Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you very much for your invitation today. It's a privilege to appear before you to share some thoughts on my mandate as the independent investigator of the listeriosis investigation review.
Last year Canadians witnessed a tragic event that eventually cost the lives of 22 citizens. This tragedy was caused by food that was assumed to be safe but was not. I was asked by government to lead this investigation, and I am proud as a Canadian to do what I can to better understand this matter of great importance to us all--to understand what happened during 2008 in the listeriosis outbreak and how to prevent a similar recurrence.
The event shook the confidence of Canadians in the safety of food products and in the food inspection system. Canadians expect their food to be safe. They expect an inspection system that works. They expect to be informed in a timely and clear manner when there is a problem, and they expect all levels of government to cooperate effectively in the best interests of the public.
I recognize that members of this committee have a key role to play in the efforts currently under way to ensure that our food safety system is second to none in the world. I take this responsibility seriously. Both this committee and the independent investigation I'm conducting can make significant contributions that will help prevent a tragedy such as the one we experienced last summer from happening again. That is why, when I was approached, I agreed to lead a non-partisan investigation into the outbreak of last summer.
I was appointed by the Governor in Council on January 20, 2009, to lead the review with a specific mandate to examine the events, circumstances, and factors that contributed to the outbreak; review the efficiency and effectiveness of the response of the federal organizations in conjunction with their food safety system partners in terms of prevention, recall of contaminated products, and collaboration and communication, including communication with consumers; and make recommendations based on lessons learned from that event and from other countries' best practices to prevent a similar outbreak in the future and remove contaminated products from the food supply.
I know you're aware that my investigation is ongoing. We're just partway through it, and as such, I am limited in what I can say publicly. This is an important point. While I understand that people want clarity, conclusions, and recommendations that can be acted on as soon as possible, I have the obligation to respect my mandate and not prejudge what I'm hearing and learning over the course of the investigation. I would be doing Canadians a disservice by drawing conclusions before all the evidence was in and analyzed.
What I can say, however, is that the evidence trail is being followed wherever it leads, and I intend to make substantive, clear recommendations that have a common purpose to improve the safety of Canadians in respect of the food they eat. I therefore ask the understanding of committee members in appreciation that this will guide my response to members' questions. I am pleased, however, to discuss today the approach we are taking with the investigation. My mandate requires me to deliver findings and recommendations by July 20 of this year, and I'm confident that the report will be substantive and on time.
We're currently engaged in an in-depth review of events that led to the tragedy last summer, with a particular focus on understanding what happened; what each of the three key federal organizations--the Public Health Agency of Canada, CFIA, and Health Canada--as well as Maple Leaf Foods did, when, and why; analyzing the quality and timeliness of the responses of the three federal agencies; determining the adequacy of actions taken to date in response to the outbreak; and advising on improvements that should be put in place based on what happened last summer, taking into account advice and practices elsewhere in the world.
I can assure you that a key focus for me is identifying improvements so this never happens again.
Our work is guided by five principles: access to the most accurate and complete information available; independence from all parties, both inside and outside government; systematic investigative techniques; external expert advice; and consideration of all legitimate viewpoints to ensure that the approach is fair, collaborative, and constructive.
I wanted to deal with each principle in a bit more detail. First, on ensuring access to the most accurate and complete information available, I am very pleased to report that the investigation has received extraordinary collaboration from the three federal organizations engaged in this issue, as well as Maple Leaf Foods. We've also had fruitful and open and ongoing discussions with senior provincial officials and their chief medical officers of health, including from the Province of Ontario.
To date, we have received significant documentation, which is now under careful examination, and this documentation complements and supports the more than 100 meetings, visits, and investigative interviews that have been completed or are planned in the preparation of our report.
Our investigative team has a mix of backgrounds and expertise. Our team has experience in food safety, public health, long-term care, regulation, and governance. Our team also includes physicians, forensic document experts, and independent investigative legal counsel.
We have a group of external expert advisers, and I'm going to name them for you: Dr. John Carsley, a public health expert, currently a medical officer of health with Vancouver Coastal Health in B.C., previously from Montreal, with a specific expertise in epidemiology; Dr. Walter Schlech from Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia, a listeria expert in the immunocompromised, and Dr. Schlech was involved in the first recorded event to identify listeria in food in the 1980s; Dr. Mansel Griffiths, a food-borne micro-organism expert from the University of Guelph, who is a director of the Canadian Research Institute for Food Safety, well known to industry as the industrial dairy chair in microbiology; Dr. Bruce Tompkin from Illinois, a microbiologist and practical expert in food safety, with a deep experience, a lot of practical experience, who has worked with some of the largest U.S. meat producers--Swift, Beatrice, Armour, ConAgra--and in this role he served as a plant hygiene expert; and last, Dr. Michael Doyle, a microbiologist from Georgia, who is now directly involved in the American peanut recall and the pistachio recall.
On the principle of independence, it is important to me that this review is conducted with full independence. I strongly believe that independence, coupled with the collaborative approach we’ve adopted, gives us the best opportunity to understand what happened and gives us our best chance at constructive suggestions for improvement. As well, our legal counsel is specialized in discovery processes. We have the assistance of forensic document experts to identify key evidence in the data we have received.
On the principle of fairness, it is our goal to treat everyone engaged in this process with respect, an open mind, while ensuring we have basic procedural fairness.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to reassure you and the members of the committee that our investigation is moving forward and we are receiving the full cooperation of all participants. We are on target for a completed and substantive report by July 20.
I believe your committee and this investigation share a common intention to get to the bottom of what happened last summer. Why did the 2008 listeriosis outbreak end in tragedy, 22 deaths, and the suffering caused to Canadian families and communities? Like you, we are seeking recommendations to reduce the risk and the consequences of future outbreaks.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear today. I look forward to your questions
