Agriculture Committee on Sept. 29th, 2016

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

So we should take a lot of comfort in that fact.

[Paul Mayers]

And we should be proud of it.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

I agree.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Ms. Lockhart.

Go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

I'm just going to follow up on that a little bit. I'm from New Brunswick, and we have an aquaculture industry there, so I want to understand this completely.

The process we've gone through has approved this genetically modified egg product for export to Panama, and has also approved the consumption of that product by consumers in Canada. Is that correct?

[Paul Mayers]

The production of these salmon eggs in Canada in containment has been approved.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

Okay.

[Paul Mayers]

Whether they are exported to Panama is Panama's decision. As for the consumption of the food product and feed product derived from those, that has been approved in Canada.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

Knowing that government doesn't dictate what the market wants to do or what businesses want to do, would it be fair to assume that if this is advantageous in Panama, our own aquaculture industry potentially will be looking at this product as well in the future?

[Paul Mayers]

Yes, that's not an unreasonable assumption. That will take all the business calculus around production into account.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

If they decide to go down that road, is that regulatory process through your department or...?

[Paul Mayers]

It's Environment and Climate Change Canada.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

All right. I guess at that time it will be the actual companies that are doing any cost comparisons for inputs and all of that?

[Paul Mayers]

Right.

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

Okay.

I'll share my time with Mr. Drouin.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I want to go back to the reason why the Government of Canada does not get into labelling, other than health and safety issues.

Right now, the flavour of the month might be GMO, but in 10 years from now it could be something else. What I'm concerned about is those who have legitimate health concerns, especially those with diabetes, for instance, who have to constantly look at the carbohydrates and the sugar levels they consume. If we mandate something on a label, then we have to take something away, because there is only so much space on a label.

Can you comment on the reason why you just stick to health and safety?

[Paul Mayers]

I can start. My colleague from Health Canada will want to speak.

In Canada, the labelling responsibility with respect to food is a shared responsibility between CFIA and Health Canada. All of the non-health-related and safety-related labelling considerations are managed by CFIA—and, of course, the enforcement of the entire labelling framework—while Health Canada sets the policies with respect to health labelling. On your point in terms of a diabetic having that important information on nutrition on the label, my colleague will speak to it.

There are a number of interests that consumers have in terms of information about products in order to make choices. We distinguish between mandatory label declaration, which includes things like net weight, the health and safety information, what the product is, the mandatory requirement to have a list of the ingredients—all of those things—and then a number of claims that can be made, provided they're truthful and not misleading, that are what we would characterize as information that supports consumer choice. If you're interested in understanding if a product is local or there's a claim with respect to the sustainable production of the product, those claims can be made provided they're truthful and not misleading.

In many cases, in order to have predictability in the marketplace, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency will work with businesses and consumers and elaborate on guidance, but it's not mandatory to make those declarations. This falls into that same category.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

In terms of the truthfulness of statements on products, the CFIA does a verification on those?

[Paul Mayers]

Absolutely.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Is it on a complaint basis? Or if you're going to put it on there, is there an automatic verification?

[Paul Mayers]

We take a risk frame to that in deploying our resources in that regard, so for those generic claims where we've provided guidance, yes, it's predominantly complaint driven.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

If a company says that something is a non-GMO product and labels it, you would look at it on a complaints basis?

[Paul Mayers]

That's correct. While if you were to say that it is a nut-free product, that's something we're going to pay very close attention to because of the health implications if that's not truthful.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Okay.

Sometimes there are third parties involved. I'm thinking of Organic Canada. Do you rely on those third parties as well to ensure that if you're going to put “organic” on it, it has to be non-GMO and it has to be X, Y, and Z?

[Paul Mayers]

CFIA elaborated an organic standard. In order to make the claim “organic” in Canada, there's a suite of rules. The claim is voluntary, but if you make the claim, you have to follow those rules. The framework that oversees this is a collaborative one between us and the organic certification bodies, which we recognize, so they are indeed third parties, yes.