Thank you, Madam Swan.
Mr. Chairman, honourable members, ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate as well the opportunity to appear again before this committee.
Despite the best efforts of the CFIA last summer, Canada bore witness to the tragic loss of life for 22 Canadians and serious illness for many others due to listeria contamination in ready-to-eat meats. It was a situation the likes of which we never want to see repeated. So the CFIA wholeheartedly supports the work of this committee and the independent investigator to provide recommendations that will further contribute to food safety in Canada and mitigate against any similar circumstance happening in the future.
Well before the appointment of the independent investigator and our first appearance before this committee, the CFIA undertook a thorough and frank review and analysis of our protocols, procedures, and activities as they related to the listeriosis outbreak. This important work was necessary to determine where vulnerabilities may have developed in an ever-changing and dynamic risk environment for our food safety system and to make immediate adjustments.
Armed with that knowledge and a resolve to maintain the highest standards of safety possible for the over 100 million meals consumed each and every day in Canada, we have turned our attention to the future. We have gained valuable insight as a result of the findings and lessons gained from the outbreak. Those insights have resulted in many key initiatives being brought forward which will demonstrably enhance protection for Canadians against this potentially lethal pathogen. Time does not permit me to outline all of the actions taken but allow me to cite a few examples for you.
Inspector training has been stepped up. This is especially necessary since we have mandated greater stringency in listeria environmental testing. Furthermore, we are strengthening our coordination with the other key players in the food safety network, such as Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, and the provinces and territories and their public health units. Key among those partners, as Carole alluded to earlier, are the food producers themselves, whose commitment to the provision of safe food is also paramount.
Investments have also been made at the laboratory level. There is ongoing work to validate new and more rapid test methods and to increase our capacity collectively to conduct genetic fingerprinting. We are continuing to fine-tune a robust inspection regime called CVS, with the full engagement of our inspection staff, that aligns with HACCP principles, which is a strong and proven approach embraced by international leaders in food safety.
While the CFIA has taken these measures to enhance protection against the risk of listeria, taken alone they will not be enough. We need to look at the food safety network holistically to ensure that all contributors take strong action to prevent a similar tragedy from occurring in the future. Just as a chain is as strong as its weakest link, vulnerabilities in any of the elements of the production continuum can have dire food safety results. That is why I have been heartened to see representatives from other government authorities, industry, academia, and unions come before this committee to share their perspectives and commit to improvements to the system. We all have a role to play.
In hindsight, it is clear that opportunities were missed to both reduce the consequences of the contamination and to reduce the potential for contamination to occur.
It is our collective earnest desire and obligation to do better.
While improvement is always possible and necessary, I reject the notion put forward by some that CFIA resources and staffing were inadequate to meet the situation. The CFIA has more resources now than at any time in its history.
Food safety inspection numbers have steadily increased since the inception of the agency, as has the educational quality and competencies to perform these tasks. The same can be said of lab technicians and food safety investigators who were key players in determining the source of the contamination. Professionalism, passion for public service, and recognition of the importance of the work they do is the hallmark of CFIA employees. Those who say otherwise serve a different agenda and constituency.
The tragic loss of life may have been reduced or avoided if this type of food, with its known associated risk to vulnerable populations, had either been heated prior to serving or had not been served to the elderly or people with compromised immune systems, in line with the long-standing guidance from Health Canada. The contamination of product may have been averted or detected earlier if positive environmental results had been reported or assessed in more detail.
Another significant contributing factor to the timelines of the situation was the speed and quality of information flow between public health and food safety authorities. The proper collection, identification, handling, and testing of food samples was also a contributing factor to the time necessary to confirm contamination at production and not during preparation.
While information flow may not have been ideal, it is evident that all jurisdictions brought a high level of intent to protecting the public and getting to the answers as quickly as possible. While lives were unfortunately and regrettably lost or forever changed, your search through the evidence will inform you that no effort was spared and undoubtedly it prevented further illness and loss of life.
By all international standards, the food safety investigation was thorough and rapid, resulting in actions to recall even before the confirmation of the typing of the listeria as the same as the illnesses and a week before the first death was confirmed as due to the deli meat contamination.
There is one overarching theme that I would like to leave you with today, and that is complexity. The interaction and interventions of many players are required to provide safe food. That necessarily introduces complexity to our food safety regime. This complexity is further compounded by the globalization of food production, changing consumer demands, demographic shifts, new production and processing technologies, and so on. The nature and the sources of risks to food safety are evolving rapidly, and our inspection systems must keep pace.
To use a military metaphor--and I do so with some reluctance, in light of what was celebrated over the past weekend in terms of D-Day remembrance--the war against food safety risk is currently being prosecuted by an alliance of units, each with its own specialty and command structure. The enemy they face is dynamic and evolving. The terrain on which they fight is constantly shifting. That is a very challenging and complex environment. To expand on the metaphor further, what is required is a broad view of the campaign and an understanding of all the assets that can be brought to bear on the challenge before us. Vision and strategy are required at the highest levels, while strong, coordinated execution is required from all the supporting units.
The CFIA is one of these many key assets in the defence against food-borne illness. We look forward to playing our part in executing the broader strategy that will be put forth by this committee and from the office of the independent investigator.
In closing, let me assure all members of the subcommittee that any and all who bring in earnest an ability to contribute to high standards of food safety and their effective implementation in Canada will find a committed, willing, and collaborative partner in the CFIA.
Thank you.