That's an excellent question, Mr. Easter, and I'll try to resist giving you a technical answer.
The root source of the contamination was deep inside a piece of equipment called a slicer. It's important to understand that the harbourage point inside that piece of equipment is just not accessible on a daily basis. It requires many hours for the maintenance department to disassemble parts that are not prescribed by the manufacturer as being “disassembleable”. Such is the nature of bacteria. As I said in my opening remarks, it's a bacteria; it's a micro-organism that can exist in many millions of places inside a facility, and it resided deep inside this equipment.
To your real question about the role of inspection, you cannot see this in an inspection. There is no inspection where you can visually, with your eyes, see that outcome. The only way you can detect it is by taking a sample, a swab site, at various points in the production process and then analyzing the results of that swab site several days later when they come back from an accredited laboratory. On the epidemiology and the scientific process, I would encourage you to ask Dr. Huffman or any of the other experts why that's so.
I genuinely don't believe this was a failure of inspection per se, where we used to inspect at one level and now we don't inspect at another level. I think the root cause was something very different from that. That's not to say we don't need more resources in the CFIA to do appropriate things; I believe we've been on the record to date saying we do believe we should. But let's not have false expectations about trying to discover bacteria or a pathogen that's not visible to the eye in an assembly or disassembly process that can't be done in any kind of routine manufacturing environment. It requires a set of engineers to disassemble a piece of equipment. That again is the nature of microbiology.