Human Resources committee  First of all, our president referred to protection not only for pregnant and nursing women but also for young workers trying to start a family. In terms of the implications of the changes here and how they would affect a pregnant woman under these certain circumstances, is in the definition of danger.

Human Resources committee  Sure. According to our data, and this comes from Treasury Board, by the way, so I'm quite surprised that you got the answers you did the other day. According to our data, in 2004 there were 147; in 2005, 151; in 2006, 140; in 2007, 125. For the three-year cycle from 2004 to 2006, the number fluctuated between 140 and 150.

Human Resources committee  It absolutely will make it more dangerous.

Human Resources committee  I thought I was getting a gift there. Thanks.

Human Resources committee  My focus will be on the presentation that was done on the 19th. I believe that this committee and the minister have been ill-served by some of the information that has been coming out about its shortcomings. What you heard from the department was incomplete, would be the politest way I can say it.

Finance committee  It's buyer beware. There will be some policing of labels going on, but nothing like what happened in the past. The federal government has responsibility for label integrity and verification, and that goes right down to restaurant menus. That program was also shelved about a year and a half ago.

Finance committee  That's correct. They're putting in more regulations, but they don't have anybody to enforce them.

Finance committee  Right now there are about 100. In terms of total population, there have been 310 so far. Some of them are different classifications, but they still monitor imports. The reason I say the regulation is better not being there than being there is because the good players, and there are many really good actors, including the small abattoirs, by the way, and we do have a plan for that, are penalized.

Finance committee  There are many aspects of what's going on with this particular budget that may, and probably will, affect consumers. For example, the question was asked in CFIA that if we're not doing something for all other products, why should we do it for meat. It was about monitoring and targeting problem suppliers.

Finance committee  Correct. Yes, we already do that. What we did was target shipments to make sure that if we had bad actors, we could follow up and increase surveillance. Those people who did that targeting and monitoring of the track records are history.

Finance committee  All the people who have been delivering this program are gone. The folks who are going to be taking it over as a third party are supposed to have a process in place. It's an accreditation program and you build safety mechanisms into the monitoring process. There's not anybody to do that; that's the problem.

Finance committee  I'm aware that none was done. What made it difficult is that, like many departments, most of the senior executives at CFIA are not from that industry. When they had to make these decisions, there was a process in place under which they couldn't talk to anybody about it. So most of the cuts that are being put in place for financial reasons—I can understand that.

Finance committee  Yes, it's absolutely putting Canadians at risk.

Finance committee  I am also a certified lead auditor—ISO lead auditor. I have helped develop many programs that would allow third parties to deliver. There's a required amount of oversight, because the Canadian government stamp still goes on what happens. The problem with CFIA making these decisions in the context of cutbacks is that they are designed programs, and all they are doing is counting the bodies they are removing and not counting the ones they will need for the oversight.

Finance committee  That's not the way it works. There's no such thing as seniority in the—