Food Safety and Quality
Act
Submitted
by:
Ontario
Cattlemen's Association
Ontario Pork
Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency
Ontario
Cattle Feeders' Association
Ontario Veal Association
Executive Summary
The groups
represented in this submission – Ontario Cattlemen’s Association, Ontario Pork,
Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency, Ontario Cattle Feeders’ Association and Ontario
Veal Association – represent approximately 34,000 livestock producers in Ontario.
We support the position put forth by the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and
wish to highlight several areas of concern to our commodities.
Farm organizations support the updating and consolidation of
safe food legislation and the provincial government needs to be commended for
taking on this initiative. Ontario farmers take pride in producing a safe, wholesome
product.
Overlap
with existing on-farm food safety programs: We recommend
that the provincial government make HACCP and HACCP-based programs the basis of
Ontario’s food safety initiative, and assure industry that any regulations that
will be developed will complement national systems that are recognized by the
CFIA. It is absolutely crucial that this new legislation be developed in harmony
with existing laws and initiatives so as to prevent overlap and duplication, and
keep costs down.
Licensing
of farms: We do not feel that licensing is the solution for farm commodities,
and instead recommend making HACCP-based on-farm food safety programs the basis
for ensuring consumers have a safe food supply. Using an industry and market driven
approach to certify farmers would be preferable.
Enforcement: We
recommend following a consistent approach, employing qualified staff with knowledge
of agriculture and normal farm practices, and allocating sufficient resources
to run the program. Inspectors must be trained in and adhere to biosecurity.
Penalties: We
recommend implementation of a quick appeal process for producers, and a compensation
program for loss of product value and days when farmers are not allowed to ship
animals.
Training
Requirements/Education: We
recommend involving commodity and industry organizations in determining training
needs for each commodity, and advocate the recognition of industry training courses
and programs. It is important to make a clear distinction between primary livestock
production and processing; the same requirements and regulations should not apply
equally to both groups.
Need
for Farming Intelligence: In order to manage the implementation
of food safety initiatives, a database of farms needs to be created, preferably
in a Geographical Information System (GIS) format. The process surrounding the
collection of data must be simplified and streamlined, and there must be coordination
amongst the commodities and government for development of such a database.
Development
of Regulations: Regulations must focus on risk reduction
as opposed to risk elimination. All proposed regulations must be subjected to
both economic and food safety impact analyses prior to implementation. It is important
that the agricultural industry be involved in consultations when regulations are
being developed.
Equal
Playing Field: Any legislated changes that affect domestically-produced
products must also apply to products imported from other provinces and, indeed,
from other countries so as not to put Ontario producers at a disadvantage.
It is our belief that a reliance on HACCP and HACCP-based food
safety programs that are designed to be preventative are better than ones that
depend too heavily on inspection. Supplementing the HACCP systems approach with
clear regulations governing inspection and prosecution will enable decisive action
in times of crisis.
It is important not to stifle production agriculture with overwhelming
legislation, and to keep the balance between guarding against risk and preserving
a positive farming environment. In developing the regulations associated with
this Act, the government needs to work with all commodity boards and other stakeholders
to meet the goal of protecting our food supply while ensuring a viable future
for agriculture.
Introduction
This submission was prepared for the consideration and review
of the Justice and Social Policy Committee on the occasion of consultations on
Bill 87, The Food Safety and Quality Act.
Food safety is a priority for everyone. Farm organizations
support the updating and consolidation of safe food legislation and the provincial
government needs to be commended for taking on this initiative. Ontario farmers
take pride in producing a safe, wholesome product.
It is important that the agricultural industry be involved
in consultations when regulations are being developed. The groups represented
in this submission – Ontario Cattlemen’s Association, Ontario Pork, Ontario Sheep
Marketing Agency, Ontario Cattle Feeders’ Association and Ontario Veal Association
– support the submission put forth by the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, and
would like to highlight several key areas of direct concern on aspects of the
recently introduced legislation.
Section 1.0
Who We Are
The agrifood sector in Ontario is a driving force in the Ontario
economy and is second only to the automotive industry in gross sales. Collectively,
the groups responsible for this submission represent almost 34,000 producers with
farm cash receipts of approximately $2 billion.
¨
The Ontario Cattlemen’s
Association represents 25,000 beef producers in Ontario. Farm gate value of
beef cattle production in Ontario ($1 billion) is second only to dairy. Beef cattle
raised in Ontario provide the raw product for significant primary and secondary
food processing sectors serving the consumer, retail and food service segments
of the economy. OCA acts as the voice of the Ontario beef industry and is active
in government relations, industry development, communications, environment and
research.
¨
Ontario
Pork represents the province’s 4,400 pork producers in many areas
including hog marketing, consumer education, research, environmental issues, animal
care and quality assurance programs. Ontario's pork producers marketed 4.6 million
hogs valued at $780 million in 2000. It is estimated that the total pork industry
is worth $4.2 billion and 35,000 jobs to the Ontario economy.
¨
The
Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency is the producer organization representing
the province's 4,200 sheep producers. In addition to marketing and promotion of
Ontario lamb and wool, OSMA's key strategic directions include advocacy, research
and education. Ontario is the largest sheep-producing province in Canada with
just over 30% of the nation's flock. Sheep and lamb farm cash receipts totaled
more than $28 million in Ontario in 2000. The Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency does
not represent the dairy sheep sector and refers issues relating to sheep milk
to the Ontario Dairy Sheep Association.
¨
The Ontario Cattle Feeders' Association was formed in 1998. The OCFA operates under the direction of 12
feedlot operators who sit on the Board of Directors. The mission of the organization
is to "Improve and maintain a more competitive and viable beef feeding industry
in Ontario". OCFA has a membership base of 90 producers, which represent
55% of the fed cattle in Ontario.
¨
The
Ontario Veal Association is a producer run organization that is
dedicated to representing the interests of both grain fed and milk fed veal producers
in Ontario. Veal production is worth approximately $110 million per year in Ontario.
We have reviewed the legislation and identified a number of
recommendations for your consideration. We believe that addressing these recommendations
would add value and clarity to the implementation of Bill 87.
We agree that nothing is more important than protecting the
quality of our food supply. We also recognize that the province has an important
role to play in assuring food safety and in keeping consumer confidence in our
products high; however, so do the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Agriculture
and Agri-Food Canada and industry groups.
Food safety has moved down the food supply chain to the source
of the product. HACCP-based on-farm food safety programs are being developed for
all commodities, and many industry groups, including those involved in this submission,
are actively involved in the development and implementation of such programs.
These programs, through which producers implement preventative processes at the
farm level to ensure the production of a safe product, are designed by and for
the industry, and are proving to be very effective in improving food safety.
We recommend that the provincial government make HACCP and
HACCP-based programs the basis of Ontario’s food safety initiative, and assure
industry that any regulations that will be developed will complement national
systems that are recognized by the CFIA. It is absolutely crucial that this new
legislation be developed in harmony with existing laws and initiatives so as to
prevent overlap and duplication, and keep costs down. Some of the programs currently underway in the red meat industry
include the following:
The Canadian beef industry developed Quality Starts Here (QSH),
an on-farm food safety and quality program, in 1995. Several publications were created and producer
education implemented that focussed on production of safe, high quality beef.
Recently, the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association modified QSH to become a
HACCP-based, on-farm food safety program. This
will be available to producers on a voluntary basis with the expectation that
market forces will cause it to become mandatory.
Key elements of QSH will include producer training, production
protocols, record keeping, third party farm validation and auditing of the program
at the national level. Recognition of
QSH by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency will be imperative to protect the current
large export market for Canadian beef. The new QSH program is to be launched in early
2002 with implementation in Ontario to be led by the Ontario Cattlemen’s Association.
Many Ontario producers have also enrolled in OCFA’s
Ontario Corn Fed branded beef program, which also carries a Quality Assurance/Food
Safety component. Third party auditors have also been trained and hired through
the program to complete on-farm audits.
¨
Canadian Quality Assurance® Program
In 1998, Ontario
Pork, in conjunction with the Canadian Pork Council, launched the Canadian Quality
Assurance (CQA)® program. CQA® is based on the principles of HACCP (Hazard Analysis
Critical Control Points), an international, science-based approach to food safety,
and is a proactive, and practical on-farm program to address safe food issues.
CQA® is also based on producer education and awareness, and emphasizes good management
practices for the handling and use of animal health products in pigs when administered
by producers.
In order to become CQA® certified, producers must keep three
months’ worth of records documenting their farm practices. These records are checked
by a CQA® validator, who also completes a visit to each producer’s farm to check
facilities. These records are then forwarded to Ontario Pork, and CQA® validation
is granted upon review of the records. Producers must undergo a partial validation
every year, which involves a review of all records and the “On-Farm Quality Assessment
Form” with CQA® validator. A full validation, which includes an on-farm visit
by a validator, must be completed every three years.
To date, approximately 1800 Ontario producers have achieved
Canadian Quality Assured status, representing 2.8 million hogs or more than 60
percent of annual sales. Although the program was voluntary in the past, in March
2001, the Ontario Pork board of directors passed a motion supporting the enrolment
of all Ontario producers in the CQA® program.
¨
Ontario
Veal Quality Assurance Program (OVQAP)
The Ontario Veal Quality Assurance Program (OVQAP) was developed
with the help of industry partners such as commodity organizations, government
agencies, veterinarians and producers. The OVQAP is a two level program encompassing
Food Safety and Product Quality.
The Food Safety aspect is addressed using a HACCP-based
system. Producers must attend a one-day workshop where they are introduced to
the requirements of the program. They must complete the Producer Certification
Manual, which will assist them in determining Critical Control Points on their
farms. Producers must also maintain specific records for a minimum of three months
before they can apply for validation. Several veterinarians have been trained
to perform this function.
Producers who meet both the Food Safety and Product Quality
components of the program, and become validated, can then order unique tamper-proof
OVQAP ear tags. These tags identify each producer through a registration number
and allow for individual identification of each calf. This provides for traceback,
should it be required.
¨
Sheep
Industry Food Safety Program
The Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency is playing a key role in
coordination of a national On-Farm Food Safety Program. This producer-led initiative
is being developed in partnership with government and industry organizations from
across Canada. The goal of the program is to develop an on-farm food safety program
for sheep producers based on HACCP. The program is voluntary and seeks to provide
enhanced consumer confidence in Canadian lamb and/or products, gain international
recognition and ultimately assist in market development.
Society is asking farmers to prove or document their commitment
to agriculture. Over recent years, there has been an increasing expectation of
farmers to be certified in a number of areas. It is not unthinkable that a livestock
producer, in ten years’ time, will require a nutrient management plan, an environmental
farm plan, a grower pesticide safety certificate, a manure applicator certificate,
an on-farm food safety validation and a livestock medicines certificate. An umbrella
for these and other programs needs to be developed to avoid the scenario in which
farmers would simply have no time left to farm because they are so busy with the
paperwork and courses required to farm.
This new legislation explores the issue of requiring producers
to be licensed to meet standards related to on-farm food safety. We do not feel
that licensing is the solution for farm commodities, and instead recommend making
HACCP-based on-farm food safety programs the basis for ensuring consumers have
a safe food supply. Using an industry and market driven approach to certify farmers
would be preferable.
However, if this licensing is to proceed, it should only do
so based on a request from the commodity organization. It is also absolutely essential
that commodity organizations be given input into any regulatory standards that
will be developed. Funds required to develop and administer a database and then
to license 60,000 Ontario farms would be significant.
Enforcement can only be successful with the following key elements:
a consistent approach, qualified and knowledgeable staff and sufficient resources.
Under the proposed legislation, directors and inspectors are given tremendous
powers and must have the industry knowledge to accompany these powers. OMAFRA,
with its agricultural expertise, should be considered as a viable option for ensuring
enforcement of the Act. Regardless of where the inspectors come from, however,
they must possess a strong knowledge of what constitutes normal farm animal practices.
As written, the Act also gives sweeping powers to inspectors
to enter premises. The recent Foot and Mouth outbreak in the United Kingdom increased
awareness of biosecurity. This must be addressed through reference in the Act
as to proper procedures for inspections. We believe that inspectors who enter
farm premises must adhere to existing biosecurity measures and should be trained
accordingly.
There must also be significant differences in what will be
required for inspectors within meat processing plants and inspectors going on-farm.
Applying one rule to all of these sectors does not seem wise.
For meat processing facilities, it is important to have licensing,
fines and on-site enforcement. However, if this legislation is also to apply to
primary livestock producers, there must be compensation for lost product value
when farmers are not allowed to ship animals. Again, this shows the problem with
using one piece of legislation for both processing industries and farms.
The Act currently states that neither inspectors nor the Ministry
will be responsible for any damage, loss of value or loss of product. If a farmer
is found innocent after being shut down during an investigation for a possible
offence, he/she must be compensated for the days when the business is down and
for a loss in product value (i.e. animals that were not sent to market at an appropriate
time, etc.). There is currently no mention of compensation to producers if they
are unable to ship livestock due to a perceived food safety threat that does not
exist or as a result of poor judgement on the part of an inspector.
There also needs to be a specific guideline for a quick appeal
process. Loss of time over weekends when the appeal process is not available needs
to be taken into account. The appeal process must be expeditious so as to ensure
that, if deemed appropriate, are allowed to resume operations as quickly as possible.
A single set of rules will not work for both farmers and meat
processing staff with regards to training requirements. There are significant
differences between these two sectors, and this needs to be clearly addressed
in the regulations. Training requirements cannot be the same for farmers as for
meat plant employees. There is also the issue of the cost of training – something
no individual commodity could absorb. Commodity organizations should be involved
in determining what the training needs are for each sector. This also applies
to items in the Act such as specifying hours of operation, locations of businesses,
etc.
The legislation hints at the possibility of requiring a minimum
level of education. While many livestock farmers have formal training, including
either university or college degrees or industry training courses in their field,
some of our producers only have on-the-job experience. Farmers are constantly
upgrading and expanding their education, especially through current industry programs
such as the Grower Pesticide Safety Course, Environmental Farm Plan and Livestock
Medicines Education Program. It is important that this type of education also be recognized.
Implementation of food safety initiatives will be much less
onerous for those commodities that have legislated powers and field staff already
in place. There may need to be specific government assistance, from both federal
and provincial levels, for those commodity organizations, such as beef, pork and
sheep, who do not have the resources in place to implement such a program.
One challenge to the implementation of on-farm food safety
programs is the lack of data that exists for the agriculture sector in general.
While some commodities have an excellent database of producers, others do not.
A database of farms needs to be created, preferably in a Geographical Information
System (GIS) format. For the creation and maintenance of such a database, the
process surrounding the collection of data must be simplified and streamlined.
Ongoing maintenance costs of such a system would be significant, perhaps higher
than can be sustained by commodity organizations. The provincial government should
see itself as a partner in this initiative. As well, existing industry and government
resources need to be coordinated amongst the groups to avoid unnecessary duplication.
We recognize that Bill 87 is enabling legislation, and as such,
will guide the government’s regulatory process in this regard for many years to
come. Regulations must focus on risk reduction as opposed to risk elimination.
Any regulation attempting risk elimination will fail and, in many cases, cause
undue economic hardship to individual producers and/or industry segments.
All proposed regulations must be subjected to both economic
and food safety impact analyses prior to implementation. The food safety and economic
impacts of regulations must be known and where needed, financial incentives and
compensations put in place.
Section
2.8
Society views agriculture through a very different lens than
in the past. In many respects, agriculture is seen merely as a business producing
a product to be sourced in a global marketplace at the lowest cost. At the same
time, however, society is placing increased demands on domestically produced products.
Any legislated changes that affect domestically-produced products
must also apply to products imported from other provinces and, indeed, from other
countries so as not to put Ontario producers at a disadvantage.
Food security is a concept that embodies environmentally sustainable
production, food safety and viable production to ensure a constant, national supply
of food. Many government and industry initiatives should be blended together into
a national food security policy. Recent federal/provincial Ministers meetings
have identified the pillars of environment, food safety and quality recognition.
These fit nicely into an overall policy of food security.
It is our belief that a reliance on HACCP and HACCP-based food
safety programs that are designed to be preventative are better than ones that
depend too heavily on inspection. Supplementing the HACCP systems approach with
clear regulations governing inspection and prosecution will enable decisive action
in times of crisis.
Agriculture is a very significant business in Ontario and must
be assured of its future in the rural landscape. Legislation and regulations regarding
farming operations must be built on this premise. It is important not to stifle
production agriculture with overwhelming legislation, and to keep the balance
between guarding against risk and preserving a positive farming environment. In
developing the regulations associated with this Act, the government needs to work
with all commodity boards and other stakeholders to meet the goal of protecting
our food supply while ensuring a viable future for agriculture.
The foundations of our country were built on agriculture. Our future lies in the capability of the industry to continue to feed not only ourselves, but the world.
