Health Committee on Nov. 4th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

The topic is the implementation of the recommendations of the Weatherill report.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Well, before I was interrupted, Madam, this was all about the Weatherill report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Mr. Dosanjh, I just want to remind you that we deal with the health issues. Agriculture has dealt with this issue as well. Just keep to the topic.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

I'm sorry. I would like to ask the question. Thank you.

Here's the question. The CVS implemented just before the Maple Leaf outbreak was“ flawed and in need of 'critical improvements related to its design'”. It was “'implemented without a detailed assessment of the resources'... [and a] shortage of food safety inspectors was in play before the outbreak”.

According to an internal CFIA assessment conducted in March and April of this year, many of the problems Weatherill identified continued to plague food inspection in Canada. Among those findings were comments by several participants regarding their experiences:

“insufficient staff to ensure full delivery of CVS in all the plants.”

The new inspection system does not allow inspectors enough time to complete verification tasks and [it] lacks effective compliance and enforcement tools when food companies violate safety requirements.

While some inspectors have access to laptops and high speed Internet, others “continued to work primarily with pencil and paper”.

Inspectors are further hobbled because they do not have direct access to the historical information about companies' food safety records.

Could you please explain how Canadians are to have confidence in the current system, given these findings of your internal assessment?

[Carole Swan]

Madam Chair, I'd be pleased to answer that question.

The CFIA takes the compliance verification system very seriously. It is one of the essential aspects of ensuring that we have safe food.

Following Sheila Weatherill's recommendations, we took a very hard look at our compliance verification system. We did that in many ways. We asked experts to actually look at the tasks that make up CVS, and they produced a report, which I believe has been made available to this committee through the progress report the government has tabled.

We conducted a front-line assessment, for which we met across the country with a variety of front-line inspectors with the Agriculture Union present, to make sure that we had discussions on how CVS was being implemented and what the challenges were. We took all that information together, and there were in fact recommendations for improving CVS. We have acted on those recommendations.

The recommendations related to more inspection capacity, which we're putting in place. There were suggestions about tools, and we are improving connectivity among inspectors. They related to the nature of updating the meat manual of procedures, which we have updated and are keeping up to date. They related to the number of CVS tasks, and in fact we took a very hard look at the CVS tasks and added CVS tasks.

I'm quite confident in saying that we took a very hard look at CVS, in conjunction with the union. That information is public, and we are acting on what we found to improve CVS.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Ms. Swan.

Monsieur Malo.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Please allow me to continue with you, Ms. Swan. When food safety and security is involved, various factors must be taken into account. You will recall that there was a leak at the end of September. In fact, an internal audit became public. It mentioned that the agency's controls over imported foods are lacking. The report touches on multiple areas of risk that need to be dealt with using drastic measures.

Have you dealt with this problem seriously? Have you found ways to show that imported products are subject to the same rules as products made and processed here? Basically, there has to be some kind of reciprocity. Products brought into Canada must be subject to the same rules and be as safe as products made here. Have you taken any concrete actions to resolve this situation?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Go ahead, Ms. Swan.

[Carole Swan]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yes, absolutely we did.

I believe what you're referring to is an audit that we posted, which was done of the CFIA's import policy. The audit covered the period from 2005 to 2008 and it identified shortcomings. We have, in fact, had a very clear look at the shortcomings and are implementing a number of measures, which have dealt with what might be shortcomings.

I would also point out that the government announced the food safety action plan in 2008 with money for CFIA, among others, to focus exactly on risks related to importing foods. We have taken those funds, we are doing more border blitzes, we have increased our testing of high-risk foods, and we have basically used the audit to help define how we should be spending the money in order to improve our inspection of imported foods.

We are very clear that the level of safety of imported foods and domestically produced foods, of course, has to be the same. We cannot put Canadians at risk from import foods. So we did use the audit, we did use the money the government gave us in the food safety action plan, and we focused on imported products.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

With the corrective action you have taken, have you been able to assess whether there has been a real improvement in this area yet? Or will we have to wait several years for a report to determine if the drastic measures needed have been taken?

[Carole Swan]

We post on our website updates to our management plan for the audit. That is one way we do hold ourselves accountable and are very public in terms of what we do. And we will do a more formal audit in a couple of years as we continue to spend the money from the food and consumer safety action plan.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Am I to understand that we will have to wait two years before finding out whether there is a policy of reciprocity, meaning that imported products are subject to the same controls as products made and processed here?

[Carole Swan]

No. You can access our website. We can report to you more fully on the results of our audit and our management action plan for implementing the findings of the audit. But we will continue to audit our activities. That's one of the ways we in fact make sure we are achieving results, and we will continue to audit.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Ms. Yeates, last June we began looking at this issue. When we met, Ms. Meena Ballantyne was here as a witness. She told us that the industry guidelines for new food additives and technologies with the potential to contribute to food safety would be ready this fall. In your comments, you told us that the guidelines were still being drafted.

Is there a delay in the drafting or the presentation of the guidelines?

[Glenda Yeates]

Thank you very much to the honourable member for his question.

No, we are on the schedule as outlined by Meena Ballantyne, our ADM, health products and food branch, when she was here earlier.

We went through a multi-stage process, so in March we posted the draft guidelines. We took a process of gathering the best science and information we could worldwide. I think Canada is now a leader in listeria guidelines as a result of the time that it was taken. We did extensive research prior to posting the draft in March. We then accepted comments and had consultations, because again we felt we wanted to have the best possible document. We did that over the summer. We received over 400 comments from 33 respondents. We reviewed those comments and have now incorporated them into the policy. So the policy is posted.

When I mentioned April 1 as the implementation date, it's because there's always a transition period for both the CFIA inspectors—obviously training and procedures need to be put in place to match the policy—and also for industry. So we are saying to them that this is the standard to which they will be held, this is the policy, and they then have the time to implement the specifics of the policy. So it was always intended that we would post the policy in this timeframe, and we know industry has been doing a great deal already to bring themselves up to standard again. Because of the consultation period, it's not as if this is new to them, but our practice is always to give some time before we finally implement it so people can adjust.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Ms. Yeates.

Now I'll go on to Ms. Hughes.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here to address this very important issue.

Sheila Weatherill found, and I quote from her report, that

Although the CVS is regarded as a sound system and has broad support, it needs critical improvements related to its design, planning and implementation.

Then she also indicated that

If senior management had been more engaged, the CFIA executives might have recognized that the new inspection system was being implemented without a detailed assessment of the resources available to take on these new tasks....

I want to ask you about the PricewaterhouseCoopers report released on October 21. As I understand it, PricewaterhouseCoopers was commissioned to conduct the resources audit Weatherill called for in her recommendation number seven. I'll read you recommendation number seven:

To accurately determine the demand on its inspection resources and the number of required inspectors, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency should retain third-party experts to conduct a resources audit. The experts should also recommend required changes and implementation strategies. The audit should include analysis as to how many plants an inspector should be responsible for and the appropriateness of rotation of inspectors.

The PricewaterhouseCoopers report includes the following statement:

This review does not constitute certification or guarantee the accuracy of CFIA's calculation since the review did not involve, for example, either of the following: detailed testing, analysis or validation (for reliability or completeness) of data sources (e.g. timesheets or CVS reports) underlying CFIA's calculations; or technical or other assessments of CVS tasks in terms of the appropriateness of their nature, frequency or duration.

It sounds to me as if CFIA has not yet complied with Weatherill's recommendations. I'm just wondering, when will you?

[Carole Swan]

The compliance verification system is an absolutely essential part of the agency, and Sheila Weatherill quite properly spent a fair bit of time on it in her report.

I'd like to talk about a couple of things we have done. The PricewaterhouseCoopers report was an independent look at the calculation CFIA had done of inspection resources needed to deliver CVS. We opened our books to PricewaterhouseCoopers. We opened our doors to PricewaterhouseCoopers. We gave it whatever it wanted. In its report PricewaterhouseCoopers, in my view, did confirm that it has found our estimates of resources required were accurate.

We did not leave it at that. As Sheila Weatherill challenged us to do, we looked at how CVS is actually being implemented. We talked to front line inspectors across the country in conjunction with the union again, I might add, because we recognize the union as an important partner in making sure CVS is effective.

We commissioned specific experts to look at the minutiae of CVS tasks and understand if we had the right tasks and the right time allocated to those tasks. We found there were things we could improve, and we did improve them.

For instance, we added additional CVS tasks. This is quite technical, but we did add additional CVS tasks. We gave more time, in fact, for inspectors to do certain CVS tasks, as we heard from inspectors themselves. We improved the training they were given in how to implement CVS, and we improved the tools they have in the organizations, again, to implement this very important verification system.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Has there been a third-party assessment of the resources required to effectively implement the meat inspection system? I'm just wondering because what we're hearing is that the inspectors are saying, sure, they're doing some CVS tasks but are not able to do them all.

Some things are obviously being overlooked, so how are you actually handling that? Has there been a third party to look at the resources, to assess the resources that are necessary to do this?

[Carole Swan]

That would be the PricewaterhouseCoopers work. I should point out also that the contract with PricewaterhouseCoopers was not engaged in by the CFIA. We were really a third party, at arm's length from the work PricewaterhouseCoopers did. We provided it with all the data, all the information. It came in independently to have a look at us.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

How is it possible to conclude that the meat hygiene program will be better? I want to touch base again with what my colleague mentioned with regard to the 155 full-time equivalent inspectors? What is being said here? The people on the ground are the ones who are doing the job, and they're saying what you're suggesting isn't enough.

[Carole Swan]

We are implementing increased inspection capacities, as I mentioned earlier, in two ways. First, we're bringing on board more inspectors to deal specifically with listeria and also to cover off daily presence. We'll have 170 by the time we're finished hiring; 150 are already on our books.

Secondly, if I might just finish, training is very important, because we heard from inspectors that they weren't getting enough training. The manuals weren't up to date. It's very important that CFIA staff be empowered to do the very important work they have to do. We have focused on that as well.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

That's my next question. It was that kind of thing. It was with respect—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I'll watch your time here so you don't lose any, Ms. Hughes, but before you continue, I'll just ask you to keep in mind that Dr. Plummer is also us with, via video. If you have any questions to direct at him, feel free to do that as well.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

I'm fine with whoever wants to jump in on the questions.

If Dr. Plummer wants to answer, my question is with respect to training and education, because the workers are saying they can't take the time to be better trained and to be better educated because there are not enough of them. Are they lying?