Details of a proposed organic regulation are leaking out, including results of a report suggesting the new law would be highly beneficial to producers.
Canadian Organic Growers has released the findings of a cost-benefit analysis conducted by the federal government’s Organic Task Force. The report concludes that implementing an organic law would have a net benefit to producers of $481 million.
Government officials have confirmed that number but are reluctant to comment on the analysis or any other aspect of the proposed regulation.
“Quite frankly, right now it’s a little too early for us to have what I’ll call widespread public discussion about things which may or may not happen,” said task force leader Joe Southall.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
While the government remains mum on the regulation, members of the organic industry have divulged some of the general concepts being discussed, although nobody could offer further information on how the government arrived at its $481 million conclusion.
One specific detail emerging from an April 21 meeting between industry and government officials is the estimated $1 million annual price tag for enforcing the soon-to-be revised national organic standard.
“That’s the rough ballpark number that we’re hearing right now,” said Debbie Miller, a member of the Organic Regulatory Committee.
Officials should have a better idea of the exact costs in the next four to six months and be better able to determine who will pay for it.
Because government agencies operate on a cost recovery basis, it is probable farmers will be footing the bill, said Miller, who manages the Organic Crop Improvement Association’s Canadian office.
Depending on how government equivalency negotiations unfold, producers could also be paying extra fees to become accredited to yet another national standard.
Many certification bodies are already accredited to European, Japanese and American standards.
However, the extra fees could be temporary if Canada convinces other countries that its new organic standard is just as good as what they operate under.
“Once this is in place and the government is able to negotiate agreements with governments in other countries that will recognize each others’ programs, then that will eliminate the need for dual certification,” Miller said.
In other words, if the United States accepts the Canadian system as equivalent to its own, there will be no need to continue certifying producers to the U.S. National Organic Program.
Regardless of whether producers are being certified to one standard or multiple standards, they are likely to see little change in terms of the actual inspection process.
“It shouldn’t be a lot of extra work for them. Most of the extra work will be for the certifiers,” Miller said.
According to the preliminary discussions, independent certification bodies will be responsible for enforcing the new national standard, issuing certificates on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
CFIA officials have suggested that new inspectors would need a specific level of education, perhaps a degree in agrology, and would be required to take a one-month, government-designed training program.
“The existing inspectors would probably be grandfathered in,” Miller said.
“None of the existing inspectors would be put out of work by this.”
Federal agriculture minister Andy Mitchell didn’t give the regulation his official nod of approval until the April 21 meeting, so the committee is still a long way from preparing the first draft of what could become a national organic law.
Full implementation of the new regulation will take two years, giving participants ample opportunity to comply with new labelling, storage and handling rules.
