TORONTO meat processor Bill Mulock could hardly have imagined the implications of what he was doing when he gave his first interview as the newly elected president of the Canadian Meat Council a year ago.
He was, he admits, naive as he talked to a reporter about the need for national, federal standards for meat inspection across the country.
Lower inspection standards for provincially or municipally licensed meat packing or processing plants were a “ticking timebomb”, The Western Producer reported.
Someone could die after eating meat that had not been properly inspected. The national meat industry would suffer the consequences as consumers were spooked by the news of unsafe meat.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
He advocated a national meat inspection standard based on rules created for federally inspected plants.
As it stands, only products from federally inspected plants can be exported or moved between provinces. Provincially or locally inspected plants can sell only locally or provincially.
The comments were controversial. Mulock did not realize the audience for the interview was national. Almost immediately, the telephone at his Toronto plant began to ring.
Outraged local meat processors in Ontario threatened to sue because of the implication their product was less than safe.
Provinces which have lower inspection standards for plants which sell only provincially or locally, but not for export, also were outraged.
Within weeks, Mulock was summoned to Ottawa for a federal-provincial-industry meeting about moving toward a new national meat code, which could include national inspection standards.
He had been warned that some of the provinces were gunning for him.
So Mulock began the meeting with what he called his “mea culpa”, telling all concerned that he may have been too blunt and a bit naive in the interview about changes needed in the national inspection system.
He apologized for ruffled provincial feathers. But he did not retract the view that a national standard is needed and infrequent inspections of local or provincially inspected plants are not enough to ensure safety or consumer comfort.
Last week, as Mulock ended his one-year term as CMC president, he said uproar over the interview had actually moved the cause of national standards along.
Once the issue was in the open, a serious debate about national standards ensued. Within a few years, it seems likely a national inspection standard will prevail.
Mulock paid a price for being blunt and truthful. He was attacked and forced to make some apologies. Yet he moved the process along. He is unrepentant.
Leadership can be conservative or radical, play it safe or propose change, keep its head down or stick its neck out.
Mulock unwittingly opened a can of worms that many in the meat industry had talked about privately but were reluctant to see discussed publicly.
He did not back down. And he proved again that more information and public debate can only help the evolution of good public policy.
