Evidence of meeting #33 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was standards.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Thank you.
This is for Mr. Dahl or Mr. Woodbeck, or perhaps for others. Has anybody established the difference in the presence of contaminants between, for example, organic wheat and non-organic wheat?
The reason I ask is because the topic was bought up in the previous panel in regard to glyphosate, that perhaps there was a residue in the tillage and we were changing the tillage. Have there been any studies done in this respect?
Commissioner, Canadian Grain Commission
I'll let Norm correct me if I'm wrong, but the quick answer to that question is that it's not something we have looked at.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I'll give you time for another short question, Alex, if you want, because used you only 30 seconds.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Would anybody else like to comment on that, or is that basically where we're at now?
Director General, Food Directorate, Department of Health
It is pretty much the same situation. At least in the scientific information that we have seen, there is minimum information right now that makes the comparison between organic products versus non-organic products vis-à-vis the presence of these types of contaminants. There are other studies that were done for other types of chemicals, but not necessarily for these types of contaminants.
So the information is limited. We really don't know whether there is a difference.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
So when we talk about more research, would this be something that would be worthwhile pursuing?
Director General, Food Directorate, Department of Health
It would be considered a data element that could be useful.
October 20th, 2009 / 5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you, Alex.
Pierre, you had a quick question.
The bells have started ringing.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Just given the witnesses we had before, there seems to be confusion. First of all, are these standards of one part per million or two parts per million actually hard and fast standards, enforceable standards upon which grain can be rejected?
Secondly, on enforcement, is it that this not been enforced very much before and all of a sudden it's being enforced now? There seems to be a disconnect between what I'm hearing here and what we heard at the producer level and from the millers.
I'm not too sure who to direct my question to in the 15 seconds I have.
I heard from Cam, I think, that there's a lot of consultation going on here, but I'm not convinced of that, given what we heard from our first set of witnesses.
Director General, Food Directorate, Department of Health
The standards that are currently present in our regulations are still enforceable. They are current. However, as was mentioned by previous witnesses, first of all, they are under review, because we're collecting data about them, but they're also narrow in the type of food commodities they cover.
From the previous discussions we heard this afternoon, it seems that the discussion tends to cover more commodities that are not covered by these standards, rather than those commodities. So again, we are looking here at standards that exist for uncleaned soft wheat and for all the different other foods, non-staple foods specifically. We are talking about non-staple foods and the uncleaned soft wheat that is destined for baby food.
There are no standards that have been established at this point in time by Health Canada for other commodities, specifically hard wheat, and this is essentially the work that is being undertaken, on top of reviewing the adequacy of the previous standards.
Commissioner, Canadian Grain Commission
I'd just add that some of the confusion might be coming from the difference between the establishment of standards for DON, which is what my friends from Health Canada are talking about, and the grade table standards, which are how farmers are graded on whether the wheat is No. 1, No. 2, feed, or not eligible—and again, some of our friends in P.E.I. actually slipped even below feed. Those grade table standards have included fusarium-damaged kernels since the mid-1980s.
There is a difference between the standards set by Health Canada for DON and the Canadian Grain Commission standards for fusarium-damaged kernels.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much.
We're going to have to adjourn. The bells are ringing.
Thanks to all our witnesses. I apologize for the short time, but there is not much we can do about it.
Thanks very much again to our witnesses from Charlottetown for staying with us to the end.
The meeting is adjourned.