(Ottawa) Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau reiterated Monday her confidence in the independence of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), which is getting away with a pat on the finger after a document about a new generation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) lists the name of an agrichemical lobby leader as the author in the metadata.
Posted at 7:22 p.m.
“The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is an independent agency whose guidance is based on science. In carrying out her mandate, she consults with stakeholders from all walks of life — as well as other independent sources — to make informed decisions,” she wrote in a statement released to The Canadian Press by her office.
Mme However, Bibeau believes that the CFIA still needs to make improvements to document processing.
“I question the way the document was shared and I asked senior management to follow up and make the necessary corrections,” she says.
Who is the author ?
In an explanatory email following a request for comment on an article published Monday by Radio-Canada, the agency insists that it is the sole author of the document
The organization says that, as part of consultations, an updated draft of part of the seed regulations was sent to industry associations representing seed developers to provide ” feedback”.
It is “in one of the returned copies” that the CFIA continued to work, it is mentioned. This copy carries metadata associated with Jennifer Hubert, the General Manager of the Plant Biology Sector at the CropLife Canada Lobby.
The document was “reviewed” by the CFIA and “subsequently circulated to a broader group of stakeholders,” including not-for-profit organizations and organic associations for feedback.
The “proposed key directions” were drafted by the agency, the spokesperson argues. He adds that “external parties, including industry associations, are not the authors of CFIA documents.”
” Together ”
In a statement, activist group Vigilance GMO said it was “scandalous” that the federal government was “letting lobbies make their own regulations” using documents created by pesticide and GMO industry representatives “as a proposal regulation” of new GMO seeds.
Called to react to the CFIA’s explanations, the organization’s coordinator, Thibault Rehn, replied that he “does not buy their explanations”, he who received the document “written by the industry” and then ” may be modified” by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
Either way, Rehn says the current situation “proves how” the CFIA is “so used to working hand-in-hand than exchanging documents and taking documents written by the industry, it doesn’t seem to be a problem”.
His group also notes that the CFIA seems to consult industry first before other partners, while parties with financial interests in regulatory changes should be contacted after farmers, civil society and independent scientists.