Office of the Auditor General, environmental petitions

Re: FW: Environmental Petition under section 22 of the Auditor General Act — genetically engineered foods, seeds and feeds released without mandatory notification or labelling

Hello,

I am making the amendments. All 3 comments are accepted. Version 2 follows in full and replaces the petition submitted on 2 September 2026. No question is withdrawn. The addressing is corrected.

On the first comment, the questions concerning the Canadian Food Inspection Agency are now directed to the Minister of Health and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food jointly, each within that Minister's mandate.

On the second comment, the question on strategic environmental assessment is moved away from Environment and Climate Change Canada to the departments that originated the proposals, and it is split across the 2 Cabinet Directives in force on the relevant dates.

On the third comment, the closing paragraph no longer refers to the annual report.

Please forward version 2 as set out below.

ENVIRONMENTAL PETITION UNDER SECTION 22 OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL ACT, VERSION 2

To: Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 240 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario [postal code]
Date: 8 September 2026

Subject: Genetically engineered foods, seeds and feeds released in Canada without mandatory notification, without mandatory labelling, and without any federal enumeration

Departments and agencies for response: Health Canada, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Privy Council Office

BACKGROUND

On 18 May 2022 Health Canada issued guidance on the Novel Food Regulations and on the novelty interpretation of products of plant breeding. Under that guidance, gene-edited foods that contain no foreign DNA fall outside the definition of a novel food and proceed to market without a pre-market safety assessment by Health Canada. Notification to the department became voluntary. Health Canada created a Transparency Initiative under which a developer may choose to submit information for publication.

On 3 May 2023 the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food approved Canadian Food Inspection Agency guidance for Part V of the Seeds Regulations, extending the same treatment to gene-edited seed.

On 3 May 2024 the Canadian Food Inspection Agency published guidance confirming the same treatment for feeds derived from gene-edited plants.

Labelling remains voluntary. The national standard, CAN/CGSB-32.315, imposes no obligation on any developer or manufacturer.

The result is a federal system in which a developer decides whether a product is regulated, decides whether the government is told, and decides whether the consumer is told. Canada therefore holds no count of the genetically engineered foods present on its territory. The same absence covers seed and feed.

Canada signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety on 19 April 2001 and has not ratified it. Canada is a party to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

QUESTIONS

To the Minister of Health

1. State the number of gene-edited foods in the Canadian food supply as of the date of the reply. Where the department does not hold that number, state so.

2. A developer may determine that a gene-edited food is outside novel food status. Identify the provision of the Food and Drugs Act or the Food and Drug Regulations under which Health Canada compels that developer to disclose the food.

3. State the number of submissions received under the Transparency Initiative since 18 May 2022, and state the department estimate of the share of gene-edited foods on the Canadian market that those submissions represent.

4. The guidance of 18 May 2022 altered the application of Division 28 of Part B of the Food and Drug Regulations. The Governor in Council made no amendment. The Canada Gazette carried no publication. Identify the authority for that alteration.

5. Describe the post-market surveillance the department applies to a food it has not been notified of.

6. State the mechanism by which an adverse effect associated with a food outside novel food status reaches the department. State how that report is traced to a specific product.

7. Notification to the department is voluntary. Labelling to the consumer is voluntary. State how a person under a religious or medical dietary obligation establishes whether a food contains genetic material of animal origin.

8. State whether the department assessed the effect of voluntary labelling on the ability of consumers under dietary restrictions to make informed choices before issuing the guidance of 18 May 2022, and provide that assessment.

To the Minister of Health and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, jointly

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency reports to the Minister of Health. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food holds the non-food safety mandate of that Agency, including the Seeds Act. The guidance of 3 May 2023 was approved by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. These questions are directed to both Ministers, each within that Minister's mandate.

9. State the number of gene-edited plant varieties released in Canada since 3 May 2023, and identify the source of that number.

10. Identify the mechanism by which an organic producer establishes the origin of contamination on their land when no federal registry of released gene-edited varieties exists.

11. State the compensation available to a producer who loses organic certification through contamination by a gene-edited variety that was never notified to the government.

12. Some jurisdictions require traceability and mandatory labelling of genetically engineered products. State whether the Canadian Food Inspection Agency assessed the effect of the guidance of 3 May 2023 and 3 May 2024 on Canadian exports to those jurisdictions. Provide that assessment.

13. State the number of meetings held with industry associations, including CropLife Canada, during the development of that guidance, and state the number held with organic sector organizations and farmer organizations.

14. The Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals required a strategic environmental assessment of a proposal requiring ministerial or Cabinet approval, and placed that duty on the department originating the proposal. That Directive was rescinded on 1 April 2024 and replaced by the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment.

State, for each of the 3 decisions below, whether an assessment was conducted, identify the department that conducted or declined to conduct it, and provide the assessment or the record of the decision not to conduct one.

The guidance of 18 May 2022, under the Directive then in force.
The guidance approved by the Minister on 3 May 2023, under the Directive then in force.
The guidance of 3 May 2024, under the Directive in force on that date.

To the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

15. The federal government does not enumerate these organisms. The preamble of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 declares the precautionary principle. Explain how their release into the Canadian environment is reconciled with that principle.

16. Canada signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety on 19 April 2001. State the position of the Government of Canada on ratification. Identify the condition that must be satisfied for ratification to proceed.

17. No federal enumeration of living modified organisms released on Canadian territory exists. Explain how Canada reports on those organisms to the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

18. Identify the department or agency holding the mandate to enumerate genetically engineered organisms released in Canada. Where no department or agency holds that mandate, state that.

REQUIREMENT

I require a written reply from each responsible Minister, to the address above. The reply is to answer every question directed to that Minister. The Auditor General Act sets the period at 120 days.

Where a Minister declines to answer a question, I require the reply to identify the question declined and to state the ground for declining.

This petition and the replies to it form a public record. A reply that does not arrive within the statutory period is a failure. A reply that arrives without answering the questions put is a failure. I will place any such failure before the Commissioner, before the Standing Committee on Health, and before the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. I will place the records underlying these decisions before the Information Commissioner of Canada.

Respectfully,

Danilo Dzyuban

Re: RE: FW: Environmental Petition under section 22 of the Auditor General Act — genetically engineered foods, seeds and feeds released without mandatory notification or labelling

Hello,

The Privy Council Office is not listed for information. I omitted the questions directed to it, and I am adding them now as questions 19 and 20. The petition then contains 20 questions.

To the Minister responsible for the Privy Council Office

19. The Privy Council Office administers the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment and administered the Cabinet Directive that preceded it. State whether the Privy Council Office holds any record showing that a strategic environmental assessment was required, conducted, or declined for each of the 3 decisions named in question 14. Where no such record exists for a decision, state so for that decision.

20. State how the Privy Council Office verifies compliance by departments with either Directive. State the number of instances since 1 April 2024 in which a department was recorded as not having complied.

Everything else in version 2 stands unchanged. Where the Office determines that the Privy Council Office is not a designated entity for the purposes of section 22, I ask to be advised of that determination in writing.

Respectfully,

Danilo Dzyuban