In the Legislative Assembly on March 12th, 2009. See this topic in context.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

Bob Bromley

Bob Bromley Weledeh

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to follow up on the questions from my colleague Mr. Ramsay earlier on the contaminated meat. More specifically the E. coli 0157:H7 strain apparently in lean range fed ground beef from the Co-op. I’d just like to note that I received a notice from a Yellowknife resident at about 11 o’clock this morning and sent a message to the Minister about it inquiring at 11:13. At about 1:10 I received the notice, the advisory on the issue. I’m wondering, was it the Yellowknife resident’s e-mail to me and mine to the Minister that actually brought this to the Minister’s attention or do we have a failsafe mechanism in place to ensure that timely notice is received by our chief medical officer and acted on in a timely way?

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

Sandy Lee

Sandy Lee Range Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand the process is that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, as soon as they are aware of these products, would contact the retail store or wherever the outlet is first so that they can remove the products, then they inform the public health office to make sure that the public health office would inform the public and take necessary public measures. I can advise the Member that I first learned of this this morning, as well, and that the department was working on preparing the public message and taking steps to make sure that the products were removed and such. Also, the environmental health officer is involved in the process as well.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

Bob Bromley

Bob Bromley Weledeh

Thanks to the Minister for those remarks. Perhaps the Minister could just review the process and ensure that, in fact, it is working in a timely and efficient way. There was only one product in this case. It was the 18 kilograms of lean range fed ground beef that arrived pre-packaged, so there was no packaging and no possibility of contamination. I am wondering, in a situation like this, and perhaps even immediately today where we have a Co-op with almost all people using the Co-op are registered members and almost all purchases are registered by computer so there is actually a registration -- we are talking about 18 kilograms of, say, 40 packages -- if in fact the department could work with the Co-op and alert the very people who purchased this product. Is that the sort of work that the department is willing to go to, to protect our people? Thank you.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

Sandy Lee

Sandy Lee Range Lake

It is a little scary that a business would know everything about what you bought, but I can see the Member’s point. If they wanted to, they could run a number and see exactly what we bought for any given time. I think we should note, though, that there are customers who shop at the Co-op who are not necessarily members. They are allowed to buy products. They used to anyway.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to tell the Member and Members of this House that I will review the process to follow exactly what happened. It is always good to, if at all possible, tighten the process.

The second thing is, as I explained to the Member for Kam Lake earlier, I understand it is always a fine balance between giving enough information so that all the necessary measures are taken as a safety measure, but also we don’t want to create undue fear on the part of the public. The environmental health officer has been working with the Co-op and that office had expressed some concern that we should make sure that there is no potential for cross-contamination. That is why the warning went out for all ground beef products that were sold there. I will review the process and get back to the Member on the findings. Thank you.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

Bob Bromley

Bob Bromley Weledeh

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I appreciate the comments from the Minister but, again, I would like to point out that these were pre-packaged. They did not arrive here for packaging, so it wasn’t processed here. That is where the panic sets in. As the Minister says, unnecessary panic is a concern, so let’s not encourage that panic. Finally, would the Minister actually follow up on this potential for contacting the very people who purchased those products? Rather than panicking everybody, let’s get right down to the people who purchased the products. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

March 11th, 2009

Sandy Lee

Sandy Lee Range Lake

All of the information I have is that the Yellowknife Direct Charge Co-op is doing all things in a responsible manner and doing everything they can. I am sure that we could talk to them about the possibility of doing that. I will follow up on that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Question 333-16(3): Process In Responding To Health Hazard Alert Regarding Contaminated Meat
Oral Questions (Reversion)

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.