Ruth Ellen Brosseau

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 4th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, on September 3, a shipment of meat from XL Foods was stopped at the U.S. border because of E. coli contamination.

However, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency did not ask the company for the information it needed about meat processing before September 6. Consumers were unnecessarily exposed to contamination for an extra 72 hours.

Can the minister tell us why it took the agency three days to take action?

[Food Safety, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, it is the minister's responsibility. Why do we have ministers if they are not held accountable? He has to be held to account. This is the second time it has happened. Do we need someone else to pass away? I think this is enough.

As I said, if one of our family members got sick, would the situation be different? Would we be having this debate? There would have been more movement. I think something would have happened faster. I do not want anyone else to get sick.

We are elected members of Parliament. We have a job to do. Enough passing the blame, let us move to action.

[Food Safety, October 3rd, 2012]

I really do enjoy working with you on the committee. You too, Pierre—

[Food Safety, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I do have the bill and I think it is a good piece of legislation. This is a step in the right direction, but it needs more meat on its bones. This is not enough.

We actually have some quotes if I could find them in time.

With regard to Bill S-11, Bob Kingston said that, unless the government committed to providing the necessary resources, Canadians could not expect to see improvements to food safety as a result of this one bill.

This is not enough. We have other statements saying this is not enough.

I will vote for it, but we will have many amendments and I hope the members opposite are open to them.

[Food Safety, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Burnaby—New Westminster.

I congratulate my colleague on his speech. I want to point out that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has a role to play. As elected representatives, we also have a role to play. Where does the responsibility of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food lie in this issue? We do not see it, and that is worrisome.

This is the largest recall of meat in history. It is worrisome and really incredible in 2012. How can a country like Canada find itself in this situation?

On September 4, tests revealed a risk of E. coli contamination. The United States found out about the contamination on September 3. Last week, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency announced the suspension of the operating licence of the XL Foods processing plant in Brooks, Alberta. This means that the plant remained in operation for over three weeks after the first suspicions, until September 27. This is unacceptable. Thousands of Canadians were exposed to E. coli because of this delay.

Why wait 24 days to close a plant where such a problem had been detected? That is the question. It seems to me that, faced with such a situation, it is better to proceed with caution and to take action as soon as there is a risk that food safety for Canadians may be compromised.

It took several days of investigation and tests for the CFIA to come to the conclusion that it was necessary to shut down the plant in Alberta. That is what we condemn. It is not only the safety of Canadians that is at stake, but also our trade relations and our credibility with the public.

Since September 16, the CFIA has issued at least eight alerts for recalled beef products from the XL Foods plant, because it fears E. coli contamination. This recall affects thousands of products. The recall of meat is growing every day. In Quebec, the recall of beef products that may have been contaminated with E. coli is getting larger.

In addition to the ground beef already identified elsewhere in the country, there are now other meat cuts sold all over Quebec. Even more worrisome is the fact that the recall also includes unlabelled and no-name beef products sold in retail stores, local meat markets and butcher shops. People are worried, and understandably so.

I would like to read some comments I received from the people of Berthier—Maskinongé. Before the E. coli crisis, I asked the people of my riding what some of their concerns were. Here is part of a letter from a woman from Saint-Alexis-des-Monts:

The reinstatement of Canadian Food Inspection Agency inspectors is urgent and crucial. Canadians should be able to buy any of the food offered for sale in Canada with full confidence.

This comment was sent to me before the crisis. Does anyone here believe that Canadians can trust the food inspection system? A system that took 24 days to close a plant that was producing contaminated meat? A system that took 12 days to even warn Canadians? A system that allowed tainted meat to make its way to our store shelves? I do not think so.

Another woman wrote, “We have 18-month-old twins and when we read labels, it is very worrisome.”

Parents should not have to worry about what they are feeding their children. In Canada, it seems they do need to worry. We should be able to trust our food safety system. As a mother, my thoughts are with Christina Lees, whose son Elijah got sick. She said she felt powerless and was angry that her son got sick and that it could happen to other people.

As parents and elected officials, we have a job to do. The minister has a responsibility. This is the second time this has happened in five years. If it were one of our children or one of our family members who became sick because of E. coli, would that make a difference?

Would changes at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency happen more quickly? Perhaps.

Why did it take so long to act, and more specifically, why did the government not learn its lesson from the listeriosis crisis? I get the impression that the recent cuts to CFIA are setting us back five years.

Food inspection is less regulated. It seems obvious that the government took a long time to act because of a lack of resources. The Conservative government's draconian cuts and the limited resources at CFIA increase the risk of this happening again.

This spring, the Conservatives tabled their Trojan Horse budget. I do not think anyone has forgotten that massive bill. How could we forget a 425-page bill?

In that budget, the Conservatives decided to take an axe to public services, and Canadians are paying the price. Food inspection is extremely important. That is not the place for budget cuts.

According to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's reports on plans and priorities for 2012-13 and 2014-15, planned spending is declining by approximately $46.6 million, and the number of full-time employees is going down by 314.

On April 25, 2012, I asked what effects the cuts would have on food safety, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture responded, “...what I said was that no cost-cutting measure will compromise food safety.” Look at where we are now.

Look at the situation we are in now. We have the largest beef recall in Canadian history. That is a big deal. When a government makes cuts to food inspection, there are consequences. The work that inspectors and veterinarians do is essential to Canadians' safety.

The Conservatives love to talk about their food safety bill, Bill S-11. They also love to say that the New Democrats will vote against this bill. First, I never said that I would vote against it. We need more measures to protect food safety in Canada.

The truth is that this bill was introduced in the Senate instead of the House of Commons. Why? This means that we have not had the chance to debate this bill, because it is currently being debated by non-elected officials. Why would they introduce it in the Senate? Are the Conservatives afraid?

If they are proud of their bill, why not introduce it in the House of Commons? Why not let my colleagues debate it in the House? That is what we are waiting for.

In the summer of 2008, the listeriosis crisis resulted in the recall of Maple Leaf deli meats. This crisis shook consumers' confidence and revealed obvious flaws in the food inspection system.

Some of the findings of the independent investigation that the federal government asked Sheila Weatherill to conduct following the 2008 listeriosis outbreak included a lack of focus on food safety among senior management in both private and public domains, a lack of planning and preparation, and a lack of communication with the public and among the various organizations.

At the time, the first case of food poisoning related to the consumption of a product made at the Maple Leaf processing plant was reported the week of June 1, 2008. The first recall was issued on August 17. In the meantime, products that were potentially contaminated with listeria continued to be sold across the country. The current situation bears a striking resemblance to that incident.

Many recommendations were made. Ms. Weatherill urged the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to establish product control requirements following positive test results for listeria on food contact surfaces. This measure would make it possible to ensure that contaminated food was withdrawn before it was distributed to consumers.

As a result, the government took steps to prevent such a situation from happening again. However, the government now wants to do more with less. We all know we cannot do more with less.

Wishful thinking will get us nowhere, and food safety for Canadian families must be paramount.

We cannot put a price tag on food safety.

When will the Conservatives demonstrate transparency to the Canadian public? When will the government take action to ensure the safety of Canadians? When will the government admit that it is responsible for this situation?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, there are limits to shirking responsibility for what goes on in one's own department.

The United States discovered the problem on September 3, and yet the plant at the centre of all this remained open for another three weeks, until September 27. Thousands of Canadians were exposed to E. coli because of this unacceptable delayed reaction.

Why did it take 24 days to close a plant that was known to have such a problem?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the Conservatives is that they have no idea what is going on in the different departments, or so it seems with this E. coli tainted meat crisis. The minister was incommunicado for several days while Canadians were looking for answers. The beef recall keeps expanding every day.

Why are the Conservatives refusing to take responsibility for this crisis and why did they wait so long to tell the truth?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the tainted beef crisis is the second major crisis to shake the Canadian meat industry in less than five years.

This meat recall fiasco is strangely reminiscent of the mess surrounding the listeriosis crisis. Every time, Canadian producers and the entire agri-food industry are the ones who pay the price. It also costs the Canadian economy billions of dollars. That is the price of Conservative cuts.

Canadians have a right to know.

Why does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food refuse to accept his own responsibility in the current crisis?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, for months we have been telling the Conservatives that food safety is not negotiable. Their response has been to claim that the budget cuts have no impact and that E. coli contamination is not serious. The Conservatives are the ones who accelerated the food inspection process last spring. Why? To save money.

It is not complicated: does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food understand the consequences of the budget cuts for food safety?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that is nonsense.

Yesterday, when speaking about the E. coli outbreak at the Alberta plant, the Minister of Agriculture said that there had been no illnesses in this case. So there is no problem. However, investigations are under way in five to eight cases. When this kind of problem comes up, consumers become distrustful and the entire industry pays the price. The United States raised the problem three days before Canada.

Why does the minister say he is satisfied with the situation?