“Food safety in Canada, believe it or not, is an accident. It really is,” says Rick Holley, a University of Manitoba food-safety expert and an adviser to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

That’s how Toronto’s Globe and Mail newspaper kicks off a week-long series on the global marketplace for food, and how Canada has yet to come to terms with the regulatory, economic and technological challenges of global food, by reporter Steven Chase.

Last year, Canada imported more than 33 million litres of apple juice from China; 11.8 million kilograms of pickles and relish from India and 4.9 million kilograms of cashews from Vietnam, all part of a two-decade-long surge that has made imported food – often from developing countries – a significant component of the Canadian diet. All of it is grown or processed far beyond the reach of Canada’s food inspection system, which – contrary to what consumers might expect – is still struggling to catch up to the reality of a global food market.

Critics say Canada’s ability to safeguard its citizens from the risks of both domestic and imported food is falling behind – charges levelled even as efforts are under way at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to update practices for the 21st-century global marketplace.

Today, foreign food makes up 15 to 20 per cent of this country’s diet.

Importers are not currently required by Ottawa to provide documentation that traces a primary food product to its origin. Some food retailers and importers may, however, already collect this information for their own commercial purposes.

Chief Food Safety Officer Brian Evans says CFIA intends to propose that importers be required to document the origin of all “ single entity products” – as opposed to multi-ingredient goods – they bring into Canada. These would include fish, eggs, leafy greens, salads, fresh fruits and vegetables. We would like to have country of origin traceability requirements as part of the first set of regulations going forward. We would like to see that in 18 to 24 months.”

However, he said, the timing and final details of such a plan is up to the government.

Roughly about 1 to 2 per cent of foreign food imports that enter Canada are inspected. The agency heavily inspects some products such as meat and also pays closer attention to goods that have a history of carrying food-borne illness – such as fish or leafy greens or eggs.

The CFIA argues that the absence of big problems shows the system works. In any given day, Dr. Evans says, about 100-million meals are eaten in Canada – which works out to about 36.5 billion meals at year. And what’s going wrong? There are about 250 to 300 recalls of food each year following inspections or consumer complaints. Canadians also suffer an estimated 11- million cases of acute gastroenteritis each year – a relatively minor amount – and one that federal authorities suggest is largely due to food preparation mistakes or bad hygiene rather than substandard imports.

However, the University of Manitoba’s Dr. Holley says a push for traceability is not a priority when there are other problems with food safety, including a lack of comprehensive information on what is making Canadians sick. “It's like putting a sunroof on a car that has bald tires.”

While regulators waffle over how to improve food safety, some of the world’s largest grocery sellers have been using their market muscle to force suppliers to clean up or risk being punted from retail’s most sought-after shelves.

Leading the run are the same corporate giants critics blame for jeopardizing food safety amidst their globe-spanning pursuit of abundant cheap food. But no one is arguing about the impact grocery heavyweights are having on safety in the global supply chain, where their border-transcending clout eclipses the reach of public regulators.

Wal-Mart, the world’s largest grocer, cut through a highly political debate over tainted hamburger meat in the U.S. this year by forcing suppliers to conduct specialized tests for E. coli and salmonella.

In Canada, Loblaws became the first national retailer to insist private-label suppliers comply with safety standards under the Global Food Safety Initiative, an alliance started by eight of the world’s largest food retailers.

Jorgen Schlundt, the recently departed director of food safety at the World Health Organization, worries big retailers view food safety as a marketing tool. “There is a huge difference between what consumers ... think is important and what is really important,” Dr. Schlundt said. “It is extremely important that the science that standards are built upon and the standards themselves are not made by industry – not made by the people who are supposed to be monitored by government,” he said.

I’d rather those standards were publicly available and marketed at retail so consumers – who probably know a lot more about food safety than Dr. Schlundt thinks they do – could support those producers and processors that consistently provide microbiologically safe food – and can prove it.

User Rating: Select ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome

Your rating: None (1 vote)

The Dallas Morning News ran a couple of excellent features on the flow of food from Mexico to the U.S. Yesterday's story was about the lack of inspectors, how little product was actually inspected, and, perhaps unwittingly, the problem of inspecting fresh produce for microbial contaminants.

“In December, officials took a sample for testing from a 5,500-pound load of Mexican basil moving through the Otay Mesa border crossing in San Diego. The basil continued on to its destination and was sold to restaurants and other customers in California, Texas and Illinois the next day. When the test results came back two weeks later, they suggested salmonella contamination, sparking a late recall.”

It's much better to design safety into all operations, beginning on the farm.

Glenn Fry helps run Taylor Farms de Mexico's new $14 million plant in San José Iturbide, Mexico. He picked the land where it sits, designed just about every facet of it, and he manages more than 800 workers who plant, harvest and package produce – including lettuce, onions and broccoli – for export to the U.S.

Today’s story says that Taylor Farms is just one of a handful of U.S. companies lured by Mexico's ideal year-round growing climate, proximity to Texas, low labor costs and plentiful workforce.

During a recent lettuce harvest, quality-control supervisor Laura Patino pointed to an aide who monitors workers coming out of the mobile toilets at the end of the fields to make sure they wash their hands before returning to work.

"Many of our workers don't even have toilets at home, so this is new to them," Ms. Patino explains. "We've literally taught many of them how to go to the restroom. It's that basic."

The lettuce field – owned by Oscar A. Bitar Macedo and leased by Taylor – is fenced off from outside "contamination." Heavy strips of yellow plastic keep out dogs, cattle and other livestock.

Mr. Bitar, owner of Rancho Don Alberto, leases all of his 100 hectares (about 247 acres) to Taylor. And he's responsible for maintenance, water wells, monthly water testing, fencing, security guards and, yes, even toilet paper. …

Within two hours, 24 boxes, each holding about 850 pounds of lettuce, are transported to Taylor's plant a few miles down the road for the first of several safety checks.

At the entrance, 19-year-old Efigenia Rosas checks the boxes to make sure they're labeled with bar codes identifying the owner's farm, crew supervisor, field and time of harvest – a crucial step in the process. If a consumer later finds a problem, Taylor can trace the produce back to the field and farmer. …

At 6 p.m., driver Roman Ayala, an employee of Flensa Trucking, begins the drive north on Mexico's Highway 57. He's in no rush because he has no chance of getting to Nuevo Laredo before Customs shuts down the bridge at 11 p.m. And it won't reopen until 8 a.m., something that frustrates Mr. Fry to no end.

"How can the U.S. government be serious about food safety when they shut down the border overnight and perishable goods have to sit there and wait?" he asks.

There is also a good video overview of the lettuce harvesting procedures available along with the story at http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/world/mexico/stories/063008dningproducttaylor.40d72a3.html

User Rating: Select ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome

Your rating: None

The U.S. Interagency Working Group on Import Safety has issued its report to President Bush with the snappy title, Protecting American Consumers Every Step of the Way: A strategic framework for continual improvement in import safety.

The report outlines an approach that can build upon existing efforts to improve the safety of imported products, while facilitating trade.

Approximately $2 trillion of imported products entered the United States economy last year and experts project that this amount will triple by 2015. … While we acknowledge it is not possible to eliminate all risk with imported and domestic products, being smarter requires us to find new ways to protect American consumers and continually improve the safety of our imports. We recommend working with the importing community to develop approaches that consider risks over the life cycle of an imported product, and that focus actions and resources to minimize the likelihood of unsafe products reaching U.S. consumers. …

Supporting this model are six building blocks: 1) Advance a common vision, 2) Increase accountability, enforcement and deterrence,
3) Focus on risks over the life cycle of an imported product, 4) Build interoperable systems, 5) Foster a culture of collaboration, and 6) Promote technological innovation and new science.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Food and Drug Administration would be granted power to require manufacturers and importers of "high risk" products to take steps to prevent contamination and other problems. The FDA could require producers and importers of such goods to certify they comply with FDA standards. The FDA could bar imports if it is given no access or only limited access to production records. The agency would also be able to mandate recalls on tainted products, something it can't do now.

At least the panel got this bit right:

"Americans benefit from one of the safest food supplies and among the highest standards of consumer protection in the world. Our task is to build on this solid foundation by identifying actions for both the public and private sectors that will help our import safety system continually improve and adapt to a rapidly growing and changing global economy."

Not the safest, which is difficult to substantiate, but one of the safest.

There's no real surprises in the report, it all sounds good, but really, government is limited in what it can do. And I'm not sure what they mean by focusing on high-risk products. Anything can be high-risk depending on how it was produced -- pot pies, peanut butter and pepperoni come to mind. And those were all foodborne illness outbreaks associated with domestic products. Food from around the corner or around the globe has the potential to be contaminated with dangerous microorganisms. Focusing on imports may detract from efforts at home. A strong food safety culture may translate to fewer sick people.

User Rating: Select ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome

Your rating: None