Last Thursday, there was a point when the line of cars turning into Wawota stretched down the highway, almost to the town limits. Approximately 300 livestock producers and others involved in the industry, had traveled to the small community to attend a Town Hall Meeting focusing on the changes to livestock traceability that have been proposed by the CFIA.
Producers came to the meeting seeking answers.
They left with a call to action.
Henry McCarthy helped to organize and led the meeting. McCarthy is a veterinarian in Wawota and a livestock producer who says that traceability has been a crucial part of the industry for a long time, and stresses that any expansion of traceability regulations must involve more than simply shifting the workload
“We’ve always had traceability and the original system had lots of compliance. It was cheque books, receipts and Brand Inspection Manifests, and it worked in the past, when we were dealing with tuberculosis and brucellosis.
“Individual animal tracking was supposed to speed up and ease that process, and any expansion made now should be done to improve it. The original traceability process was fairly onerous for the CFIA. We have to make sure that the changes being proposed now don’t involve just taking the onus off of the CFIA and putting it all on producers.”
To date, very little information about the proposed enhanced regulations has been provided by the CFIA and one producer who came to the mic during the meeting in Wawota expressed the frustration that comes with a lack of clear, reliable information.
“What is the ask? What are they telling us we can and can’t do? That does not seem to be clear. There was stuff put out on Facebook originally, but if you commented on it, you had people jumping down your throat and telling you that wasn’t what they are asking for. So, what are we debating here? Is there anyone in the building that can tell us exactly what they’re asking?”
Unfortunately, the answer was “No”.
Although the CFIA stated that it will “pause any publication of the regulations until the proposed changes are more widely understood and concerns are heard and taken into consideration” further information has not yet been forthcoming from the agency. Nor were any representatives from the CFIA on hand to respond at the meeting.
Kevin Weedmark (MLA Moosomin) who had come to the meeting in response to concerns brought to him by producers in his riding and was there to “listen to producers, learn from them and understand what the issue is” says that this lack of information from the CFIA makes meaningful debate problematic at best.
“It sounds like there are some communication issues around this whole thing. When you’re discussing proposed regulations, I would love to have those proposed regulations in hand, to know what I’m discussing. But it certainly seems as though the CFIA hasn’t communicated with producers about what these proposed regulations are going to be.”
McCarthy says that this lack of clear, reliable information on what the proposed changes are leaves producers anxious and uncertain
“Everybody wants security. If you don’t know what’s coming or how it might hurt your business, how secure do you feel? The question that needs to be addressed right now is ‘What’s next? Where is this heading?’”
Yet at the same time he says that it is concern for both the present and the future that is fueling producer’s determination to take action despite the uncertainty.
“The theme that I heard a lot in that room was that people were there for themselves – but also their children and grandchildren. When people start thinking that way, that’s powerful.”
McCarthy is also Second Vice President of the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA) and the SSGA representative on the Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association (SCA) Board). He stresses that the best way producers can ensure that their concerns are communicated effectively, is by engaging with those associations and individuals representing them
“Our goal in holding this meeting was to get to the point where we can come up with some concrete ideas and suggestions. Debate is great, that’s what we were after. But we don’t want kneejerk reactions. We want well-thought-out plans of action.
“The feeling I get is that producers want to get something done now and not kick the can down the road and delay it more. For that to happen, producers must realize that information flows uphill. During BSE, everyone was asking lots of questions and information flowed downhill. People got used to that. But that’s not the way it works here. The CFIA will be in charge of its own messaging. But it’s up to these producer associations to convey the message of what the producers want up the hill, and producers need to give them the power to do that.
“Producers need to focus on getting their concerns to their representative on the various associations and becoming involved with those associations. If you can’t attend a meeting, talk to your zone representative and they can present a resolution on your behalf. That way, the message about what producers want will at least be flowing in the right direction, and the people volunteering for those positions can have some direction and support.”
Daryl Harrison (MLA Cannington) is both a former Provincial Agriculture Minister and a livestock producer. Harrison was also at the meeting in Wawota and agrees that producers need to work with their representatives.
“These industry-led groups are very valuable to producers because that’s where government seeks its direction from. So, that’s where producers need to focus their attention. They need to be involved, talk to their representatives and let them know how they feel. If they want to make sure their concerns are heard, people need to have those concerns funneled through the producer groups.”
Another message to come out of the meeting was a call to reform the CFIA itself.
When the CFIA was originally created as an “arm’s length” regulatory agency, it reported primarily to the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, and then to the Ministry of Health. However, under the Harper Government, this was reversed, so that the CFIA now reports primarily to the Ministry of Health.
Christine Ewert Hill (Veterinarian and purebred livestock producer) says that bringing the CFIA back under the primary oversight of the Ministry of Agriculture is necessary.
“The CFIA has to be accountable and who keeps the CFIA accountable matters, because regulations won’t work unless they work for producers. If the CFIA was brought back under the Ministry of Agriculture, there would be more opportunity to ensure that the realities of livestock production are heard and clearly understood. So, we need to push for serious CFIA reform so that we can have confidence that the CFIA is doing what needs to be done in a timely and logical manner.”
Harrison agrees, adding that such a change would not compromise the ability to ensure food safety.
“My biggest concern with the CFIA is that it reports primarily to the Ministry of Health. We must be sure that we’re doing the right things, so that we can provide consumers with the assurance that the steak, roast or ground beef that they buy is safe to eat. Yet what we’re discussing here is all about agriculture. When a feeder animal goes from the farm – to the feedlot – to slaughter – that is all agriculture. It’s when that animal is slaughtered that it becomes food and we start talking about food safety. Of course it’s not a completely clear-cut distinction. But, having the CFIA report primarily to the Ministry of Agriculture would not, in my opinion, compromise our ability to provide the consumer with that necessary assurance.”
However, with the clock ticking on the pause put in place by the CFIA, McCarthy says priority must be given to dealing with the situation as it stands.
“The most important question to ask right now is – where do we go from here? This is an opportunity I haven’t seen come around very often, where producers are so engaged. I think that’s why we had such a good turn-out at the meeting. People want to participate. I also think that everyone has to be willing to be at the table because if our producers don’t have confidence in our system, then we have no system. And there’s a lot of things that look good on paper, but make it reality, and it becomes a different story. The CFIA has their perspective and the producers have theirs. For this to work, those two have to come together.”
