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

Results 121-135 of 147
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  We certainly do get our information from CIOSC--that is the acronym. In terms of e-mail or telephone, I don't have that information personally, but it would be the same information.

June 8th, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chairman, the situation is no different than I described. We absolutely agree that, as Ontario notes, through CIOSC, the CFIA was informed that there was an increase in the number of listeriosis cases being experienced in Ontario on the 29th, and I've noted that is the case.

June 8th, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Food and Drugs Act is clear in its direct placement of the responsibility for providing safe food on the producer. As an example, section 4 of the act states: (1) No person shall sell an article of food that (a) has in or on it any poisonous or harmful substance The CFIA Act equally makes clear the responsibility of the CFIA in oversight.

June 8th, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  Let me be clear. We had no knowledge on July 29 of an outbreak, nor did anyone else in the system. The CNPHI, the Canadian Network for Public Health Intelligence, system and the Kiosk system that is used to exchange information are simply a means of reporting information in the public health system.

June 8th, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Subcommittee on Food Safety committee  That's quite all right, Mr. Chair.

June 8th, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  Australia and New Zealand, with their unique ecosystems, have placed a significant focus in this area. We work quite closely with our colleagues in Australia and New Zealand, as well as in the U.S., in the plant health quadrilaterals. It's a tremendous opportunity to learn lessons.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. I will do my best on this front. It's obviously a detailed technical question that might certainly go beyond my expertise. As was noted earlier, the issue of what particular shipments might enter at a particular border, a point of entry, and the nature of the risks associated with those shipments will define the level of intensity of activity.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  That's right, because not all of the circumstances facilitate eradication, unfortunately, as we've learned with the emerald ash borer.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  That's an excellent point. That's why the international collaboration that Brian spoke to earlier becomes so important. Understanding the nature of the risk associated with the pest in its country of origin becomes an important part. The risk assessment process we spoke to earlier takes into account those considerations in defining the nature of the risk--the potential, for example, that the pest will be able to overwinter.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  It is within the North American Plant Protection Organization--and that is the body within which we work with our colleagues to the south, the U.S. as well as Mexico--where we work to harmonize the risk assessment process for North America, where we work towards what we characterize as a North American perimeter approach, where we collectively take similar approaches to preventing the entry of pests not just to Canada or to the U.S., but on a collaborative basis to prevent their entry into North America.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. Mr. Chair, when a new pest enters Canada, the first considerations are, of course, its distribution in Canada and the potential for establishment, its impacts, and potential pathways to spread. The CFIA, as the federal regulatory agency, regulates those behaviours that might contribute to spread and responds in the context of mitigation--eradication where eradication is possible, and where eradication is not possible, then in terms of minimizing that potential for spread.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  Absolutely. Thank you. As Dr. Evans noted, there are a number of pathways of concern. Those pathways don't only relate to the import of plant products. Wood packaging material and the risks it presents can also be a significant issue. That is why the focus of our activities is really on partnership and collaboration.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers

Public Accounts committee  Thank you very much. The answer that Stephen provided earlier gives some insight into the challenge we face. The investment that we've already started to make in terms of some short-term solutions on our IM/IT, coupled with, as the president has noted, a broader assessment of where we can further improve in this area, is focused on the improvement that Stephen noted.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Paul Mayers