Parliamentary consideration of new legislation to govern the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has become open season for critics to criticize the way the agency operates.
In part, it is because the CFIA Enforcement Act was referred to the House of Commons agriculture committee before approval in principle by the Commons so all proposals for change can be considered.
It is also because the CFIA has been under fire from critics for its handling of the avian flu issue in 2004 and what some see as bureaucratic delays in approving new livestock packers in Canada.
Read Also
Farming Smarter receives financial boost from Alberta government for potato research
Farming Smarter near Lethbridge got a boost to its research equipment, thanks to the Alberta government’s increase in funding for research associations.
The bill, C-27, proposes to consolidate rules and authority available to CFIA but also to increase its power of regulation.
Canada’s major meat packers told the agriculture committee two weeks ago they are happy with the CFIA and the new legislation.
“We look at this as a step in the right direction,”said Canadian Meat Council chief official Jim Laws in a Feb. 17 appearance. “We don’t really see any disadvantages but we’ll be watching closely the regulations.”
Critics were not as benign.
“I’m very concerned about this bill,” Conservative Saskatchewan MP Gerry Ritz said. “It’s said to be housekeeping but I’m concerned about the lack of oversight in it.”
Dairy Farmers of Canada appeared at the committee to call for a change in some of the legislation CFIA oversees to make sure that non-dairy products cannot be labelled to appear to contain dairy products.
DFC executive director Richard Doyle cited many examples, among them “butter tarts” that are made with margarine and not butter. It may be a good product, he said, but it does not contain butter and the dairy industry spends millions of dollars each year advertising and promoting butter.
“CFIA’s legislative ability to deliver on its mandate to administer food labelling policies and to protect consumers from misrepresentation and fraud in respect to food labelling, packaging and advertising is questionable,” said DFC president Jacques Laforge of New Brunswick.
The committee should use this legislation to correct flaws in legislation that CFIA administers, he said.
Robert de Valk from the Further Poultry Processors Association of Canada urged the committee to recommend changes to the legislation that would make it less complex, more comprehensive and more subject to an appeal if CFIA inspectors close down a plant or seize a product for suspicious food safety.
“We have an opportunity to clean up our own backyard,” said de Valk. “Let’s do it and let’s do it right. I’m not sure this legislation does it right.”
The Canadian Meat Council, representing federally inspected packing plants that process 90 percent of the meat handled in Canada, was far more supportive.
It praised the fact that the new legislation will declare illegal any attempt to tamper with food products and will increase the ability of CFIA inspectors to stop suspect import products at the border.
The agency’s ability to prepare and receive export approval documents electronically will speed up the export system.
Laws said meat packers have not complained about the lack of an appeal process within the legislation.
And the tougher laws on tampering are welcome.
He said tampering threats have led to expensive recall situations and the destruction of otherwise wholesome products.
“The new authorities under this bill will allow CFIA to take quicker action to deal with situations related to tampering, which in the past relied on municipal authorities and their priorities of the day,” Laws told MPs.
