 |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Acts and Regulations > Regulatory Initiatives REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT(This statement is not part of the Regulations.) DescriptionThe purpose of the Health of Animals Act (the Act) is to prevent the introduction of animal diseases into Canada and to prevent the spread within Canada of diseases of animals that either affect human health or could have a significant economic effect on the Canadian livestock industry, and to provide for the humane treatment of animals during transport. Pursuant to paragraph 6(2) of the Act, a person who owns or has the possession, care or control of an animal or of any other thing that is capable of being affected or contaminated by a disease or toxic substance shall supply in the prescribed manner such samples from the animal or other thing as the Minister may request. International standards require that Canada (the CFIA) periodically perform surveys to reaffirm the level or absence of a particular animal disease in Canada. An example of such an activity would be the triennial bovine serological survey in which the CFIA collects 16,000 bovine blood samples which are tested for brucellosis, bluetongue and anaplasmosis. The results of this survey enable Canada to continue to claim freedom from these diseases and thus exemptions from conditions of export applicable to these diseases. Emerging human disease threats frequently involve an animal species reservoir. When Canada becomes aware of an emerging human health crisis, it may be necessary to rapidly survey an animal population in Canada to ascertain if the disease agent is present in Canada or to use certain animal species as sentinels to monitor the entrance of the disease into Canada. West Nile virus was a good example of such a scenario. Testing of both horses and birds were used to monitor the entrance into and spread of this disease in Canada. Sudden domestic or international discoveries of contaminated products in the feed / food chain may necessitate an immediate survey of a particular product to ascertain whether or not a problem that requires action exists. The announcement of dioxin contamination of fat used in the manufacture of livestock feed in Belgium that necessitated the investigation of all related products imported into Canada from all of Europe was an example of such a situation. While the current regulations enable CFIA inspectors to procure samples in any situation in which they suspect disease or contamination by a toxic substance, they do not currently enable the procurement of samples of animals or things capable of being affected by a disease or toxic substance when no disease is suspected. As described above, surveillance programs or surveys of animals or things capable of being affected by a disease or toxic substance are frequently undertaken even when no disease or contamination is suspected in that population. They are undertaken either as an initial investigation to determine if the disease or toxic substance is even present in Canada, or may be repeated routinely to document that Canada remains free from that particular disease or toxic substance. The proposed amendment will serve to harmonize the Act and the Regulations by adding a provision to the Regulations for inspectors to procure samples from susceptible animals or products even when a disease or contamination by a toxic substance is not suspected. In addition, the proposed amendment would see that samples stipulated in a written order by a Minister’s request could be provided by a person who owns or has care or control of an animal, a carcass or a related product. Enabling a person other than an inspector, that is present with the animal, carcass or product to collect the sample will give the CFIA greater control and flexibility over sampling and will help the CFIA to manage inspector resources. AlternativesOption 1 - Status quo Typically, sector wide surveys have been conducted with industry cooperation. However, as the scope of the diseases and toxic substances on which we rapidly need data expands to include emerging human health issues, industry is becoming increasingly reluctant to be involved due to the danger of negative publicity surrounding a positive finding. Recent examples of this would include BSE surveillance and avian influenza. Without co-operation from the full industry sector, sampling may not represent the true incidence of disease and toxic substances presence. Option 2 - Increased CFIA staffing Under the current Regulations, CFIA staff designated as inspectors under the Act are required to collect samples. Responding to the increased sampling required by the BSE situation, for example, has required a new presence of CFIA inspectors in provincial abattoirs and deadstock plants, where inspection powers are exercised to procure samples. An increase in surveillance activities for other diseases and toxic substances would likewise require a large influx of new resources to the CFIA at a significant cost. Option 3 - Amending the Regulations - Provide authority to the CFIA to request samples (Preferred Option) Surveillance samples other than milk or cream that are required for national surveillance are collected under the direction of federal policies with the co-operation of industry and/or provincial ministry staff. Although the specific detailed scientific information and requirements for surveillance programs will still remain in federal policy, the responsibilities of the caretakers of the animals or things will be strengthened from an enforcement standpoint by being clearly set out in the Regulations. As a result, the integrity of these surveillance programs will withstand international scrutiny and the response time required for surveys in response to emerging human health hazards will be shortened. Under the proposed amendments, the owner of an animal or the person who owns or who has care or control of a susceptible animal could be required to take and submit samples for testing and surveillance purposes as detailed in a written request of an inspector. This would allow the CFIA to manage inspectors resources more effectively without a significant cost. Benefits and CostsAs this is a minor regulatory initiative that is administrative in nature, a full cost benefit analysis was not required. Benefits This regulatory amendment will serve to harmonize the Act and the Regulations by officially providing the authority to the CFIA inspectors to collect or request samples for surveillance purposes under the authority of the Act. The surveillance programs implemented under these proposed Regulations will allow the CFIA to utilize non-federal resources by enabling the direct involvement of provincial agency staff and industry. Sampling and other surveillance programs are required to meet the international standards set out by the Office International des Epizooties and our trading partners. The CFIA would be able to design such programs which minimize the financial impact on industry under this authority. This amendment to the Regulations would clarify the authority for enforcement actions that could be undertaken should non-compliance with surveillance measures as required by disease control programs be discovered or in responding to an emerging human health hazard. Costs This amendment to the Regulations has no direct cost impact as it is administrative in nature. Producers, including cattle producers, will not incur additional costs as a result of the approval of this amendment. These changes would, however, enable the CFIA to give clear written instructions to producers or deadstock company owners to hold animals or carcasses (the sample) of interest in order for a CFIA inspector or individual such as a private veterinarian working on behalf of CFIA to collect a final brain sample. As is currently the case, each new planned surveillance program established under these Regulations will be developed in consultation with every impacted industry sector in the production chain. Ultimately, the implementation of any new program will depend upon securing the resources necessary for the roles and responsibilities that the CFIA and any other impacted partner is proposing to assume. ConsultationThis regulatory amendment will serve to harmonize the Act and the Regulations and it does not, in itself, constitute a new program. Therefore, consultation on these specific amendments has not been undertaken. Compliance and EnforcementThese Regulations would clarify the authority for enforcement actions that could be undertaken should non-compliance be discovered in a sampling program. Existing disease control programs that use extended surveillance programs as additional risk mitigation measures have not indicated a high level of non-compliance. These Regulations have identified enforcement actions for non-compliance and it is not anticipated that there will be a significant need for any additional enforcement resources than are already available under existing programs. Where a surveillance program constitutes risk mitigation steps that follow a disease control or a toxic substance exposure, it is important to be able to demonstrate that the CFIA can effectively enforce the submission of the requested samples. Each new surveillance program established under these Regulations would have a business case developed for consultation and compliance and enforcement activities would be included in the estimation of the resources required for the complete program. Implementation of the program would be dependent upon securing the resources necessary for the roles and responsibilities that CFIA is proposing to assume for that program. ContactDr. Penny Greenwood Dr. Pierre Lafortune |
 Top of Page |
Important Notices |
