50-50 Food safety: the forgotten issue?

In the 2008 election campaign, federal party leaders vowed to make the country's food safer.

Reforms, they pledged, would help insure that Canadians, especially the frail elderly in nursing homes and hospitals, would never have to worry about eating tainted meat again.

These promises were made when the country was still reeling from a listeriosis crisis that would eventually claim the lives of 23 Canadians, precipitate two investigations and shine an unwelcome spotlight on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the minister responsible for it, Gerry Ritz.

A Maple Leaf Foods meat processing plant in Toronto turned out to be the source of the contamination and its CEO stepped up to issue an apology, testify before parliamentarians and settle out of court with those who were directly affected.

For its part, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency hired more meat inspectors and the two investigations into the crisis recommended dozens of ways to improve the inspection of meat in processing plants like the one belonging to Maple Leaf Foods.

But while the leading federal parties have all acknowledged that more needs to be done, they have not directly set out what exactly they would do next.

Perhaps this is why, on April 13, the Canadian Medical Association Journal decided to shake things up with an editorial that pulled no punches: "Food in Canada: Eat at your own risk."

A fair assessment?

In essence, the editorial argued that even after all the publicity generated by the tainted meat crisis, Canada's food system may not be as safe as people think.

Why? Because we do a poor job "detecting, controlling and reporting infections caused by food."

What we need, the editorial continued, is a system that does a better job tracking food-borne illnesses from farm to fork, which means spotting problems before meat ends up in a processing plant.

It is an assessment supported by Bob Kingston, president of the union that represents federal meat inspectors.

Could there be another tainted meat crisis? "The odds have reduced," he says. "But it still could happen."

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has hired more inspectors for meat-processing plants, an additional 70 according to an emailed response from the agency. But Kingston says the CFIA has yet to conduct a proper audit to assess the number of inspectors it truly needs and that some inspectors lack proper training and basic equipment.

"Believe it or not, there are inspectors on the road today who do not have cellphones. When someone tries to reach them, the best they've got is a pager."

For its part, the CFIA says it is in the process of "identifying" ways to track pathogens like listeria, "building" systems to respond quicker to outbreaks, and "supporting" a national effort to track food-borne illnesses.

The choice of verbs alone is probably enough of an indication that much more work needs to be done.

What the parties are saying

The Conservative platform is silent on the issue, but the budget in March promised to spend $17 million over the next two years to "strengthen food safety."

It is not an insignificant amount but it is much less, for example, than the $50 million over the same period for "investing in agricultural innovation."

In the so-called "next phase of Canada's Economic Action Plan" - meaning a few years from now when the deficit is eliminated - the Conservatives are pledging to provide $100 million "over five years to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to improve food inspection capacity."

In their platform, the Liberals pledge broadly to conduct a "comprehensive review of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), to ensure Canada's food safety system is effectively coordinated to minimize risks and assure Canadians that the food on their dinner tables is safe."

As well, the Liberals would spend "an additional $50 million over four years to improve food inspection by the CFIA and to ensure the same food safety standards set for Canadian producers are applied to foods imported into Canada."

That works out to about $12 million a year versus the $9 million and $8 million the Conservatives are promising over each of the next two years.

The NDP platform vows to "introduce a Canadian Food Strategy that will combine health goals, environmental goals, food quality objectives, local and organic choices for consumers across the country."

The NDP is also promising to hire up to 200 food inspectors at a cost of $75 million a year.

Can these plans work?

Rick Holley is a food specialist at the University of Manitoba who advised the Canadian Food Inspection Agency in the wake of the listeriosis crisis.

He says it's fine to talk about hiring more inspectors, but that only addresses part of the problem.

Echoing the observation of the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Holley says the country needs a comprehensive surveillance system that monitors food-borne diseases, akin to the program in the U.S.

Had Canada had such a system in place in 2008, listeria-tainted meat might have been detected before it reached the Maple Leaf plant and ended up in nursing homes and hospitals across the country.

"You have to get at the reasons why problems are happening, and then solve them," Holley says. 

"We just don't have the motivation to take it to the next step. "We have the understanding. But we don't have the dollars that are needed in order to make the transition. And we don't have the political motivation to do it at all."

David McKie can be reached at david_mckie@cbc.ca