identified gaps in AAFC's internal capabilities or internal resource availability.

In order to ensure compliance with project timelines and minimize transaction and administration costs, existing Government of Canada (GOC) and AAFC procurement instruments (Supply Arrangements, Standing Offers, etc) will be used as appropriate to the circumstances.

Procurement of specialized IT and other professional services will be structured to maximize knowledge transfer to AAFC in order to ensure cost-effective maintenance of the National Land and Water Information Service.

Major Milestones:

Major Milestones	Date
Milestone
Preliminary Project Approval	10-Apr-03
Project Management Office Established	30-Jun-03
Preliminary Project Approval Amendment	08-Apr-04
Proof of Concept Completed	31-Jan-05
Effective Project Approval Documentation Completed	31-Jan-05
Effective Project Approval	02-May-05
Phase 1 (Single Window) completion	31-Mar-06
Phase 2 (Geospatial Environment) commencement	01-Sep-05
Phase 2 (Geospatial Environment) completion	30-Nov-07
Phase 3 (National Source for Agri-environmental Geospatial Information) commencement	01-Jan-06

Progress Report and Explanations of Variances:

The Treasury Board approved the National Land and Water Information Service (NLWIS) with an estimated cost of $100.1 million. The NLWIS Project received Preliminary Project Approval on April 10, 2003 and was designated a Major Crown Project. The National Land and Water Information Service Project received Effective Project Approval from Treasury Board in May 2005. Phase 1 (Single Window) was completed in March 2006. Phase 2 (Geospatial Environment) was initiated in September 2005 and was completed in November 2007. Phase 3 (National Source for Agri-environmental Geospatial Information) commenced in January 2006. Phase 3 will provide accessibility to new GIS applications and services to users across Canada. Direct access to geospatial data, maps and tools will be made available. Users will be able to access information and data in both official languages and in standardized formats.

No additional funding has been provided by the Treasury Board or by the department. NLWIS is currently running on budget with the completion date still estimated to be March 2009.

Industrial Benefits:

The National Land and Water Information Service is a national program that will use and provide information in all the provinces. Resources required to support implementation will be located across Canada.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Advancing Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Food (ACAAF) (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2004
End Date:March 31, 2009

Description:The purpose of the ACAAF program is to position Canada's agriculture and agri-food sector at the leading edge to seize new opportunities. It is based on a three-pillar approach, including:
Pillar I: "Industry-Led Solutions to Emerging Issues";
Pillar II: "Capturing Market Opportunities By Advancing Research Results";
Pillar III: "Sharing Information to Advance the Sector".

In July of 2006, the Biofuels Opportunities for Producers Initiative (BOPI), a two-year, $20.0 million initiative under the ACAAF program was launched. It was designed to help farmers and rural communities conduct feasibility studies and develop sound, viable business proposals to create and expand biofuel production capacity involving significant ownership by agricultural producers. BOPI is delivered by the ACAAF regional Industry Councils. BOPI ended in March 2008.

The ACAAF Program was developed as the successor to the Canadian Adaptation and Rural Development (CARD) II Fund.

Strategic Outcome: Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
In 2007-08, 376 new projects were approved. Of these, 29 new national projects, 300 new Industry Council regional projects and 47 multi-regional collective outcome projects were funded. The highest increase was in Pillar II projects that increased by 40% over last year. Under BOPI, 36 projects received funding in 2007-08. BOPI was completed in March 2008 with 90% of the funding allocated to projects. Increased efforts on service standards have reduced project review times by 5%.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal
Total Grants	30.3	44.3	35.0	37.7	37.7	(2.7)
Total Contributions	7.1	6.2	3.1	10.5	10.5	(7.4)
Total Transfer Payment Program	37.4	50.5	38.1	48.2	48.2	(10.1)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
At the time of preparation of the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities Treasury Board approval had not yet been received for the Biofuels Opportunities for Producers Initiative and as such, the Planned Spending does not reflect this funding.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: An evaluation of ACAAF was started in 2007-08 and will be completed in the fall of 2008.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: No program audits were done and none are planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: AgriInvest Kickstart Program (Statutory)

Start Date: October 25, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2009

Description: The $600 million Kickstart payment was a one-time federal initiative to seed AgriInvest accounts until producers can build up a balance in their accounts.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
The objective of AgriInvest Kickstart was to encourage producer participation in AgriInvest. As of March 30, 2008 the total number of letters to producers with calculated benefits was 154,731, number of responses received 75,030, total value of benefits for responses received $254.8 million.

Where Canada delivers: the number of payments to producers was 48,277, total value of payments to producers $180.8 million, total value of deposits to producer accounts $74 million.

Quebec: Number of payments to producers not available, total value of payments to producers $22.8 million, total value of deposits to producer accounts $27.9 million.

Kickstart payments will continue to be delivered into the 2008-09 fiscal year as the application deadline for new participants is April 14, 2008. and the deadline for receiving responses to letters with calculated benefits is June 30, 2008.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	484.4	484.4	(484.4)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	95.8	95.8	(95.8)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	580.1	580.1	(580.1)

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: There are no existing or planned evaluations for this program at this time.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: There are no existing or planned audits for this program at this time.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: AgriInvest Program (Statutory)

Start Date: December 19, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2012

Description: The AgriInvest program is designed to help producers stabilize their farm income on an individual basis by providing the opportunity for them to deposit money annually into their program savings account and receive matching government contributions. AgriInvest replaces the first 15% margin decline (first tier) coverage of CAIS. AgriInvest will play an important role in the new suite of BRM programs by providing producers with less complexity, more predictability and quicker access to program funding for small losses, thereby improving the predictability, bankability and responsiveness of the entire BRM suite.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Program Grants & Contributions are recognized here in the year that the related economic event occurs (i.e. the 2007 Program/tax year). However, performance results related to delivery of ensuing payments to producers will not be available until the 2008/09 fiscal year, once the 2007 tax/program year is complete and applications are received.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	165.6	165.6	(165.6)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	1.7	1.7	(1.7)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	167.3	167.3	(167.3)

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: There are no existing or planned evaluations for this program at this time.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: There are no existing or planned audits for this program at this time.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Payments in connection with the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act (Statutory) - Advance Payment Program

Start Date: 1997
End Date: On-going under the AMPA legislation

Description: The Advance Payments Program (APP) guarantees provides cash advances to eligible producers (recent amendments to AMPA increased the interest free portion of advances from $0.05 to $0.1 million, and the maximum advance from $0.25 to $0.4 million) to enable them to produce and market their agricultural products when market conditions are most ideal. Amendments now also allow livestock producers the ability to receive an advance under AMPA.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Legislative amendments on the AMPA were tabled in Parliament in May 2006, and the Enhanced Spring Credit Advance Program was announced as an interim measure. The AMPA received royal assent in June, 2006, and came into force in November, 2006.

On February 28th, 2006 AAFC launched the APP/SCAP Electronic Delivery System allowing producer organizations to submit producer level data electronically. AAFC now has greater access to more accurate reporting of advances and repayments across provinces and producer organizations.

As of April 1st, 2007, the first full production period for the new APP was launched (new APP 2007-08 production period). During the 2007-08 production period, $1.581 billion was advanced to 36,653 producers. The 18 month production period allows for advances and repayments during the first 12 months, and for repayments only during the final 6 months of the production period.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	9.2	10.6	138.7	44.1	44.1	94.6
Total Transfer Payment Program	9.2	10.6	138.7	44.1	44.1	94.6

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
Due to the overlap of the old APP program and the New APP, statutory alloment was increased to $138.7M for the 2007-08 fiscal year only. Actual spending for the New APP for fiscal year 2007-08 was less than planned due to the implementation of the New APP program along with old APP still being completed, and we also were offering the interim ESCAP program concurrently. This allowed for 3 different programs in which producers could choose from in order to receive an advance, which were being run concurrently. Uptake for all 3 programs was less than planned, but only due to a 3rd program being offered during the same time period.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
No evaluation of the new APP program was completed during the 2007-08 fiscal year. As per AMPA legislation, a full evalution is to be completed every 5 years. With the last amendments completed to AMPA during 2007-08, the next evaluation is planned for 2012-13.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit:
No audit of the NAPP program was completed during the 2007-08 fiscal year.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Cull Breeding Swine Program (Statutory)

Start Date: March 6, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2012

Description: The purpose of the Cull Breeding Swine Program program is to assist in restructuring the Canadian swine industry by facilitating a reduction of the breeding herd. This $50 million initiative is a grant to the Canadian Pork Council (CPC). The objective is to reduce the national breeding herd size by up to 10% over and above normal annual reductions.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Financial assistance is provided to the hog industry to assist producers that wish to downsize or exit the industry. $38 million has been transfered to the CPC in 2007-08 for reimbursement of slaughter and disposal costs and payment of $225 per breeding animal. As of June 13, 2008, 477 claims have been received for a total of 105,292 animals.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	38.0	38.0	(38.0)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	38.0	38.0	(38.0)

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: There are no existing or planned evaluations for this program at this time.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: There are no existing or planned audits for this program at this time.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Control of Diseases in the Hog Industry- Circovirus Initiative (Voted) - Phase I - Circovirus Inoculation Strategy

Start Date: September 27, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2009

Description: The Circovirus Inoculation Strategy (CIS) is an Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) initiative aimed at providing assistance in minimizing the overall potential effect of the Porcine Circovirus Associated Diseases (PCVAD) on the Canadian hog herd. AAFC is to provide financial assistance towards the identification and mitigation of the virus.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
The delivery process of this program has now been fully automated in order to provide timely allocation of payments. We have processed over 1000 applications and dispersed over $11.5M to producers to inoculate the hog herd against PCVAD. In collecting the data through the application process, we have been able to map and demonstrate the occurances of CIP in Canada. This will further our ability to administer future swine health initiatives.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	-	14.3	14.3	(14.3)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	14.3	14.3	(14.3)

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: This program has not been subject to an evaulation, and there is not one planned.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: This program has not been subject to an audit, and there is not one planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Facilitating the Disposal of Specified Risk Materials (Voted)

Start Date: December 14, 2006
End Date: March 31, 2009

Description:
The federal government continues to provide BSE related assistance to Canada's cattle industry to support its efforts to recover from the impacts of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) first discovered in Canada in May 2003. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has implemented an enhanced feed ban, which is a significant step towards eliminating BSE from the national cattle herd.

This program will help the beef industry mitigate the cost of adapting to the July 12, 2007 enhancements to the feed ban enforced by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The enhancements regulate the disposal of specified risk material (SRM) for which adequate disposal infrastructure is required.

Cost-shared federal-provincial programs are in place and offer $127.5 million in financial assistance to the industry (federal: $76.5 million; provincial: $51 million). The program is administered provincially and federal funds are used to support projects that have been approved through the provincial government process.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
As of March 2008, approximately 216 infrastructure project and research iniatives were approved for a total commitment of $91 million to help the beef industry adapt to the enhanced feed ban. Facilities such as federal and provincial abattoirs, SRM rendering plants, research institutions are participating in the program. Further more, various technologies are being explored to seek value added options for SRM.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	4.4	-	22.8	22.8	(22.8)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	4.4	-	22.8	22.8	(22.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
At the time of preparation of the 2007-08 Main Estimates, Treasury Board approval for this program had not yet been received and as such Planned Spending is shown as zero.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: This program has not been subject to an evaluation, and there is not one planned.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: This program has not been subject to an audit, and there is not one planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)/Cull Cow (under the BSE Recovery Program Terms and Conditions - Statutory and Voted)

Start Date:
June 2003
End Date:
March 31, 2008

Description:
Purpose of Transfer Payment Program: The purpose of this program is to deal with the sudden impacts of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) on the beef industry. The aim of the program was to get the domestic market moving again and to improve returns to producers following border closure to Canadian cattle and beef.

Old programs included the BSE Recovery Program, which ran in 2003-04, and offered several price incentives to help keep the domestic market moving and provided improved returns to feedlots and processors to move product through the chain in light of severely depressed prices caused by the USA border closure;

The Cull Animal Program, which ran in 2003-04, made a payment to producers for each eligible older animal sold for slaughter; and; The Fed Cattle Set-Aside Program, the Feeder Calf Set-Aside Program, and the Managing Older Animals program ran in 2004-05 to 2005-06 and assisted balance animals supply and demand until normal trade patterns resumed and/or slaughter capacity increased.

To assure the future of the industry, additional funding has been provided for marketing assistance, increasing slaughter capacity and enhancing traceability.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Ruminant Slaughter Loan Loss Reserve Program:
In 2007-08 four projects were approved under the Ruminant Slaughter Loan Loss Reserve Program, for a total commitment of $29.1 million of the $41.7 million available through the program. Of that total, $24.9 million has been disbursed to lending institutions involved with the projects.

Canadian Cattle Identification Agency (CCIA):

In FY 2007-08 the CCIA integrated its old Cattle Tracking System (CTS) with a new internet-based system called the Canadian Livestock Tracking System (CLTS). The system tracks age verification (AV), premises identification and movement and sighting, and allows for new value-added services to be added to further enhance the CCIA's traceability program. Since its release, the CLTS has provided the cattle industry with a reliable and integrated method of information-keeping to re-open and keep international and domestic markets open to Canadian beef exports.

CCIA successfully completed and fully implemented a $3.7 million project - the Canadian Livestock Traceability System (CLTS) and has continued to be recognized, both domestically and internationally, as a multi-species leader in Animal Identification and Traceability. CCIA has reported that the program is industry supported, sustainable and has proven invaluable through the BSE and TB animal health investigations.

Canadian Integrated Traceability Program (CITP):

17 Pilot projects supported animal identification, tracking of animal movements and the tracking of meat products through the food value chain. Communicating the results of these 17 projects by the Recipients to interested public stakeholders was a key aspect of CITP. These projects will help to refine the traceability system for various commodities.

Canadian Livestock Identification Agency (CLIA):

The original mandate of the CLIA was to move forward as the administrator responsible for the development, administration and maintenance of a national traceability system for the livestock sector in Canada. However in the fall of 2007, CLIA changed its strategic direction as follows:
- Redefining CLIA's abiding purpose to provide the leadership that will build consensus across the livestock and poultry sectors specific to industry and government needs associated with individual animal and group identification.
- Establish two distinct divisions: (i) Technical Services that builds on the investment and capability already established by the CCIA that can in turn provide traceability and value added services to other livestock/poultry sectors; (ii) The Industry Forum that facilitates and encourages all livestock/poultry sectors to meet and
form policies specific to emerging traceability requirements (both private and public sector).

The total funding for the CLIA project was $1.1 million, however in light of the mandate changes the amount contributed was $765,000.

Canadian Radio Frequency Identification Reader Program (CRFID):

The objective of CFRID was to subsidize the purchase of radio-frequency identification Readers. These Readers are used to capture tracing and tracking information to facilitate recalls and quarantines in the event of a disease outbreak and reduce the negative economic and health effects associated with an outbreak. Organizations such as slaughter and processing plants, veterinarians, and commercial feedlots working in the cattle and/or bison industry beyond the farm gate were eligible. This program was established in April 2005 and expired in February 2008. Over the life of the program, 460 applicants were reimbursed for a total of $738,162.

Marketing Assistance

In the final year of the Genetics Marketing Program and the Other Ruminants Market Development Program $219,390 supported industry association projects to implement marketing strategies targeting traditional and non-traditional markets.
The Other Ruminants Market Development Program has been very successful for the bison industry. New markets were developed for the bison industry. There is now a need to identify ways to generate more returns from bison carcasses, and to identify production and risk management strategies that will assist in increasing industry returns to encourage investment for the industry to grow.
Hurdles in international market development included obtaining protocol regarding the health requirements of other countries, suitable air transportation to countries of destination and the cost of air freight.
Shipment of goats and rabbits were sent to Trinidad and Tobago in the Fall of 2007. Orders of Boer goats have been received from Antigua, and enquiries for over 100 Boer goats to the Azores were received.
In the final year (2007-08) of the Sustaining the Genetic Quality of Ruminants Program provided $56,926 in support of industry association projects to help maintain Canada's reputation for genetics and the marketability of genetic ruminant products. A number of herds signed up under the New Herd Enrolment Program. An assessment to identify strategies to strengthen business development activities were undertaken under the Harmonization of Classification Program. Preliminary work has been completed on the Electronic Animal OwnerShip Transfer (E-Paper) Program. Marketing and Business Resource staff conducted an analysis to redesign the website.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	59.5	23.1	12.4	(6.6)	(6.6)	19.0
Total Transfer Payment Program	59.5	23.1	12.4	(6.6)	(6.6)	19.0

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
In 2007-2008, it was anticipated that $12.4 million was required to fund various BSE programs. These programs initially were ending in fiscal year 2006-2007, however received a program extension to fiscal year 2007-2008. Approximately $3.4 million was spent. The remaining program authority that was not spent is mainly due to some projects that were to be initially funded through the Ruminant Slaughter Loan Loss Reserve Program did not materialise or were funded through a different program.

Also the reversal of accruals of older BSE Recovery programs in the amount of $9.7 million contributes to the negative spending amount. These accruals were for programs which are complete. Therefore the outstanding estimated accruals are no longer necessary. In addition, provincial compliance audits results concluded that a minor reimbursement to Canada was required in the amount of approximately $220,000.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
An evaluation has been completed, but not yet finalized at this time.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit:
An audit for the first three phases of the program has been completed, but not yet finalized at this time.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program : Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS)/AgriStability & CAIS Inventory Transition Initiative (CITI) (Statutory Programs)

Start Date: CAIS/AgriStability (April 1, 2003) CITI (May 18, 2006 )
End Date: CAIS/AgriStability (March 31, 2012) CITI (September 30, 2008 )

Description: CAIS was a margin-based program that integrated stabilization and disaster protection into a single program under the previous Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) (2003/04 - 2006/07). The program assisted the producers in protecting their farming operations from small and large drops in income. This was a whole-farm program available to eligible farmers regardless of the commodities they produced. Producers were eligible if they reported farm income or loss to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), had at least six months of farming activity and completed a production cycle in the program year. Producer margins are based on their eligible income less their eligible expenses for a program year and payments were triggered under the program when a producer’s margin for a program year dropped below their average historical margin for the past five years (less the highest and lowest years).

Repeated producer and industry concerns prompted the government to commit, in the 2006 Speech from the Throne and Budget, to replacing CAIS with more responsive, predictable and bankable programs. As a result, federal-provincial-territorial governments agreed to replace CAIS with a new suite of Business Risk Management (BRM) programs. In December 2007, the government announced the implementation of AgriInvest (income stabilization) which replaces the top tier (first 15% of margin decline) of CAIS and the implementation of AgriStability for the 2007 program delivery year. AgriStability is an improved margin-based program that provides producers with assistance for larger income declines. The program compensates producers when their margin in the program year is more than 15 percent lower than their reference margin from previous years (the second and third tiers of CAIS covering the disaster component of the program). AgriStability includes several enhancements to address industry concerns, including a better method for valuing producer inventories, expansion of the criteria for negative margin coverage to allow deeper coverage for back-to-back disasters and an automatic Targeted Advance Payment for when disasters occur. In addition to these parameter changes, governments have also worked to improve the service delivery of the program by introducing automatic sign-up for previous participants, more flexible deadlines, simplified forms and electronic filing, online calculators, national service standards, and clearer program statements.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
CAIS (2006 Program Year - see note below)
Of the 92.7% of 2006 program year applications processed the estimated out-going accuracy rate is 98.13% as of end of March, 2008.
Federal Delivery: 47,281 complete applications received. Total value of producer payments was $353,875,438 million as of end of March, 2008.
National Delivery: 125,092 complete applications received. Total value of producer payments was $822,655,450 million as of end of March, 2008.
AgriStability 2007 Program Year reporting had not begun as of end of March, 2008.
CITI Program National Delivery: A total of 147,463 producer payments have been paid for all program years. Total value of producer payments was $856.2 million for all program years as of end of March, 2008.
2003 Program Year - Federal Delivery: total value of producer payments was $214.1 million as of end of March, 2008.
2004 Program Year - Federal Delivery: total value of producer payments was $128.6 million as of end of March, 2008.
2005 Program Year - Federal Delivery: total value of producer payments was $59.9 million as of end of March, 2008.

Enhancements have been made to the AgriStability program including a better method for valuing producer inventories (CITI), expansion of the criteria for negative margin coverage to allow deeper coverage for back-to-back disasters and an automatic Targeted Advance Payment for when disasters occur. In addition, work has been done to improve the service delivery of the program by introducing things such as automatic sign-up for previous participants, more flexible deadlines, simplified forms and electronic filing, online calculators, national service standards, and clearer program statements.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants (CITI)	-	431.0	-	(0.7)	(0.7)	0.7
Total Contributions (CITI)	-	442.0	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions (CAIS/AgriStability)	1,068.7	933.3	570.5	377.3	377.3	193.2
Total Transfer Payment Program	1,068.7	1,806.3	570.5	376.6	376.6	193.9

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
Year to year G&C payments are directly related to the needs of the agriculture industry as CAIS/AgriStability is demand-driven rather than being funded from a set allocation for each fiscal year. As such, in good years, the program will cost governments less, while in bad years (i.e., years with dropping commodity prices, disasters, etc.) the costs of the program will be higher. The program does, however, include a payment cap of $3 million per participant per program year in order to control costs for governments and prevent larger operations from capturing a large share of program benefits.

Notably, 2007-08 G&C expenditures varied widely from previous years largely due to record market pricing in the Grains and Oilseed sectors during the 2006 program year.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
The Chapter Evaluation of the BRM programs was prepared to meet reporting requirements as stipulated in the Implementation Agreement. As the report had no targets, the OAG recommended targets be developed by December 31, 2007. These targets have been developed.

The Office of Audit and Evaluation reached an agreement with the ADM of Programs Branch to delay the CAIS evaluation until 2010. The delay is expected to allow program officials to act on the OAG recommendations and to develop performance information as well as establishing baseline information.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit:
The Office of the Auditor General released their report on the CAIS program in May 2007. The report and its findings can be found at:
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_parl_oag_200705_e_18289.html

Note: Program Grant & Contribution spending are recognized here in the year that the related economic event occurs (i.e. the 2007 Program/tax year). However, performance results related to delivery of ensuing payments to producers will not be available until the 2008/09 fiscal year, once the 2007 tax/program year is complete and applications are received. Therefore, results achieved are reported for the 2006 Program year.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Cover Crop Protection Program (Voted)

Start Date: June 8, 2006
End Date: March 31, 2011

Description: The Cover Crop Protection Program (CCPP) is a Federal only program aimed at assisting producers whose lands are adversely affected by excess soil moisture and flooding with the added costs of improving and protecting the soil until a commercial crop can be planted. Under this program, a fixed amount per acre is provided to assist in planting and maintaining a cover crop (a crop not intended for commercial sale that stabilizes the soil and helps to limit weeds and environmental degradation). Target clients are producers in the affected areas.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
There were 6,909 payments made to producers who where affected by excess moisture or flooding covering 852,031 acres in 2007/08. Of the 100% of known eligible recipients, those who had not applied were contacted and encouraged to apply which resulted in a participation rate of 95.5% of eligible applicants receiving a payment. Although no workshops/information sessions were held in 2007/08, 100% of eligible applicants received information describing best management practices related to soils with excess moisture or flooding.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	78.0	-	22.1	13.2	(13.2)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	78.0	-	22.1	13.2	(13.2)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
At the time of preparation of the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities, Treasury Board approval for this program had not yet been received and as such Planned Spending is shown as zero. In terms of the variance between actual spending and authorities, the designated area requirement limited the eligible acres and as a result lowered the overall program expenditures and commitments to $13.2M from the authorities of $22.1M as provided per TB submission. The impact of designated areas was unknown at the time the authorities were obtained. As well, 2007/08 was drier than previous years.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: Office of Audit and Evaluation is planning to initiate an evaluation of the CCPP in July 2008 for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 program years with completion by December 2008.

Significant Audit findings and URL to last Audit: This program has not been subject to an audit, and there is not one planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Cattlemen's Association Legacy Fund (Statutory)

Start Date: June 27, 2005
End Date: March 31, 2015

Description: The purpose of the Legacy Fund is to support to the Canadian beef sector to develop markets for beef cattle, beef cattle genetics, beef and beef products in a post-BSE environment. A grant totalling $50 million over 10 years will be provided to the Canadian Cattlemen's Association on behalf of the beef sector.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Industry is struggling to manage the ongoing impact of BSE and simultaneously regain its competive position given the rapid appreciation in the value of the Canadian dollar, increased feed prices and under utilization of packing capacity. Notwithstanding these challenges, Legacy Funds enabled the Beef Information Centre, Canada Beef Export Federation and Canadian Beef Breeds Council to undertake significant market development programs focussed on key Canadian, US and Asian beef markets. In 2007, beef exports totalled $1.2 billion, down slightly from $1.3 billion in 2006. Sales of beef cattle genetics in 2007 were $7.2 million compared to $0 in 2006.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	0.1	4.9	5.0	7.0	7.0	(2.0)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	0.1	4.9	5.0	7.0	7.0	(2.0)

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
In developing the spending profile for the Legacy Fund annual expenditures were estimated by spreading the available funding over the ten year time frame in equal annual increments. However, funds are allocated based on the requirements outlined in an annual business plan which reflects the priorities of the three marketing groups. As such the funds needed in any particular year will vary depending on the marketing program developed in that year. These forecasts are made even more difficult by challenges in predicting when a market might actually open to imports of Candian beef.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: An interim evaluation is expected to be finalized by August 2008 and a final evaluation will be completed by June 30, 2015.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: An audit has recently been completed by CCA which reported no significant findings. There is currently no URL for this audit.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Farm Families Options Program (CFFOP) (Voted)

Start Date: June 23, 2006
End Date:March 31, 2010

Description: The Options Program is a two-year pilot program that provides short-term financial assistance to low-income farm families and provides eligible clients with access to farm business assessment and training services that could help them increase their long-term on- and off-farm income opportunities. Income payments are issued to eligible applicants based on information on the 2005 and 2006 tax years. Eligible applicants commit to completing a Renewal activity, either a Farm Business Assessment or Canadian Agricultural Skills Service, or an approved equivalent activity by November 20, 2008.

Strategic Outcome: Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
As of March 31, 2008, $205.7 million was distributed to farmers and farm families, including the 2005 program year payments and the initial payments for the 2006 program year. With the final payment for the 2006 program year, the total payments will increase to $221 million for both program years. Of the 15,278 individuals and farm families who received a year 1 options payment, 9,019 of the participants in the first year of the program re-applied for funds in year 2. Approximately 80% of the 2005 Options applicants who received a payment have completed or are in the process of completing business planning and skills development activities. In 2007-08, a total of 9,101 farmers/farm families participated in business planning and skills development. Of these 9,101 farmers/farm families, 5,759 participated in Farm Business Assessment (FBA) and 2,951 in Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS).

Results from Canadian Farm Families Options client feedback forms received between July 1, 2007 and February 28, 2008 show that 73.4% of respondents were satisfied with the payment they received; 48% reported that the payment reduced financial pressures to a great or very great extent; and 88.3% reported that the payment received made it easier to participate in a Renewal program.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal
Total Grants	-	145.0	157.5	76.0	76.0	156.3
Total Contributions	-	-	86.0	11.2	11.2	74.8
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	145.0	243.5	87.2	87.2	156.3

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
At the time of preparation of the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities, the amount allocated for CFFOP had not been finalized. On May 31, 2007 changes to the program were approved by Treasury Board. These changes resulted in the original $550.0 million budget being reduced to $304.0 million. Approval was obtained to reprofile the remaining funding to other intiatives.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
Findings relating to CFFOP have not been included in the Renewal Chapter Evaluation, as the program had not been in place long enough and there weas insufficient data to provide a basis for evaluating it. The report on the evaluation of the Renewal Chapter will be finalized by October 2008.

There is no summative evaluation of Renewal or the Options program scheduled for completion by March 31, 2008. Between November 2007 and March 2008, two Planning Studies were completion in preparation for future evaluations. Each study addressed selected and diferent Renewal programs. No decision has been taken yet as to when these evaluations will take place, as a new five-year plan is in development and has not yet been approved.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: No Program audit was conducted in 2007-08 and none is planned for 2008-09.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Cost of Production Benefit (Statutory)

Start Date: April 1, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2012

Description: The Cost of Production Direct Payment was intended to partially compensate producers for the decline in incomes experienced over the past four years due to production costs increasing at a faster rate than output prices. The payment was based on a percentage of their historical average net sales of eligible commodities.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Reduced producers income loss through participation in Business Risk Management programs. As of March 2008:

Applications received was 165,413
Number of zero payments 3,591
Number of payments 160,689
Applications remaining to be processed 1,133

Total value of payments were $343,857,477 not including the $44.4 million transferred to Quebec.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	353.5	353.5	(353.5)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	44.7	44.7	(44.7)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	398.3	398.3	(398.3)

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: There are currently no existing or planned evaluation for this program.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: There are currently no existing or planned audits for this program.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Agriculture and Agri-food Sector Assistance - Environment (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description: The purpose of the Environment programs is to support the adoption of management practices on farms across Canada, which are beneficial to the environment and economically sustainable.

Strategic Outcome: Health of the Environment

Results Achieved:

EFP - As of March 31, 2008 over 56,700 reviewed Environmental Farm Plans (EFPs)/Equivalent Agri-Environmental Plans (EAEPs) have been completed under the Agricultural Policy Framework (APF). This represents 25% of all farms across Canada and approximately 34% of the agricultural landscape. This is compared with over 45,600 reviewed EFPs/EAEPs completed under the APF as of March 31, 2007.
NFSP - National Farm Stewardship Program - approximately 35,000 BMP Projects completed as of March 31, 2008.
Greencover Canada - As of March 31, 2008 approximately 7,000 BMP projects, 572,393 acres converted to long-term perennial cover and 230 technical assistance projects were completed.
National Water Supply Expansion Program (NWSEP) - Approximately 6,200 Tier 1 projects completed; 240 Tier 2 projects completed; 430 Tier 3 projects completed.
Agri-Environmental Standards - Developed standards in the areas of water, biodiversity, pesticides and air
Water Quality Surveillance Program (WQSP) - Conducted pilot studies at several test sites
Information Gaps in Water Quality and Nutrients (GAPS) Study on Regulations- Funded 11 R&D projects.
Study on Regulations- Released Phase 1 report in February 2006.
National Agri-Environmental Health Analysis and Reporting Program (NAHARP)- Released agri-environmental indicator report

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Environment
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	48.6	97.0	111.0	198.8	198.8	(87.8)
Total Transfer Payment Program	48.6	97.0	111.0	198.8	198.8	(87.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
Initial delays in signing provincial implementation agreements resulted in delays in project start up with consequential impacts on resource requirements. This required on-going reprofiling over the 5 year program which resulted in a significant variance in the final year as projects were completed.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: An evaluation was conducted of the Environment Chapter in 2007-08 and will be made official in the 2008-09 fiscal year.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: An internal audit of the Greencover Canada program was conducted in 2007-08 and officially signed off on June 10, 2008 by the AAFC Audit committee. This is currently not posted online.

The Office of the Auditor General is conducting an audit of the Environment Chapter Programs. It began in 2007-08 and will continue through to the 2008-09 fiscal year.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Agriculture and Agri-food Sector Assistance - Food Safety and Food Quality (FSQ) (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description:The objective of the program is to assist industry in developing and implementing government-recognized food safety, traceability and quality process control systems throughout the agri-food continuum, in order to:

protect human health by reducing exposure to food hazards;
increase consumer confidence in the safety and quality of food produced in Canada;
increase industry's ability to meet or to exceed market requirements for food safety and food quality; and to
provide value-added opportunities through the adoption of food safety and food quality systems

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
The Canadian Food Safety and Quality Program is made up of three components: 1) Systems Development 2) On-Farm Implementation and 3) Food Safety Initiative.

The Systems Development component has three elements 1) Systems Development (On-Farm & Post-Farm), 2) Traceability and 3) Food Quality.

In 2007-08:

Under Systems Development: 16 of 19 eligible industry commodity organizations were at various stages of system development. Of those 16 organizations, 12 have completed the first part of a three-part Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) recognition process; three have completed the second part of the process. In all, four projects worth $186,128 were approved.
13 of 28 eligible post-farm organizations participated in CFSQP and have systems at various stages of development. Four projects were approved for a total of $182,982 in funding; and
Traceability element: three projects were approved for a total of $235,060.
Food Quality element: one project worth $155,806.67 was approved. A food quality policy is still being developed.

Under the On-Farm Implementation component, seven national commodity organizations offered workshops and technical support directly to producers to assist them to implement Food Safety systems. Three new projects worth $4.42M were approved.

Under the Food Safety Initiative component, PEI joined the initiative bringing the approved funding under this component to $50.4M for the seven provinces involved (BC. AB., SK., MB, ON, NS & PEI). All seven provinces participated in Outreach, Implementation and/or Research & Development (R&D).

As of March 31, 2008, $89.9M (46.8 percent of a total of $190.0M) of Agricultural Policy Framework funding for CFSQP has been approved for projects and $67.0M (74.5 percent of the $89.9M) has been spent.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Food Safety & Food Quality
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	6.1	10.5	71.4	45.9	45.9	25.5
Total Transfer Payment Program	6.1	10.5	71.4	45.9	45.9	25.5

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
The planned amount for 2007-08 was $71.4M which included $22.8M carried forward from unspent 2006-07 funding as well as $16M reallocated from the Canadian Farm Families Options Program. The initial planned amount in the TB submission for 07-08 was $36.08M. Actual expenditures for the year were $45.9M.

The overall increase in actual expenditure in 2007-08 of $35.4M over 2006-07 included $28M in the Food Safety Initiative component.

Under On-Farm Implementation, seven national organizations increased their spending from $2.2M in 2006-07 to $6.0M in 2007-08, an increase of about 276%, for workshops and technical support (services or equipment purchase) to farmers.

Systems Development (SD) is a 4-phase approach, most organizations developing post-farm food safety systems were at the later stages of developing systems or providing training which are more expensive than the beginning of Systems Development. These post-farm projects expenditures were about $2M (accounting for over 200% of the increase within the SD component) in 2007-08 compared to $0.6M in 2006-07. On the part of the on-farm food safety element, $2.7M expenditure was reported in 2007-08 compared to $1.9M in 2006-07, an increase of about 45% within the on-farm food safety element.

The CFSQP is a demand-driven program, and CFSQP projects typically take place over a 3-6 year period which is the length of time that most organizations typically require to complete development of their food safety or traceability system. Unlike short-term projects (less than 12 months - e.g. pilot projects), spending can often vary significantly from one year to the next, making program forecasting more difficult.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: According to the FSQ Chapter evaluation for Progress on Results undertaken in 2007, "food safety has remained very relevant and perhaps even more relevant today than at the beginning of the FSQ priority. At the project level, case studies showed that some important achievements and successes were made in individual projects funded by FSQ. But overall, progress in the Chapter was limited and slowed relative to original outcome goals and the emerging market requirements."

Lessons learned from the Evaluation include:

FSQ Chapter outcomes were not realistic regarding industry state or readiness and the time required (10-15 years) to achieve objectives;
A voluntary approach has limitations because associations do not have a mandate to impose the use of food safety systems by their members and do not cover all commodities;
Under APF, some performance indicators proved difficult to measure. Under Growing Forward, AAFC is taking great care to ensure that we identify meaningful measurements with appropriate and viable baseline data;
Some national associations lack the necessary capacity to efficiently and effectively implement food safety systems;
There is on-going interest in development and implementation of government recognized on-farm and post-farm HACCP-based systems; and
Provincial partners commented on the late start of the FSI agreements and the cumbersome AAFC program delivery infrastructure; and the Provincial delivery of the FSI component was efficiently and effectively delivered.

There is currently no URL for this evaluation.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: No Program audit was conducted in 2007-08 and none is planned for 2008-09.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Agriculture and Agri-food Sector Assistance - Science and Innovation (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description: The purpose of the Science and Innovation Transfer Payments Programs (TPP) is to accelerate innovation adoption in agriculture. Science and innovation are the cornerstone of efforts to make the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector the world leader in food safety, innovation and environmentally responsible production and to support its future success and prosperity. The programs are designed to bring together a full spectrum of organizations to develop ideas that will accelerate the adoption of innovation and the commercialization of products. The three major objectives of the program are; realigning of public science resources; co-ordination along the whole value chain; and the creation of an innovation climate. Advances in agri-food science and technology are accelerating the development of a wide range of new industrial, health and nutritional products obtained from plants, animals and micro organisms.

Strategic Outcome: Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:

By the end of 2007-2008, 29 Contribution Agreements were in place for the Broker and Agri-Innovation Programs, as well as 4 Collateral Agreements under the Science and Innovation Division, utilizing the balance of the funds available. A number of "lessons learned" have become visible that will be considered in future programming.
By the end of 2007-2008, 23 contracts were utilized to support the re-alignment of public science resources in the agri-food sector, coordinate activities along the whole agri-food value chain, create an innovative agri-food business climate as well as to support the development of Broker and Agri-Innovation projects.

Funded sector-led projects to implement alternative value-added strategies for existing commodities and new products and markets

In 2007-2008 the Science and Innovation programs provided funding which enabled nine commodity associations to develop and implement new value-added strategies/plans to increase profitability for Canadian producers, processors and other members along the value chain. This reflects a significant increase over the 2006-2007 fiscal year in which one strategy was developed and implemented to increase the value of an existing commodity.

Improved collaboration along value chains to identify risks, opportunities and new markets.

During the 2007-2008 period, Science and Innovation programs funded projects that developed 42 innovation networks, workshops and forums that identified risks, opportunities and new markets to increase profitability of the sector. This is a moderate increase to the approximate 30 collaboration activities held in the 2006-2007 fiscal year.

Funded support for the development and start-up costs for centres of innovation and/or incubators or business mentoring.

The Science and Innovation programs provided funding to assist the acceleration of the development of commercial success of bio-based businesses, commercialization, formalizing strategic plans and building knowledge networks. 26 business mentoring opportunities with private Canadian companies were initiated that resulted in 6 companies that successfully launched new bio-based products.

Number of domestic and world agri-food research opportunities created.

763 new research opportunities were created in 2007-2008 from Science and Innovation Contribution/Collateral Agreements. In 2006-2007, 323 opportunities were created. Funded projects assisted towards achieving increased value for research investments by focusing efforts on industry led opportunities. In addition, funding increased research capacity to exploit Canada's natural advantage in biomass by allowing combined efforts of public and private research to explore new economic opportunities.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	3.1	54.0	48.8	73.5	73.5	(24.7)
Total Transfer Payment Program	3.1	54.0	48.8	73.5	73.5	(24.7)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
In the last two years of the Programs (2006-2007 and 2007-2008), unspent funds from other programs were reallocated to support the demand under the Science and Innovation Programs.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:

The Science and Innovation Division lacked sufficient human resources, especially early on, to develop a transparent and consistent delivery structure to facilitate streamlined application, selection and approval process and reporting systems.
The Broker Program was viewed as cutting edge. No other programs like it exist within AAFC and it is favored by the industry.
The current regulatory framework for submission processes for agri-food products is a major barrier to new bioproducts and bioprocesses market entry and development.
Innovation is a horizontal issue which cuts across the department and impacts the activities of a significant number of branches.

Note: The Evalutation has not been posted to date

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: No audit of the Science and Innovation Transfer Payment Program has been conducted to date.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Production Insurance (under the Agricultural Policy Framework-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Statutory Program)

Start Date: April 1, 2003 for APF-Business Risk Management (BRM)
End Date: March 31, 2008 for APF-Business Risk Management (BRM) funding

Description: The purpose of the program is to seek to stabilize farm income through cushioning the producer against the economic impact of production losses arising from natural hazards like drought, hail, frost and diseases.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Results Achieved:
Producer participation in PI has a targeted participation rate of 70% and for forage 50% as measured by a comparison of crops grown to crops insured. For the main crop groups (excluding forage), Manitoba has the highest participation rate at 80% followed by Quebec at 71.2%. The national average was 57.9% which is lower than the target but considered good based on the wide range of uptake across provinces. Quebec has the highest participation rate for forage at 79%, while the other provinces range from 0% to 20% bringing the national average participation rate for the forage programs to approximately 19%. Overall, numerous enhancements were made this year and will continue to be made to the PI program including improvements for forage, horticulture, potato storage, new crops and available coverage levels.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	345.9	343.1	407.0	416.4	416.4	(9.4)
Total Transfer Payment Program	345.9	343.1	407.0	416.4	416.4	(9.4)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
The actual expenditures for 2007/08 are higher than what was originally planned due to a rise in grain and oilseed prices which have increased total premium costs. In addition, the overall higher federal cost-share has also contributed to the increase in premium costs.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to last Evaluation:
An evaluation that assessed the relevance, implementation, success and cost effectiveness of the PI program from 2003/04 to 2005/06 has been completed. The evaluation recommended the following for each item assessed:

Relevance: the federal government continue to support the program
Implementation: AAFC work with commodity associations and provincial agencies to improve the flow of information on PI to all producers, particularly regarding recent changes and options that have been introduced;
Success: the intent to place livestock insurance under PI be reviewed given the differing basis on which insurance risk is assessed; and
Cost effectiveness: The governance model for PI be reviewed in the context of BRM governance systems to ensure future delivery of PI demonstrates more consistency, equity, sharing of information and best practices.

There is currently no URL for this evaluation.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audience: Management has addressed the recommendations contained in the PI audit finalized in 2004.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Plum Pox Eradication Program (PPEP) (Voted)

Start Date:September 2004
End Date: March 31, 2011

Description: The purpose of this seven-year program (2004-05 to 2010-11) is to eradicate the Plum Pox Virus (PPV) in Canada while ensuring the viability of the industry. This program is a follow-up of the expired three-year program (2001-02 to 2003-04) which showed that the eradication of PPV was possible. 2007-08 was year 4 of the 7-year program. Additional funding for the PPEP program in the amount of $5.811M was approved by Treasury Board in September 2007. This additional funding will be used to continue intensive sampling activites of trees and to compensate producers for the removal of infected trees in the quarantine area. This additional funding has increasing planned contributions for 2007-08 from the original $3.1M to $8.9M.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System/Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
2007-08 was year 4 of the 7-year program. Surveillance for the virus continued by sampling trees in the quarantine area. Infected trees and trees in infected blocks that met the removal threshold were removed. Producers were financially assisted for the loss of trees.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	-	6.9	6.9	(6.9)
Total Business Risk Management	-	-	-	6.9	6.9	(6.9)
Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	8.1	5.5	3.1	-	-	3.1
Total Innovation and Renewal	8.1	5.5	3.1	-	-	3.1
Total Transfer Payment Program	8.1	5.5	3.1	6.9	6.9	(3.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
At the time of preparation of the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities Treasury Board approval had not yet been received for additional funding for this program and as such Planned Spending does not reflect this funding.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: The PPEP has not been subject to an evaluation, and there is no evaluation planned.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: The PPEP has not been subject to an audit, and there is no audit planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Agriculture and Agri-food Sector Assistance - Renewal (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description:Through Renewal programming, AAFC aims to provide producers with the tools and skills they need to make business decisions based on good knowledge. Renewal programming is built on the concept of continuous learning, and is designed to help producers assess their situations and plan for the future during critical transition times. Renewal programs enhance producers' access to information, advice and training, and enable them to pursue on- and off-farm income opportunities.

Strategic Outcome: Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS) - Three Renewal indicators were developed to measure the results of Renewal programs. Using baseline data from the 2004 National Renewal Survey (NRS), provincial working groups developed targets for each of the 3 Renewal indicators. The 2007 NRS was used to determine if producers have increased their level of knowledge and use of beneficial management practices, and if targets are being met.

The percentage of farmers and farm families who have knowledge and understanding of beneficial business management practices increased from 52% in 2004 to 59% in 2007 (the target was set at 65%).
The percentage of farmers and farm families that use beneficial business management tools, services, practices and/or improved skills increased from 66% in 2004 to 69% in 2007 (the target was set at 74%).
The percentage of farmers and farm families that are meeting their business and personal goals increased from 37% in 2004 to 41% in 2007 (the target was set at 48%).

In addition, 4,638 applications were received for Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS) in 2007-08 (1,687 renewal applicants and 2,951 Options clients). 80% of CASS respondents to a Client Impact Assessment (CIA) survey conducted in 2007 reported that the skills and/or knowledge they developed through participation in CASS helped them in reaching their most important business goal. In 2007-08, 8,757 producers across Canada applied to participate in the Canadian Farm Business Advisory Service (CFBAS) and Planning and Assessment for Value-Added Enterprise (PAVE). Of those, 8,086 were for Farm Business Assessment (FBA), 643 were for SBPS, and 28 were for PAVE (6,150 of the 8,086 FBA applicants were Options clients). 55% of FBA CIA respondents and 71% of SBPS CIA respondents indicated that the program had been helpful in reaching their most important farm business goal.

Three Renewal indicators were developed to measure the results of Renewal programs. Using baseline data from the 2004 National Renewal Survey (NRS), provincial working groups developed targets for each of the 3 Renewal indicators. The 2007 NRS was used to determine if producers have increased their level of knowledge and use of beneficial business management practices, and if targets are being met.

On average, 70% agreed that these programs were beneficial in increasing understanding of the factors most critical to the success of the enterprise and creating the potential for increased profitability. To help producers acquire the skills they need to adapt to rapid changes in the industry, AAFC continued to work strategically with the agriculture and agri-food sector in 2007-08 to identify the new skills and learning opportunities needed in a knowledge-intensive economy.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	15.3	31.6	5.6	55.0	55.0	(49.4)
Total Transfer Payment Program	15.3	31.6	5.6	55.0	55.0	(49.4)

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
The actual spending is higher than Planned due to the following:
1) A substantial number of applications received in late 2006-07 and which were paid in 2007-08;
2) Pressure by consultants to complete the work by March 2008 since there was uncertainty as to program availability and funding for fiscal year 2008-09; and
3) APF Renewal receives the majority of its funding as operating funding, and therefore contribution funds is reallocated from other APF initiatives during the fiscal year to meet requirements.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
A Renewal chapter evaluation has been completed and a draft report is currently receiving internal review at the Office of Audit and Evaluation. A final evaluation report is expected to be completed by September 31, 2008. The summative evaluation scheduled to be completed by March 31, 2010 is under review; decisions regarding evaluations will be completed once Growing Forward programs have been determined.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: 5 compliance audits were undertaken in 2007/2008, including:

The Canadian Agricultural Skills Service under the Canada-Alberta Implementation Agreement. The auditor reported that as at March 31, 2008 the Program is in compliance, in all material respects, with the criteria established in the Agreement. Through the compliance audit it was determined that the Agreement was administered in accordance with the purposes of the CASS program for eligible activities; the Federal-Provincial Working Group was established in accordance with the Agreement and had adequate control and reporting systems to enable them to monitor and track activities and objective; policies and administrative procedures developed were appropriate and operating effectively for the program; roles and responsibilities of the Responsible Officer were clearly defined; performance information was documented; and administrative expenses were in accordance with the Agreement.
The delivery of the Canadian Agricultural Skills Service under the Canada-Saskatchewan Implementation Agreement. The auditor reported that as at March 31, 2007, the Program is in compliance, in all material respects, with the criteria established in the Agreement. The auditor reported that the procedures and systems in place and used by the Province’s Responsible Officer were appropriate and well documented; and the procedures used by the delivery agent to ensure that the Colleges applied the terms and conditions of the agreement to their assessment and individual learning plan development assistance appeared to be appropriate, documented and operating properly.
The Collateral Agreement for Renewal under the Canada - Alberta Implementation Agreement. The auditor noted that with the exception of non-compliance with section 4.14, 6.1, and A.1 and Article 9 of the agreement, as at March 31, 2007 and for the years ended March 31, 2006 and 2007, the Province of Alberta, as represented by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, is in compliance, in all material respects, with the criteria established by the administrative procedures described in the Agreement. The auditor reported that during the audit they noted adequate internal, financial, and administrative controls exist and meet the needs of the Program. Also, there were adequate controls with respect to the calculation, collection, payment and recording of federal contributions by the Province.
The Renewal element of the Agriculture Framework Canada - Quebec Collateral Agreement on the management of Federal-Provincial implementation measures. The auditor reported that as at March 31, 2007, the Province of Quebec is in compliance, in all material respects, with the terms and conditions set out by AAFC. The auditor reported that during the audit they noted that approved expenditures are subject to controls, responsibilities are specified, allocations are adequate and calculations are properly applied for the admissible activities specified in the Agreement; funds are subject to appropriate tracking and verification; the management reporting systems are appropriate for administering the program; Canada and the province appear to share equal visibility on public documents; and administrative expenditures were found to be in compliance with the Agreement.
The delivery of the Canadian Agricultural Skills Service in the Canada - Manitoba Implementation Agreement. Draft copies of the audit report and the detailed report for discussion purposes with the project authority are scheduled to be completed by July 18, 2008; and the Final Report to be delivered July 31, 2008.

The compliance audit on the Canadian Agricultural Skills Service under the Canada-Ontario Implementation Agreement is on-going; and compliance audits for CASS-PEI and 4-H have been deferred.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Agriculture and Agri-food Sector Assistance - International (Canadian Agriculture and Food International) (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description: The purpose of the CAFI program is to provide support to industry to gain and expand international recognition for Canada and enhance market opportunities for Canadian agriculture and food products. The program replaces and improves on AAFC's Agri-Food Trade Program (AFTP).

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System/Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
In 2007-08, the CAFI Program supported industry initiatives in targeted markets that aim to gain international recognition for Canadian agriculture, agri-food, beverage, and seafood products.

The CAFI program provides funding for industry initiatives designed to increase international sales of Canadian agriculture and food products, by building upon Canada's reputation as a provider of high-quality, safe and innovative agriculture, agri-food, beverage, and seafood products.

For example, in 2007-08, through initiatives funded under the CAFI program:
During 2007 the first major shipments of purebred Canadian cattle, since the discovery of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in 2003, were delivered to Russia, which imported more than 5000 head of Canadian cattle. Two further shipments, amounting to 3800 head in total took place during the first half of 2008 and additional orders are under negotiation. Canadian swine exporters are also experiencing success in the Russian market. In 2006, over 2,000 breeding swine were exported to Russia valued at $1.8 million, while 10,447 breeding swine were exported in 2007 with a value of $9.1 million, making Russia the largest off-shore market for Canadian breeding swine in 2006 and 2007.

Pulse Canada efforts to reduce the risks of market access barriers has resulted in the transition to a tariff and quota-free environment, and access of beans to Mexico in January 2008.

Part of the strategy involved working with Mexico's bean sector on areas of mutual interest including research collaboration and increasing demand initiatives. Although continued monitoring of the market access situation is required, Pulse Canada is ready to shift focus to increasing demand initiatives in 2008-2009. The partnerships developed with Mexico industry and government through market access activities have paved the way for transition to take place.

The main objective of the Canadian Special Crops Association export market growth strategy was to create a vibrant business environment that promotes and facilitates export success for Canadian exporters of pulses and special crops. The total export value of mustard seed, sunflower seed, canary seed and buckwheat increased 80% from approximately $147M in 2005 to nearly $264M in 2007.

The Health and Antioxidant Super-fruit message continues to drive the demand for Blueberries and Wild Blueberries around the world, but winter damage and poor weather during pollination resulted in less production than anticipated. The industry will need 50-60 million pounds of Wild Blueberries to fulfill the strong demand worldwide. Processors are receiving excellent returns for their fruit, and this has put them in a stronger position to invest in the growth of the industry.

The Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance Long Term International Strategy created the opportunity for industry members to network and gain valuable contacts from all aquaculture and seafood industries within the U.S. and other international markets. Contacts made at a CAFI funded marketing activity led to the selection of Canadian farmed Arctic Char as a sustainably farmed species featured at the Monterrey Bay Aquarium 6th Cooking for Solutions Gala Event.

Increased recognition of Canadian products and capabilities.

AAFC continued to work in 2007-08 to generate greater recognition for Canada by branding its achievements in food safety, traceability, animal health and environmental sustainability to maximize exports and generate greater sales for Canadian agriculture and agri-food products. The CAFI Program assists industry associations in undertaking activities with these objectives.

Canadian Pork International is the export promotion agency for the Canadian pork industry representing producers, processors and trading houses. In 2007, despite challenges, pork exports remain strong. Promotional campaigns, including retail promotions, have nearly doubled the sales of chilled pork over the last few years with a wider distribution in more than 20% of Japanese supermarkets. Chilled pork exports comprise of 30% of all pork exports to Japan along with a 225% growth in the same product to Korea. The launch of a promotional campaign in Singapore contributed towards exports of chilled pork increasing 250% over the previous year and accounting for 7% of exports to Singapore in 2007 versus 2% in 2006.

The CAFI Program is also committed to increasing international recognition of Canada's capabilities an exporter of agriculture, agri-food, and seafood products. To this end, the CAFI Program supported numerous incoming missions of international delegations interested in learning about the superior capabilities of the Canadian industry first-hand. The Canadian Swine Exporters Association considers incoming missions a significant building block in their quest for increasing sales and developing new markets. In 2007 over 300,000 breeding swine were exported to 26 countries.

The challenges the pork sector faced were the increasing competitive export market, the increasing number of non-tariff barriers impacting market access, a strong Canadian dollar making Canadian product more expensive internationally and particularly less competitive versus US pork products, increasing hog cost of production contributing to uncertainty and rationalization in the sector and competitiveness challenges at processing (labour cost and availability, plant scale) contributing to the rationalization in hog processing.

The CAFI program is also committed to increasing international recognition of Canada's capabilities as a net exporter of agriculture, agri-food, and seafood products. To this end, the CAFI program supported numerous incoming missions of international delegations interested in learning about the superior capabilities of the Canadian industry first-hand. The Canadian Swine Exporters Association (CSEA) considers incoming missions a significant building block in their quest for increasing sales and developing new markets. In August 2006 two Chilean veterinary inspectors came to Canada on an incoming mission and inspected approximately 20 farms in four provinces. As a result of the inspections several hundred breeding swine were shipped to Chile.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Markets and International
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	24.2	22.1	24.7	17.9	17.9	6.8
Total Transfer Payment Program	24.2	22.1	24.7	17.9	17.9	6.8

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
The variance between actual and planned spending for 2007-08 is due in part to the withdrawal / rejection of three proposals primarily due to delays in implementation.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
An evaluation was requested in 2006-2007 fiscal year, but could not be accommodated in the evaluation plan. The program is currently drawing on an evaluation from its predecessor program and observations from the evaluation of the APF International Chapter. Industry associations benefits from CAFI Program funding, and this demonstrates a positive impact on their members' export performance.

As a result of close and ongoing consultation, which also take place with industry, numerous adjustments have been made to the Program.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: No audits have been completed and none are planned.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions in support of Rural Canada and of development in the area of Co-operatives (under the Agricultural Policy Framework - Non-Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2008 (extension until March 31, 2009)

Description: The purpose of the programs is to carry out plans for Rural and Co-operative development. The programming covers the following three initiatives:

the renewal and strengthening of the Canadian Rural Partnership, which includes the transfer payments program "Models for Rural Development", and "The Rural Partnership Development Program" (formerly the Networking Initiative), both of which focus on approaches to rural development, and building partnerships.
the Rural Community Capacity Building Program, which places a focus on tools, services, knowledge, and processes.
the Co-operatives Development Initiative (CDI) ($12.4 million from 2003-04 to 2007-08). In 2006, additional funding was provided to CDI to provide support for co-op development projects to enable farmers to capture new biofuels and other value-added opportunities - Ag-CDI funding (G&Cs): $3.75 million for 2006-07 to 2008-09.

Strategic Outcome: Innovation for Growth

Results Achieved:
Models for Rural Development -In 2007-2008, the 23 models were able to be replicated in more than 60 sites across rural Canada, involving more than 270 communities. Final Participatory Evaluation reports are being submitted which will serve as the basis for the body of knowledge regarding rural development. Most models completed their projects by March 31, 2008, however certain models and/or sites, due to external factors beyond their control, did not have the opportunity to reach their full potential. Some short term incremental funding in 2008/2009 will allow them to achieve the best results possible. The Networking Initiative provided funding for over 253 projects to rural communities.

Co-operatives Secretariat - In 2007-08, a network of 20 provincial, regional, and sectoral partners delivered the Advisory Services component across the country. At the end of the third quarter, Advisory Services had assisted three new co-operatives to incorporate and provide technical assistance to 76 existing co-operatives in order to cope with internal issues or support business expansion. Under the Innovation and Research component, the Secretariat approved 41 new projects for a total of $1.4 million that addressed the six priorities of the program.

Also, the Agriculture Co-operative Development Initiative (Ag-CDI) was renewed for two years and for 2007-2008 a total of 28 biofuel and value-added co-op projects and other activities to enhance the co-operative sector development capacity were funded for a total value of $1.0 million. In both CDI and Ag-CDI, the expected result to commit 100% of our G & C budget was met. In 2007-2008, all budget for CDI was used. For Ag-CDI, 90.4 % of the budget was spent; the late start of the program (september 2007) explains the variance in results.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Rural and Cooperatives Secretariat
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	8.6	9.1	7.8	10.6	10.6	(2.8)
Total Transfer Payment Program	8.6	9.1	7.8	10.6	10.6	(2.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
The variance between Actual and Planned spending is due in part to additional funding received subsequent to the publication of the 2007-2008 RPP, specifically for Ag-CDI. Secondly, due to delays in the development of the Models for Rural Development in 2006-2007, funding was reallocated to other initiatives. This funding was then reallocated back to Rural Development in 2007-2008.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: The Models for Rural Development Program is still receiving final evaluation reports and is therefore unable to provide any significant findings at this time. Audited financial statements from the proponents are due this year as well, which will faciliate the conclusion of the initiative.

In 2006 the Co-operative Development Initiative in 2006 conducted a mid-term evaluation and found that the program conformed to the mandate and was well received by communities as the demand for assistance exceeded the level of resources. Further information can be found at http://www.agr.gc.ca/info/audit-exam/pdf/cdi_idc_e.pdf or http://www.agr.gc.ca/info/audit-exam/index_e.php?page=cdi_idc

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: Models for Rural Development and Networking Initiative: No evaluation is planned at this time; however this may be reconsidered if variances are noted on the submitted audited financial statements.

Co-operatives Secretariat: the CDI and Ag-CDI programs were not part of the Department Audit Plan for 2007-2008 and were not identified in 2008-2009 plan. An internal evaluation at the end of programs will be conducted, but an audit will be performed only if the finding of the evaluation indicates a requirement of further investigation.

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

($ millions)

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Spring Credit Advance Program (SCAP) and Enhanced Spring Credit Advanced Program (ESCAP) (under the Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) -Business Risk Management Terms and Conditions - Voted & Statutory)

Start Date: April 1, 2003 For APF-Business Risk Management (BRM)
End Date: 2007-2008 concurrent with the end of the APF

Description:The SCAP program has been in place since 2000. The Spring Credit Advance Program (SCAP) provides producer organizations and their lenders with a repayment guarantee for advances of up to $0.05 million which are issued to producers in the spring. The objective of the program is to assist producers with their spring production input costs.

The ESCAP program was put in place in 2006 as a transitional program to increase the amount of interest free benefit to $0.1 million while amendments were being made to Agricultural Marketing Programs Act (AMPA). The objective of ESCAP is to allow producers to make decisions based on sound production or marketing rationale rather than on the availability of operating cash. Such objectives will contribute to the overarching goal of the APF.

The benefits of ESCAP include:
- Minimizing the distortion of producers' marketing and production decisions; and
- Facilitating short-term cash flow and long-term planning by producers.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

On February 28th, 2006 AAFC launched the Advance Payments Program (APP)/SCAP Electronic Delivery System allowing producer organizations to submit producer level data electronically. AAFC now has greater access to more accurate reporting of advances and repayments across provinces and producer organizations.

The ESCAP production period ended on September 30th, 2007. The ESCAP was an interim program while legislative changes were made to the AMPA in regards to the APP program. In total, $1.021 billion was advanced under the ESCAP to 29,625 producers. The average advance was $34,494 per producer, with an average interest savings of $915.41 per producer. With this access to capital, and interest savings, the ESCAP achieved it's expected results to provide producers with greater access to credit in the spring to assist with input costs; Improved cash flow; and allow for better farming practices by providing greater access to working capital.

	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	15.3	27.4	26.1	26.7	15.7	10.4
Total Transfer Payment Program	15.3	27.4	26.1	26.7	15.7	10.4

Comment(s) on Variance(s)
Actual cost of ESCAP for 2007-08 was less than planned due to the implementation of the New APP program along with old APP still being completed. This allowed for 3 different programs in which producers could choose from in order to receive an advance, which were being run concurrently. Uptake for all 3 programs was less than planned, but only due to a 3rd program being offered during the same time period.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation:
No evaluation of the ESCAP program was completed during the 2007-08 fiscal year. As the ESCAP program is now complete, no evaluation of the program will be pursued in the future.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit:
No audit of the ESCAP program was completed during the 2007-08 fiscal year. As the ESCAP program is now complete, no audit of the program will be pursued in the future.

Table 9: Foundations (Conditional Grants)

Name of Recipient: Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI)

Start Date: December 14, 2006

End Date: March 31, 2022

Total Funding: $15.0M

Description: To encourage independent policy research benefitting the Canadian agricultural sector. The conditional grant for CAPI will ensure continued success in building an inclusive and forward looking dialogue on the future of Canadian agriculture, and provide a stable and sustained forum to discuss issues of importance to the industry.

Strategic Outcome: Security of the Food System

Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: CAPI submitted their Business and Research Plans in 2007/2008 but the annual report containing information on the results achieved relative to the Business Plan and Research Plan is due July 31, 2008 under the agreement.

	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008
$ millions	Actual Spending	Actual Spending	Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending	Variance(s) between Actual and Planned
Program Activity: Business Risk Management	0.0	15.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	-

Comment on Variance(s): The CAPI agreement was signed on March 31, 2007 and the full amount was paid to the client in the 2006/2007 fiscal year in the form of an endowment to be drawn down at the rate of $1 million per year for 15 years.

Significant Evaluation Findings and URL to Last Evaluation: A Performance Evaluation will be done in 2010.

Significant Audit Findings and URL to Last Audit: The annual audit will be submitted to us by July 31, 2008.

URL to Recipient's Site: http://www.capi-icpa.ca

URL to Recipient's Annual Report: Will be available after July 31, 2008.

Table 10: Horizontal Initiatives

A "horizontal initiative" is an initiative in which partners from two or more organizations have agreed under a formal funding agreement (e.g. Memorandum to Cabinet, Treasury Board submission, federal-provincial agreement) to work toward the achievement of shared outcomes.

The objective of reporting on horizontal initiatives is to provide Parliament and the Canadian public and government with an overall picture of public spending and results achieved by departments working together.

Horizontal initiatives listed below were led by AAFC and were allocated federal funds that exceed $100 million (counting all federal partners) for the duration of the program, or were allocated less than $100 million in federal funds but still considered to be key to the achievement of government priorities, or had a high public profile.

Following is a summary list of horizontal initiatives for 2007-08. More complete information on each initiative, including spending and results, is available on the Treasury Board Secretariat's Horizontal Results Database.

Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program (CAIS)
Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS)
Co-operatives Secretariat
Farm Business Services
MOU with Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) on Food Safety and Quality
AAFC-Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) MOU on Agri-Food Specialists Positions Abroad
MOU with Environment Canada (EC) on the National Agri-Environmental Standards Initiative (NAESI)
MOU with Health Canada (HC) on Food Safety and Quality and Environment
Production Insurance
Rural Development

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative:
Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) (transition to AgriStability/ AgriInvest)

2. Name of Lead Department(s):
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity:
Business Risk Management

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
April 1, 2003
For Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) - Business Risk Management funding, which covers CAIS.

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
March 31, 2008
For APF-Business Risk Management funding, which covers CAIS.

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date):
$2.4 billion over five years.

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
Under the Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) 2003/04-2007/08, CAIS was one of two core business risk management (BRM) programs, together with Production Insurance. CAIS was a margin-based program that integrated stabilization and disaster protection into a single program, helping producers protect their farming operations from small and large drops in income. This was a whole-farm program available to eligible farmers regardless of the commodities they produced.

As a result of producer and industry concerns with the responsiveness, timing of payments and predictability of the program, the government committed, in the 2006 Speech from the Throne and Budget, to replacing CAIS with more responsive, predictable and bankable programs. After consultations with industry and the provinces and territories, federal-provincial-territorial governments agreed to replace CAIS with a new suite of BRM programs which includes AgriStability, AgrInvest, AgriInsurance and AgriRecovery. Transition to the new programs began in the 2007-08 fiscal year. The application deadline for the 2007 program year is the fall of 2008.

AgriStability is an improved margin-based program that provides farmers with assistance for larger income decline. The program compensates producers when their margin in the program year is more than 15 percent lower than their reference margin from previous years (the second and third tiers under CAIS). While AgriStability is similar to CAIS, it includes a number of enhancements which have long been requested by industry leaders, including a better method for valuing producer inventories, expansion of the criteria for negative margin coverage to allow deeper coverage for back-to-back disasters and an automatic Targeted Advance Payment for when disasters occur. In addition to these parameter changes, governments have also worked to improve the service delivery of the program by introducing enhancements such as automatic sign-up for previous participants, more flexible deadlines, simplified forms and electronic filing, online calculators, national service standards, and clearer program statements.

The new AgriInvest program will allow producers to self-manage the first 15 percent of their losses (the first tier under CAIS), through producer-government savings accounts. Annual producer deposits will be matched by government contributions (cost-shared 60:40 by federal and provincial governments) into the producer's account. Producers will have full access to use their AgriInvest money to address their farm income losses or for investments to mitigate on-farm risks or otherwise enhance profitability. In addition, to ensure that AgriInvest accounts are effective in the first years of the program, before producers have had a chance to build up their AgriInvest balances, the federal government provided one-time "kick-start" contributions into accounts (which did not require a matching producer deposit).

Program costs, including program payments and administrative costs, are cost shared by the federal government and the provinces on a 60:40 basis, respectively as identified in the following authorities:

Farm Income Protection (FIPA): Section 4
inet:
- Action Plan for the Agricultural Sector: Part II (June 2006);
- Action Plan for the Agricultural Sector: Part III (Oct. 2006)
- Amendments to Farm Income Stabilization Programming (March 2007)

The program links to the departmental strategic outcome Security of the Food System.

8. Shared Outcome(s):
To assist producers in protecting their farming operations from drops in income due to circumstances beyond their control.

Performance measures are:

Percentage target of 80% of the 5-year average program margin that eligible participants achieve overall as a result of the program payments.
Percentage target of 80% of farm market receipts covered by the program.

9. Governance Structure(s):
The CAIS program is part of the comprehensive APF developed by federal, provincial and territorial Ministers of Agriculture, and falls under the Business Risk Management priority. Funding is 60% federal and 40% provincial/territorial.

The CAIS program is delivered in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Yukon by a federal administration. In Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island, the CAIS program is delivered provincially.

Governance structure consists of the following:

The Senior Administrator's Delivery Committee consists of select ADMs and Senior Administrators from the delivering CAIS administrations (Canada, Alberta, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island) with the purpose of strategically looking at how Administrations can work together to create national efficiencies and make strategic decisions on delivery.
The Federal/Provincial/Territorial (FPT) Business Risk Management (BRM) Policy Working Group examines overarching BRM policy issues including performance measurement and future direction. The federal government has two voting representatives and each participating province/territory has one voting representative. The FPT BRM Policy Working Group is co-chaired by one federal official appointed by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and one provincial/territorial representative elected from the FPT BRM Policy Working Group to a one year term.
The FPT CAIS Administrators Working Group consists of officials from FPT levels of government who are policy or subject matter experts of business risk management programs and report to the Business Risk Management Working Group through its chair. The purpose of the Working Group is to develop the program guidelines and evaluate program parameters and processing issues. The group discusses issues related to program administration, file processing, administrative policy, finance, communication and any other related program issues.
The National CAIS Committee (NCC) assists in the administration of the program as specified in Section 5(3) of the Farm Income Protection Act (FIPA). Each participating province and territory appoints one provincial and one producer (maximum 3 year term) representative. The Minister appoints 10 producer representatives, one producer who is an aboriginal person and four federal officials. The chairperson is named by Canada from the four federal official members. The Committee monitors the operation of the CAIS Program and ensures national consistency in program delivery. The NCC was replaced by the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) in December 2007. The mandate and composition of the NPAC remains the same as that of NCC.

A similar structure is utilized for the new BRM programs AgriStability and AgriInvest.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
1. AAFC (lead)	Business Risk Management	CAIS / AgriStability	$2.4 billion (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2007/08)	$610.5 million	$433.6 million	Producers better supported and able to manage business risks Increased sector viability and profitability	A number of program enhancements have been implemented to better serve producers including: a better method for valuing producer inventories, expansion of the criteria for negative margin coverage to allow deeper coverage for back-to-back disasters and an automatic Targeted Advance Payment for when disasters occur. In addition, improvements have been made to service delivery by introducing automatic sign-up for previous participants, more flexible deadlines, simplified forms and electronic filing, online calculators, national service standards, and clearer program statement.
1. AAFC (lead)	Business Risk Management	AgriInvest	$172.5 M for fiscal year 2007-08 (This amount was diverted from the CAIS $2.4B as AgriInvest replaces the top 15% of CAIS)		$168.3 M	Producers better supported and able to manage business risks Increased sector viability and profitability	Fiscal year 2007-08 was a transition year for the AgriInvest program. As such, program development was the focus and actual program payments to producers were not made. However, Program Grants & Contributions are recognized in the year that the related economic event occurs (ie 2007 Program/tax year). Payments to producers happen the year following the program/tax year (2008-09). To help producers build their AgriInvest accounts, the federal government provided a one-time only initiative to seed AgriInvest accounts. The $600 million Kickstart payment was delivered to producers in the 2007-08 fiscal year (not included in spending figures).
Total			$2.4 billion	$610.5 million	$601.9 million

18. Comments on variances:
Although the Administration costs remain relatively constant, the variance in year to year G&C payments is directly related to the needs of the agriculture industry. CAIS/AgriStability is demand-driven rather than being funded from a set allocation for each fiscal year. As such, in good years, the program will cost governments less, while in bad years (i.e., years with dropping commodity prices, disasters, etc.) the costs of the program will be higher. The program does, however, include a payment cap of $3 million per participant per program year in order to control costs for governments and prevent larger operations from capturing a large share of program benefits.

The AgriInvest variance between planned and actual spending was due to the timing of the program approval which occurred after the preparation of the 2007-08 RPP.

19. Results to be Achieved by Non-federal Partners (if applicable)
Joint planning and execution (federally and provincially) so provincial results are consistent.

The BRM Working Group has been working towards developing national performance indicators for program delivery. A national processing service standard for CAIS 2006 program delivery year was agreed upon. This was a key achievement and responded to the Treasury Board policy requiring departments to establish and monitor service standards. Ongoing discussions on the expectation of administrations for regular service standard reporting will be taking place.

20. Contact Information
Michele Taylor
Director General
Farm Financial Programs Branch
204-984-5645

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS)

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Innovation and Renewal

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008 (extended to March 31, 2009)

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$74.58 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
Farmers and/or their spouses are offered assistance for skills development and access to training that could result in increased on or off-farm income. Assistance is provided to access training in areas such as improved farm practices and farm business management including accounting, finance, human resource management; training for other employment; or training to acquire skills for starting a new business. To access training, financial support such as tuition fees for courses, supplies for courses as well as travel and accommodation is provided. By providing assistance for skills development and training, this horizontal initiative contributes to the strategic outcome of innovation for growth. Further details can be found at the following web link: http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1176222540186&lang=e

8. Shared Outcome(s):
(a) Farmers' profitability increased;
(b) Improved choices about sources of income; and
(c) Production of farm products based on market and consumer demands respecting food safety and food quality and environmentally-responsible production, and opportunities from science and innovation captured.

9. Governance Structure(s)
Program development with Renewal federal/provincial/territorial working group. Program delivery by Service Canada (Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC)), Provincial Governments and Third Party delivery agents.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
						Please note that expected results are different from the ones expressed in the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities. Expected results presented here are consistent with those for Renewal Programs within the recently approved Performance Measurement Framework of the Management Resources and Results Structure. They also better reflect the outcomes of the program.
1. AAFC Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC)	Innovation and Renewal	a. Canadian Agricultural Skills Service	$74.58 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09)	$29.4 million	$40.8 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals	In 2007-2008, 4,638 producers participated (2,951 of these through the Canadian Farm Families Options Program), bringing the cumulative total to 13,807; 80% of CASS CIA respondents reported that the skills and/or knowledge they developed through participation in CASS helped them in reaching their most important business goal (60% of most important goals reported by CIA CASS respondents were financial goals).
Total			$74.58 million	$29.4 million	$40.8 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals.	Of total 2007 NRS respondents 30% reported that their top business goal is maximizing return on investment, up from 26% in 2004; 96% reported to be meeting this goal to some extent in 2007.

18. Comments on Variances
The delivery of CASS was in its third year in 2007-08. Increased awareness of the program, combined with the CASS cross compliance requirement under the Options program has resulted in higher uptake than originally anticipated for 2007-08.

19. Results to be Achieved by Non-federal Partners (if applicable)
CASS is delivered through agreements with five provinces (Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Prince Edward Island) and through Service Canada in the remaining four provinces and the Yukon (CASS is not available in Quebec and only available on demand in Nunavut and North West Territories). Of the 4,638 producers who participated in 2007-08, 4,449 were in the provinces with provincial delivery arrangements and 189 were in the provinces/territories served by Service Canada. In the provinces with provincial delivery arrangements, participation was as follows: Ontario (841), Manitoba (739), Saskatchewan (2,070), Alberta (764), and PEI (35). In provinces covered by Service Canada, participation was as follows: British Columbia (125), New Brunswick (25), Nova Scotia (37) and Yukon (2). Overall, analysis to date indicates that 79% of CASS participants from provinces with provincial delivery were satisfied or very satisfied with the services provided for the development of their individual learning plan.

20. Contact Information:
Johanne M�tayer, Director
Renewal Division, Farm Financial Programs Branch
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
613-759-6689

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
Co-operatives Secretariat

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008 (extended to March 31, 2009)

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$22.0 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
The Co operatives Secretariat was established in 1987 to help the Government of Canada respond more effectively to the concerns and needs of Canadian co-operatives. The Secretariat advises the government on policies affecting co-operatives, co-ordinates the implementation of such policies, promotes co-operatives within the federal government, and provides a link between the co-operative sector and the many federal departments and agencies with which they interact.

8. Shared Outcome(s)
The end outcome of the Government of Canada with respect to co operatives is the expanded use of the co-operatives model to enhance the economic growth and social development of Canadian rural and urban society. The objectives are to:
-raise awareness of the co operative model and of the role that co operatives can play in both social and economic development;
-promote policies, programs and legislation that support co operatives development to achieve federal policy objectives, and greater harmonization of efforts; and
- encourage the growth of existing co operatives and the creation of new co-operatives to meet the social and economic needs of Canadians.

9. Governance Structure(s):
The Co-operatives Secretariat was created to improve the relationship between Canadian co operatives and the 17 federal departments and agencies currently known to have legislation, policies or programs affecting co operatives. Formal mechanisms for collaboration include the Interdepartmental Committee on Co operatives, dialogue with provincial collaborators and sector working groups. The Co-operatives Secretariat, working closely with the Minister responsible for co-operatives, acts as a coordinator for interaction between the government and the co operative sector. The Secretariat is headed by an Executive Director, and administrative services for the Secretariat are provided by AAFC. More details on the functions of the Secretariat are available.

10. Federal Partners Involved	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
Co-operatives Secretariat/ AAFC A listing of the 17 departments and agencies with legislation, policies and programs affecting co-operatives is available at: http://www.agr.gc.ca/rcs-src/coop/index_e.php?s1=leg&page=intro#CIC.	Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats	Co-operative Development Initiative (CDI): - Advisory Services - Innovation & Research	$22.0 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09)	$4.1 million	$9.3 million	Enhanced capacity for development of co operatives.	Network of 20 provincial, regional and sectoral partners involved in the delivery of CDI - Advisory services
	Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats		$22.0 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09)	$4.1 million	$9.3 million	Increased opportunities, barriers mitigated and enhanced capacity of co-operatives development through government policies, programs and services.	During 2007-08, the Ag-CDI was extended for 2 years which will enable partnership with the co-op sector to assist farmers who want to explore the co-op approach to capture new agricultural value-added opportunities, including biofuels.
Total			$22.0 million	$4.1 million	$9.3 million

18. Comments on variances:
The Ag-CDI funding renewal during the year increased available funding by $1M which was essentially expended.

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:
Not applicable

20. Contact Information:
Donna Mitchell
Executive Director
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats
613-759-7113

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative:
AAFC-Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) MOU on Agri-Food Specialists Positions Abroad

2. Name of Lead Department(s):
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity:
Markets and International

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
2003-04 fiscal year

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
2007-08 fiscal year (extended to March 31, 2009)

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date):
$44.4 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative:
This MOU was established under the 5 year Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) which ended in 2007/2008. The APF was extended for one year in order to facilitate the transition to Growing Forward, AAFC's new policy framework. The MOU establishes the operational principles, management practices and performance measurement criteria for the 34 agriculture and agri-food specialist positions abroad. The objective is to enhance the delivery of the services to Canadian exporters in areas such as agriculture and agri-food business development, investment promotion, market access and advocacy, through Canadian Embassies and High Commissions located in key export markets.

8. Shared Outcome(s):
(a) Improved capacity within DFAIT's Trade Commissioner Service (TCS) to deliver in-market support to Canadian agriculture and food exporters;
(b) Increased recognition in targeted markets of Canada's ability to supply high quality, safe and innovative agriculture and food products produced in an environmentally responsible manner; and
(c) Improved market access in key markets for Canadian agriculture and food products.

9. Governance Structure(s):
The MOU Governance Model includes three levels:
(1) The Joint Management Committee (JMC) which approves costed work plans with milestones, targets and indicators; reviews expenditures; and reports semi-annually on results to the Deputy Ministers' Committee;
(2) Deputy Ministers who review and recommend the annual release of funds that are held in frozen allotment by Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), and recommend the Ministers' approval of changes, where objectives of this MOU change materially; and
(3) Ministers who approve changes where objectives of this MOU change materially and who constitute the last resort dispute resolution.

A TBS official sits as an ex-officio member on the JMC.
This MOU Governance Structure was supported in 2007-08 by the International Markets Coordination Unit (IMCU), which will evolve in 2008-09 into the Agriculture and Food Trade Commissioner Service (AFTCS) at AAFC. Operating under the guidance of the relevant Directors General of AAFC and DFAIT and the Senior Director at TBS, IMCU consults with appropriate AAFC and DFAIT officials from the geographic, trade policy, investment, performance measurement, and human resources teams.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
1. AAFC	Markets and International	a. International Team Program Delivery	$13.8 million	$2.5 million	$1.7 million	1. Recognition gained and markets built through the implementation of Canada's branding strategy.	Agri-food specialists contributed to branding Canada abroad through timely information provided to potential customers, trade show participation, missions abroad, incoming buyer missions, etc. Examples include: participation in 5 international food shows in Russia, including the International VIV Show in Moscow; Foodex in Japan; the European Seafood Exposition in Brussels; HoFex in Hong Kong; Mexican buyers mission to Boston Seafood Show.
						2. Improved market access	Market access improvements have been made at several posts abroad. Key achievements include: Partial beef market opening in Indonesia; full beef access restored in the Philippines; maintained beef market access for under-thirty-months boneless beef to Hong Kong despite more BSE outbreaks in Canada; in June 2007 the market for Canadian beef was re-opened in Taipei, with conditions (de-boned meat from animals over 30 months of age).
						3. Technical barriers overcome	Overcame technical barriers for some key agri-food products. Examples of achievements: Korean Food and Drug Administration added the specifications for oxygenated products in its regulations. This has effectively removed an obstacle preventing access for Canadian oxygenated water; for salmon roe in Taipei export certificates are no longer required to certify that the wild fish from which the roe is taken are free of a number of several diseases endemic to the species; the EU reduced the end-use restriction on the cooked and peeled shrimp quota, increasing it to 20,000 tonnes. This change significantly opens the market to greater volumes of Canadian shrimp.
		b. Agricultural Policy Framework (For 10 additional positions and regularizing the 6.5 existing positions transferred)	$15.8 million (involves funds transferred from AAFC to DFAIT for work that supports AAFC and DFAIT Strategic Outcomes)	$3.2 million (involves funds transferred from AAFC to DFAIT for work that supports AAFC and DFAIT Strategic Outcomes)	$3.2 million	1. Workplans developed for all agri-food positions abroad, harmonized as much as possible with DFAIT's planning and reporting requirements.	Workplans and reports developed. They will continue to be refined and updated as the work progresses. Progress has been made to integrate processes of both departments.
						2. Vacant positions staffed.	Candidates selected for New Delhi, Dubai and Singapore. Temporary duty assignments filled for Moscow, New York and Miami.
						3. Training and pre-posting tour arranged for new agri-food specialists	Outreach and training provided for India and Moscow trade commissioners.
						4. Review of agricultural and food positions abroad in line with priority markets.	Review completed.
						5. Re-integration strategy developed for returning agri-food specialists.	Returning officers successfully reintegrated according to new processes, however, a formalized strategy is to be developed.
		c. Annual Reference Level Update (ARLU) (for original positions)	$9.5 million (involves funds transferred from AAFC to DFAIT for work that supports AAFC and DFAIT Strategic Outcomes)	$1.9 million	$1.9 million
2. DFAIT	Investment, Innovation and Sectors	Client Service Fund (for general expenditures in support of the positions)	$5.3 million	$1.1 million	$1.1 million
Total			$44.4 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09	$8.7 million	$7.9 million

18. Comments on variances:
n/a

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners (if applicable):
n/a

20. Contact Information:
Bruce Howard, Director - Agriculture and Food Trade Commissioner Service
Room 1059A
935 Carling Ave. Ottawa, ON K1A 0C5
613-759-6284
howardb@agr.gc.ca

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts identified in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
Farm Business Services

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Innovation and Renewal

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008 (extended to March 31, 2009)

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$109.0 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
These services will provide eligible farmers access to financial consultants who will help them assess their finances and develop succession, action plans and business plans (financial, marketing, value-added). By providing access to financial consultants, this horizontal initiative contributes to the strategic outcome of innovation for growth.Further details can be found at the following web link: http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1177623682220&lang=e

8. Shared Outcome(s)
(a) Farmers' profitability increased;
(b) Improved choices about sources of income; and
(c) Production of farm products based on market and consumer demands respecting food safety and food quality and environmentally responsible production, and opportunities from science and innovation captured.

9. Governance Structure(s)
Program development and performance measurement by Renewal federal/provincial/territorial working group.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
						Please note that expected results are different from the ones expressed in the 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities. Expected results presented here are consistent with those for Renewal Programs within the recently approved Performance Measurement Framework of the Management Resources and Results Structure. They also better reflect the outcomes of the program.
1. AAC	Innovation and Renewal	a. Farm Business Assessment (FBA). This included for the beginning period of the FBA program, in cases where provinces had not yet signed their respective APF Implementation Agreements, the Farm Consultation Service (FCS), which was an existing program similar to FBA. Costs to deliver FCS have been included in FBA allocations.	$55.8 million	$15.3 million	$14.3 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals.	In 2007-2008, 8,086 producers participated in FBA, 5,759 of these through Options. 55% of FBA Client Impact Assessment (CIA) respondents indicated that the FBA had been helpful in reaching their most important farm business goal. Of all FBA CIA respondents approximately 77% of most important goals reported were financial goals.
		b. Specialized Business Planning Services (SBPS)	$26.5 million	$5.5 million	$7.2 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals.	643 producers participated in SBPS in 2007-2008, with a cumulative total of 1,817. 71% of SBPS CIA respondents reported that the SBPS program had assisted them in reaching their most important business goal. Of all SBPS CIA respondents 49% of most important goals reported were financial goals.
		c. Planning and Assessment for Value-added Enterprises (PAVE)	$26.7 million	$1.5 million	$0.6 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals.	28 producers participated in PAVE during 2007-2008, with a cumulative total of 161.
Total			$109.0 million (fiscal years 2003/04 to 2007/2008)	$22.3 million	$22.1 million	Farmers and farm families meet their financial goals.	The 2007 National Renewal Survey (NRS) results show that 41% of farmers and farm families are meeting their business and personal goals; up from 37% in 2004. In addition, 30% reported that their top business goal is maximizing return on investment, up from 26% in 2004. From 2003-2008 21,144 producers participated in FBA, SBPS, or PAVE

18. Comments on Variances
Increased awareness of the FBA program, combined with the FBA cross compliance requirement under the Options program has resulted in higher uptake than originally anticipated for 2007-08. Further, uptake of the SBPS program was similar to 2006-07, and a slight decline in PAVE program uptake occurred in 2007-08.

19. Results to be Achieved by Non-federal Partners (if applicable)
Planning and execution done jointly (federally and provincially) so provincial results do not differ.

20. Contact Information
Johanne M�tayer, Director
Renewal Division, Farm Financial Programs Branch
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
613-759-6689

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
MOU with Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) on Food Safety and Quality

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Food Safety and Food Quality

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative
April 1, 2003 for both initiatives

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008 for Medicated Feeds initiative and
March 31, 2009 for On-Farm Food Safety Recognition initiative

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$29.4 over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
To establish minimum standards, as well as inspection and enforcement strategies for manufacturers of medicated feed for food producing animals. Also to establish the On-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program (OFFSRP), which provides for government recognition of HACCP - based food safety systems developed and implemented by national producer associations.

Specific activities under the medicated feeds initiative will:
- promulgate and implement medicated feed regulations establishing minimum standards for manufacturers of medicated feed for food producing animals; and
- establish standards and policies supporting the design and implementation of an inspection and licensing system for these feed mills and farms by evaluating their manufacturing procedures and records.

Specific activities under the on-farm food safety recognition initiative will:
- establish a recognition system for on-farm food safety programs, which will ensure that adequate government oversight mechanisms are in place to maintain the confidence of Canada=s trading partners and facilitate open access to marketplace.

8. Shared Outcome(s) (MOU, section 1.2)
(a) protect human health by reducing exposure to hazards; and
(b) increase consumer confidence in the safety and quality of food produced in Canada

9. Governance Structure(s)
The MOU Governance Model includes three levels:
(1) the Joint Management Committee (JMC) which approves costed work plans with milestones, targets and indicators; reviews expenditures; and reports semi-annually on results to the Deputy Ministers' Committee;
(2) the Deputy Ministers' Committee which reviews and recommends the annual release of funds that are held in frozen allotment by Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), and recommends the Minister's approval of changes, where objectives of this MOU change materially; and
(3) the Ministers who approve changes where objectives of this MOU change materially and who constitute the last resort for dispute resolution.
A TBS official sits as an ex-officio member on the first committee.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
1. AAFC (work performed by CFIA)	Food Safety and Food Quality (AAFC) 2007-08 Food Safety and Public Health (CFIA)	a. On-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program (OFFSRP)	$ 10.0 million for 2003/04 to 2007/08 plus $2.4 million for 2008/09 totalling $12.4 million over 6 fiscal years.(APF plus first year of Growing Forward)	$1.98 million	$1.5 million	OFFSRP Development - The requirements, criteria, and procedures for the 3rd party audit accreditation process developed and finalized	- 3rd party audit accreditation process finalized.
						- Assessment process implemented (industry management system) - On-going monitoring process. Conduct - Pilots on accreditation and implementation assessment processes conducted - Training to industry and government partners on the details of the above processes provided	- The latter stages of the OFFSRP developed in consultation with industry and FPT governments.
						OFFSRP Implementation - Ongoing technical review of industry-submitted generic HACCP models and producer manuals - Pilot on management system conducted.	- Technical reviews completed on 2 more industry-submitted generic HACCP models and producer manuals, and 4 more were initiated. - Pilot completed on industry management system
						- Ongoing technical review of industry procedures manual, management system documents and manuals. Expanded Activities (from re-profiled funding) Hazard Data Base (HDB) - The existing information and supplemental information for the Hazard Data Base (HDB) updated and reviewed.	- No additional industry management systems were submitted for review. - The existing information & supplemental information for the HDB were reviewed and updated.
						- The web-based application for the provision of the HDB technical information to stakeholders developed and implemented.	- The web-based application has been developed and implemented.
						Generic Models - On-farm and / or post-farm HACCP generic models for identified products developed. Guidelines - A reference document that will serve as a tool for industry regarding the safety of fresh fruit and vegetables developed. - A training module related to the reference document developed and delivered.	- HACCP generic models and Food Safety Practices Guidance documents for Sprouts, RTE Fresh Cut Vegetables, and Spices were fully developed and released to stakeholders - Work done in this area conducted through other activities
						Enhanced knowledge skills - Work continued with provinces and stakeholders to identify knowledge and information gaps and integrate into generic plans and hazard data base as appropriate. Post Farm Recognition - Stakeholder needs and OFFSRP tools and methodology integrated into the Post Farm Recognition Program (PFFSRP).	- Work done in this area conducted through other activities. - Analysis on stakeholder need and OFFSRP completed. Preliminary work conducted on the conversion of OFFSRP manuals for use with the proposed PFFSRP
						- Implementation strategy developed	- Program development and implementation plan created
						- Technical review process for HACCP plans and participant manuals piloted	- Pilot will be conducted following identification of both government and industry bodies to participate
						- Technical review process related to management systems developed	- Preliminary work conducted on the conversion of OFFSRP manuals for use with the proposed PFFSRP
						Technical Advice - Timely scientific and technical advice to AAFC and AAFC stakeholders provided.	- Timely scientific and technical advice provided to AAFC and AAFC stakeholders.
						Information gathering and sharing - Workshop conducted with provincial partners to identify information needs, objectives and information management options.	- work done in this area conducted through other activities.
						Surveillance - Current knowledge on the prevalence of E. coli 0157:H7, Salmonella and Campylobacter in food-producing animals and meat products marketed in Canada assessed. - Critical gaps in industry food safety plans that require action are identified. Strengthening Food Safety Programs - Key food safety, traceability and quality strategies development through work with interdepartmental colleagues as well as consultation with P/T Governments and external stakeholders. - Risk modelling tool to evaluate risk profiles development.	The Survey design for the Surveillance study was completed. - CFIA participation and input on various intradepartmental and interdepartmental committees and working groups - e.g. the FPT Food Safety Committee, FPT Strategy for Safe Food sub-committee and working groups, FPT HACCP Recognition sub-committee, AAFC's Growing Forward development, and the proposed Agriculture-Health Agenda.
2. CFIA	b. Animal and Plant Resource Protection	Medicated Feed Regulations	$ 17.0 million for 2003/04 to 2007/08.	$ 3.36 million	$2.6 million	Development of the Proposed Regulations - Regulatory text developed and finalized, including Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement and other required documents; Regulatory proposal published in Publish Gazette I and II	Development of the Proposed Regulations After consultations with stakeholders the regulatory text was developed and is currently with the Department of Justice for review. It is anticipated that the regulations may be published in Gazette Part 1 in late 2008. The Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement was reviewed and revised.
						- Continued participation in bilateral and multi-lateral stakeholder meetings and conferences to discuss the regulatory proposal	Stakeholder meetings held to determine the controls necessary to meet regulatory outcomes and develop the Manual of Procedures outlining how to implement and assess the proposed controls, Twelve information sessions held across the country to inform stakeholders about the proposed regulation.
						- Environmental scan prepared on effective licensing options - Functional licensing office opened	A risk ranking model to assist in determining the risk of carryover medication residues to animal and human health. The draft model was presented to stakeholders, USFDA and gFARAD. Work is ongoing. A decision was made not to spend significant amounts of funds evaluating options and open an office until the final the regulations were approve
						Lab Accreditation - Development continued on a lab accreditation system for medication guarantees and residues	Lab Accreditation Ongoing work to support ISO 97025 accreditation through SCC Development of new methodologies to determine trace levels of medicating ingredients.
						Development of Training Program/Inspector Certification -National documented training and assessment program for feed inspection staff developed	Development of Training Program/Inspector Certification A series of Training Manuals, E-Learning Courses and Workshop Templates were developed. The Launch of the Training Program is tentatively scheduled for July 2008. Facility Inspection Inspection facility protocols continue to be adjusted and piloted to support the regulations.
						Computer Applications - IT system to ensure availability of accurate, comprehensive electronic compliance information is improved	A Compliance Verification System for feed facility inspection was developed. Computer Applications Medicated Feed Team Staff coordinated Feed Program Submission for the improvements to the MCAP System, including reporting capabilities.
Total			$29.4 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09; (funds transferred from AAFC to CFIA)	$5.34 million	$4.1 million

18. Comments on variances:
OFFSRP development is still on-going since further discussions to be held with industry and FPT governments regarding need and scope of latter stages of recognition process. As part of the Quality Assurance process, the web-based application and user acceptance testing is being conducted for the Hazard Database. OFFSRP development is continuing under a Memorandum of Understanding for 2008-09. Under the Medicated Feed Regulations a decision was made not to spend a significant amount of funds evaluating licensing options and opening an office until the final regulations are approve.

19. Results to be Achieved by Non-federal Partners (if applicable)
Not applicable

20. Contact Information
Anita Stanger
Director
Food Safety and Quality Programs Division
613-759-6054

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
MOU with Health Canada (HC) on Food Safety and Quality and Environment

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Food Safety and Food Quality

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$56.5 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
To conduct research-related work in support of standard setting, on-farm food safety standards, national integrated enteric pathogen surveillance, and human health impact of on-farm anti-microbial use.

Specific activities will include:

development of on-farm food safety standards related activities that support industry-developed food safety programs (i.e., information collection and analysis; the conduct of risk assessments; consultation with industry, federal, provincial and territorial colleagues and other relevant and interested parties; decision-making; communication; and information dissemination);
research that addresses hazards of public health significance and supports on-farm food safety standards;
development of a national integrated pathogen surveillance program to link human exposure to pathogens from animal and other food sources to the occurrence of human enteric illness in the population;
development of an integrated antimicrobial resistance program that can measure the impact of agri-food and aquaculture sector antimicrobial use, and other management factors on the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in human pathogens at the farm level;
develop a better understanding of the impact of agriculture on the prevalence, levels and sources of microbiological (faecal) contamination at drinking water supply intake points and recreational beaches; and detection, characterization and control of microbial and chemical hazards through the entirety of the food continuum to insure the safety of foods during production, processing, storage and distribution by using an integrated approach from the farm to the consumer.

8. Shared Outcome(s):
(a) protect human health by reducing exposure to hazards;
(b) increase consumer confidence in the safety and quality of food produced in Canada; and
(c) reduce agricultural risks to the environment and provide benefits to health and supply of water, with key priority areas being nutrients, human pathogens, pesticides and water conservation. [MOU, section 1.2]

9. Governance Structure(s)
The MOU Governance Model includes three levels:
(1) the Joint Management Committee (JMC) which approves costed work plans with milestones, targets and indicators; reviews expenditures; and reports semi-annually on results to the Deputy Ministers' Committee;
(2) the Deputy Ministers' Committee which reviews and recommends the annual release of funds that are held in frozen allotment by Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), and recommends Ministers' approval of changes, where objectives of this MOU change materially; and
(3) Ministers who approve changes where objectives of this MOU change materially and who constitute the last resort for dispute resolution.
A TBS official sits as an ex-officio member on the JMC.
This MOU Governance Structure is supported by the Interdepartmental Director General Working Group, whose members are the relevant Directors General from AAFC, HC, and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and a Senior Director from TBS.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
1. HC, PHAC and AAFC	Food Safety and Food Quality	a. HC On-Farm Food Safety Standards	$11.9 million	$2.5 million	$2.5 million	Increased quality, quantity and availability of information relevant to on-farm food safety issues. Policies and risk management strategies applicable on-farm	- Developed CANLINE, a centralized, searchable database on levels of chemical contaminants in food: data generated by the HC and NCR will be readily accessible for use in health risk assessments and policy development activities within the department.
		a. HC On-Farm Food Safety Standards	$11.9 million	$2.5 million	$2.5 million	Industry developed on farm food safety programs are recognized by on-farm food safety recognition programs Ongoing collaborations with F/P/T governments on issue identification, gap analysis and data collection in support of research and or policy development. Work to be done by HC to pursue AAFC, HC and PHAC Strategic Outcomes)	- Completed Strategy for Safe Food and obtained agreement in principle from the FPT Food Safety Committee to use the Strategy to identify key activities and priorities for the consideration of FPT ADMs of Agriculture and Health.
		b. HC Research in Support of Standard Setting	$9.2 million	$2.0 million	$2.0 million	Increased capacity to identify and monitor key foodborne pathogens and chemical contaminants in food and food inputs at the farm level. Increased scientific knowledge of key pathogens and chemical contaminants in food and food inputs at the farm level. Increased scientific contribution to the development of evidence-based on-farm food safety intervention strategies Established and/or strengthened partnerships among government policy makers, government researchers, academia and industry associations to optimize coordinated on-farm food safety research. (Work to be done by HC to pursue AAFC and HC Strategic Outcomes)	- Conducted surveillance of raw agricultural products, animal feeds and composted manure from farms to better understand the transmission of Shigella, Salmonella, viruses such as the noroviruses, and other key pathogens through the food system. This will allow identification of key areas of interventions to manage microbiological risks, and to develop Codes of Practice and educational materials. - Contributed to finding that human strains of noroviruses can be found in animals and be transmitted to humans through the food chain. Discovery could have a huge impact on policy. - Discovered a high prevalence of Giardia and Cryptosporidium (human parasites) on farms and the potential zoonotic transmission of these pathogens through direct contact, water or foods. This discovery could have a huge impact on policy. - Determined residue levels in single serving commodities at the farm level to establish the impacts of composting. These data provided knowledge of chemical contamination and residue drift within a growing operation, and to occupational exposure to these contaminants. - Conducted a large review on allergens and produced an Information Update document on the safety of including limited amounts of pure oats in the diet of Celiac patients. - Reviewed current risk assessment of dioxins, furans and dioxin-like PCBs. As a result, the HC's tolerable daily intake (TDI) for dioxins (and dioxin-like PCBs) has been revised and reduced almost 5-fold.
		c. PHAC - National Integrated Enteric Pathogen Surveillance	$3.3 million	$0.7 million	$0.7 million	An integrated enteric pathogen sentinel site surveillance program is operational in one sentinel site (human, food, food animal, water) Data synthesis and analysis with respect to trends / emerging issues. (Work to be done by PHAC to pursue AAFC, HC, and PHAC Strategic Outcomes)	- Developed Framework for National Sentinel Surveillance - Consulted with National and International Stakeholders - MOUs and Agreements developed and signed. - Implemented and Maintained Pilot Sentinel Site using the region of Kitchener-Waterloo. - Reports, Publications, Presentations
		d. PHAC - Human Health Impact of On-Farm Antimicro-bial Use	$3.3 million	$0.7 million	$0.7 million	Farm level studies on antimicrobial use and development of resistant pathogens. Data synthesis and analysis with respect to trends / emerging issues. (Work to be done by PHAC to pursue AAFC HC, and PHAC Strategic Outcomes)	- Consensus obtained among stakeholders contributed to the establishment of a sentinel vet/farm-based framework design where herd biosecurity and data confidentiality are protected. - This national program is active in the 5 major pork producing provinces, involving 28 veterinarians and 108 sentinel farms. - Additional support from BC, AB and SK provided better data in those provinces. Support included funds and in kind contributions. - On-farm surveillance provides the only usable data on antimicrobial use (AMU) in animals that is currently available in Canada. - Provincial, federal and industry funding agencies have funded on-farm research that will direct the expansion of this surveillance program to other commodities. - This infrastructure provides a platform to address new issues as they arise, e.g. methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in farmers. - This pilot will provide direction on the activities that contribute to core public health surveillance of the food-chain.
		e. HC - Water Quality Surveillance	$4.8 million ($4.0 million for HC; $0.8 million for AAFC)	$0.7 million	$0.7 million	Define whether agriculture is a contributor of microbiological (faecal) contamination at drinking water supply intake points in three distinct watersheds; which will, in turn, contribute to the development of policies/strategies that will reduce human exposure to faecal contaminants (refer to logic model and HC PAA). (Work to be done by HC and AAFC to pursue AAFC and HC Strategic Outcomes)	- Strategic planning meetings held each year; finalized study activities for years 1 through 5. - Sampling using optimized MST methods (water and faecal) conducted on South Nation Watershed from 2004 to November 2007. - Comprehensive science reports completed annually. - Results presented at national and international fora, thereby contributing to the advancement of the field of MST. - Mining of data continues
2. AAFC (work performed by AAFC)		AAFC - Research in Support of APF Priorities	$24.0 million	$4.0 million	$4.0 million	Scientific knowledge advanced and data on food safety provided.	Research activities were conducted on the effect of antimicrobial use in foods, alternative strategies to reduce antibiotic use in animals, improved detection and control of food borne viruses, bacteria and chemical toxicants including mycotoxins, enhanced knowledge of biochemical mechanisms and processes as they affect sensitivity to allergens and development of a comprehensive understanding of microbial interactions during food production from the farm to the plate and the impact of these interactions on the safety of food
						Methodologies developed to detect and quantify foodborne viruses, food borne pathogens, allergens and mycotoxins in food nutrices.	- Allergic reactions appear to be on the rise in Canada. The impacts of AAFC research in this area include: AAFC scientists supplied control allergen reference materials for use in method development, evaluation and validation in support of Health - Canada's allergen policy development for detection of peanut allergens in chocolate. Identification of the potential sources of allergen cross-contamination during food processing was evaluated to provide allergen free product to sensitive consumers. - Samples of allergenic materials were provided to European scientists to be used in a human double blind food allergy challenge study by Europrevall. - North American study (26 Canadians and Americans) was completed and 13 allergens (5 novel) were identified and the frequency among the population of patients with soybean allergy was determined. In addition, over 2,500 soy lines were screened for hypo-allergenic material and antibodies developed against one. Detailed characterization of allergenic proteins continues as soy allergens are considered as one of the 10 allergens most frequently affecting people.
						Continue to design and evaluate strategies to control pathogenic agents in food matrices, through food productive, processing, distribution, continuum.	- Through partnerships with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Health Canada and provincial organizations, the food virology group has made breakthroughs in the methodology to detect and quantify food-borne pathogenic viruses in complex food matrices. Jointly, AAFC, HC, CFIA, and PHAC initiated a 4 year integrated national project to provide potential solutions to recurring incidents of contamination of fresh horticultural products including the detection and control of verotoxigenic E.coli (VTEC; includes E.coli O157:H7 and similar strains). Of special interest, research into the effect of beneficial bacteria - probiotics - on virulence of E. coli O157:H7 (bacteria responsible for "hamburger disease") produced results that indicate a role for probiotics in the treatment of E. coli O157:H7 infections. - An integrated study of the impact of pathogens and antibiotic use in beef and swine on the safety throughout the farm to food continuum progressed. Results will provide insight into potential of decreasing antibiotic use in animals therefore decreasing antibiotic resistance.
Total			$56.5 million (portions where AAFC is listed as a partner and work is performed by HC and/or PHAC involves funds transferred from AAFC to HC - see note)	$10.6 million (portions where AAFC is listed as a partner and work is performed by HC and/or PHAC involves funds transferred from AAFC to HC)	$10.6 million

18. Comments on variances:
MOU ended March 31, 2008. All funds were dispersed. HC and PHAC are looking forward to further collaboration.

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners (if applicable):
Not applicable

20. Contact Information:
Dr. Maria Nazarowec-White
Program Coordinator
Research Branch
Food Safety and Quality
613-759-6378

Note: Planned Spending and total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates. Total Allocation for 2008-09 and beyond is dependent upon finalization of an extension MOU with PHAC, and is therefore not included in the Total Allocation.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
MOU with Environment Canada (EC) on the National Agri-Environmental Standards Initiative (NAESI)

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)
Environment Canada

3. Lead Department Program Activity
AAFC: Environment
EC: Sustainable Agricultural Landscapes Program

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
April 1, 2004

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$25.0 million over four years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
This initiative involves the development of non-regulatory agri-environmental "performance standards" (i.e., outcome-based standards) that will address both desired levels of environmental quality, and the levels that are considered achievable based on available technology and practice. These standards will act as benchmarks and targets against which environmental performance can be assessed. They may also help guide development of practices used by producers and industry to help reduce environmental risks and provide benefits to the health and supply of water, the health of soils, the health of air and the atmosphere, thus ensuring compatibility between biodiversity and agriculture. Standards will be developed in four theme areas: Air, Water, Biodiversity and Pesticides.

Funding for NAESI was allocated to EC under the APF and allotments were released to EC annually following the Deputy Ministers Committee decision based on the recommendation of the Joint Management Committee.

8. Shared Outcome(s)
(a) Consistent national agri-environmental standards are available to support, assess, and demonstrate progress towards the goal of environmentally sustainable agriculture in Canada;
(b) Recognition of Canada's role as a world leader in environmentally responsible agricultural production is advanced;
(c) Environmental farm planning and the move towards environmental farm certification is supported;
(d) Uptake of national standards to benefit the health and supply of water, soil, air and atmosphere; and
(e) Compatibility between agriculture and biodiversity is ensured.

A TBS official sits as an ex-officio member on the first committee.

This MOU Governance Structure is supported by the Interdepartmental Director General Steering Committee, whose members are the relevant Directors General from AAFC and EC and an Executive Director from TBS.

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
AAFC	Environment	MOU with EC on NAESI	$25.0 million (for fiscal years 2004-05 to 2007-08)	$4.3 million	$4.3 million	- Completed protocols and standards for the water, biodiversity, air and pesticide themes - Completed science assessment for the air theme - Recommendation for standards use and draft implementation plan prepared - Stakeholder communication materials prepared and workshop held	- EC developed approximately 90 metric-specific environmental performance standards related to water (nutrients, pathogens, sediments, in-stream flow, availability), biodiversity (habitat), pesticides (ideal and achievable standards for high risk pesticides, risk-based standards, meteorological standard for spray application, mixture and commodity based standards) and air (agricultural ammonia emissions and its role in PM formation). - Ammonia science assessment completed. - Analysis of the maturity of standards for use to be completed this fiscal year. - Two newsletters and 2007 technical reports published.
EC	Sustainable Agricultural Landscapes Program	MOU with AAFC on NAESI				Same as above	Same as above
Total			$25.0 million (work to be done by EC to pursue joint EC/AAFC Strategic Outcomes)	$4.3 million	$4.3 million

18. Comments on Variances

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:
There are no non-federal partners involved in NAESI.

20. Contact Information:
Sarah Kalff
Manager, Biophysical Information and Analysis
Agri-Environmental Policy Bureau
613-715-5195

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative
Production Insurance (PI)

2. Name of Lead Department(s)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity
Business Risk Management (BRM)

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative
March 31, 2008

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date)
$2.0 billion estimated over five years.

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement)
Under the Agricultural Policy Framework (APF), PI is one of two core federal-provincial-territorial BRM programs available to Canadian Producers. PI is designed to stabilize producers' incomes by minimizing the economic impacts of production losses arising from natural hazards like drought, hail, frost, and excessive moisture, as well as uncontrollable pests and diseases. The program is cost-shared by producers and governments. It is delivered by the provinces, with the federal government contributing a portion of total premiums and administrative costs. By stabilizing producers' income, this horizontal initiative contributes to AAFC's strategic outcome "Security of the Food System".

8. Shared Outcome(s)
Expand production loss protection to a broader range of agricultural commodities to further reduce the need for ad hoc compensation.

9. Governance Structure(s)
PI is a provincial-territorial program to which the federal government contributes financially under federal-provincial-territorial APF Implementation Agreements. Governance structure includes various national standards outlined in federal PI Regulations and federal-provincial committees (Production Insurance and BRM Working Groups as well as Policy Assistant Deputy Ministers).

10. Federal Partners	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
1. AAFC	Business Risk Management	Production Insurance	$2.0 billion (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2007/08)	$407.2 million	$422.1 million	1. Increased number of new programs and options available to farmers, including new plans for horticulture, forage and livestock sectors.	12 new plans, programs and options.
1. AAFC	Business Risk Management	Production Insurance	$2.0 billion (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2007/08)	$407.2 million	$422.1 million	2. Increased producer participation in provinces and territories that have amended existing plans and that are implementing new plans and options.	2,047 new contracts
Total			$2.0 billion (see note)	$407.2 million (see note)	$422.1 million

18. Comments on Variances
Total expenditures for 2007/08 were higher than what was planned due to rise in grain and oilseed prices which have increased total premium costs.

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:
N/A

20. Contact Information:
Michel Mass�
A/Director
Production Insurance and Risk Management Division
Farm Financial Programs Branch
613-759-6179

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates. Planned spending includes Production Insurance premiums, Production Insurance administration expenses, Wildlife Damage Compensation, and Wildlife Damage Compensation administration expenses.

See also the related horizontal initiative: Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative:
Rural Development

2. Name of Lead Department(s):
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

3. Lead Department Program Activity:
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats

4. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
April 1, 2003

5. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative:
March 31, 2008 (extended to March 31, 2009)

6. Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date):
$69.4 million over six years

7. Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
The Government of Canada has mandated the Rural Secretariat with developing, coordinating, and implementing a national, coordinated, cross-government approach to better understand the issues and concerns of rural Canadians and to encourage federal departments and agencies to make adjustments to their policies, programs and services to reflect the unique needs of rural communities. In conjunction with 34 federal departments and agencies - the Canadian Rural Partnership - the Government of Canada aims to integrate its economic, social, environmental and cultural policies to enhance the quality of life for rural Canadians.

8. Shared Outcome(s):
The outcome is enhanced access by rural Canadians to opportunities which will allow them to contribute to and benefit from Canada's prosperity and success. It is based on the following six guiding principles:

community is the cornerstone of rural development;
collaboration across and among governments;
flexible government approach to address rural diversity;
multi-faceted/integrated approach to realize a community's potential;
local leadership underpins the community's capacity; and
business and entrepreneurship are essential components of building strong rural communities

9. Governance Structure(s):
The federal partnership - the Canadian Rural Partnership - is managed by the Rural Secretariat based in AAFC in cooperation with an Assistant Deputy Minister Steering Committee and an Interdepartmental Working Group with representatives from 34 federal departments and agencies involved in the rural agenda. Horizontal coordination and leadership are provided by the Rural Secretariat under the direction of the Minister. This collaborative effort is reinforced by Rural Teams in each province and territory comprised of the federal government in the region with most teams also including members from the provincial or territorial government and/or sectoral stakeholders. At the Federal/Provincial/Territorial (F/P/T) level there is an Assistant Deputy Ministers Committee and a Working Group reporting to FPT Ministers responsible for the Rural file.

10. Federal Partners Involved in each program	11. Federal Partner Program Activity	12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners	13. Total Allocation (from start to end date)	14. Planned Spending for 2007-2008	15. Actual Spending for 2007-2008	16. Expected Results for 2007-2008	17. Results Achieved in 2007-2008
Rural Secretariat A listing of the 34 departments and agencies of the Canadian Rural Partnership isa available at http://rural.gc.ca/part_e.phtml.	Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat	1. Rural Dialogue 2. Rural Lens 3. Rural Research and Analysis 4. Outreach 5. Rural Programs	$69.4 million (for fiscal years 2003/04 to 2008/09)	$11.3 million (for all program elements)	$18.2 million (for all program elements)	A stronger rural voice	More than 300 regional initiatives (including learning events, workshops, dialogues and research projects) were achieved
						Enhanced capacity for development of rural communities	The Community Information database (CID) has shown continued strong usage (800-1,000 visits per month – comparable to last year)
						Increased opportunities, barriers mitigated and rural development capacity enhanced through Government policies, programs and services.	Rural Development Network (RDN) involves members from 29 depts - held 18 inter-departmental activities. Consolidated membership (24 depts last year).
Total			$69.4 million	$11.3 million	$18.2 million

18. Comments on variances:
Models for Rural Development program had unused funding in 2006/2007 which was carried over into the 2007/2008 fiscal year.

19. Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:
Not applicable

20. Contact Information:
Donna Mitchell
Executive Director
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats
613-759-7113

Note: Planned Spending and Total Allocation figures represent the amounts included in Estimates.

Table 11: Sustainable Development Strategy

AAFC's fourth Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS), Making Progress Together can be found on AAFC's website at: www.agr.gc.ca/sds

1. SDS Departmental Goals: AAFC's fourth SDS presents eight outcomes (goals) to indicate what the Department plans to accomplish by the target date of 2009.

2. Federal SD Goal (s) including GGO goals, if applicable: AAFC supports these priorities and contributes to the Government of Canada's long- term goals for sustainable development. Linkages are made in the details below.

3: Department's Expected Results for 2007-2008 (SDS commitments continue until 2009)	4. Supporting Performance Measure(s)	5. Achieved SDS Departmental Results for 2007-2008
1. The Next Generation of Agricultural Policy is in place and operational.	The number of new policies, programs and research initiatives that consider the three pillars of sustainable development as determined through application of the SD Test Questions.	The SD Test Questions, now referred to as Sustainability Questions, are not being consistently completed. The overall participation rate since 2006 is 26 percent. An approach has been developed to address the poor application of the questions.
	A suite of policy, program and research activities in place to support the objectives of the next generation of agricultural policy.	The new framework, Growing Forward, was developed and its BRM component was ready for implementation by the end of the fiscal year. As well, arrangements were made for 2008-2009 to be a transition year during which the rest of the Growing Forward initiatives will be implemented and the FPT framework agreement signed.
	Number of stakeholders (both internal and external) from various disciplines involved in the development of the next generation of agricultural policy.	Consultations included meetings with a broad range of external stakeholders from across the country in May 2007 and February 2008, with 41 organizations represented at the May meeting and 59 at the February meeting. As well, extensive discussions were held on an ongoing basis with internal stakeholders through, for example, internal committees at various levels.
2. Government policies, programs, and services increase opportunities for, and mitigate barriers, to sustainable rural community development. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals -4.1.1 “Communities are well positioned to advance sustainable social development.” 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.”	Percentage of federal policies and programs that consider the rural perspective.	Rural Secretariat staff attended seventeen (17) Interdepartmental Committee (IDC) meetings, analysed 96 Memoranda to Cabinet (MCs), and provided input to 48 briefing notes or MCs in applying the Rural Lens to federal policies and programs.
	Number of partnership plans with key federal, provincial and territorial, and First Nation partners.	Established the Interdepartmental working group on resource-based communities with NRCan and DFO. Ongoing work with Regional Development Agencies and Metropolis on a strategic policy research topic including publishing an article on the regionalization of immigration. Coordinated ten other departments to prepare the Canadian submission in the 16th report of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development - Rural Development. Elaboration of a bioeconomy action plan in collaboration with federal departments. Through the Rural Teams 345 partnership initiatives were achieved for 2007-2008. For example: Forum "Op�ration grande s�duction rurale", April 2007, QC; Nova Scotia Food Forum, November 16, 2007, NS; The "Communities Achieving Responsive Services national Conference, February 2008, MB; Learning Series in Northwest Territories - NWT, SK and YT Rural Teams, along with Statistics Canada, co-hosted its first seminar in 2008. (Saskatchewan, SK, January 28, 2008; Whitehorse, YT, February 1, 2008; Yellowknife, NWT, January 30, 2008) Learning Initiatives for Rural and Northern B.C. (August 15, 2007 to April 7, 2008)
	Percentage of departments and agencies reached through federal engagement strategy activities including: Rural Teams, Rural Research Network Rural Development Network.	The Rural Secretariat is engaging relevant federal department and agencies through: The Rural Development Network : 168 members from 29 departments and agencies; held 18 interdepartmental activities; The Rural Teams work with 23 departments and agencies, and; The Rural Secretariat serves as a steering committee member of the National Rural Research Network with other departments, agencies and rural research stakeholders.
3. Increased value-added opportunities for the agri-food sector from innovative use of agricultural bioresources as a result of R&D, technology transfer, and commercialization network activities. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 3.2.2 “Renewable and clean energy is promoted.” 3.2.1 “Support for clean technology is provided (such as building, transportation, and industrial processes).”	Increased knowledge and technological advances produced by the Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program (ABIP) networks with the potential to strengthen Canada's industrial base and generate wealth.	Increased knowledge and technological advances did not take place since the ABIP Networks had not yet initiated R&D activities.
	Increased number of effective networks/clusters involving Canadian-based researchers.	Out of 100 proposal synopses initially submitted to AAFC, a total of 78 eligible Full Network Proposals were received. Fifteen (15) network proposals were recommended for funding by a review committee of external international experts. These Networks were directed to submit reduced plans to meet a national allocation of the ABIP funds expected to be available. The 15 networks received a draft template agreement at the end of the fiscal year to be used to effect the negotiation of contributions.
	Improving transfer of knowledge, technology and expertise to organizations that can commercialize these innovations.	Technology management plans were not implemented since the ABIP Networks had not yet initiated R&D activities.
	An ABIP that considers each of the three pillars of SD.	The program is specifically designed to build on the three pillars of SD.
4. Sustainable development is integrated into the Department's decision making and AAFC's fourth SDS is utilized by AAFC employees and external stakeholders. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 4.3.1 "Canadian communities are actively engaged in sound environmental and natural resource management practices, stewardship initiatives and biodiversity conservation." 5.2.1 "Sustainable consumption and production of natural resources is promoted." 6.1.2 “Clear and effective governance mechanisms to integrate sustainable development into decision making (e.g. SEA)." 6.1.1 "SDS commitments are integrated into the key planning and reporting processes of departments and agencies."	Increased awareness of sustainable development within the Department	Sustainability Questions are operational.
		SD was promoted during Environment Week.
		An SD information session was developed for AAFC employees.
	Each pillar of SD is taken into consideration together and not in isolation through the application of the SD Test Questions.	The Sustainability Questions ask policy makers to identify how their new policy or program contributes to a stronger economy, an improved environment or enhanced health and social well-being. While the questions are not being consistently completed, when they are completed, the responses provide policy makers with information on all three pillars of SD to consider in their decision-making. An approach has been developed to address the poor application of the questions.
5. Information and Tools: A. Environmental considerations are incorporated into the development of public policies at AAFC on the same level as economic and social considerations At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goal - 6.1.2 “Clear and effective governance mechanisms to integrate sustainable development into decision making (e.g. SEA).”	Percentage of new policies, plans and programs that have gone through the SEA process.	Overall, 76 percent of new policies, plans and programs have gone through the SEA process. This represents 94 percent of all MCs and 63 percent of all TB submissions.
	The results of SEAs are accurately reported on in all Memoranda to Cabinet (MCs) and Treasury Board (TB) submissions.	Seventy-six (76) percent of all new policies, plans and programs went through the SEA process and in all of these cases, the results of the SEA was accurately reported on in the MC or TB submission.
	Increased knowledge of the SEA requirement and its application in the Department.	Knowledge of the SEA requirements and its application in the Department was achieved through: Presentations to senior management on SEA and the approach for assessing Growing Forward. An internal message to all staff from the Deputy Minister about SEA. Ongoing guidance and training with individual SEA writers.
B. Models inform the ongoing policy decision making process for priority agricultural issues by providing integrated quantitative analyses of the economic and environmental impacts. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.” 6.1.2 “Clear and effective governance mechanisms to integrate sustainable development into decision making (e.g. SEA).”	An improvement in the capacity to predict environmental impacts from agriculture resulting in informed decision making with respect to agricultural policies and programs that are consistent with both economic and environmental objectives.	Four of the original AEIs used for the APF Outcome Target Analysis were placed on the NLWIS system to facilitate integrated analysis. Methods to place all the new AEIs on NLWIS have been determined.
	Number of requests for integrated analyses and incorporation of results into the policy decision making process.	Completed Phase I analysis looking at enhance production of bioenergy, assessing GHG and energy efficiency. Assessments of CAIS, Production Insurance, and APF are underway.
	The development of the integrated modeling system considers all three pillars of SD (particularly the economic and environmental pillars)	The modeling system has been extended to look at upstream and downstream economic impacts for the bioeconomy in conjunctions with environmental impacts.
C. Initial research is conducted and measures are in place to determine economic values corresponding to bio-physical changes in the environment resulting from agriculture. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goal- 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.”	Number of stakeholders (both internal and external) from various disciplines involved in the development of AAFC economic valuation studies.	A committee of academics and government officials convened in August 2007 to discuss development of valuation research at AAFC.
	Increased public awareness of the need for, and the practical application of environmental valuation.	The Full-cost Accounting Framework for Agriculture, developed by International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) was applied to one watershed in Manitoba. Report completed June 2008.
	Number of estimated economic values assigned to environmental effects of specific agricultural practices at specific locations in Canada.	Two AAFC valuation pilots developed survey instruments to measure public benefits from Ecological Goods and Services (EG&S) in selected watersheds. Expected completion in December, 2008.
D. A suite of social indicators is in place to help monitor and assess trends of social issues affecting the agriculture sector and to inform decision making. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 4.1.1 “Communities are well positioned to advance sustainable social development.” 6.1.2 “Clear and effective governance mechanisms to integrate sustainable development into decision making (e.g. SEA).”	The successful development of a defined social dimension of sustainable agriculture.	Given the focus on economic and environment performance, the focus was shifted to identify other factors, beyond economics, that influenced innovation. Report published by IISD.
	Number of links established between social issues affecting the agriculture sector and related economic and environmental issues.	Social networking opportunities were identified as critical to learning process by the agricultural sector. This is part of larger effort to determine link between BMP uptake and economic and environmental performance
	Number of methods available for sharing information on social issues affecting the agriculture sector.	A variety of social networking and learning opportunities were defined as they link to innovation and economic and environmental performance.
6. Research: To increase carbon sequestration in agricultural soils, reduce GHG emissions per unit of production, and enhance the synergy between agriculture and the environment. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goal - 3.2.1 “Support for clean technology is provided (such as building, transportation, and industrial processes).”	Improved communication between researchers, policy makers and producers, by demonstrating an increase in the use of AAFC's GHG calculator for evaluating innovative technologies.	The first phase of the development of the GHG calculator was recently completed and the software tool, now called Holos, was released in March 2008. The software and installation instructions are freely available for download on the following ftp site. During the winter and spring of 2008, Holos was demonstrated at the Technical Advisory Committee of the Renewables Integration and Assessment Group of NRCAN, at the AGM of the Soil Conservation Council of Canada and during Environment Week at AAFC. Further, Holos is featured on the Integration of Renewable Energy on Farms website. As a result, Holos and its abilities have been recently communicated to a diverse audience.
	Number of confirmed contribution of the program to various offset system pilot projects.	A total of 7 protocols related to the agricultural sector for quantifying potential GHG reductions from agriculture have been approved in the province of Alberta. AAFC scientists have been involved in the development of most of these protocols, either as members of the National Offset Quantification Teams or have contributed original research that have assisted in the development of these protocols. Further, a protocol for quantifying potential GHG reductions for the Canadian dairy industry is currently being prepared by the Atlantic Dairy and Forage Institute, based in New Brunswick, and several AAFC staff members were included on the Technical Advisory Committee
	Enhanced integration of the three pillars of SD by identifying and promoting farming practices that consider all three pillars of SD.	Several management practices have been identified and promoted as a beneficial management practices that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration in agricultural soils.
7. Work with the sector to apply and perfect integrated approaches: A. The development of the National Ecological Goods and Services (EG&S) Policy Framework benefits from research gathered through EG&S policy pilot projects and through other research initiatives. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.” 4.3.1 “Canadian communities are actively engaged in sound environmental management practices, stewardship initiatives and biodiversity conservation.” 5.2.1 “Sustainable consumption and production of natural resources is promoted.” 5.3.1 “Environmentally sustainable use of natural resources is promoted.”	An EG&S policy framework that is science-based will have measurable outcomes for evaluation.	An EG&S policy framework that is science-based will obtain more insight from eight pilot projects currently operating across Canada. When completed in 2009, the pilots will provide new science-based and measurable information to the framework.
	An EG&S policy framework that considers each of the three pillars of SD, through application of the SD Test Questions, is in place.	An EG&S policy framework that adheres to three pillars of the SDS is in place.
B. Increased adoption of and support for applying an Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) approach to watershed planning and management activities that will improve the protection of water quality from agriculture impacts, secure water supplies for agricultural needs, and consider the three elements of sustainable development. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goals - 1.3.2 “Knowledge of water resources is increased.” 1.2.1 “Water efficiency and sustainable water use is improved.”	Percentage of transferable tools, knowledge activities and instruments that support IWRM and decision making.	Development of Watershed MAPS (Watershed Management And Planning System) – a geo-spatial information management system (tool) for supporting decision-making in watersheds in Manitoba. (90% complete)
	Percentage of watershed planning and management activities that apply the IWRM approach to managing resources in watersheds.	Implementation of Manitoba's Integrated Watershed Management Planning strategy in 10 priority watersheds in agricultural Manitoba for which PFRA&E has also provided technical support. There has been significant progress on Saskatchewan's Integrated Water Management (IWM) Strategy. A governance structure model has been developed as part of the IWM Strategic Framework for consideration by Provincial cabinet (SK) in the fall of 2008. Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Initiative is benefiting from technical capacity related to group environmental farm plans provided by AAFC in collaboration with other federal and provincial partners. In general, increased number of requests from watershed authorities and provincial departments for technical support in IWRM activities.
	Percentage of partners and watersheds with capacity-building or decision-making tools, plans and instruments that consider the three elements of sustainable development	Utilizing the governance established by the AAFC Strategic Water Framework, the department has been an active participant on the interdepartmental Water ADM's Committee on Water Policy where IWRM as a governance model is a common thread to the priorities under consideration. Technical support and decision-making capacity was provided in the development of 19 watershed- and geographically-based group environmental farm plans in Manitoba and Saskatchewan to support on-farm and watershed level decisions for agri-environmental improvements. As a result, financial support was provided for the implementation of approximately 500 BMP's through the NFSP. Technical information and financial support was provided to the Prairies Provinces Water Board, the International Red River Board - International Joint Commission and Red River Basin Commission to enhance watershed-based decisions regarding flooding, drainage and drought issues in agricultural areas.
8. Programs: A. To develop new co-operatives that respond to the needs of citizens, and that fall into areas of federal priority. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goal - 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.”	Percentage of co-operatives initiated in new and emerging areas of the economy.	Seventeen (17) percent of Co-operative Development Initiative (CDI) projects (07/08) were initiated in new and emerging areas of the economy.
	Percentage of new co-operatives in areas of federal priority.	Ninety-one (91) percent of CDI projects (07/08) are within CDI Federal priorities.
	Percentage of new co-op funded projects within priority areas that integrate the three pillars of SD.	One-hundred (100) percent of CDI projects (07/08) meet at least one pillar of SD; 32 percent meet all 3 pillars of SD.
B. Low-income farm families have found ways to increase their family incomes. At output (deliverable) level: Link to Federal SD Goal - 4.2.1 “Communities are well positioned to adapt and to maintain or generate sustainable economic activities.”	Increased on-or off-farm income for farm families	Skills of low-income farm families were enhanced in 2007-08 through the Canadian Agricultural Skills Service (CASS) program, targeted to farms where the net family income does not exceed $45,000 per year. In a CASS impact survey of participants in 2007, 53 percent reported that the training completed through CASS had led to an increase in income. Commonly cited reasons given for the positive impact on farm income included being more employable off-farm (most common at 46 percent), cutting farm costs, increasing farm productivity and improving marketing.
	Increased skills of farmers and farm families.	The Farm Business Assessment program had positive impacts on income for 49 percent of participants. Two thirds of the participants in this program in 2007-08 were low income. Commonly cited benefits were increased understanding of the farm financial situation and improved farm planning.
	Enhanced integration of the three pillars of SD (particularly the social and economic pillars).	The two-year pilot Canadian Farm Family Options Program provided short-term income support to 23,393 participants (8655 in 2007/08), both families with less than $25,000 in income and individuals with less than $15,000 in income, conditional on participating in a farm business assessment and/or training. Participants could also use the business assessment and training to identify and develop strategies to address environmental issues.

Table 12: Reponses to Parliamentary Committees and External Audits

Responses to Parliamentary Committees

Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food (SCAAF)

A Government Response was tabled in the Commons on April 16, 2007 in response to the SCAAF's report entitled Report on the Review of the Canada Grain Act and the Canadian Grain Commission conducted by COMPAS Inc. Legislation was introduced in the House of Commons on December 13, 2007 to amend the Canada Grain Act based on the SCAAF report, the COMPAS study, and the general policy direction of the government.

A report by the Committee entitled “Growing Forward” was tabled in February 2008, with a Government Response requested by July 16, 2008. This report was a result of extensive hearings across Canada, including Ottawa with recommendations to the Government with strong emphasis on primary production research and innovation.

The Committee also tabled a report entitled “Study on the Collapse of the Beef and Pork Sector Revenues” in December 2007. The Committee requested a comprehensive Government Response which was tabled on April 10, 2008. This was a unanimous report by the committee members, undertaken due to the income crisis suffered by the beef and hog farmers in Canada. It included calling for measures to enable immediate cash-flow to producers, measures to improve the responsiveness of Business Risk Management programs as well as recommending that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada review program funding as it pertains to the implications of ruminant specified risk material.

On February 27, 2008, the Committee reported back to the Commons on Bill C-33, An Act to Amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. The Bill would enable the introduction of regulations with respect to the renewable content in fuels. It also provides for a periodic and comprehensive review of the environmental and economic aspects of biofuel production in Canada by a parliamentary committee and be reported to Parliament.

Standing Committee on Public Accounts

On June 16, 2008, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts tabled its 18th report in the House of Commons, entitled “Chapter 4, Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada of the May 2007 Report of the Auditor General of Canada.” This report, building on an audit of the CAIS program conducted by the Office of the Auditor General, made five recommendations to the department, including improving program transparency, program evaluation, and performance monitoring and reporting. A government response to the report, currently under development, must be tabled in the House of Commons on or before October 14, 2008.

Responses to the Auditor General (including to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development)

Office of the Auditor General (OAG )

Chapter 4 of the May 2007 OAG report related to AAFC's Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program.

An audit was conducted by the OAG at the request of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. It examined how the department processes applications for income support, ensures that all parties are respecting the various monitoring provisions set out in the federal-provincial-territorial agreements, and measures and reports its performance to Parliament.

AAFC agreed with the Auditor General's recommendations and is acting on them as part of its continued effort to improve delivery of farm financial support programs to clients across Canada.

The detailed May 2007 report and a listing of recommendations with departmental responses can be found on the Auditor General's website

Table 13 - Internal Audits and Evaluations (2007-08)

1. Name of Internal Audit	2. Audit Type	3. Status	4. Completion Date	5. Electronic Link to Report
Management of IST Taxi Voucher Usage	Financial Management Controls	Completed	September 2007*	**

*Reports are considered complete when approved by the Departmental Audit and Evaluation Committee.

**Because of a backlog in preparation of reports for posting (translation, etc), this report has not yet been posted to the AAFC website. The new DG is addressing this backlog.

Table 13B - Evaluations (2007-08)

1. Name of Evaluation	2. Program Activity	3. Evaluation Type	4. Status	5. Completion Date	6. Electronic Link to Report
Province-based Programs	Non-BRM	Summative	Completed	2007-08*	**
Production Insurance	Business Risk Management	Summative	Completed	2007-08*	**
Chapter Evaluation Food Safety and Quality	Food Safety and Quality	Formative	Completed	2007-08*	**
Chapter Evaluation of Environment	Environment	Formative	Completed	2007-08*	**
Chapter Evaluation Business Risk Management Programs	Business Risk Management	Formative	Completed	2007-08*	**
Chapter Evaluation of Science and Innovation	Innovation and Renewal	Formative	Completed	2007-08*	**
The Department Evaluation Plan is scheduled for approval in the Autumn of 2008 and has not yet been posted to the AAFC website.

* Reports are considered complete when approved by the Departmental Audit and Evaluation Committee.

** Because of a backlog in preparation of reports for posting (translation, etc), this report has not yet been posted to the AAFC website. The new DG is addressing this backlog.

Program Activity

Business Risk Management 2007-08
Environment 2007-08
Food Safety and Food Quality 2007-08
Innovation and Renewal 2007-08
Markets and International 2007-08 SO1
Markets and International 2007-08 SO3
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats 2007-08

Program Activity: Business Risk Management 2007-08

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Enhanced producer capacity to manage risk Increased sector viability and profitability	Producers better supported and able to manage business risks Increased sector viability and profitability Increased producer capacity to manage operations (cashflow) throughout the production year	Level of variability of farm income over time	Yes	N/A
		Level of sector farm income over time	Yes	N/A
		Level of farm capital investments over time	Yes	N/A
	Programming that is more responsive and predictable	Industry reaction to changes made to BRM programming	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Additional Production Insurance plans and benefits in place		No

Program Activity: Environment 2007-08

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Improved environmental sustainability of the industry by preserving the quality and availability of resources - air, water, soil, and biodiversity - for present and future generations	Environmental components of new agreements on agricultural policy developed with provinces	Environmental components included in implementation agreements signed with all provinces and territories	Yes	N/A
	Enhanced environmental performance of the Canadian agricultural system Enhanced understanding of Canadian bioresources and protection and conservation of their genetic diversity	Number of scientific publications (number of peer-reviewed articles in scientific and technical literature, etc.), cooperative research (number of signed agreements with industry partners, etc)., technology transfer activities (number of oral communications, posters, reports, press articles, etc.), innovations (number of licenses, royalties, copyrights, patents, etc.), recognition and influence (number of invited presentations, prizes, awards, etc.)	Yes	N/A
	Increased access to authoritative data via the National Land and Water Information Service	Completion of the National Land and Water Information Service project - Phase 2: Establish geospatial environment	Yes	N/A
	Increased accuracy and currency of data	Implementation of the National Land and Water Information Service project – Phase 3: National Source for Agri-Environmental Geospatial Information	Yes	N/A
	Increased content and coverage of data	Increased usage of the National Land and Water Information Service	Yes	N/A
	Growers have greater access to new pest management technologies, thereby increasing their competitiveness domestically and abroad	Number of minor use and reduced risk pesticide regulatory submissions made to Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency	Yes	N/A
		Number of crop profiles, risk reduction strategies, research projects and new products, practices or technologies that can be utilized by growers	Yes	N/A
	Creation of a governance structure for AAFC water-related activities	Governance structure is operational	Yes	N/A
	Establishment of an annual forum on water in agricultural landscapes	Annual meeting of the forum on water in agricultural landscapes	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator; contribution of expected result to strategic outcome not clear
	Staff and provinces will have a better understanding of AAFC's role in water	AAFC staff using the strategic water plan as a work planning and policy-development tool	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator; contribution of expected result to strategic outcome not clear
	More focused partnerships developed with provinces	Feedback from the provinces	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	AAFC better positioned to contribute to the federal water strategy discussions	IWRM partnership developed with Manitoba and Environment Canada as a pilot	Yes	N/A
		AAFC becomes significant contributor in federal water policy discussions	Yes	N/A
	Increased uptake of Environmental Farm Plans Increased adoption of on-farm beneficial management practices by agricultural producers in the management of land, water, air, and biodiversity	Number of reviewed (i.e. completed) Environmental Farm Plans and/or Equivalent Agri-Environment Plans	Yes	N/A

Program Activity: Food Safety and Food Quality 2007-08

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Minimized risk and impact of food borne hazards on human health Increased consumer confidence and improved ability of the sector to meet or exceed market requirements for food products Increased value-added opportunities through the adoption of food safety, food quality and traceability systems	Farmed animals can be traced from birth throughout their life cycle	Regulatory strategy for priority livestock species animal identification is complete and costs and benefits have been identified	Yes	N/A
		Livestock movement strategies drafted for priority species	Yes	N/A
		Number of successfully completed projects that demonstrate traceability	Yes	N/A
		Number of RFID readers adopted by industry (higher number = more successful)	Yes	N/A
		Completion of priority activities, including a well-documented business plan	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Waste disposal infrastructure in place	The number of successfully completed projects that enhance SRM disposal capacity	Yes	N/A
	Development and adoption of industry-led and government-recognized on-farm food safety process control systems by all commodities in the primary production sector	Number of systems developed in the various stages (phases) of SD component	Yes	N/A
	Development and participation in food safety systems, developed by the industry and recognized by government, by other sectors of the agri-food continuum	Number of organizations participating in OFI systems	Yes	N/A
	Development and government recognition of food quality process control systems at minimum in the sectors required by market specification	Progress of provinces in implementation of FSI initiatives	Yes	N/A

Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal 2007-08

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Industry equipped with new business and management skills, bioproducts, knowledge-based production systems and strategies to capture opportunities and manage change	Funding support to organizations to develop sector-based, innovative, market-focused strategies that utilize science to transform commodities into new value-added or bio-product opportunities for processors, producers and rural communities, and new life sciences products for consumers Increased opportunities for the agriculture and agri-food sector in existing and new markets	Funded sector-led projects to implement alternative value-added strategies for existing commodities and new products and markets	Yes	N/A
		Improved collaboration along value chains to identify risks, opportunities and new markets	Yes	N/A
		Funded support for the development and start-up costs for centres of innovation and/or incubators or business mentoring	Yes	N/A
	Increased value for research investments through better alignment of research activities and resources with departmental, government and sector priorities Increased research capacity to exploit Canada's natural advantage in biomass to develop new economic opportunities for agriculture in the areas of bioproducts and bioprocesses	Science and Innovation Strategy research implemented	Yes	N/A
		Number of domestic and world agri-food research opportunities created	Yes	N/A
		Increased contribution of bioproducts and value-added agricultural products by agriculture	Yes	N/A
	Utilization of advances in value-added research that enable farmers, processors, rural communities, and service providers to differentiate their products and services	Number of science and innovation clusters and networks established to bring together stakeholders to form complete innovation chains	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Improved co-ordination of national research efforts and resources along the innovation chain in priority areas of focus for the agriculture and agri-food sector Increased co-operation among federal and provincial departments and agencies, academic, institutions, industrial organizations, and not-for-profit science and research entities Market-responsive research collaboration among national players to accelerate the transformation of knowledge from the bench to the marketplace	Number of research agreements between AAFC and industry	Yes	N/A
	Sound, well-documented business plans and feasibility studies, with significant producer ownership, developed which support the creation and expansion of the biofuel production capacity	Number of biofuels pilot projects funded with successful results and targets met	Yes	N/A
	Increased awareness and benefits of Renewal programs by providing the income support necessary for farmers to take advantage of the opportunity to increase their business management capacity and skills learning Canadian farmers increase their knowledge of business management practices Canadian farmers increase the use of tools available through renewal programming and services in order to increase profitability Enhanced and integrated approach to Innovation and Renewal Policy	Level and use of Renewal programs	Yes	N/A
		Number of Options payment receipts compared to total eligible per year	Yes	N/A
		Total value of payments issued per year	Yes	N/A
		Percentage of Options payment recipients enrolled in Renewal programming	Yes	N/A
		Percentage of Options payment recipients who have met their business and personal financial goals	Yes	N/A
	ACAAF most effectively positioned to respond to new emerging issues while fostering innovative technologies Canada's agriculture and agri-food sector positioned at the leading edge to seize new opportunities	Increased number of national, multi-regional (collective outcome), and regional Pillar I, II and III projects	Yes	N/A
		Number of projects addressing current and emerging issues	Yes	N/A
		Number of pre-commercialization activities	Yes	N/A
		Number of policy dialogue events and market and trend studies	Yes	Expected results not clearly measurable via performance indicators
	Increased farm equity investment in biofuels facilities	Number of biofuels facilities	Yes	N/A
	Agricultural producers more aware of consumer requirements for renewable fuel	Value of producers' investment in biofuels facilities	Yes	N/A
	Successful launch of the Agri-Opportunities program Increased market opportunities for the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector which benefit primary producers Enhanced industry competitiveness and prosperity through new and value-added areas of opportunity	Number of new products, processes or services commercialized or being commercialized	Yes	N/A

Program Activity: Markets and International 2007-08 SO1

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Expanded international opportunities for the Canadian agriculture and food sector	Canadian interests strategically advanced through participation in WTO Committee on Agriculture, WTO agriculture trade and accessions negotiations	Analysis of World Trade Organization (WTO) notifications, submitting written questions to Members for clarification, responding to questions from countries and participation at WTO Committee on Agriculture	Yes	N/A
	Canadian approaches fully informed through outreach activities with agriculture sector and provincial and territorial governments	Records of meetings and teleconference calls with provinces, territories and industry stakeholders	No	Expected results not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Canadian interests strategically advanced through regional/bilateral trade negotiations Canadian approaches fully informed through outreach activities with agriculture sector and provincial and territorial governments	Participation in bilateral WTO accession meetings to negotiate favourable market access conditions for Canada's agricultural export interests; analysis of documents prepared by the Secretariat, other WTO Members and acceding parties on multilateral issues	Yes	N/A
	Canadian interests advanced through strategic participation in offensive trade cases Canadian policies and programs adequately defended as required
	Increased influence in the development and application of international rules, technical standards and policies governing the trade of agriculture Gradual opening of international markets for cattle and livestock products	Number of initiatives where objectives were met towards prevention, minimization or resolution of international trade barriers and other irritants through trade advocacy, bilateral negotiations and/or dispute resolution	Yes	N/A
	Canadian positions informed and influence international technical trade discussions to advance Canada's agri-food sector's interests; and development of domestic policies in line with Canada's (existing or evolving) international obligations	Participation at international fora concerning multilateral technical trade issues	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Industry responsiveness to consumer and buyer demands for product differentiation based on quality-related product attributes facilitated through development of quality standards and analysis- based recommendations made on food industry technical and regulatory issues	Number of new or updated, consensus-based, whole value-chain agreements leading to national standards/guidelines, assurance programs, regulations, and/or audit/ enforcement provisions Number of analytical reports, briefings, workshops and/or presentations completed for use in regulatory decision-making processes	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Industry responsiveness to consumer demands for specific attributes facilitated by the use of effective communication of data and analysis on new and emerging trends	Number of new or updated data purchases, briefings, reports, media articles, meetings, workshops, and presentations completed for the department and industry	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	Industry responsiveness to market demands	Number of industry initiatives aimed at marketing Canadian products based on healthy-quality attributes	Yes	N/A

Program Activity: Markets and International 2007-08 SO3

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template	Justification
Expanded international opportunities for the Canadian agriculture and food sector	Increased exports of Canadian agriculture and food products	Change in international market share of Canadian agriculture and food exports	Yes	N/A
	Increased recognition of Canadian products and capabilities over the long term	Number of communications and marketing tools developed to facilitate integration of branding strategy into stakeholder planning and activities	Yes	N/A
		Number of projects completed to facilitate integration of branding strategy into stakeholder planning and activities	Yes	N/A
		Number of outreach meetings held and usage agreements signed to facilitate integration of branding strategy into stakeholder planning and activities	Yes	N/A
	Increased awareness of global market demands and opportunities, development and implementation of value chain strategies for each sector with established roundtables and industry engagement in the development of a Brand Canada strategy	Industry Satisfaction with VCRT Meetings	Yes	N/A
		Number of research projects completed in conjunction with Industry to support strategic development	Yes	N/A
	Foreign markets engaged by focusing on highest potential Canadian agriculture & food products & investment prospects, in conjunction with government and industry partners, to build markets; and increase investment	Partner satisfaction with investment promotion activities	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
		Number of market development initiatives completed in priority markets	No
		Market development activities aligned with strategic direction	No
	Perception of Canada as a leader in the development of certain advanced food technologies and agri-related biotechnologies is enhanced	Number of joint activities carried out to promote Canada as a leader in the development of advanced food technologies and agri-related biotechnologies	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator
	International market access to ruminants and ruminant products enhanced	Key markets identify Canada as a preferential North American supplier	Yes	N/A
		Key markets (Korea/Taiwan) previously closed to Canada but open to the US become open	Yes	N/A
		Expansion of range of products eligible for export (SRM free tallow to China, SRM free MBM to Indonesia, over thirty month beef, under thirty month and over thirty month bone-in beef, live cattle)	Yes	N/A
	Canada’s relations with developing countries strengthened to enhance and support bilateral trade and policy relations with an emphasis on agriculture and food products	Number of capacity building training modules on Food Safety, Business Risk management and Agri-Environmental Policy delivered in target countries	No	Expected result not clearly measurable via performance indicator No measurable link between number of capacity building training modules and strengthened relations with developing countries
	Market development strategy for AAFC engagement with commodities sectors	Strategies in place for each commodity sector group in AAFC	Yes	N/A

Program Activity: Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats 2007-08

Revised Expected Result(s)	Original Expected Result(s)	Performance Indicators	Included in DPR template
Better co-ordination of government policy responses to rural community priorities Government policies, programs and services increase opportunities, mitigate barriers and enhance capacity for co-operative development Increased capacity of co-operatives to meet the needs of Canadians	Better co-ordination of government policy responses to community priorities More informed decisions by governments and rural communities through evidence-based research and analysis and improved accessibility of information	Economic stability	Yes
		Economic competitiveness	Yes
		Social progress	Yes
		Local institutional capacity	Yes
	Government policies, programs and services increase opportunities, mitigate barriers and enhance capacity for co-operative development Increased capacity of co-operatives to meet the needs of Canadians	Number of partnerships established and maintained with sectoral organizations, other federal departments and provinces	Yes
		Change in available research pertinent to co-operatives and co-operative development	Yes
		Use of or reference to research and tools	Yes
		Number of co-operative initiatives supported by the CDI program	Yes

Expected Results

Performance Indicators

Leads an integrated, government-wide approach, called the Canadian Rural Partnership, through which the government aims to co-ordinate its economic, social, environmental and cultural policies towards the goal of economic and social renewal of rural Canada.

Facilitating relations between cooperatives and federal departments and agencies with legislation or policies affecting cooperatives. As well, the Secretariat provides advice across government on policies affecting cooperatives, coordinates the implementation of such policies, and acts as a centre of expertise on cooperatives within the federal government.

Better co-ordination of government policy responses to community priorities

More informed decisions by governments and rural communities through evidence-based research and analysis and improved accessibility of information

Economic stability

Economic competitiveness

Social progress

Local institutional capacity

Government policies, programs and services increase opportunities, mitigate barriers and enhance capacity for co-operative development

Increased capacity of co-operatives to meet the needs of Canadians

Number of partnerships established and maintained with sectoral organizations, other federal departments and provinces

Change in available research pertinent to co-operatives and co-operative development

Use of or reference to research and tools

Number of co-operative initiatives supported by the CDI program

Program Activity - Business Risk Management

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-08:

Continue to work with partners to replace Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization with distinct programs for agricultural income stabilization and disaster relief

AAFC's approach to ensuring the agriculture and agri-food sector is viable and profitable involves ensuring that producers have access to the tools they need to be successful. The Agreements reached by Governments in December 2007 to launch a new suite of BRM programs for the 2007 program year combined with an increase in aggregate farm income in 2007 supported by significant government payments to the sector during that year demonstrate Governments' commitment and success in contributing to increase the sector's viability and profitability.

The CAIS program has been the subject of much criticism since its inception in 2003. The extraordinary financial pressures put on CAIS by events such as markets closing due to BSE, avian influenza, and rapidly rising input costs gave rise to the primary complaints that the program does not provide timely assistance, nor does it provide a predictable level of assistance.

In light of these continued criticisms, and given the opportunity to establish a new policy framework with the expiration of the APF in March 2008, consultations with governments and industry stakeholders across Canada were held.

As a result, federal, provincial and territorial governments signed agreements in 2007-08 to launch a new suite of business risk management programs for the 2007 program year that replace CAIS and include separate income stabilization and disaster components. These new programs - AgriInvest, AgriStability, AgriRecovery, and AgriInsurance - provide more predictable, bankable and responsive support as part of Growing Forward, the new policy framework for Canada's agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products industry.

The federal government also committed an additional $1 billion to assist producers with the transition to the new programming, with the bulk of this payment delivered by March 31, 2008. This was comprised of $600 million to kickstart new AgriInvest accounts, which began going to producers in January 2008, and $400 million as a one-time payment to help producers address the challenge of rising input costs.

Develop and implement new products under Production Insurance for horticulture, forage and livestock

Production Insurance coverage was extended to an additional 45 fresh horticulture crops on a pilot basis in Ontario. Other provinces extended coverage to additional crops and some provinces continued to examine ways to extend coverage to forage. AAFC continued to work with provinces to develop livestock insurance plans, which will reduce the need for future requests for ad-hoc assistance from the livestock sector.

Deliver new Advance Payments Program resulting from amended Agricultural Marketing Programs Act

As a result of amendments made in 2006 to the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, the Advance Payments Program became available to livestock producers across Canada in 2007-08. These amendments also increased the maximum amount producers can now receive under the program from $250,000 to $400,000, and the interest-free portion from $50,000 to $100,000.
The Agricultural Marketing Programs Act was further amended in February 2008 to further improve access to the Advance Payments Program for livestock producers. The changes involved:
- replacing the requirement of securing livestock advances with the proceeds of a business risk management program to securing them with the animal inventory; and
- expanding the conditions for Emergency Advances to include situations of Severe Economic Hardship, where deemed reasonable by the Governor in Council upon the recommendation of the Ministers of Agriculture and Finance. Emergency advances due to severe economic hardship were authorized by an Order of the Governor in Council on February 29, 2008 to address the crisis facing the cattle and hog sectors.

Initiate enhancements to existing Farm Improvement and Marketing Co-operatives Loan Act (FIMCLA) to provide support to beginning farmers and intergenerational farm transfers

Based on national consultations in 2006, the department developed recommendations in 2007-08 on how the Farm Improvement and Marketing Co-operatives Loan Act could be adapted to better support beginning farmers, intergenerational farm transfers and agricultural co-operatives. It is anticipated these recommendations would necessitate legislative changes which could be initiated in the 2008-09 fiscal year. The recommendations will also include the development of an electronic delivery system to improve and simplify the administration of the FIMCLA program.

Program Activity - Food Safety and Food Quality

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-08:

Accelerate development and implementation of comprehensive and integrated traceability systems across the Canadian meat and livestock industry

The federal-provincial-territorial Traceability Task Team and the Industry-Government Advisory Committee involving 20 national industry association representatives concluded that a national plan was needed to progress the development of the National Agriculture and Food Traceability System (NAFTS), beginning with livestock and poultry. The Integrated Traceability Division led processes with each of these groups, resulting in a national strategic management plan for NAFTS, agreed to by federal, provincial and territorial governments, and an industry-government road map for livestock and poultry traceability. The implementation of these plans will accelerate the development of a comprehensive and integrated traceability system.
Seventeen pilot projects were launched under the Canadian Integrated Traceability Program (CITP) in support of animal identification, the tracking of animal movements and the tracking of meat products through the food value chain. Communicating the results of these 17 projects by the recipients to interested public stakeholders was a key aspect of the CITP. These projects will help to refine the traceability system for various commodities.
The Canadian Cattle Identification Agency (CCIA) successfully completed and implemented a $3.7 million project called the Canadian Livestock Traceability System (CLTS) and has continued to be recognized, both domestically and internationally, as a multi-species leader in Animal Identification and Traceability. The CLTS incorporates three key pillars of traceability: Animal Identification, Premises Identification and Animal Movement, plus Value-added, and will continue to meet the ever-increasing domestic and international requirements for animal health, food safety and market access.
The Canadian Livestock Identification Agency (CLIA) provides the leadership to build consensus across the livestock and poultry sectors specific to industry and government needs associated with individual animal and group identification, and establish two distinct divisions: Technical Services, which builds on the investment and capability already established by the CCIA that can in turn provide traceability and value added services to other livestock/poultry sectors; and the Industry Forum, which facilitates and encourages all livestock/poultry sectors to meet and form policies specific to emerging traceability requirements (both private and public sector). Total funding for the CLIA project was $1.1 million; however, in light of the changes in mandate the amount contributed was $765,000.
Twelve associations are at various stages of traceability projects, including the Canadian Pork Council, Canadian Bison Association, Canadian Sheep Federation, Equine Canada, Canada Grain Council and Can-Trace, all of which completed a traceability data standard for the supply chain.
As of Dec. 31, 2007, more than 320 million transactions and over 63 million unique identification numbers had been allocated or sold to tag manufacturers across Canada, and the CCIA reported it had a tremendous positive response to the industry's animal identification and traceability initiative. Of the tag numbers allocated, more than 48 million had been issued, 47 million distributed, and 12.5 million retired. Of these numbers, 92 per cent were for beef, 45 per cent for dairy, four per cent for sheep, and one per cent for bison.

Continue to support industry's efforts to develop food safety, quality and traceability systems

The Canadian Food Safety and Quality Program (CFSQP) continued to assist industry in developing and implementing government-recognized Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP)-based food safety process-control systems throughout the food chain. Under the program:
- sixteen of the 19 eligible commodity organizations are at various stages of the four-phase approach for food safety, and five were completed by the end of APF;
- thirteen of 28 post-farm organizations are at various stages of the four-phase approach for food safety;
- all the participating provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Island and Quebec) in the Food Safety Initiative component are conducting Outreach activities and more than 250 provincial and municipal staff have received food safety training, and more than 780 food processors have attended workshops or received a one-on-one consultation; and
- 740 non-federally registered processing plants in Ontario are being assisted to implement food safety and traceability systems, and 39 pilot projects are being carried out. In Manitoba, 40 processors are being assisted to implement food safety systems and 3 pilot projects are underway. In Alberta, 120 processors are being assisted to implement food safety systems and one pilot project was conducted.

Implement three key science priorities designed to improve the agriculture and agri-food sector's ability to respond to food safety and security issues, while creating opportunities for the sector through food innovation

The Food Safety and Quality Science program, through its three key science priorities, contributed to improving the agriculture and agri-food sector's ability to respond to food safety and security issues, while creating opportunities for the sector through food innovation. The three priorities are:

enhancing human health and wellness through food, nutrition and innovative products;
enhancing the quality of food and the safety of the food system; and
enhancing the security and protection of the food supply.

Enhancing human health and wellness through food, nutrition and innovative products

AAFC scientists have developed a new technology that improves the functionality (gelling properties) of isolates and concentrates from pulses while reducing phytic acid content and improving the nutritional value.
New techniques have been developed to protect bioactive molecules to ensure they are not destroyed, or altered, and remain active as they pass through the food processing continuum.
Improved methods were developed to estimate bioavailability of antioxidant components in fruits and vegetables. The method uses smaller sample sizes and is very rapid and therefore reduces costs of research. Data produced using this process allows for easier interpretation of results by nutrition and clinical researchers to determine how these components impact on human health.
Beta glucan is a component in oats that has potential of decreasing blood lipids (cholesterol) and impacting on blood glucose in diabetics. A protocol has been developed to be used by the food industry and nutrition labs to estimate the bioactivity of beta-glucans. The method is being considered as an international standard method.

Enhancing the quality of food and the safety of the food system

Allergic reactions appear to be on the rise in Canada. The impacts of AAFC research in this area include:

AAFC scientists identified the potential sources of allergen cross-contamination during food processing, in collaboration with Association Quebecoise d'Allergies Alimentaires, to ensure food processors can provide allergen free product to sensitive consumers.
Samples of allergenic materials were provided to European scientists to be used in a human double blind food allergy challenge study by Europrevall.
A study to better understand soybean allergy among North Americans (Canadians and Americans) was completed and 13 allergens (5 novel) were identified and the frequency among the population of patients with soybean allergy was determined. In addition, over 2,500 soy lines were screened for hypo-allergenic material and antibodies developed against one. Detailed characterization of allergenic proteins continues as soy allergens are considered as one of the 10 allergens most frequently affecting people.

Through partnerships with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Health Canada and provincial organizations, the food virology group has made breakthroughs in the methodology to detect and quantify food-borne pathogenic viruses in complex food matrices.

Jointly, AAFC, HC, CFIA, and PHAC initiated a 4 year integrated national project to provide potential solutions to recurring incidents of contamination of fresh horticultural products including the detection and control of verotoxigenic E.coli (VTEC; includes E.coli O157:H7 and similar strains). Research in this area will provide a better understanding in development of mitigation strategies in an effort to decrease foodborne illness from fresh produce.
Of special interest, research into the effect of beneficial bacteria - probiotics - on virulence of E. coli O157:H7 (bacteria responsible for "hamburger disease") produced results that indicate a role for probiotics in the treatment of E. coli O157:H7 infections.
An integrated study of the impact of pathogens and antibiotic use in beef and swine on the safety throughout the farm to food continuum progressed. Results will provide insight into potential of decreasing antibiotic use in animals therefore decreasing antibiotic resistance.

Research in food quality is closely linked to industry and AAFC research is having impacts on food industry. Progress made in 2007-08 included:

The development of HarvestWatch chlorophyll fluorescence-based system for controlling superficial scald in apples and maintaining optimal storage fruit quality. It is a chemical-free and environmentally friendly system.
The food industry is commercializing/producing an AAFC researcher's patented barley tortilla chip that has higher protein content and is a healthier product than corn chips.

Enhancing the security and protection of the food supply

A CRTI-DND project has been successful in securing funding for research that will address critical gaps in Canada's ability to deal with bioterrorism events directed at the food supply.
The Food Safety and Food Quality Science program was successful in building the necessary networks between government departments and with third parties, enabling dissemination of information, research and technologies in support of food safety and quality outcomes.
The Food Safety and Food Quality Science program is relatively small but very productive considering the size and the scope of the objectives. Working in collaboration with other departments over the past year, AAFC has contributed successfully to improving food safety from farm to fork. Moreover, it has also developed a portfolio of activities in the area of quality food for health benefits.

Work with provincial and territorial partners and with industry to develop the next generation of agriculture and agri-food policy

AAFC held multilateral and bilateral meetings with the provinces and territories, beginning with the development of policy for the next generation of agriculture and agri-food policy, and progressing to specific programming details for Growing Forward. Several rounds of consultations have also been held with industry. FSQ helped prepare AAFC's initial positions on food safety, biosecurity and traceability programming for these meetings and, based on the input received from both the provinces and industry, has continued to modify and refine the programming details. At the last round of industry consultations, industry expressed satisfaction with both the proposed food safety programming and the new biosecurity and traceability programming.

Program Activity - Markets and International

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-08:

Work through agriculture negotiations and other WTO activities to promote and defend Canada's interests

AAFC provided analytical leadership within the WTO agriculture negotiations on a number of complex negotiating issues. Canada's AAFC delegation produced nearly the third of all the papers, notes, contributions and other "non-papers" circulated among WTO Members in these negotiations.
AAFC's negotiating team managed to achieve significant results in terms of advancing Canadian negotiating interests. Canada's contribution to analysis has played an instrumental role in realizing the progress made, not only from a Canadian perspective, but also from a global point of view. The current draft text for modalities for the agriculture negotiations (the blueprint for the negotiations) reflects, to a large extent, Canada's key priorities and ideas.
AAFC concluded WTO bilateral market access negotiations with Kazakhstan. Upon Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO this agreement will be incorporated into its schedule of commitments which will provide improved access to the market for Canadian agri-food exports.
AAFC officials participated in a number of bilateral and multilateral meetings in the context of the working party on Russia's accession to the WTO. During these meetings incremental progress was achieved on a number of issues of importance to AAFC including the alignment of Russia's domestic agriculture policies and import regime with WTO guidelines.

Manage bilateral and regional trade agreements and negotiations

Canada secured access for older cattle and beef from older animals in November 2007, and a delay in the implementation of USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services user fees. Early implementation of country-of-origin labeling was also avoided, despite pressure from some U.S. interests.
Securing access to the U.S. market in November, 2007 for cattle for any use including breeding stock born on or after March 1, 1999, and beef from animals of any age should restore the annual bilateral trade in live cattle and beef to its 2002 pre-BSE level of nearly $3 million. To date, in 2008 older cattle valued at more than $75 million have been exported to the United States.
Canada and the U.S. implemented a bilateral Technical Arrangement concerning trade in potatoes, with a view to facilitating trade and increasing certainty for stakeholders.
AAFC and the Government of Canada concluded the Canada Free Trade Agreement with the EFTA members (Switzerland, Iceland, Lietchenstein and Norway), representing immediate benefits for Canadian exporters, with over $5.2 million in annual duty savings for Canadian exports. Top products with duty savings include durum wheat and other wheat, corn, horse meat, potato chips and grape juice. In addition, the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement was concluded, representing an estimated duty savings of approximately $20.5 million annually for Canadian exporters. The top products with duty savings are durum wheat, other wheat, lentils and malt (grains). AAFC also initiated active negotiations with Colombia, Peru and Dominican Republic and also launched negotiations with CARICOM and Jordan, and continued negotiations with Korea and other partners.
In conjunction with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office, AAFC processed 100 alcohol beverage GI applications for intellectual property protection from the European Union, which protects the intellectual property of Canadian products in international markets. The department also worked with the Canada Revenue Agency and Canada Border Services Agency to complete a Memorandum of Understanding for domestic implementation of the Spirit Drinks Trade Act, which required to protect foreign drink names belonging to the EU, U.S., Mexico, and Caribbean countries. The MOU is expected to be signed by all parties and come into force in the first half of 2008-09.
When a trade irritant emerged that threatened Canada's access to the Chinese market for Canadian peas and pork, AAFC advocacy efforts with Chinese officials resulted in China's re-evaluation of the applicable standard and other actions to mitigate the effect on trade. This is a critical success in light of the fact that China sources 90 per cent of all its pea imports from Canada.
Of all agricultural products that Canada exports to China, Canola seed represents the top commodity destined for China; exports were valued at $330 million in 2007. This commodity has much greater potential to expand in China but is constrained by Chinese tariffs for canola seed. In 2007-08, AAFC continued advocacy efforts to lower this tariff in order to expand Canadian access to this market.
AAFC's international trade advocacy efforts are driven by the needs of the Canadian agriculture industry. When the industry expressed interest in exporting fresh blueberries to Korea, the Government of Canada (through AAFC and the CFIA) made a request to the Korean government to conduct a pest risk assessment. Once this risk assessment is complete and an import protocol is agreed to, imports of fresh Canadian blueberries to Korea will be allowed.
In December 2007, Russian authorities placed import restrictions on Canadian meat products entering Russian territory, requiring verification by CFIA of hundreds of certificates. Russia is Canada's third largest market for pork products ($144 million in 2007). Following extensive technical work by the CFIA, as well as interdepartmental advocacy efforts, the import restrictions were rescinded in January 2008, averting a potentially large loss in Canadian pork exports. However, Russia imposed a temporary suspension on Canadian pork from April 1-June 1, 2008, causing economic losses to Canadian industry. This was resolved through development of a new pork export certificate with enhanced security features by the CFIA, and intervention by a task force comprised of officials of AAFC, the CFIA, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), and the Canadian Embassy in Moscow.
In October 2007, Australia announced it would be undertaking a safeguard investigation on the economic impact of imports of frozen pork on the Australian pork industry. Canada, Denmark and the United States are the major suppliers to Australia. As Canada is a major supplier to the Australian market (2007 frozen pork exports from Canada were $120.9 million), DFAIT and AAFC, in consultation with industry, defended Canada's position by making several submissions to Australia's Productivity Commission. As a result, the Government of Australia decided not to implement a safeguard measure.
As a result of efforts by AAFC officials, Egypt reopened its market to Canadian under-thirty-months (UTM) boneless beef and live cattle.
The first Canadian shipment of wheat to Greece was made in December 2007, after Canada successfully overcame some of the trade restrictive measures implemented by Greek authorities in 2004.
Although the European Union expanded significantly in 2004 from 15 to 25 member states, a corresponding increase in import quotas for various agricultural products did not follow. Thus, Canada began working with the EU to achieve improved levels of import quotas for various commodities. In 2007-08, Canada's efforts were rewarded with a country allocation of 4,624 tonnes for exporting pork to the EU.

Work bilaterally and multilaterally to influence the development of technical trade policies, measures and international standards

AAFC's continued role in the ongoing work of international standard setting bodies in 2007-08 resulted in, among other achievements:
- the development of guidelines that will allow for the regionalization of responses to disease outbreaks such as avian influenza, a key mitigating factor in the response at the international level; and
- the successful counter of a push by some members of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling to legitimize mandatory labelling of genetically modified organisms at the international level, which would have negative repercussions for some of the most innovative and leading-edge industries in the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector.
AAFC continued to participate in new and ongoing trade negotiations dealing with technical trade issues on trade related intellectual property rights (IPRs) and environmental measures.
The department's involvement in bilateral negotiations increased as six new free trade agreement (FTA) initiatives were launched (Peru, Colombia, Korea, Dominican Republic, CARICOM and Jordan) and the scope of issues covered was expanded to include technical trade issues. These issues were not traditionally included in FTA negotiations.
AAFC's ongoing participation and leadership in key multilateral and regional forums such as the United Nations Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety or the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation helps to ensure that market access for agriculture and agri-food products is not unnecessarily impeded due to regulatory or technical barriers to trade. In particular, this work focuses on addressing the development of international policy or agreements with direct linkages between regulatory, technical trade, and environmental policy that will directly or indirectly impact Canada's agriculture trade.
AAFC's intensified its dialogue with the provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade compared to activity in 2006-07. Although negotiation of an Agricultural Chapter (Chapter 9) was not successfully completed, progress was made and as a result of the options developed and resolution is expected over the short term in the next fiscal year.

Engage in litigation when necessary, and increase Canada's trade advocacy efforts abroad through targeted initiatives

In 2007-08, the Government of Canada launched a WTO dispute settlement process against U.S. agricultural subsidies to influence the debate surrounding the drafting of a new U.S. Farm Bill.
Pursuant to the implementation of new or revised advocacy and engagement strategies in 2007-08, developed by AAFC in consultation with OGDs, provinces and key stakeholders, for key bilateral issues with the U.S.
On November 23, Canada filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in opposition to the U.S Rancher and Cattlemen's Legal Fund's request for the preliminary injunction against the November 19 opening of the U.S. border to older cattle and their products. Filing an amicus brief gives Canada control over the manner in which information about the Canadian system is presented. There is no risk that Canadian government officials could be compelled to provide additional evidence in the U.S. Court.

Work to ensure that the interpretation and implementation of existing international obligations do not unnecessarily restrict trade, and continue working toward re-opening and expanding markets for Canadian beef and cattle that were closed following the discovery of BSE in 2003

Continued efforts by AAFC and other government officials resulted in the re-opening of Taiwanese markets to Canadian under-30-month boneless beef, after four years of closure due to the BSE crisis.
The integrated team approach, which involved AAFC and other federal officials (CFIA, DFAIT, Embassy and agricultural specialists in Denver and Minnesota) working closely with provinces and Canadian industry to implement our engagement and advocacy plan, contributed to Canada securing access for older cattle and beef from older animals in November 2007.
This model served as the basis for expanded engagement of Mexico in 2007-08.

Review regulatory environment to enhance the competitiveness of Canadian agriculture

Amendments to the national organic standards and implementation of the Organic Products Regulations proceeded as planned in 2007-08, and will result in enhanced competitiveness of the Canadian organic sector through improved access to international markets, removal of costs of multiple accreditations from the certification system and a level playing field for Canadian producers in the domestic market. It will also protect Canadian consumers against fraudulent claims.
Regulatory, policy and technical issues can have a significant impact on innovation, investment and competitiveness in the food industry in Canada, making it important to identify, analyze and facilitate a broader understanding of these issues and promote their strategic resolution. The following are examples of progress that was made in this area in 2007-08:
- AAFC represented on interdepartmental committee developing regulatory framework for health claims, and on Committee of Federal Regulators;
- trans fat issue monitoring continued, with AAFC represented on a national Health Canada-led task force on reducing sodium in the food supply;
- AAFC represented on Health Canada-led interdepartmental committee on revising the Dietary Reference Intakes, which are important to the food industry as standards for nutrition labelling, nutrient content claims and health claims;
- advice provided to industry through the Value Chain Roundtables on the regulatory environment for health claims;
- food industry advised on approaches to analyzing business impacts of regulatory issues;
- analysis completed on business and economic value generated by health claims along the value chain;
- food technology foresight paper commissioned and completed, and regulatory foresight workshop planned; and
- work continued on a Growing Forward proposal to facilitate regulatory submissions for novel foods and health claims through industry awareness-building, science substantiation, and regulatory-process / capacity enhancement.

Continue to support industry associations in gaining recognition for the safety and quality of Canadian agriculture and food products

AAFC continued to work through the Canadian Agriculture and Food International (CAFI) program to provide funding for industry initiatives designed to increase international sales of Canadian agriculture and food products, by building upon Canada's reputation as a provider of high-quality, safe and innovative agriculture, agri-food, beverage, and seafood products. In 2007-08, the CAFI Program provided $19.1 million to 31 industry associations to support the execution of long-term international strategies and $6.2 million in support of 27 associations to undertake short-term projects. The following were achieved by industry with CAFI funds:
- more than 5,000 head of cattle were shipped to Russia in 2007 - the first major shipments of purebred Canadian cattle to that country since the discovery of BSE in 2003. Two further shipments, amounting to 3,800 head, took place in the first half of 2008 and additional orders are under negotiation;
- 10,447 breeding swine valuing $9.1 million were exported to Russia, making that country the largest off-shore market for Canadian breeding swine in 2007-08;
- AAFC's Sectoral Food Industry Services Division, in conjunction with Legal Services, identified the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Act as a short term legislative alternative to resolve the blending rules and age and origin certification issues for exported spirits, and ensure there is no interruption in the export of spirits (primarily Canadian whisky).

National Wine Standard

Despite making requested improvements to the Winery Inspection Manual and committing to the industry to develop software to help facilitate the introduction of a National Wine Standard, efforts in conjunction with CFIA and the wine industry to complete national wine standards did not sufficiently progress in 2007-08. There is a difference of opinion on the content of these standards and on their value to the industry as a whole. AAFC and the sector are pursuing the development of a much simplified National Wine Standard over the course of the next several months.

Support industry initiatives aimed at marketing Canadian products based on healthy-quality attributes

AAFC was involved on a number of fronts in 2007-08 in the promotion of Canadian products based on health-quality attributes, which is viewed as an important area with growing domestic and international demand, including:
- participated in Health Canada's consultation on nutritional health claims. The process is ongoing; a streamlined approvals process for health and nutrition claims (for a range of agricultural products) will benefit agriculture by presenting opportunities to promote products that provide specific health benefits;
- together with Pulse Canada completed Phase I of the Pulse Innovation Project, supporting the marketing of pulses based on their health benefits. The project was so successful the Mexican government has launched a campaign promoting the consumption of beans based on their health benefits. It is anticipated this will increase the demand for beans in North America and put the Canadian bean industry in a favorable position to meet this growing demand;
- through the CAFI program, AAFC supported an initiative designed to market Canadian wild blueberries based on their health attributes. The blueberry industry will need 50 to 60 million pounds of wild blueberries to fulfill the strong demand worldwide. Canadian processors are receiving excellent returns for their fruit, and this has put them in a stronger position to invest in the growth of the industry; and
- through the CAFI program, supported the Canadian canola industry's efforts to promote canola oil as a healthy alternative low in trans-fat and saturated fats. It is anticipated foreign and domestic users will increase their purchases of Canadian product sufficiently to enable a 66 per cent increase in annual production between 2007 and 2015. In addition, the United States has granted a qualified health claim to canola oil, and this has formed a significant element of the industry's marketing campaign.

Program Activity -- Environment

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-2008:

Develop and implement policy options to achieve environmental goals under the next generation of agriculture and agri-food policy, including a biofuels strategy

Growing Forward (the next generation of agriculture and agri-food policy), has undergone more than two years of assessment and extensive consultation with industry, with efforts undertaken to ensure long-term competitiveness, adaptability, and sustainability of the sector:
- there is a suite of agri-environmental programs in development - federal policy priorities identified as water (quality and use) and climate change (impact, adaptation and mitigation of emissions as well as extreme event vulnerability);
The implementation of Growing Forward in conjunction with the provinces will result in a more profitable and environmentally sustainable agriculture sector.
Ecological Goods and Services (EG&S):
- AAFC continued to monitor the progress of eight EG&S pilot projects that are testing new agri-environmental approaches across Canada. Final results are expected in 2009.
- A cost-benefit study of potential EG&S policy options (water quality trading, annual payments, auctions, and one-time payments) has been undertaken with results available in Spring 2008.
EG&S will provide new information on potential policy options for Growing Forward and beyond.
Climate Change:
- AAFC staff consulted with Environment Canada (EC) and agricultural groups to clarify options and create consensus on EC's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Regulatory Framework, including some parameters of the proposed GHG offset system.
- Work was undertaken on Climate Change Impact Adaptation to ensure the sector anticipates and adapts to potential impacts of climate change by improving the understanding of the impacts on agriculture.
- Work was undertaken on Climate Change Mitigation to ensure the sector understands agriculture's ability to mitigate GHG emissions with respect to development and adoption of related sustainable agriculture practices.
AAFC's work on climate change in 2007-08 resulted in a contribution to the Government of Canada's commitment to reducing greenhouse gases and ensuring clean air, water, and land for Canadians.

Develop the knowledge to improve the environmental performance of the Canadian agricultural system, foster greater scientific collaboration among partners, and develop an enhanced understanding of the country's bioresources and their protection

Under the National Agri-Environmental Health Analysis and Reporting Program (NAHARP), AAFC continued its work with Environmental Health Science to determine the impacts of agricultural policies on the environment through the development and monitoring of agri-environmental indicators that determine how environmental conditions within agriculture are changing over time:
- Agri-Environmental Indicators: 3rd indicator report in preparation (1981 to 2006 data), targeting a release in January - March 2009, will be the most comprehensive results of the indicator reports to date;
- Two watershed-specific valuation pilots are in the early stages of data collection and analysis. The results will determine individual willingness-to-pay for environmental changes using non-market valuation techniques. These will feed into the broader valuation initiative to assess values for public goods and linking them to the NAHARP indicators.
AAFC's work on the Farm Environmental Management Survey in 2007-08 has led to the development and utilization of new information on the environmental performance of the agricultural sector.
Results from 2006 are being utilized to help develop agri-environmental policies that will contribute to AAFC's commitment to further enable the sector to address environmental priorities while building profitability in the industry;
In 2007, the Community Pastures Program (CPP) managed 2.2 million acres of grazing land in western Canada, protecting it from future deterioration due to drought while utilizing the land for the breeding and grazing of livestock. The CPP is the largest steward of native prairie in the world:
- The large tracts of contiguous native prairie managed by CPP have been protected from cultivation and the subsequent threat of degradation.
- The community pastures conserved habitat for 20 listed species at risk, which are found in greater density on these pastures than on surrounding lands.
- 3,200 farmers and ranchers grazed over 220,000 head of livestock, representing 5 per cent of the total beef cattle herd in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
AAFC's Environmental Health Science program contributed to improving environmental performance of agriculture in Canada in 2007-08:
- In relation to the awarding of the Nobel prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), five AAFC scientists were recognized for their work on carbon sequestration and accounting, as well as for their contribution to quantifying greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from agriculture.
- AAFC scientists developed methodologies to determine non-point sources of fecal pollution which can be a risk to human and animal health, and used to support development of strategies to mitigate the environmental loading of pathogens and other disease borne organisms in water.
- The Germplasm Resources Information Network-Canada (GRIN-CA), created by AAFC's Plant Gene Resources of Canada program, makes germplasm information accessible to national and international clients, mainly scientists conducting crop and animal breeding programs, helping to mitigate the risks of invasive alien species, drought tolerance, climate change, and genetic vulnerability, and working to improve the understanding and conservation of natural biodiversity.
- AAFC researchers used rapid diagnostics based on specimens in the AAFC fungal collections to quickly identify and determine the distribution of the Potato Wart disease in Prince-Edward Island, which was instrumental in facilitating the re-opening of the U.S. border in an expedited manner and recapturing an important export market for Canadian producers.
- Research on the restoration of productivity on agricultural soils disturbed by industrial activity, such as abandoned oil and natural gas well sites, has resulted in recommendations for applications of beef cattle feedlot manure compost or alfalfa hay to maximize improvement of soil properties and crop yields.
- Studies have demonstrated that, despite drought conditions, seeding pastures with native species mixtures, to replace the more common single species, helped to improve biodiversity, enabled cattle weight gains to extend later in the grazing season, and increased the storage of carbon in soils, which results in reduced GHG emissions.
- AAFC scientists, using their extensive knowledge and collections on plant pests and disease, received an award from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) "For doing more than others expect, maintaining the highest standards and ensuring scientific excellence by participating in the diagnostic response for Sudden Oak Death (Phytopthora ramorum)."
- A technique using DNA testing membranes developed by AAFC scientists has been commercialized as a product to detect fungi directly from the roots or hydroponic water systems of greenhouses, resulting in significant royalties received by AAFC.
- Research results, showing that N2O and CO2 emissions from agricultural fields are influenced by both the current and previous crops, will lead to more accurate estimates and forecasts of GHGs.

Continue to implement the National Land and Water Information Service (NLWIS)

In 2007-08, the NLWIS project continued to improve the way the federal government uses and delivers consistent, timely, high quality agri-environmental information and knowledge to inform and support sustainable land-use management decision-making by producers and other land owners, as well as to support agri-environmental program delivery (e.g. Environmental Farm Planning).
- Internally, NLWIS enabled a more effective way to do business by rationalizing expenditures in geomatics and establishing nationally consistent approaches with regional flexibility.
- Externally, NLWIS enabled greater access to agri-environmental information over the Internet, including to farmers who are able to use the Internet and NLWIS to collect information for making decisions related to their farm business.
- The NLWIS web site attraced more than 10,000 unique visitors per month, with more than 900,000 page views every month during the planting and growing season, and peaking at more than 1.5 million in May 2007.

NLWIS Audits

Internal and external audits and reviews have given the project the opportunity to realize its full investment by making improvements in the areas of: promoting a shared vision, clear outcomes and best practices for business requirements management; strengthened governance with well defined roles and responsibilities and supporting processes; and rigorous project management including calculating and reporting monthly earned value.

Enhance the availability of minor-use pesticides, risk-reduction products and beneficial management practices to improve the health of the environment while contributing to the competitive position of Canadian farmers

The Minor Use Pesticide program initiated 69 projects, made 45 regulatory submissions, and had 309 ongoing projects.
The Pest Management Centre continued to collaborate with the U.S. on joint projects with the goal of obtaining new registered uses of pesticides in both countries simultaneously.
Work continued to increase producer awareness of the benefits of reduced risk products and technologies, such as biopesticides and mechanical pest controls, has resulted in increased focus on these tools. Improved access to reduced risk pest management products and beneficial management practices contribute to sustainability of agriculture by lessening the potential for development of resistance to pesticides in pest populations and the reliance on chemical pest control products. Together, these contribute to a reduction in risk to the environment from the use of pesticides in agriculture.
Priorities for pesticide risk reduction strategies were determined based on national data collected in 25 crop profiles and on input from stakeholders (industry, extension and research experts, other government departments and NGOs). An initial set of strategies has advanced to the point where interested growers are beginning to adopt new tools and approaches made available through the strategies. Completed projects have delivered new Beneficial Management Practices including forecasting and decisions support systems, cultural practices, and reduced-risk pest control products. In addition, collaboration with the private sector resulted in 10 new biopesticide submissions to PMRA. Together these activities have enhanced the tool box available to implement pesticide risk reduction strategies.
Through improved access to more pest management technologies, AAFC continued work to improve the environmental sustainability of the sector by reducing the potential for development of resistance to pesticides in pest populations, and by reducing the reliance of the industry on chemical pest control products. Together, these contributed to a reduction in risk to the environment from the use of pesticides in agriculture.

Develop an AAFC water strategy related to agricultural sustainability through the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration

Work continued in 2007-08 on a water strategy to help provide leadership in addressing emerging water supply and quality challenges for Canada's agriculture sector. AAFC's ongoing work on a water strategy will help the agricultural-sector remain sustainable and profitable in a changing climate and evolving global market, and by helping meet society's expectations of environmental stewardship, the agriculture sector can become better prepared to manage and conserve water resources.
Following the first Ag-Water Forum, an AAFC Water Steering Committee was established to direct development of a Strategic Water Framework and continue consultations with the agriculture sector. The Framework was finalized in the spring of 2007.
The AAFC Water Steering Committee provided departmental input into federal water policy discussions.

Continue to support Environmental Farm Plans and the development and adoption of on-farm beneficial management practices through financial and technical assistance

Since the inception of the Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) program, 56,700 producers (25 per cent of all producers) have developed a reviewed individual or group plan, which identifies specific actions to address risks to air, water, soil and biodiversity.
Participation in the EFP and National Farm Stewardship Program grew substantially, with more than 11,000 producers completing EFPs in 2007-08 and more than 25,000 new BMP projects supported, totaling more than $100 million in federal payments in 2007-08. This demonstrates a continued effort by Canada's producers to take advantage of the programs for technical and financial assistance to reduce their environmental risks with respects to air, soil, water and biodiversity resources.
Two components of Greencover Canada, Critical Areas and Shelterbelts, were integrated into the delivery of NFSP, providing additional technical and financial support to encourage beneficial management practices (BMPs) adoption.

Program Activity - Innovation and Renewal

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-2008:

Enhance the innovative capacity of the sector through support for strategy development and better opportunities to capture the benefits of science and innovation

Advances in science and technology present opportunities for increased prosperity and security in the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector. The progress made in Sustainable Production Systems science contribute to stable farm incomes, support an expanded agriculture and agri-food sector in the lives of all Canadians and provide a secure and profitable climate for foreign investment and partnerships with Canadians.
In 2007-08 AAFC's Sustainable Production Systems program made considerable progress towards increasing the adoption of innovative products and technologies that will equip industry with the bioproducts, knowledge-based production systems and strategies to capture opportunities and manage change:
- Departmental scientists developed 10 licenses, 58 new crop variety registrations and 12 patents.
- Cereal breeding programs continued to show a return of about a one per cent increase in yield per year for wheat. A one per cent improvement in wheat yield is worth $75 million to the sector.
- Newer variety introductions are being adopted more quickly as demonstrated by the uptake of a new AAFC variety of Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS), the largest class of wheat grown across the prairies. Lillian, one of the newest CWRS varieties developed by AAFC, demonstrated a strong introduction in 2006, occupying three per cent of the prairie acreage. A four-fold increase in 2007 made Lillian the top ranking wheat variety grown on the prairies.
- The orange wheat blossom midge resulted in a loss of $40 million for farmers in 2006. Four midge tolerant wheat varieties were registered in 2007, and are the first spring wheat varieties that have been developed with any defense to wheat midge. These varieties were developed at AAFC's Winnipeg and Swift Current research centres in collaboration with industry and with support from farmers through the Western Grains Research Foundation.
- As members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists in Sustainable Production Systems and the Environmental Health team from AAFC Centres in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec were exceptionally recognized by the co-chairs of IPCC to share the honour of the organization as Nobel laureates, following the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 to former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore and the IPCC. The AAFC scientists contributed to the various IPCC climate change reports, which have had a direct effect on raising public awareness and for their contributions that provided the foundation for the current recognition of IPCC as an authoritative voice on the climate system, the impacts of climate change and the methods to avoid it.
Bioproducts are increasingly important in the global economy. They offer significant opportunities to position Canada at the leading edge of important developments that generate economic benefits. Opportunities from Bioresources research will help the agricultural industry transform itself into a reliable and versatile supplier of agricultural biomass, technologies and processes enabling the agriculture sector to take its place in the bioeconomy. The examples below provide evidence of AAFC's contribution.
- Wheat is the largest crop in Canada with approximately 9 million hectares. Leaf rust, caused by Puccinia triticina, results in yield losses of five to 20 per cent annually and is the most common disease of wheat worldwide. AAFC has an outstanding reputation and history as a world leader in research on the genetic control of leaf rust with 30 of the 59 leaf rust resistance genes discovered by AAFC researchers.
- AAFC researchers identified a key gene responsible for enabling legumes to host nitrogen fixing bacteria. Through this discovery AAFC researchers hope to develop a way to transfer nitrogen fixing ability to non-legume crops.
- With respect to AAFC's Plum Pox Virus (PPV) work, the disease was suppressed in Niagara, and progress was made towards eradication in other areas of Ontario and Nova Scotia. Over the past three years, the ability to detect PPV improved with better and more intense surveys. Studies indicate that PPV is confined to fruit trees in Ontario and Nova Scotia as it was not found in native plants, in nurseries' Prunus ornamental species, nor outside these provinces. The affected industries have maintained production, and are establishing a certification program to prevent the spread of PPV and other viruses.
- Scientists from Research Branch have worked with AAFC's Prairie Farm Rehabilitation and Environment Branch, the National Land and Water Information Service, the Canadian Forest Service, and other federal partners to develop an Internet-based tool to identify agricultural residue, forestry, and urban woody biomass available for conversion to energy and bioproducts. The tool, known as the Biomass Inventory Mapping and Analysis Tool, allows users to query the GIS database for production information by location against a backdrop of transportation and energy infrastructure, while applying sustainability criteria such as erosion protection, tillage system type, and nutrient balance. Further development is creating additional analytical functions, including economic and carbon costs of producing, harvesting and transporting biomass. By combining the materials suited for next generation technologies with seed quality information to target low-grade materials, appropriate investment will be encouraged to mitigate negative food versus fuel impacts.
The ACAAF program added to the innovative capacity of the sector by reducing the risks for innovators by facilitating the costly testing and piloting of new products, processes and technologies intended to lead to increased efficiency and profitability for the sector. The program assisted industry to test innovative Canadian products, processes and technologies and conduct pilot projects that address issues like safer, healthier, and more convenient foods, natural resource conservation, environmental protection, and animal health and welfare.

Implement AAFC's Science and Innovation Strategy

In 2007-08, AAFC continued to implement its Science and Innovation Strategy, refocusing its science efforts across seven national priorities outlined in the Strategy in an effort to build a competitive edge for the agriculture and agri-food sector and capture the significant growth opportunities that exist for non-food products in the bioeconomy. Specific results included:
- new partnerships with universities and government organizations to better integrate capacity and improve impacts, including a partnership with the St-Boniface Research Hospital and the University of Manitoba in the area of food, nutrition, health and wellness, and a research facility for Nutrisciences and Health in partnership with the University of Prince Edward Island and the National Research Council;
- expanded capacity in the form of additional researchers, facilities, equipment and financial resources applied to research in bioeconomy science through the Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program, which provides funding to support the development of bioeconomy focussed research networks among government, academic and private sector research providers;
- accelerated rate of adoption of innovation and the commercialization of products through the Broker and Agri-Innovation Programs. By having the entire value chain for commodities work collaboratively to identify a range of innovative and high-value products, new markets can be captured and better returns provided to growers, processors, distributors, etc. Twenty three multi-year projects have been approved, for a total investment of $22 million creating new value chain initiatives, such as Soy 2020 and Flax 2015; and
- explored options to develop a national innovation co-ordination mechanism by engaging in discussion with stakeholders from industry, academia and governments. The result for participants would be a strategy to optimize returns to the players in the value chain and develop innovative products that would ensure long term market success.

Implement the newly established external peer-review process for the selection of departmental research projects and the allocation of resources

To ensure research at AAFC meets criteria of excellence and alignment with the Government of Canada's priorities, as well as the seven management goals defined in AAFC's Science and Innovation Strategy, the department has implemented a two-step evaluation of all research projects. This evaluation is designed to ensure the best possible investment of public funds, scientific excellence through competition of ideas, and the provision of international caliber science in the agriculture and agri-food sector. It also includes an internal management evaluation by branch executives that ensures AAFC's investment in science research is aligned to departmental and government-wide priorities.
This evaluation process gives strategic focus to AAFC's research activities, and is the first of its kind to be put in place in government-led research.

In 2007-08, 254 projects were reviewed. Of this, 233 projects were funded. Most projects have a long-term focus of three years or more. It will be important for AAFC to secure funding each year to ensure the completion of the approved projects in order to get the expected results. This risk will be mitigated through effective planning of resources and communication of priorities.

Implement the new Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program

The Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program (ABIP) was implemented in 2007-08.
Proposals for creating new networks in targeted scientific research areas were received and reviewed by a committee of external international experts. Networks that were recommended for funding by the committee were directed to submit reduced financial plans to meet a notional allocation of the funds expected to be available. Discussions are currently underway with respect to distribution of the ABIP funds to the various networks.

Implement the Biofuels Opportunities for Producers Initiative

Implementation of the $20-million Biofuels Opportunities for Producers Initiative was completed in 2007-08. The program concluded March 31, 2008. It was one of the initiatives established in response to the announcement by the Government of Canada to implement targets of five per cent renewable content in gasoline and two per cent in diesel and heating fuels.
BOPI was, in part, designed to meet the desire in the agricultural community to participate in the biofuels industry, as a way to have a positive effect on farm income, through both higher commodity prices and ownership in biofuel production facilities, by providing funding to support the development of business plans and/or feasibility studies. BOPI provided the industry and producers with funding to develop business plans and feasibility studies and, as a result, are or will receive the information they require to determine if they should or could proceed to the next step in developing a production facility. The objectives of the initiative were met as far as providing industry with the tools needed to make informed decisions. The demand for this type of assistance was met as it was highest during the initial first year and diminished through the second year.
Management and performance frameworks were in place to effectively deliver this initiative and to measure the performance under it. Delivered in partnership with the same Industry Councils that deliver ACAAF, the Industry Councils were required to follow the same reporting requirements as under ACAAF, including: Monthly Financial Reports, BOPI Annual Performance Reports (to provide information on the progress and impact of BOPI projects) and supply project information (based on the performance framework) to the ACAAF Extranet System.

Implement the Agri-Opportunities Program

The Agri-Opportunities Program was implemented in 2007-08, with the aim of accelerating the commericialisation of new innovative, value-added agricultural, agri-food and agri-based products, services and processes that are not currently commercially produced or available in Canada, and that are ready to be introduced into the marketplace. There was tremendous interest in the program and AAFC received proposals requesting approximately $800 million of funding. About $12.5 million in repayable contributions was committed to five projects, which allowed the projects to leverage another $15 million in private sector funding, and a further $21.25 million in other government contributions.
A comprehensive risk management strategy was implemented for the Agri-Opportunities Program, with risks identified and assessed, and mitigation measures selected and implemented, prior to the program launch. A risk re-assessment was also completed six months after implementation to verify the appropriateness of the existing mitigation measures and generate new measures.
Based on experiences during the first eight months of program delivery, the application process was modified so program staff could identify non-viable projects earlier in the assessment process. This has meant clients whose projects are ineligible are notified sooner, saving them time and reducing their administrative efforts, and has allowed program resources to be more focused on eligible projects as non-eligible projects are filtered out sooner in the process. AAFC continues to review its application and assessment processes and and procedures to reduce the time required to assess and approve projects that better meet industry needs for timely decisions.

Work strategically with the sector to identify and enhance skills and learning opportunities needed to succeed in the increasingly knowledge-intensive economy

The ACAAF delivery model is designed to have industry identify issues and decide the response required within the parameters of the program, both at a national and regional level. The delivery structure provides national and regional flexibility, enhanced accountability, continued cost effectiveness, encourage collaboration and the dissemination of ideas across regions, and the ability to capture value-added opportunities and to facilitate transfer of applied research and technology.

BOPI was introduced, implemented and delivered in a timely manner to the sector through the ACAAF Industry Councils. The Councils were well suited to administer and deliver BOPI as it is consistent with their mandate to position the sector at the leading edge to seize new opportunities. This resulted in rapid delivery of the program with minimal administrative costs.

Develop and implement a national innovation co-ordination mechanism

Work under this commitment was expected to result in improved co-ordination of national research efforts and resources along the innovation chain in priority areas of focus for the agriculture and agri-food sector, and to this end a working group with federal, provincial and territorial and industry stakeholders was established in 2007-08.
The working group further developed the concept and process for a national innovation co-ordination mechanism. A small pilot foresighting exercise was held to explore foresight processes and techniques in the context of research priorities for the sector. A substantive pilot innovation forum on biofibres was held to develop collaborative work plans for implementation in 2008-2009. As a result of the work on foresighting and innovation fora, further activities in this area are being proposed within the Growing Forward Policy Framework for agriculture and agri-food.

Develop and implement a new investment model for innovation

The development of a new investment model for innovation is one of the ongoing initiatives being discussed under the new Growing Forward policy framework.

Industry equipped with new business and management skills, bioproducts, knowledge-based production systems and strategies to capture opportunities and manage change

In 2007-08, AAFC worked to enhance the innovative capacity of the agriculture and agri-food sector through support for better opportunities to capture the benefits of science and innovation. Examples of the impact of AAFC's research include:
- AAFC and Canadian Grain Commission scientists improved an assay procedure for identifying barley with low storage potential with respect to germination loss. Barley is normally rejected for malting, an important ingredient for brewing beer, once germination drops to less than 95 per cent. Some barley lots deteriorate rapidly in storage and may not be suitable for export. The new method reliably identifies such barley and is faster and much less expensive than the only existing method. This procedure is suitable for use in commercial applications as well as malt barley breeding research;
- the Cereal Research Centre in Winnipeg took the lead on an effort to characterize virulence and find new sources of resistance to a strain of wheat stem rust, first identified in Uganda in 1999, that poses a significant threat to world wheat production. The Global Rust Initiative, planned and administered by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, has adopted a strategic approach to combating this virulent new strain and AAFC scientists are playing a leading role;
- largely through dietary adjustments in livestock rations developed by AAFC scientists, products with specific health enhancing characteristics (e.g. omega 3 eggs, milk products and meat) are available commercially and are being purchased by consumers; and
- AAFC researchers, working with pharmacologists, found that the content and bioavailability of phenolics from over-mature sweet cherries was comparable to that of mature fruit. Since these compounds are known to have several positive effects on human health, over-mature fruit may be a valuable source of anthocyanins for nutraceutical products or natural food colouring.

Program Activity - Markets and International

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-2008:

Continue to support Canada's agriculture, food and seafood industry associations in their efforts to gain and expand international recognition for Canadian agriculture and agri-food products

Canadian Pork International, the export promotion agency for the Canadian pork industry, used CAFI funding to undertake promotional campaigns in markets abroad. In Japan, retail promotions resulted in a 20 per cent increase in distribution of Canadian chilled pork, and a campaign in Singapore helped chilled pork exports increase 207 per cent from 2006. This accounted for 1.44 per cent of all agricultural exports to Singapore in 2007, compared to 0.92 per cent in 2006.
The total export value of mustard seed, sunflower seed, canary seed and buckwheat increased 80 per cent to reach $264 million in 2007, compared to $147 million in 2005.
Pulse Canada efforts to reduce the risks of market access barriers resulted in the transition to a tariff and quota-free environment, and access of beans to Mexico in January 2008.
The CAFI program supported incoming missions of international delegations interested in learning about the superior capabilities of the Canadian industry first-hand. The Canadian Swine Exporters Association considers incoming missions a significant building block in their quest for increasing sales and developing new markets. In 2007 over 18,860 breeding swine were exported to 20 countries.

Continue to support Canada's agriculture, food and seafood industry associations in their efforts to gain and expand international recognition for Canadian agriculture and agri-food products

Participation in the Canada Brand is continuing to grow and 2007-08 ended with 160 members from a wide cross section of the industry and provinces, as well as resulting in the first co-branding agreement with a Malaysian company. In addition, awareness and implementation of the brand at Canadian embassies and consulates abroad has solidified. This progress has ensured the brand is increasingly visible in all our key markets (U.S., Mexico, Japan, UK, Germany, and China) as well as many other major markets around the world, both in terms of market development activities and in press coverage of these events. This is a long-term effort and building extensive brand equity will require time, but the progress so far is promising.
In fall 2007, a survey was conducted with brand members to determine the effectiveness of the program and to drive improvements. The results indicated broad satisfaction with the program, but encouraged more extensive communications with members, and increased one-on-one training to improve the integration of the brand into member business plans.
As a result, AAFC immediately increased the frequency of its Branding electronic newsletter to five-times-a-year from three, and scheduled one-on-one training sessions and group seminars on brand integration for the fall of 2008. Other improvements implemented as a result of survey recommendations included improving website naming conventions to make some tools easier to find and adding photos to the web site photo library for members.

Continue to promote Value Chain Roundtables and other collaborative mechanisms

In 2007-08, VCRTs actively engaged government departments and agencies at the roundtable and working group levels. This two-way communication on a range of regulatory, program and strategic investment subjects helped roundtable members better understand government positions and decision making processes, while communicating industry priorities directly.
In addition, provincial government representation on roundtables, as coordinated by the Federal-Provincial Market Development Council (FPMDC), helped ensure roundtable developments were communicated back to provincial government officials responsible for agricultural issues and promotion and marketing.

Develop an investment strategy for innovation

AAFC's Investment Secretariat evolved its Investment Strategy Framework to profit from new opportunities, meet tough economic challenges, and align itself with Advantage Canada's focus on global investment and innovation networks and DFAIT's new emphasis on an integrated model that combines trade, investment, innovation and branding efforts. A visioning and consultation process across AAFC and with other government departments and private sector stakeholders has led to a more focused, proactive and collaborative approach to investment at AAFC. The Secretariat has refocused on its role as pathfinder and advocate for companies positioned to innovate and invest in Canada's agri-food sector. There is an emphasis on integrating investment perspectives and priorities in policy, programs, research and marketing decisions, in addressing regulatory issues impacting business and in building strong linkages and partnerships with stakeholders (regions, provinces, OGDs, industry, etc.).

Program Activity - Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency

Results Achieved

AAFC achieved results against the following key commitments for 2007-2008:

Provide effective pari-mutuel supervision

The CPMA deploys officers to oversee and report on the operation of all pari-mutuel systems in Canada. Historically, this has placed the greatest emphasis on live horse-racing. However, Canadian horse racing fans have more recently been showing a growing interest for betting on foreign or 'simulcast' racing products.

Consequently, in 2007-08 the CPMA began an exploration into developing a comprehensive approach to fulfilling its supervisory responsibilities; one that provides greater oversight of simulcast and remote (ie, 'theatre') betting. It is expected that a transition in the CPMA's approach to pari-mutuel supervision will be necessary to maintain the level of oversight that Canadian horseplayers have grown to expect.

Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS)

Sustainable development integrates environmental, economic, and social considerations allowing today's needs to be met without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In the context of Canadian agriculture and agri-food production, sustainable development means producing, processing, and distributing agricultural products in a manner that supports or enhances the high quality of life we enjoy in Canada, both today and into the future.

The focus of AAFC's fourth Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS IV) Making Progress Together is to enhance the integration of the three pillars of sustainable development (SD) - economic, environmental, and social. Through various initiatives, AAFC strives to strengthen linkages between the three pillars to ensure a seamless approach to sustainable development. AAFC's ongoing efforts to integrate its work under the three pillars of SD will support truly sustainable agriculture in Canada - agriculture that attends to the needs of people, protects the environment and makes judicious use of its resources, and ensures the economic viability of farms and other components in the chain of food production, processing, and distribution.

SDS IV highlights the ongoing implementation of the Agricultural Policy Framework and examines progress towards sustainable agriculture in Canada. The SDS also helps to lay the groundwork for the next generation of agricultural policies and programs.

In preparation for the fourth round of SDSs, departments worked together to improve coordination and build coherence among the strategies through a set of common federal goals. These goals comprise three environmental quality goals - clean water, clean air, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. They also include three SD management goals - sustainable communities, sustainable development and use of natural resources and governance for SD. Departments are also taking a coordinated approach to greening government operations. AAFC indicated how the department contributes to these federal goals in SDS IV.

For more information about how AAFC is implementing SDS IV commitments, please refer to the online table.

Greening AAFC's Operations

In addition to promoting sustainable economic, social and environmental development in the agriculture and agri-food sector, AAFC is committed to greening its own operations by reducing reliance on natural resources and by limiting potential damage to the environment caused by on-going activities.

The 2008 Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development included a chapter on Greening Operations, which examined how departments used the guidance issued by the Office of Green Government Operations (OGGO) to develop SDS targets. In a case study of various departmental approaches, AAFC was chosen as the example of a department which followed the guidance and included all the suggested targets. In some target areas, AAFC has been collecting baseline data to enable future reports on progress. Overall, progress against the SDS IV commitments appears on track and achievable.

Several new initiatives undertaken in 2007-08 year at AAFC. A Green Information Technology (IT) working group was formed to further green the department's IT environment. The group has decided on an agenda of issues to investigate and resolve, starting with the implementation of a plan to change default settings of all printers which have duplex capability to two-sided copying. This will save a considerable amount of paper and contribute significantly to AAFC's SDS targets. The progress of this initiative will be reported on next year. Other energy saving and waste reduction initiatives have been implemented and more are being considered for 2008-09.

Reporting on AAFC's Greening Operations targets can be found online.

ARCHIVED - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Archived Content

2007-08 Departmental Performance Report

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Table of Contents

Table 3: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue

Table 4: Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency Revolving Fund

Table 5-A: User Fees Act (1)

Table 5-B: Policy on Service Standards for External Fees

Table 6: Details on Project Spending 1

Table 7: Status Report on Major Crown Projects

Description:

Project Phases:

Leading and Participating Departments and Agencies:

Prime and Major Sub-Contractors:

Major Milestones:

Progress Report and Explanations of Variances:

Industrial Benefits:

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Details on Transfer Payments Programs for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Table 9: Foundations (Conditional Grants)

Table 10: Horizontal Initiatives

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Horizontal Initiative

Table 11: Sustainable Development Strategy

Table 12: Reponses to Parliamentary Committees and External Audits

Responses to Parliamentary Committees

Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food (SCAAF)

Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Responses to the Auditor General (including to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development)

Office of the Auditor General (OAG )

Table 13 - Internal Audits and Evaluations (2007-08)

Table 13B - Evaluations (2007-08)

Program Activity

Program Activity: Business Risk Management 2007-08

Program Activity: Environment 2007-08

Program Activity: Food Safety and Food Quality 2007-08

Program Activity: Innovation and Renewal 2007-08

Program Activity: Markets and International 2007-08 SO1

Program Activity: Markets and International 2007-08 SO3

Program Activity: Rural and Co-operatives Secretariats 2007-08

Program Activity - Business Risk Management

Results Achieved

Program Activity - Food Safety and Food Quality

Results Achieved

Program Activity - Markets and International

Results Achieved

National Wine Standard

Program Activity -- Environment

Results Achieved

NLWIS Audits

Program Activity - Innovation and Renewal

2007-08
Departmental Performance Report

**Table 5-A: User Fees Act ⁽¹⁾**

Table 6: Details on Project Spending ¹