Public Accounts committee  I was actually hoping the Auditor General would answer the third question first. In response to the question on the issue of survey priorization, we fully agree with the Auditor General that we need to find a different equilibrium in terms of both what we're actively doing for new detections versus dealing with those issues that have been identified.

Public Accounts committee  If I could comment, Mr. Chairman, with respect to the issue of how one plans for the expected and also how one is prepared for the unexpected, I think it is important to point out, as others have mentioned, that Canada is part of a number of collaborations. One that has been referred to is NAPPO, the North American Plant Protection Organization, which brings together the science expertise and capacities that exist with Canada, the U.S., and Mexico.

Public Accounts committee  If I could, Mr. Chairman, just to supplement, I hope it's the direct answer to the question the member was searching for. I think it's important to understand that one of the points the Auditor General identified was to ensure that we had systemic, consistent approaches across the country.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. As has been indicated, this is an area where, when one adds climate change, globalization, invasive species, the reality of a number of different convergent factors, what is absolutely critical, and where CFIA knows and is currently making significant investments, is the recognition that we are not in isolation in this.

Public Accounts committee  It's not intended to be inconsistent. The audit finding is the audit finding, and we fully agree with the audit finding. The challenge with risk-based inspection systems, as Carole was attempting to indicate, is what you determine is such a risk that you're not going to allow it in at all.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, honourable member, for the question, and Carole, for the opportunity to provide some additional perspective on it. It is very important to understand equally that the plant health import program deals not only with those products for which a risk assessment has been completed and an import permit has been issued to allow that product to come into the country, but it also has to take on board the reality, as Carole indicated, that unless an assessment has been done there is no import permit issued and none of that product can arrive in Canada until that's completed.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  No, you did very well on the question. I just wanted to clarify again, because it did come up in a previous question from the other side here, that having made those adjustments in our system, it's now incumbent on us in our import verification activities--and I think this comes back to a point that Mr.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Thank you for the question. I think people need to understand what the lessons learned really were intended to achieve. As President Swan has indicated, in effect we have this Office of Food Safety and Recall. It operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. It doesn't stop.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  I'm done.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  For respect of brevity, honourable member, I'll ask Paul to answer the first question and perhaps the president to answer the second.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  I have tremendous respect for Dr. Holley, his colleagues at the University of Manitoba, and the good work they do in food safety. Dr. Holley raises a valid point—one size does not fit all. What we've attempted to do, with the introduction of mandatory testing under HACCP, is to establish a baseline with which the company assessments and our more frequent assessments can be related.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  I concur, and I hope my comments reflected your summation. Food safety comes first. But in any good inspection system, in any good regulatory system, if new information comes forward, based on the level of monitoring we're doing, and it doesn't appear that other factors in the plant are adequately controlling, there are other authorities that we can exercise.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Certainly the authorities do exist and have been exercised in the past. Recently, most people would recognize what occurred in North Bay at one of the restaurant chains. It was local, but was subsequently found to be in other parts of Ontario. Ontario was the lead face in managing that because it remained constrained to Ontario at that time.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Yes. As I say, the pilots were validated, and over the previous two years their effectiveness was confirmed. Maple Leaf was part of that system, along with 123 other plants. When that was then extended to other plants, it had already been tested and verified in other locations, so on April 1, there was no change whatsoever to what was going on in Maple Leaf when it was instituted nationally across other jurisdictions.

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  My response to that, honourable member, is at two levels. In previous discussions I've had with Dr. Randy Huffman, who I believe was accompanying Mr. Michael McCain earlier today, and drawing on his broad experience again...these--for lack of a better term--slicers, because that's how they're referred to, are monstrous machines.