Dennis Laycraft sounded frustrated as he complained to MPs earlier this year about what he sees as Canada’s poor record of using its food inspection system to help exporters.
The executive vice-president of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association told the House of Commons agriculture committee in February that in New Zealand, food system regulators are a key part of the export team.
“They’re proud to go out and advocate their regulatory system everywhere,” Laycraft said.
“We (in Canada) have a constant struggle about whether a regulator can do that.”
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
His comment touched the core of a controversial debate that has bubbled around the Canadian Food Inspection Agency since its creation 12 years ago.
Should the government agency that was created to act as an independent food inspection organization also be involved in trade negotiations to gain foreign market access for those products?
Are the roles of regulator and promoter at odds? Is the CFIA’s arms-length position compromised, at least in perception, through its role as a partner with industry?
Exporters clearly think not, insisting that the CFIA establish a vice-president in charge of market access and international affairs who would be part of the Market Access Secretariat that Agriculture Canada is creating.
“Representatives of the CFIA and Canadian agricultural industry stakeholders have expressed concerns related to mandates and their relationship to key aspects of market access-related initiatives including incoming and outgoing missions,” said a report prepared for an industry market access workshop last winter.
“This is a long-standing issue which should be resolved as quickly as possible.”
Alberta cattle producer Darcy Davis, president of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance, said many of Canada’s export competitors have supportive food safety regulators.
“I think some of the frustration among Canadian exporters is that CFIA often does not see itself playing that role.”
However, there are also critics who see CFIA playing too much of that role, of being too close to the industry it is supposed to regulate.
In a 2001 report on CFIA’s role as overseer and advocate for the safety of genetically modified products, an expert panel of the Royal Society of Canada summed up what it saw as the conflict.
“If the same government agency that is charged with the responsibility to protect the public health and environmental safety from risks posed by technologies also is charged with the promotion of that same technology and if its safety assessments are, by official policy, balanced against the economic industries that develop them, this represents from the point of view of both the public and the industrial stakeholders a significant conflict of interest,” said the national body of distinguished Canadian scientists and scholars.
On April 5, 2005, when the Commons agriculture committee was studying legislation to reform the CFIA, National Farmers Union executive secretary Terry Pugh said the same argument applied to the agency’s trade promotion role. The legislation did not pass and questions about conflicting mandates were part of the reason debate dragged on without resolution.
“When the CFIA was created in 1997, it was founded on a dual mandate,” Pugh said.
“It was charged with not only protecting the public interest by ensuring food safety but also with facilitating exports of food and expediting free trade agreements with Canada’s trading partners. These dual responsibilities place the CFIA in a compromised position.”
Even Quebec cattle producer Gib Drury, president of the Canada Beef Export Federation that officially supports a stronger role for CFIA in market access negotiations, said he is nervous about the agency appearing to be too supportive of the industry it is supposed to police.
“I think we have to be very careful to maintain the arm’s length and the appearance of arm’s length,” he said.
“It cannot be seen to be promoting Canadian product. You can’t have a regulator and an advocate at the same time. It makes you look two-faced.”
Ottawa food lawyer Ron Doering, the first CFIA president and the federal bureaucrat who helped craft the 1997 legislation and get it through Parliament, scoffs at that argument. He said it’s like saying a police officer cannot help an elderly person across the street and then minutes later pull a gun to take down a bad guy.
“I don’t see a conflict,” Doering said.
“Does anybody really believe if a vet goes to Uruguay to open up a market for Canadian beef that he has abandoned professional concepts of food safety? He’s trying to help Canadians sell meat to a foreign country. How is that compromising Canadians in any way?”
Many of the negotiations are highly technical.
“You wouldn’t want to send a policy person to negotiate those.”
Brian Evans, CFIA executive vice-president and Canada’s chief veterinarian, said he understands the agency has to be seen to walk a fine line between regulation and advocacy.
“I agree there is a delicate line because we have no ability, no capacity, no interest in promoting a brand, if you will,” he said.
“What we have to say is if you purchase beef from Canada, it has been inspected to this level and carries this level of assurance behind it. I don’t think it’s a case of us promoting Canadian industry because in fact, we are not active promoters of the sector itself. We are active proponents of the integrity of the regulatory system.”
Still, critics will remain skeptical and the issue will be raised when a future government once again tries to change CFIA legislation.
At some future Parliament Hill committee hearing, the critics may even bring up comments made April 29 by agriculture minister Gerry Ritz as he used an appearance before a food safety committee of MPs studying the 2008 listeria outbreak to extol the virtues of CFIA as a trade barrier buster.
“Brian Evans was the main salesman during the BSE crisis and he did a fantastic job for us, and continues to,” he said.
