February 14, 2008

Retail Council of Canada (RCC) and its members are deeply committed to the safety of Canadians. The following are specific comments with respect to the document entitled, Strengthening and Modernizing Canada's Safety System for Food, Health and Consumer Products — A Discussion Paper on Canada's Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan:

1. Retailers require a clear understanding of how administrative monetary fines and penalties will be applied and recommend that they be reserved only for those who demonstrate blatant disregard for public safety after due process. Clarity is also required as to how fines and penalties relate to civil and criminal liability. The concept of uncapped penalties is unreasonable and not in keeping with international standards. An appeals process must be defined should there be disputes between the federal government and industry with respect to the levying of fines and penalties under the new Administrative Monetary Penalties Scheme (AMPS).
2. RCC and its members strongly recommend that the federal government harmonize the proposed legislation with federal, provincial and municipal legislation to ensure consistent and equitable compliance across Canada. For example, federal safety standards for electrical products should be consistent with those relating to electrical product safety in Ontario. It must be acknowledged that the implementation of the Plan will require significant administrative costs that will be required to be passed on to Canadian consumers. This highlights the need for a system to be as comprehensive and efficient as possible.
3. Retailers need clarity on definitions of safety, quality and ownership and on specific criteria for testing, monitoring, reporting and recalls. For example, is the term 'quality' measured by performance and/or safety metrics?
4. RCC and its members want to ensure that the Plan is implemented in such a manner that there is an equal playing field. We recommend the creation of international safety standards as a means to ensure compliance in an increasingly global marketplace.
5. RCC and its members have consumer privacy concerns relating to the reporting of adverse reactions and near-misses, serious injuries, etc. Correspondence between individual consumers and retailers is considered confidential. Retailers may not aware of these incidents and may only have partial information pertaining to individual incidents.
6. Retailers have serious concerns regarding any decisions impacting the delivery or sale of products which are not purely based on scientific fact.
7. An appeals process must be defined, in consultation with industry, to address disputes that may arise with government officials with respect to the holding, monitoring and recalling of product. Government authorities should be accountable for lost revenues and decreased value of inventories brought forth by unsubstantiated recalls or holding of product.
8. RCC and its members believe the best way to ensure products on the market are safe is to focus on the earliest possible stage of a product's life cycle. Therefore, manufacturers and national brand owners (usually importers of record) should be accountable for compliance related to testing, monitoring, reporting for their products, with retailers having responsibility for exclusive private brands when the formulation is proprietary.
9. The Plan implementation timeline must be staggered over a reasonable period of time. Production lead times require that buying plans and contracts are currently being finalized for late 2009 shipments.
10. Retailers are concerned about the potential use or misuse of products by consumers; they should not be held accountable for unsafe consumer practices. Similarly, there must be a clear definition of terms such as "likely to be dangerous" products, in that it incorrectly presumes that industry can determine all potential uses for any given product.
11. The mandatory recall process should be designed in collaboration with industry and should leverage best practices gained in the implementation of voluntary recalls.
12. RCC and its members favour industry-wide reporting versus that by individual manufacturers, importers or retailers. Retailers request that a progressive process be put in place to ensure they have an opportunity to take required action prior to the public release of compliance and injury reports.