Evidence of meeting #43 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cfia.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
That was in our opening comments, yes.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Exactly. You say:
For the CFIA, as outlined in the 2008 Budget, the savings identified in the review were redirected to Canada's Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan to enhance and protect the health and safety of Canadians. There were no reductions in funding for the CFIA as a result of this exercise. Nor were there job losses. In fact, one of the goals of our strategic review was to ensure that the CFIA was allocating resources to areas of highest risk. Mr. Chairman, in Budget 2008, the Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan was earmarked to receive $113 million over two years. The CFIA will receive some $62 million of this amount, to enhance our system by concentrating on preventing problems in the first place, targeting the products that present the highest risks and providing rapid response to problems when they occur.
I could go on, but I want to tell you why this happened, Dr. Evans, and I want to tell Canadians, because this started way back, I think, in January.
Let me read you another quote:
I'm going to be honest with you. This election, when it comes, I believe it will be the most brutal, it will be the most negative, and it will be the most aggressive election campaign that this country has ever seen.
It also says this:
Canadians should brace themselves for a “brutal, negative, aggressive, Republican/U.S.-style election campaign” that could come as early as this spring, says Malpeque MP Wayne Easter.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'd like to give the rest of my time to my colleague.
Conservative
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Let's rehash a little bit what's actually happened in today's committee meeting, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Easter and his gang know there's a secret report out there. They don't know what's in the report, and that's why they need somebody to table the report. Then when CFIA comes to deny the allegations that are made, Mr. Easter and his gang suddenly know some of the contents that are in the report. But they still need to see the report and they no longer believe what the witnesses have come forward and said.
If you listen to what Mr. Easter has said, or what Mr. Easter has alleged, there's going to be a decrease in funding. We see on page 2 that Mr. Evans says that there was no decrease in funding.
There has also been allegations that the avian flu preparedness is going to somehow be impacted to the negative. Mr. Evans has said on page 3 that there has not been any impact to the avian flu preparedness in this country.
Then Mr. Easter goes off and talks about decentralization and how this is all some big conspiracy about decentralization. Now, he may be afraid that there isn't going to be a green shaft in this country and there isn't going to be $15 billion sucked away from rural economies to give to, you know, downtown Toronto, but the fact of the matter is that there have been 200 more inspectors put in place in the last two years.
I hope Mr. Easter is taking notes of some of these things.
I do have a question for the witnesses.
Mr. Evans, you talked about your department being asked to identify a potential of 5% reallocation, some things that could be done more effectively or efficiently. I assume you met with these directions and came forward with at least 5% in proposals. Is that correct?
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
These were department proposals put forward by you and your professionals that you felt could in some ways enhance or take away some of the duplicity in the previous department?
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
I think it's important that we state this for Canadians: were all of the proposals that were put forth accepted and implemented?
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
I can only speak to the fact that budget 2008 identified those initiatives that had been approved for implementation.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Exactly, and I think that's the point.
You bring forward proposals. Not all proposals are going to be accepted and not all proposals are going to be implemented. I'm sure that across the 17 departments that you talked about not every proposal that was ever brought up by a bureaucrat was implemented in budget 2008. Would this be a safe assumption, or can you comment on that?
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Obviously, our role as public servants is to give our best advice and ultimately government will determine whether that advice is advice that they wish to accept.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
But it only makes sense. When we start talking about this stuff, we have to break it down and not allow the fear-mongering to come in. It only makes sense that bureaucrats would come from any stream with different proposals, but they're not all going to be put forward.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
I think it's also very safe to say that in these proposals the Government of Canada has gone forward and decided to increase funding, and you said $62 million to CFIA alone.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Over two years. There's not going to be a decrease this year in inspectors. There has actually been an increase in animal science specialists over the last—
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
What I indicated is that in terms of our overall inspection staff we've seen an increase of 200 inspectors, as you've indicated, over the past two years. I've also pointed out on numerous occasions before this committee that our veterinary cadre, which we see as one of several very important scientific disciplines to advance our efforts, has itself grown from 470 to 734 over 10 years.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Mr. Mayers, Mr. White and you have come before our committee, and sometimes we haven't been that nice to you guys. I think it's also important to recognize that you have taken into account some of the hard work done on this committee with the food labelling aspects and other things that weren't necessarily included in budget 2008. It's important that we as a committee--and it's our responsibility as members of Parliament--tell the truth and advocate on behalf of the safety of our system and therefore advocate our ability for international trade throughout the world.
These are the things, Mr. Easter, that I really hope you're writing down some notes on over there.
The last question I have for you is in regard to your talking about science-based food safety programs that are internationally recognized and the modernization of our process. Can you tell me some of the countries that are already using this science-based program?
Acting Vice-President, Programs, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
In terms of an approach that recognizes the accountability of industry to produce safe food and verifies that industry delivers on that accountability through their process controls, using approaches such as HACCP, several developed countries around the world apply the same approaches, with mandatory HACCP requirements--in the United States, Europe, Australia, and Japan--and government agencies like our own with responsibility to verify that those process controls are indeed in place and are indeed effective in reducing risk and preventing or responding to any hazards in order to protect the safety of consumers.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you very much. Your time has expired.
Mr. Dewar, the floor is yours. You have the last seven-minute round.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And thank you to our guests for appearing before the committee.
I want to start off with a question about, I guess, how we got here. We've established that you did bring proposals forward to government, but you were asked to do so, right?
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
So let's be clear about this. This is direction, and that's the way government works. The government wanted to seek efficiencies—there's sometimes a euphemism for that—in certain departments. The number of 5% was established, and your agency was asked to bring forward efficiencies. Since that time we've learned that there have been changes in the way your agency does business. What we're trying to establish is exactly to what extent.
What we've heard in the public domain--and maybe you could help us here--is that the changes that have been put in place will affect the animal feed mills. Is that correct?
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Yes. That which has been announced deals with the consolidation of import document review; improving our seed certification programs; removing the mandatory pre-market label review for meat, processed fruit, and vegetable; feed inspection harmonization; and adjustment to our avian influenza preparedness program.
