Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 91-105 of 147
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Agriculture committee  No, not at all.

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  A comprehensive--

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  Thank you. Absolutely, the answer is yes: increased inspection at the border and increased action beyond the border. Because long before the foods arrive in Canada...we believe that prevention starts at the country of origin. So we're working outside Canada as well in terms of e

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  In terms of the inspection program, that $223 million in investment focuses not just in terms of programs, but in on-the-ground inspection.

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  We can certainly report back. Those programs, as you know, are operating over a five-year period, with full implementation in 2013. So we would have to report back to you the number of inspectors that will be part of the overall improvement.

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  Thank you very much. In terms of the way the process works, the U.S. does not delist the plants. Canada delisted those plants in terms of their eligibility to export to the U.S. We took that action in response to the finding because they were not, therefore, meeting the export e

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the question. Indeed, the audit of the imported food program is an important part of our continuous look at how we do our business in order to improve. That audit covered April 2005 to March 2008, so it did not take into account the $223 mi

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Agriculture committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The U.S. posts their audit of us. We post our audit of them. The U.S. audit of the Canadian system isn't on our website because it is a U.S. audit. In terms of the issue, which is food safety, any audit process will of course identify any issu

November 18th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  Thank you. The agency uses a risk-based approach, so it's not simply a one-plant, one-number approach. Slaughter establishments for meat of course require continuous presence. As we've heard already, in terms of meat processing, they receive daily inspection visits. In other

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  Thank you, Madam Chair. For the sake of brevity, there are significant numbers of continuous improvements in the system, but as it relates to listeria particularly, given the focus of today's discussion there are three areas I would note. One is that we significantly enhanced th

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  The U.S. legislation does require a daily presence in meat processing facilities. That's correct.

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  All facilities in Canada, both those exporting to the U.S. and those not exporting to the U.S., receive a daily inspection visit.

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  The U.S. undertakes audits of the Canadian system typically on an annual basis, and we similarly audit their system, because the systems in Canada and the U.S. have formally been reviewed as equivalent.

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Health committee  Thank you very much, Madam Chair. The requirement that companies report to us any findings of significance in terms of public health has been tremendously valuable. What it allows us to do is not only identify individual issues but undertake trend analysis. That is perhaps the

November 4th, 2010Committee meeting

Paul Mayers