CFIA – Public Opinion Research with Food Businesses on Food Safety Regulations: 2022-2023
Conversely, some participants who dealt with the CFIA less described them as either “another layer of
bureaucracy”, or “like law enforcement” - only showing up when there was a problem. One participant
felt “my ideal relationship with the CFIA is if they never show up at all”.
The most common criticisms raised across the groups resulting in businesses having a negative
impression of the CFIA were:
Lack of support: The most common criticism among participants that held a negative view of
the CFIA was that the organization was just an enforcement body rather than a group willing to
support the industry. There was near-unanimous agreement the CFIA can, and should, play a
more supportive role by working with companies in the industry to understand and adhere to
regulations. A powerful example of this sentiment was displayed when one participant said:
“Early on, when I was starting my business, I was calling the CFIA to ask them questions about
food regulations. One CFIA representative I talked to said ‘We are not your consultant’, and
since then, I have stopped asking the CFIA questions and relying on them to help me comply
with regulations.”
Personnel changeover: Many participants were frustrated by what they perceived as high
turnover at the CFIA, feeling they lacked one consistent point of contact due to staff changes.
According to these participants, this commonly led to breakdowns in communication, a lack of
support, and inconsistent guidance on regulations. Some participants reported receiving
different answers to the same questions they asked the CFIA when they spoke to different
employees, which caused them to lose confidence in CFIA’s ability to support them. A few
participants suggested the CFIA institute CFIA liaisons for businesses, particularly for businesses
that regularly interact with the agency.
Changing regulations without notification: Some participants felt the CFIA doesn’t do enough
to notify them proactively when regulations that apply to their businesses change. Most
understood that regulations need to be updated, though there was some disagreement on if
regulations were changing too much. Regardless of how participants felt about the rate at which
regulations are updated, a majority felt the CFIA was not doing a good enough job at proactively
notifying them about these changes. Several participants suggested the CFIA institute email lists
for specific areas of regulation that businesses could sign up for – this indicates there is not high
awareness of the existing CFIA email lists.
Lack of digestible information: Many felt information the CFIA provides to food businesses is
not digestible, easy to understand, or user-friendly. These participants felt the CFIA could do a
better job providing educational information to businesses, particularly new businesses, and
smaller businesses that may not have as much policy and regulation expertise in-house. One
participant wondered: “How do I know my position with the CFIA if they’re not going to educate
me?”. There is a desire for the CFIA to provide businesses, particularly new ones, with more
educational materials about how regulations apply to their type of business.
There was a strong sense that people need help from the CIFA most when starting a business, while
those who have established businesses only wanted to hear from the CFIA about regulation changes