Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 160, Number 26: Regulations Amending the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Unmet Slaughter Capacity)

June 27, 2026

Statutory authority
Safe Food for Canadians Act

Sponsoring agency
Canadian Food Inspection Agency

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues

The Government recognizes the importance of supporting a One Canadian Economy by removing interprovincial barriers to trade, to unlock the economic growth and potential within the Canadian marketplace. Within the food sector, there is recognition that Canada’s federal food safety system, which is ranked as one of the safest in the world, is critical for protecting health and safety and maintaining access to international markets. Canada’s federal food safety system provides a single, consistent set of rules for food safety that is based on international standards and is trusted by Canada’s trading partners. This trust underpins Canada’s access to international markets and is the basis for further diversifying market access.

At the same time, stakeholders have raised that the decline in federally licensed slaughter establishments (or abattoirs) is creating a barrier to the internal trade of red meat within Canada, particularly in rural and remote regions, and for minor animal species such as sheep. Removing barriers to internal trade of meat when there is unmet slaughter capacity would unlock the economic potential of Canada’s food businesses.

It is possible to leverage existing federal food safety rules to address internal trade barriers for food without compromising Canada’s internationally credible federal food safety system. The CFIA is proposing three sets of amendments to the SFCR and an amendment to the CFIA Fees Notice to address these issues.

Issue 1: Internal trade barriers due to unmet slaughter capacity

Meat traded between provinces or exported must comply with the SFCR, which includes coming from a federally inspected slaughter establishment operated by a SFC licence holder. Among other requirements, the establishment must have a written preventive control plan (PCP), have a veterinarian and inspector present during slaughter, and keep records to ensure food traceability. Currently, the SFCR prohibits all meat produced in a slaughter establishment under provincial oversight from being traded interprovincially or exported.

In recent years, the number of federal and provincial slaughter establishments has declined. For instance, since 2018, the number of federal slaughter establishments regulated by the CFIA has decreased from 100 to 86. This decline is due to several factors, including industry consolidation and concentration, instability of international markets, labour shortages, aging infrastructure and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has also been a corresponding decline in provincial slaughter capacity. In Ontario, over the past 25 years, the number of slaughter establishments with provincial oversight has decreased from 225 to 114. In Quebec, the number of provincial slaughter establishments decreased from 58 to 51 between 2015 and 2025, and 69% of the establishments are concentrated in only four regions in Quebec.

This has led to a lack of slaughter capacity in Canada and has created situations where small-scale livestock producers, specifically in rural and remote areas of Canada, cannot access nearby slaughter capacity under provincial or federal oversight. This limits their ability to sell meat within their own province or move it across provincial borders for sale. In addition to affecting rural and remote livestock producers, the issue of unmet slaughter capacity also affects producers of specific livestock such as sheep. The result is an internal barrier to trade that prevents livestock producers from selling their meat products, or it forces them to incur additional costs associated with transporting their animals over longer distances to the nearest federally inspected slaughter establishment. This results in fewer choices and higher prices for consumers and can contribute to food insecurity in rural and remote communities. This situation also affects provincial slaughter establishments that are unable to provide slaughter services to local livestock producers wishing to sell their meat products interprovincially. Without the ability to test market demand, provincial slaughter establishments may be reluctant to pursue federal licensing due to uncertainty about return on investment and perceived business risks.

To address this barrier to internal trade, a regulatory amendment to the SFCR is being proposed that would offer a time-limited, targeted exemption from the interprovincial trade requirements of the Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) and the SFCR when there is unmet slaughter capacity. It would apply to livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments, which would allow the livestock producer’s meat to move and be sold to another province under provincial oversight.

For example, cattle producers in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of northwestern Quebec do not have access to nearby provincial or federal slaughter establishments within their province. The closest slaughter establishment under federal oversight in Quebec is approximately 800 km away. However, there is a slaughter establishment under provincial oversight across the border in Nipissing-Timiskaming, Ontario, that is less than 20 km away. While the Ontario slaughter establishment is the most practical slaughter option, meat prepared in this establishment cannot be returned to Quebec for sale because it is not operating under a federal SFC licence. This forces producers in Abitibi-Témiscamingue to incur higher costs and longer transportation distances if they want to sell their meat in Quebec. Under the proposed exemption, livestock producers would transport their cattle to the nearby Ontario slaughter establishment for preparation into meat products and then return the resulting meat back to Quebec for sale, provided both provinces assume responsibility for oversight of humane treatment of food animals, food safety, packaging, labelling, and traceability of the meat products traded.

Issue 2: Unnecessary red tape in the meat sector

Unnecessary work shift agreements for certain continuous activities

Under the SFCR, a work shift is a scheduled period during which a SFC licence holder can conduct activities in respect of meat products (such as processing, treating, preserving or manufacturing) at their establishment. The CFIA schedules inspections during this time and, as such, businesses are charged a work shift inspection fee for each work shift, as set out in the CFIA Fees Notice.

The SFCR does not provide flexibility for the number of work shifts required for continuous activities (e.g. freezing) that may not require ongoing oversight. As a result, continuous activities trigger multiple work shifts, which result in higher inspection fees. This was not the CFIA’s intent when the SFCR was introduced, and this differs from the approach in the previous Meat Inspection Regulations, where some continuous activities were authorized to occur outside an approved work shift.

To maintain the status quo and align with the original intent of the regulations, the CFIA is currently allowing certain simple continuous activities to occur beyond an approved work shift and only charges one work shift fee. An amendment to the SFCR is needed to align with the current practice to only require one work shift.

Unintended higher inspection fee for certain meat storage activities

The CFIA Fees Notice is worded in a way that cold storage businesses that only conduct specific processing activities (i.e. freeze and/or thaw meat products) are subject to a higher inspection fee than intended. To avoid overcharging these businesses, the CFIA has been using a fee Remission Order to address the difference.

The CFIA Fees Notice needs to be amended to add clarity and ensure that businesses are charged the appropriate amount of inspection fees and the Remission Order revoked. The CFIA Fees Notice would be amended at the time of final publication of the regulatory changes.

Issue 3: Ambiguity in the application of the SFCR

Food safety requirements in the SFCR are intended to apply to all food produced under an SFC licence. However, in certain circumstances, the determination of whether certain foods produced under an SFC licence will be sold intraprovincially is made further down the supply chain. This has created an additional unnecessary burden for businesses, as the amount of product that may end up for intra-provincial sale may not be known at the time of production, even though all the food was produced under the same SFC licence and CFIA oversight.

For example, if a SFC licence holder makes 1 000 boxes of cookies, they are not likely to know at the time of production that 900 boxes will enter interprovincial trade and 100 boxes will remain within the province. The CFIA would not expect the business to separate the boxes if their final destination is not yet determined. To remove this burden on businesses, the regulations would be updated to clarify that, since all 1 000 boxes of cookies were made under the same SFC licence, they must all comply with the SFCR food safety requirements. It is not necessary to make and store them separately based on the level of trade.

Other minor amendments are also needed to clarify that importers or exporters must meet applicable SFCR requirements prior to the importation or exportation of food. As currently written, some provisions could be interpreted as only applying after the food has already been imported or exported, creating ambiguity.

Collectively, the proposed amendments support the Government of Canada’s commitment to build a One Canadian Economy by removing a known barrier to interprovincial trade in the meat sector and support the government’s efforts on food security, without compromising health, safety, or consumer protection. The amendments also align with the CFIA’s efforts to reduce red tape to enable businesses to grow and contribute to Canada’s economy.

Background

Federal legislative and regulatory authorities

Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA)

The SFCA establishes the legislative framework for food safety and consumer protection, with the objectives of improving the consistency of rules across all types of food and between food businesses and enabling food businesses to be innovative through outcome-based provisions.

The SFCA also provides an authority for exemptions. Specifically, subsection 51(1)(w) of the SFCA allows the Governor in Council (GIC) to make regulations to exempt or permit the Minister to exempt, with or without conditions, any item to which the SFCA applies, or a person or activity in respect of a food commodity from the application or a provision of the SFCA or its regulations. Further, 51(4) of the SFCA requires that such regulations must also provide that the Minister may do so only if they are of the opinion that it will not result in risk or injury to human health.

Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR)

The core requirements of the SFCR include licensing, preventive controls, and traceability for food. These are key for promoting food safety, supporting consumer confidence, and for gaining and maintaining access to international markets. The SFCR also applies to the slaughter of food animals from which meat products may be derived for export or interprovincial trade. While the SFCR generally applies to food that is imported, exported, or traded interprovincially for commercial purposes, some provisions, such as traceability, apply to all food sold at retail in Canada.

The requirements of the SFCA and the SFCR are aligned with internationally recognized standards, such as the Codex Alimentarius and the World Organisation for Animal Health. These requirements, as well as the requirements that apply to all food sold in Canada (regardless of where it is traded) under the Food and Drugs Act (FDA) and the Food and Drugs Regulations (FDR), provide a consistent approach to food safety across Canada and give confidence to consumers and international trading partners. This, in turn, enables food businesses to access domestic and international markets.

CFIA Fees Notice

The CFIA Fees Notice sets out the fees fixed by the Minister of Health under subsection 24(1) and section 25 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act (CFIA Act). These fees are for services, products, provision of rights or privileges, and the use of a facility provided by the CFIA.

The Minister of Health has the authority to approve amendments to the CFIA Fees Notice. The CFIA Act also provides the Minister with the authority to remit all, or part, of any fee fixed under the CFIA Act or any other Act that the Agency enforces or administers, which includes fees listed in the CFIA Fees Notice.

Meat products inspection fees are set out in Part 10 of the CFIA Fees Notice. For work shifts, the annual inspection fees per work shift are listed in Part 10, Table 2. The specific fee is based on the minimum number of hours of inspection for each work shift, which consider factors such as the nature and complexity of the activities conducted.

Free Trade and Labour Mobility Act for Canada

The Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act (FTLMCA) provides a framework to remove federal barriers to interprovincial trade through deeming PT requirements comparable to federal requirements for goods and services and PT authorizations to practise occupations.

During the development of regulations for the FTLMCA, industry stakeholders and PTs expressed strong support for the federal food system to remain the basis of food trade in Canada, rather than recognizing the PT requirements on food, as doing so could undermine the federal system. The continued integrity of the federal food safety system is critical for Canada to access and diversify its markets and for Canada’s ability to ensure imported food meets Canada’s stringent standards.

As a result, exceptions to the SFCA, its regulations and related provisions of the FDR were introduced into the Free Trade and Labour Mobility for Canadians Regulations to protect the health and safety of Canadians by maintaining established federal standards and oversight over food safety, and to protect Canadian exports by maintaining a high level of trading partner confidence in Canada’s food safety system.

Federal role in interprovincial trade and CFIA oversight

The interprovincial trade of food in Canada is a federal responsibility. Food is permitted to move across a provincial-territorial border when a regulated party (such as a food business) complies with all federal interprovincial trade requirements of the SFCA and the SFCR. This includes the requirements to hold an SFC licence issued by the CFIA and maintain preventive controls, as well as other requirements related to food traceability, packaging, and federal compositional standards.

The CFIA is responsible for administering and enforcing the SFCA and the SFCR, including issuing licences, conducting inspections, and enforcing federal humane treatment of food animals, food safety, consumer protection and traceability requirements. At food establishments, including establishments preparing meat products, the CFIA’s oversight focuses on verifying compliance with written preventive control plans associated with production, packaging, and storing of food commodities. At slaughter establishments, the CFIA’s oversight also focuses on ensuring compliance for live animal handling, humane slaughter, and carcass inspection.

Provincial/Territorial context

PTs have the responsibility for food produced, sold and traded within their jurisdiction. PTs develop and implement the legislation to govern and regulate food establishments in their province or territory. As such, PTs are responsible for regulatory oversight for intraprovincial trade.

PTs are also responsible for inspection programs at slaughter establishments and food processing facilities that manufacture food for the intraprovincial market, service establishments, retailers, hospitals, etc., and enforcing the applicable legislation. In addition, PTs are responsible for conducting enteric illness surveillance, investigating and controlling human illness outbreaks that occur within provincial-territorial boundaries.

The proposed exemption to address unmet slaughter capacity directly responds to commitments by federal-provincial-territorial (FPT) Ministers of Agriculture to address barriers to trade of agriculture and agri-food products through targeted efforts. It is also aligned with First Ministers who agreed to work collaboratively to reduce barriers in food and agriculture, to help lower the cost of food for Canadians.

International context

Canada’s federal food safety system is trusted globally because it applies consistent, science-based approaches that align with international standards, including HACCP principles. This is reflected in the SFCA and SFCR, which ensures that inspection, certification, laboratory testing, surveillance, and emergency response activities meet globally recognized expectations. These internationally aligned practices underpin Canada’s reputation as a reliable trading partner and support $64.5 billion in annual food exports, including more than $11.36 billion in red meat exports.

The proposed exemption would not affect international trade. It would be targeted to low-volumes of trade on a time-limited basis and any food traded under this exemption would be required to be identifiable and traceable so any inadvertent export can be prevented. Importantly, any food businesses preparing products for export would continue to meet all applicable requirements under the SFCA and SFCR, including licensing, preventive controls, traceability, and export certification. As a result, Canada’s internationally recognized food safety assurances, and its ability to meet foreign market conditions, would remain fully intact.

Objective

The proposed amendments would

• create a targeted, time-limited exemption to reduce barriers to the interprovincial trade of red meat when there is unmet slaughter capacity;
• reduce unnecessary red tape for stakeholders in the meat sector; and
• clarify regulatory requirements for all food businesses.

Description

This regulatory package proposes three sets of amendments to the SFCR and one amendment to the CFIA Fees Notice. The amendments to the SFCR require approval by the GIC, while changes to the CFIA Fees Notice are ministerial amendments and only need approval from the Minister of Health under their existing authority. The ministerial amendment is included in this regulatory package for clarity and transparency.

1. Targeted, time-limited exemption to address internal trade barriers due to unmet slaughter capacity

The amendment would grant an exemption (i.e. a Ministerial Exemption [ME]) under Part 8 of the SFCR. This would provide the Minister with the authority to grant a targeted exemption from the application of certain interprovincial trade requirements of the SFCA (e.g. sections 10 to 13) and SFCR (e.g. Parts 3 to 6, and 10 to 12) to livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments when there is unmet slaughter capacity.

To mitigate international trade risks, the exemption would be a one-time, time-limited four-year measure that would be targeted at the trade of low volumes of meat products, which would also be identifiable and traceable. To mitigate food safety risks, PTs would agree to provide food safety oversight. Specific conditions and guardrails would be set out in both regulatory and policy requirements.

Regulatory requirements

The SFCR amendments would define “unmet slaughter capacity” to mean a situation where federal and/or provincial slaughter establishments in a region of a province or territory are unable to meet the slaughter needs of the livestock producers in that region. As a result, the sale of the producers’ meat products is limited, including interprovincial sales.

The proposed amendments would also establish the following conditions for the exemption:

• Only provincial slaughter establishments and livestock producers would be eligible.
• One PT must confirm that the livestock producers in a specific region of their province or territory have unmet slaughter capacity and they must partner with another PT to address it.
• The partnering PTs must develop a written agreement confirming that they will exercise their respective authorities to oversee the humane treatment of food animals, food safety, packaging, labelling, and traceability of the meat products traded.
• The Minister must be satisfied that granting the exemption
  • would not pose a risk to human health;
  • would not cause harm to interprovincial trade or export markets; and
  • is required to address the unmet slaughter capacity.
• Meat products produced under the exemption must still meet the interprovincial trade requirement related to food safety in the SFCR and may only be distributed to the province or territory specified in the application.
• All meat products must be clearly identifiable and fully traceable in the marketplace and must not be exported.

The amendments would also specify that the exemption can only be granted once for a maximum period of four years. This would ensure that the exemption remains a temporary measure and not a substitute for federal licensing. When the exemption period ends, the interprovincial trade authorized under the exemption must stop unless the provincial slaughter establishment obtained an SFC licence before the expiry date of the exemption.

In addition, if any food safety or trade-related incidents arise with the meat products made under the exemption, the regulations would provide the CFIA with the authority to cancel the exemption. The CFIA’s responsibilities for conducting food safety investigations and for food recall activities would also continue to apply when there is reason to believe that a potentially contaminated food has reached the marketplace.

Policy requirements

In addition to the regulatory amendments, supporting policy and guidance materials would be developed to further clarify roles and responsibilities and how the exemption would be applied. This includes but is not limited to the following:

• Clarifying PT roles, such as coordinating the submission of the PT endorsed application, overseeing the exempted livestock producers and slaughter establishment throughout the exemption period (including establishment inspections), and reporting to the CFIA. Partnering PTs are not required to share a border (i.e. can be non-contiguous).
• Articulating the livestock producer’s responsibilities such as completing an exemption application and providing supporting information demonstrating their unmet slaughter capacity.
• Articulating the slaughter establishment’s responsibilities such as completing an application form and operating at a fixed location.
• Clarifying eligibility criteria for meat products, such as limiting eligibility to raw, single ingredient, whole muscle cuts of red meat from food animals such as cattle, sheep, goats, pigs and cervids. Additionally, products would need to be consumer prepackaged and could only be sold directly to consumers to ensure strong traceability.
• Clarifying that only low volumes of meat would be eligible to ensure there is no impact to trade.
• Information on the exemptions granted would be posted on the CFIA’s website for transparency.

General process

PTs would confirm the existence of unmet slaughter capacity and would coordinate and submit an application package to the CFIA on behalf of the livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments in their province. In the application, provincial and territorial governments would identify the livestock producers and slaughter establishments that the exemption would apply to. The two PTs involved would also need to demonstrate that they meet the conditions set out in the regulations. There also needs to be an agreement between the two provinces regarding provincial oversight of slaughter, humane treatment of animals, food safety, packaging and labelling, and traceability of any meat products traded between them.

Based on the application received by the participating jurisdictions, the CFIA would conduct a risk assessment. If no risks to human health or trade are identified, and all the eligibility requirements and conditions are met, the CFIA could grant the ME (through delegated authority from the Minister) to the livestock producers and slaughter establishment.

The provincial slaughter establishments granted the exemption would continue to operate under provincial oversight and would be required to meet the relevant provincial requirements. In addition, the requirements of the SFCA and the SFCR that apply to all food, regardless of whether it is traded interprovincially, would continue to apply, as would the requirements of the FDA and the FDR that apply to all food sold in Canada. However, the exemption would remove the need to obtain a SFC licence, develop a preventive control plan, or maintain recall and traceability documentation to prepare the meat products that would move across a provincial border. This would allow these establishments to test new markets and supply chains and would provide the slaughter establishment with time to assess the business case for transitioning to an SFC licence before the exemption expires.

For livestock producers, the Health of Animals Act (HAA) and Health of Animal Regulations (HAR), as administered and enforced by the CFIA, would continue to apply. However, the exemption would open the door to new market opportunities by allowing them to use an exempted provincial slaughter establishment, and to move and sell the meat in the province or territory specified in the application. It would also give livestock producers access to a closer slaughter establishment, thereby reducing transportation costs and making supply chains more resilient. These savings can help lower prices for consumers and strengthen livestock producers’ competitiveness. In addition, the exemption could increase food security by increasing the availability of affordable locally produced meat, especially in rural and remote communities.

Throughout the exemption period, the CFIA would provide tailored guidance through its concierge service to the provincial slaughter establishments considering the transition to an SFC licence at the end of the exemption period. By complementing the temporary exemption with access to direct support from the CFIA, establishments would be well positioned to determine if pursuing a federal license would be aligned with their long-term business goals.

2. Amendments to remove unnecessary red tape in the meat sector

Amendment to the SFCR to eliminate unnecessary work shifts for certain continuous activities

A new provision would be added after section 31 of the SFCR to allow the CFIA to approve exceptions so certain continuous activities can occur beyond a work shift. The CFIA could implement these exceptions, for example, when the continuous activity is considered simple, is the only aspect of the process occurring during that time, and the CFIA has determined inspection services are not needed.

For instance, for the process of freezing meat products, one work shift would likely be required even though the whole process may span over several days. Other examples of simple, continuous activities include refrigerating, defrosting, smoking and curing. This would align with the CFIA’s current and historical practices regarding work shifts.

Amendment to the CFIA Fees Notice to clarify the inspection fee for certain meat storage activities

Part 10 of the CFIA Fees Notice would be amended to clarify that cold storage businesses that only freeze or defrost fully packaged meat should be charged the lower annual inspection fee in Table 1: Meat Products Inspection Fees (currently $369.52 per year) rather than work shift inspection fees set out in Table 2: Annual Fees per Work Shift (currently at least $3,017.94.60 per work shift).

The lower annual inspection fee should be charged in these cases due to the simple nature of the activities. This change would restore the original intended fee for meat cold storage businesses prior to the SFCR.

The CFIA would seek approval from the Minister of Health for this proposed amendment. The final change to the CFIA Fees Notice would be published concurrently with the final regulatory amendments to the SFCR that require GIC approval, when the final regulatory amendments are published in Canada Gazette, Part II.

3. Amendments to clarify the application of SFCR requirements

A new provision would be added to section 61 of the SFCR to clarify that if food is not separated in a manner that meets the requirements of the SFCA or the SFCR, all food in the establishment is subject to the requirements of the SFCA and the SFCR.

Other amendments (to SFCR sections 47, 85, 86, 282, and 287) would clarify that holders of a licence to import or export food (importer or exporter) must meet specified SFCR requirements before food is imported or exported. For example, section 85 would be amended to include the language “before importing a food,” to clarify that the importer would need to have a written preventative control plan in place prior to the importation of food, not just at the time the food is imported.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Industry associations and businesses

National and provincial industry associations and businesses have expressed the need to remove internal trade barriers to strengthen the trade of food in Canada. At the same time, industry associations and businesses have consistently expressed that the federal food safety standards (the SFCA and the SFCR) must remain to ensure a robust food safety system in Canada, and to maintain access to international markets. The associations and businesses listed below emphasized this position throughout the summer and fall consultations on the 2025 Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act (FTLMCA) and in written submissions to the CFIA.

• Associations: Canadian Meat Council, Food and Beverage Canada, Retail Council of Canada, Canadian Poultry and Egg Producers of Canada, Canadian Association of Regulated Importers, Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters, Canadian Cattle Association, Manitoba Beef Producers
• Businesses: Maple Leaf Foods, Cargill, Maple Lodge Farms, Exceldor Cooperative, Progressive Group of Companies

While supporting a strong national food safety framework, several industry associations have identified persistent barriers affecting the interprovincial movement of meat. For example, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, Restaurants Canada, and the National Farmers Union highlighted that internal trade barriers make it difficult for small businesses and restaurants to purchase locally sourced meat from neighbouring provinces. The Canadian Sheep Federation also raised concerns about limited slaughter capacity and asked the CFIA to explore options that would allow meat to move more freely between provinces.

In winter and spring 2026, the CFIA held early engagement sessions with different stakeholders and industry associations regarding the proposed targeted exemption to address internal trade barriers caused by unmet slaughter capacity. This included

• Canadian Meat Council, Canadian Cattle Association, Canadian Sheep Federation, Chicken Farmers of Canada, Turkey Farmers of Canada, Canadian Pork Council, Canadian Association of Importers & Exporters, Retail Council of Canada, Canadian Supply Chain Food Safety Coalition, Canadian Federation of Independent Business, Food Health and Consumer Products Canada, Meat & Poultry Ontario, and Ontario Sheep Farmers.

Most industry associations support the proposed exemption and believe it could help address unmet slaughter capacity for specific species, such as sheep. However, some stakeholders raised concerns about potential impacts on international trade and emphasized the importance of maintaining traceability requirements for any food that is sold under an exemption. Others also noted that the proposed exemption could increase competition for meat products from federally licensed slaughter establishments.

The CFIA agrees that food safety and the protection of market access are critical. The proposed conditions and requirements for the exemption would mitigate food safety and trade risks. This includes targeting the exemption to low volumes of inspected red meat on a time-limited basis and requiring a written agreement from participating PTs confirming that they will oversee food safety and traceability. The objective is to provide a targeted regulatory pathway to enable livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments to test the market to determine whether they should pursue a federal licence.

Stakeholders also reaffirmed their strong support for the CFIA’s concierge service, providing tailored guidance and advice to help businesses transition to obtain a federal licence. It was suggested that a long-term solution is for slaughter establishments receiving the exemption to use the concierge service to obtain a federal SFC licence during the exemption period.

Provincial/territorial governments

PTs have emphasized that limited federal slaughter capacity is creating a significant barrier to the internal trade of meat in Canada. They have committed to working with the CFIA to address this challenge while maintaining the SFCA/SFCR as Canada’s national food safety standard.

For example, during the summer and fall 2025 FTLMCA consultations, PTs reaffirmed that the SFCR and FDR must remain the basis for interprovincial food trade and supported further exploration of regulatory exemptions to address slaughter capacity gaps. In their September 2025 meeting, FPT Ministers of Agriculture discussed their commitment to preserving the SFCR as the basis for interprovincial trade of food in Canada, while continuing joint efforts on other opportunities to further facilitate internal trade First Ministers reinforced this direction in January 2026 by committing to collaborate on reducing trade barriers in food, agriculture, and alcoholic beverages to help lower food costs for Canadians.

L’Union des producteurs agricoles in Quebec identified that border regions in Quebec have slaughter capacity shortages. PTs have also identified regional capacity shortages. Collectively, the following regional capacity shortages were identified:

• Border regions between Northern Quebec and Ontario;
• Border regions between British Columbia and Alberta;
• Prince Edward Island;
• New Brunswick; and
• Specific gaps, including sheep, in Manitoba and Saskatchewan

In March 2026, the CFIA engaged with various FPT governance tables and ministries of Agriculture to validate the proposed regulatory approach, to identify costs and benefits, and to inform any implementation considerations. The proposal was endorsed by FPT Ministers of Agriculture, as well as FPT Ministers of Intergovernmental Affairs.

The CFIA also conducted an early engagement survey with PTs in spring 2026, which demonstrated continued support for the proposed exemption. PTs indicated that livestock producers would benefit from improved access to slaughter services and markets, and provincial slaughter establishments would benefit from expanded market access and improved viability, profitability, business growth and competitiveness.

Some PTs noted that the differences in inspection levels and regulatory frameworks could impact their ability to partner with another PT. The feedback also suggested that the uptake of the exemption may vary across jurisdictions and would likely be limited to PTs with compatible regulatory frameworks. Questions were raised about PT roles and responsibilities, and factors that could impact PT participation were noted, such as staffing requirements.

PTs expressed differing views on key aspects of the proposal, including whether it should be time limited or permanent, and the types of meat products that would be eligible. In addition, some responses emphasized the importance of slaughter establishments demonstrating both a strong commitment and sufficient financial capacity to work toward SFC licensing, including an automatic enrollment requirement for CFIA’s concierge service. Some responses also suggested federal funding should be provided to support the establishments in obtaining an SFC licence.

The CFIA will ensure that policy and guidance materials clearly define PT roles and responsibilities and will continue to work collaboratively with PTs to further refine the exemption framework. The CFIA will continue to support establishments in understanding the federal requirements to obtain an SFC licence through its concierge service.

Public feedback

Some Canadians and businesses continue to question why food that is safe to eat in one province cannot be sold in another without meeting federal requirements. PT food safety systems have critical gaps and do not meet international standards that trading partners expect. Allowing internal trade under PT standards would risk international trust in Canada’s system, jeopardize exports, hinder trade diversification, and displace Canadian food products by low-quality imports.

As the CFIA works with the PTs and small businesses, it is becoming clear that federal requirements are not as onerous as they are often believed to be. The CFIA’s work to promote internal trade shows that when businesses receive targeted, practical support, they can successfully meet federal requirements and expand into new markets.

Amendments to remove red tape in the meat sector and clarify the application of SFCR requirements

In winter and spring 2026, the CFIA also consulted industry associations and PTs regarding the amendments to remove red tape in the meat sector and clarify the application of SFCR requirements. No concerns were raised. The amendments regarding work shift requirements are technical in nature and respond to previous stakeholder feedback, and the amendments to clarify the application of the SFCR prevent added burden and address ambiguity in the regulations.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

The initial Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications examined the geographical scope and subject matter of the initiative in relation to Indigenous Modern Treaties and Self-Government Agreements in effect and did not identify any potential Modern Treaty or Self-Government impacts. As pursuant to the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, and in accordance with Canada’s Collaborative Modern Treaty Implementation Policy, no implications were identified, and as such, a detailed assessment is not required. As part of broader Government of Canada priorities and obligations, in alignment with the spirit of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, this assessment considered Indigenous communities that may not have a treaty with the Crown or a historical treaty with the Crown, in addition to modern treaties.

The regulatory changes regarding the exemption to address unmet slaughter capacity are applicable equally to Indigenous livestock producers, should the PTs determine there is an unmet need. The clarifying amendments apply equally to all businesses that must use work shifts for certain continuous activities, including those that freeze or defrost fully packaged meat, as well as all food importers.

Instrument choice

Under the status quo, the existing requirements for the interprovincial trade of meat would continue to apply, the unintended consequences regarding work shift requirements would persist, and the application of certain SFCR requirements would remain unclear. This would not align with the Government’s commitments to reduce internal barriers to food trade in Canada, enhance food security, and reduce red tape.

An ME was selected as the most appropriate instrument to address specific regulatory barriers that are currently impeding the interprovincial trade of meat because it offers a focused, time-limited solution that can be implemented quickly to address the immediate gap.

The other proposed regulatory amendments are technical in nature and are required to address the identified issues.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

The cost-benefit analysis assessed the potential impacts (i.e. costs and benefits) representing the differences between the baseline and regulatory scenarios. The baseline scenario describes the situation under the current federal regulatory framework. The regulatory scenario describes the future situation when the regulations come into force.

Targeted, time-limited exemption to address internal trade barriers due to unmet slaughter capacity

Baseline scenario

In the baseline scenario, all meat traded between provinces and territories must meet the interprovincial trade requirements of the SFCA and SFCR. Specifically, only meat from a federal slaughter establishment can be moved or sold interprovincially. This means a slaughter establishment must obtain an SFC licence, renew their licence every two years, and develop and implement a written PCP. They also must meet other interprovincial trade requirements related to traceability, labelling, and federal veterinary and inspector presence during slaughter. The livestock producers involved in the interprovincial movement and sale of meat are also subject to the federal interprovincial trade requirements, but do not require an SFC licence.

Regulatory scenario

Under the regulatory scenario, the CFIA would have the ability to grant livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments a four-year exemption to certain interprovincial trade requirements of the SFCA and SFCR. Under the exemption, the provincial slaughter establishments would be able to prepare meat to be traded interprovincially in accordance with the conditions of the exemption, without holding an SFC licence, for four years. This approach enables a provincial slaughter establishment to test new markets and supply chains, helping them assess whether to pursue federal licensing in the future. In addition, the exempted livestock producers would be able to use a nearby exempted provincial slaughter establishment and move and sell their meat products in the province or territory specified in the application.

Stakeholders

• Livestock producers
• Provincial slaughter establishments
• Federal slaughter establishments
• Industry associations
• PT governments
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency
• Consumers

Profile of industry stakeholders

In 2025, there were 5 848 businesses in the livestock sector (Statistics Canada Table 33-10-1014-01). Of the 5 848 businesses, 5 834 are small businesses with fewer than 100 employees.

In 2025, there were approximately 400 provincial slaughter establishments in Canada. Approximately half of these establishments are primarily active as slaughter establishments and 99% of these slaughter establishments are small businesses with fewer than 100 employees. The other half of these establishments either have a function other than slaughter that is their primary revenue (e.g. primarily a processor that also has a licence for slaughter) or are a business that holds a licence but is not currently conducting business under the licence. The CFIA estimates that approximately 5% of the red meat produced in Canada is slaughtered at provincial slaughter establishments.

Benefits and costs

Benefits

Benefits to industry

The proposal is expected to benefit industry by reducing internal trade barriers, enabling greater use of existing slaughter capacity with provincial oversight, and reducing costs for livestock producers who currently face challenges finding slaughter establishments that meet their needs (e.g. too far away, not federally-SFC licenced). Livestock producers who must currently send animals longer distances to a federal slaughter establishment in their own province would benefit from reduced transportation costs when using a nearby provincial slaughter establishment. Improved access to slaughter capacity and new market opportunities may help sustain family run operations, many of which rely on multiple generations of workers who face limited employment opportunities in remote areas.

Communities, particularly rural and remote regions, stand to benefit through increased food security and the retention of local economic activity. When producers can reliably access slaughter capacity and reach new markets, they are more likely to maintain and expand operations, supporting long-term employment and rural vitality.

Provincial slaughter establishments would also benefit from the opportunity to test the market and expand their businesses before committing to the upfront costs associated with obtaining a federal SFC licence (e.g. cost of the licence, cost to develop and implement a PCP, traceability). Provincial slaughter establishments would also avoid the costs for federal veterinary and inspector presence during slaughter. Once the exemption is granted, it is intended to reduce business risk and costs associated with trialling a new market. For example, a provincial slaughter establishment that was not considering getting an SFC licence that decides to benefit from the exemption may experience greater than expected increases in slaughter volume and gain important experience that encourages them to take the next step of getting a federal licence when they otherwise would have missed this opportunity. Conversely, a provincial slaughter establishment that was already considering getting their SFC licence may decide to benefit from the exemption and then realize that getting their SFC licence would not be a good business decision based on market information gained under the exemption. They may decide not to pursue an SFC licence after the exemption expires and would save the costs of going through the process of obtaining an SFC licence only to realize it was not a good business decision.

Based on preliminary survey responses from PTs and industry associations, in the first one to two years of the exemption, up to 30 provincial slaughter establishments in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island may seek the exemption through their respective PTs to address unmet slaughter capacity faced by local livestock producers.

The CFIA estimates that it costs approximately $37,500 in the first year, and $18,500 per year in subsequent years for a provincial slaughter establishment to obtain and keep an SFC licence. In some situations, provincial slaughter establishments are choosing not to incur these costs and obtain an SFC licence even when there is a market opportunity and unmet need for federal slaughter capacity in their region. Provincial slaughter establishments participating in the exemption benefit from a time-limited, low-cost opportunity to test the market, with specific constraints, and avoid incurring the costs required to obtain an SFC licence that would normally be required for products prepared for interprovincial trade.

Table 1 presents estimates of the costs and fees to meet the SFCR requirements associated with the interprovincial trade.

Table 1: SFCR interprovincial trade requirements — Estimated costs per business, in 2025 Canadian dollars

Activity	Costs per business (excludes capital costs)
Preventive controls and preventive control plans (PCPs)
Developing PCP (upfront cost)	$15,046
Implementing and documenting PCP Initial/first year costs On-going costs	$15,357 $11,357
Fees
Licence fee	$154 ($307.96 every two years)
Slaughter inspection station fee (operating under SFC licence one day/week) table b1 note a	$2,427.90
Work shift fee	$4,557.71
Fee subtotal	$7,139.61
Total First Year Cost (PCP + Fees)	$37,500
Total Ongoing Costs (PCP + Fees)	$18,500
Table b1 note(s) Table b1 note a For this illustrative example, we assumed the slaughter establishment operates under an SFC licence one day per week and operates under its provincial licence four days per week. Return to table b1 note a referrer

The costs per business of meeting the SFCR interprovincial trade requirements in Table 1 were calculated using the following assumptions:

1. Capital costs or infrastructure upgrades are not included.
   • The business is a small traditional slaughter establishment operating two days a week at the lowest line speed for any species.
2. The costs to develop and implement the PCP assume that an external consultant is used.
3. The wage rate of the employees responsible for implementing the PCP was assumed as $46/hour — the average wage rate in Canada across all industries, plus 25% overhead. Source: Statistics Canada. Table 14-10-0064-01 - Employee wages by industry, annual.
   • PCP development is a onetime cost incurred in the first year.
4. PCP implementation is an ongoing cost. The first year includes training related to the PCP plan implementation.
5. The costs are average costs based on information provided by food safety consultants.

The proposal could strengthen Canada’s domestic food system by reducing barriers that limit the movement of safe, Canadian-produced meat across provincial borders. Over time, this could lead to greater investment in local food production, more federally licensed facilities, and improved competitiveness within the sector.

Benefits to consumers

Consumers may benefit from increased access to red meat, improved affordability of meat products and enhanced food security under the exemption because it would increase the flexibility of local supply chains and make the overall food system more resilient. This would be of particular benefit in rural and remote communities, which often have less extensive food supply chains, which may limit access to food.

Over time, it could lead to stabilized or improved meat availability by strengthening supply chains and reducing chokepoints caused by limited slaughter access. This can contribute to a more diverse, affordable, and resilient domestic food supply.

Costs

Costs to industry

The costs are anticipated to be low given that no new federal requirements would be introduced under the proposal, and the overall number of provincial slaughter establishments and livestock producers expected to participate is small. Livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments would need to complete a CFIA form as part of the package that PTs would submit on their behalf to the CFIA. The small cost associated with completing the form would be more than offset by the benefits of participating in the exemption. While there would be a requirement to provide an identifier for the meat produced under the exemption, provincial slaughter establishments and producers would be able to leverage existing information that is already provided on the label, including an existing lot code. There would be no new labelling requirements. Overseeing PTs would be expected to inform the CFIA of what the provincial slaughter establishment is using as the identifier.

For further context, the pilot project with Ontario and Quebec involves one provincial slaughter establishment and several producers interested in slaughtering a total of 50 cattle per year. The exemptions granted under the proposed amendment would be similar low-volume arrangements. While the impacts of the exemption would be significant and positive for the participating businesses, the overall number of participants is anticipated to be low.

Costs to Government

The proposal is also expected to have incremental costs to the agency’s food program to develop policy, guidance, review requests for exemptions, and monitor implementation. It would not increase the burden on CFIA operational staff. Given that the number of exemptions is expected to be small, the CFIA would not require any additional resources and would only require minimal existing resources to implement the proposal. The CFIA would not incur any additional costs related to monitoring enforcement and compliance. There would be no change in the CFIA’s role in a food incident response.

The proposal is expected to have some costs for PTs. PTs would prepare an oversight arrangement and are responsible for providing oversight of humane treatment of food animals, food safety, packaging and labelling, and traceability for the food produced under the exemption. The oversight arrangements, and the conditions associated with the time-limited exemption, are intended to reduce food safety risks and limit food safety costs to government and Canadians.

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens shows beneficial impact on participating exempted provincial slaughter establishments and livestock producers. Provincial slaughter establishments that are impacted by the proposed regulatory amendment would gain the opportunity of testing new markets, earning additional revenue from increased production volume of meat products and the delayed or avoided costs associated with the interprovincial trade requirements of the SFCR. Livestock producers would also gain the ability to test new market opportunities and earn increased revenue. Both the producers and establishments would be required to complete a CFIA form for the exemption, but any cost to businesses related to filling out the form would be more than offset by the benefits of participating in the exemption.

The number of impacted small businesses depends on the number of livestock producers and provincial slaughter establishments that seek an exemption. Given that the proposed regulatory amendment would result in net benefit, further flexibility to help small businesses is not being offered.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies, since there would be an incremental increase in administrative burden for participating businesses. No regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.

The regulations would require participating livestock producers and slaughter establishments to complete an exemption application form as part of the application submitted to CFIA by PT governments. While the cost of completing the form must be counted as administrative burden under the rule, it would be a very minor cost relative to the overall benefits of participating in the exemption (e.g. opportunity to test new markets, earn additional revenue from increased production volume, and reduce transportation distances for livestock).

The administrative cost was estimated using the prescribed method in the Red Tape Reduction Regulations and all values listed in this section are presented in 2012 dollars, discounted to 2012 at a rate of 7%, with impacts assessed over a ten-year period from 2026 to 2035. The total annualized administrative cost of the proposal is $27, or $1 per affected business. This represents the administrative cost for 15 slaughter establishments and 15 livestock producers to fill out an application form for the exemption, assuming it takes each business 30 minutes to complete the form, and the wage for the individual completing the form is $32.26 per hour (including overhead). Preliminary survey results showed that up to 30 slaughter establishments would be interested in applying for an exemption, but it was assumed that about half (15, or 50% of the 30) would apply and be granted an exemption, and correspondingly, an equal number of livestock producers would apply for the exemption (i.e. one for each slaughter establishment).

Table 2: Estimated annualized values of administrative impacts for the one-for-one rule (Canadian $)

Total annualized administrative impact on all businesses	-$27
Estimated number of affected businesses	30
Average annualized administrative impact per affected business	-$1

Amendments to remove unnecessary red tape in the meat sector

Amendment to the SFCR to eliminate unnecessary work shifts for certain continuous activities

Baseline scenario

Under the current SFCR, meat businesses need to pay multiple work shift fees for simple, continuous activities (such as freezing) that last longer than one work shift, even if no inspection hours are required past the first work shift due to the passive nature of the processes. This was not the intent of the SFCR. In practice, the CFIA ensures that multiple work shifts are not issued so that work shift fees are not charged for these simple, continuous processes where no inspection hours are required.

Regulatory scenario

The proposed amendment would formally amend the SFCR to allow the CFIA to approve exceptions to the work shift requirements for simple, continuous activities. This reflects what is already being done in practice.

Stakeholders

• Meat businesses
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Benefits and costs

The proposed amendment would align the regulations with current practices and would not result in any fee changes or revenue implications for the CFIA.

Amendment to the CFIA Fees Notice to clarify the inspection fee for certain meat storage activities

Baseline scenario

Currently, cold storage businesses that only freeze and defrost fully packaged meat are subject to higher fees than intended due to unintended wording in the CFIA Fees Notice. The CFIA has been issuing remittance orders since 2019 to avoid overcharging these businesses.

The current remissions reduce the fee charged to cold storages that only freeze or defrost packaged meat from $3,017.94 or more (depending on the number of inspection hours) down to $369.52.

Regulatory scenario

The proposed amendment would add clarity to the CFIA Fees Notice to enable the cold storages to be charged the intended work shift fee. This would eliminate the need to remit a portion of the fee.

Stakeholders

• Meat cold storage businesses
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Benefits and costs

As the amendment is simply clarifying in nature, and there are no changes to the existing fee, there is no cost to the CFIA.

Amendments to clarify the application of SFCR requirements

Baseline scenario

Currently, ambiguity in the SFCR leads to questions from businesses about the application of food safety provisions. These questions can delay food business operations and also result in CFIA having to dedicate inspector, AskCFIA service, and policy resources to providing responses to the questions.

Regulatory scenario

The regulatory amendment would clarify when SFCR provisions apply to all foods produced under a SFC licence. The SFCR currently lacks clarity which describes when its requirements apply, including for food that is traded only within a province. The amendments would also clarify the SCFR requirements that apply before a food is imported or exported.

Stakeholders

• Safe Food for Canadian Regulations licensed food establishments
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Benefits

This proposal is expected to benefit industry by removing the ambiguity around application of the SFCR. This would result in more efficient operations at food businesses and for importers and exporters, since there would be a better understanding of how the SFCR applies. It would also benefit the CFIA by reducing the number of hours taken by inspectors, the AskCFIA service, and program staff to respond to these questions.

Costs

This proposal is not expected to have any costs for industry or government.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The federal SFCA and SFCR requirements are aligned with internationally recognized standards, such as the Codex Alimentarius and the HACCP system. These requirements, as well as the requirements that apply to all food sold in Canada (regardless of where it is traded) under the FDA and the FDR, provide a consistent approach to food safety across Canada and give confidence to consumers and international trading partners. Further, the HAA and HAR, as administered and enforced by the CFIA would continue to apply, ensuring the humane transport of animals.

The proposed exemption aligns with FPT Ministers of Agriculture commitments and commitments from First Ministers.

International obligations

The CFIA will issue a notification to the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a period of 60 days, in alignment with the Canada Gazette, Part I, consultation period. This will allow Canada’s trading partners to provide comments and feedback on the regulatory proposal.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA Directive), a comprehensive strategic environmental and economic assessment has been conducted. Regulatory proposals subject to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation are exempted from the economic analysis elements of the SEEA Directive. The findings from the strategic environmental and economic assessment concluded that there are no significant impacts on the environment as a result of the amendments.

Gender-based analysis plus

The proposed regulatory amendments would directly impact livestock producers with unmet slaughter capacity. Most farm operators are male and 55 years old or over.

The CFIA has also identified potential indirect benefits for the farm and rural populations in Canada, and the Canadian population at large. The proposal would strengthen Canada’s domestic food system by removing barriers to interprovincial meat trade, supporting growth, investment, and competitiveness among livestock producers. It would also benefit rural and remote communities through improved food security, lower operational costs, and more stable conditions for long-term economic activity and employment.

Food security and food affordability

The CFIA examined how the amendments would support food security, supply stability, and the affordability of food. Removing barriers to the internal trade of food in Canada is essential to building a more resilient food system and unlocking the economic potential of Canada’s food businesses. Persistent slaughter capacity constraints create an internal trade barrier to the movement of domestically produced meat, which can contribute to localized supply challenges, particularly in rural and Northern communities, and results in fewer choices and higher prices for consumers. By addressing unmet slaughter capacity, the proposed amendment is expected to enhance supply chain reliability and support a stable and affordable food supply, while maintaining Canada’s strong health and safety protections.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The proposed amendments to the Regulations would come into force on the date of registration.

Once the Regulations come into force, the CFIA would engage with and provide information to all stakeholders and CFIA staff to ensure they are aware of changes. This could include webinars, presentations, and meetings, as well as FAQs and InfoBulletins. Guidance would also be developed and published on the CFIA website.

The proposed Regulations for unmet slaughter capacity would not require additional CFIA resources to implement. As needed, the CFIA would engage with PTs regarding submitted applications to support the risk assessment and determine whether an exemption may be issued. When an exemption is granted, the oversight responsibilities would fall to the implicated PTs.

The other proposed amendments are technical and clarifying in nature and would likewise not require any additional CFIA resources to implement.

Compliance and enforcement

When a time-limited exemption is granted, the implicated PTs would be responsible for the oversight of the red meat products produced and traded under the exemption.

However, the CFIA remains committed to maintaining food safety. The CFIA will maintain its current risk-based inspection oversight relating to intraprovincial, interprovincial, and international trade. In the event of a food complaint or investigation, the CFIA will conduct a food safety investigation and collaborate with provincial authorities as required, consistent with the CFIA’s Standard Regulatory Response Process.

In addition, if any food safety or trade-related incidents arise with the meat products made under the exemption, the CFIA would have the authority to cancel the exemption.

Contact

Lindsay Wild
Director
Regulatory, Legislative and Economic Affairs
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
1400 Merivale Road
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0Y9
Email: CFIA.internaltrade-commerceinterieur.ACIA@inspection.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Unmet Slaughter Capacity) under section 51^{footnote a} of the Safe Food for Canadians Act ^{footnote b}.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the following email address: CFIA.internaltrade-commerceinterieur.ACIA@inspection.gc.ca.

Ottawa, June 19, 2026

Janna Rinaldi
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Unmet Slaughter Capacity)

Amendments

1 The Safe Food for Canadians Regulations ^{footnote 1} are amended by adding the following after section 31:

Continuous activities

31.1 In the case of the manufacturing, processing, treating or preserving of a meat product, part of a continuous activity referred to in subsection 31(2) may continue to be conducted outside that work shift with the approval of the President.

2 Subsection 46(2) of the Regulations is repealed.

3 Subsection 47(3) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Imported food

(3) Before importing a food, the holder of a licence to import must comply with subsections (1) and (2).

4 Section 61 of the Regulations is renumbered as subsection 61(1) and is amended by adding the following:

Non-compliant separation

(2) If a food is not separated in a manner that meets the requirements of subsection (1), all food in the establishment is subject to the requirements of the Act and these Regulations.

5 Section 85 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Imported food

85 Before importing a food, the holder of a licence to import must comply with sections 82 to 84 and 86.

6 Subsection 86(2) of the English version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exception — food to be exported

(2) Despite subsection (1), a preventive control plan is not required to be prepared, kept or maintained for any activity that the licence holder conducts in respect of a food, other than fish or a meat product, that is to be exported, unless a certificate or other document referred to in section 48 of the Act is sought in respect of the food.

7 Section 176 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Application for exemption — unmet slaughter capacity

175.1 (1) A producer of livestock for slaughter and a person who is authorized by a competent authority of a province to prepare meat products for human consumption may jointly apply, in a form approved by the President, for an exemption from the application of a provision of the Act or these Regulations for the purpose of addressing unmet slaughter capacity.

Exemption

(2) The Minister may, in writing, grant the exemption if

• (a) the information submitted in the application is complete, truthful and not misleading;
• (b) an attestation from the competent authority of the province that there is unmet slaughter capacity is submitted with the application;
• (c) the meat product derived from the slaughtering in respect of which the application is made meets the requirements that are set out in subsection 8(1);
• (d) the meat product derived from the slaughtering in respect of which the application is made is identifiable and traceable in the marketplace and is not to be exported;
• (e) the meat product derived from the slaughtering in respect of which the application is made is distributed only in the province specified in the application;
• (f) the Minister is of the opinion that no risk of injury to human health will result from the exemption; and
• (g) the Minister is of the opinion that no risk of harm to interprovincial trade or export will result from the exemption.

Criteria

(3) When considering the application, the Minister must take into account the following factors:

• (a) the efforts of the competent provincial authorities to address the unmet slaughter capacity that one of those authorities has identified; and
• (b) the written agreement between those competent authorities to oversee the food safety, packaging, labelling, traceability and the humane treatment of food animals in respect of any meat products sent or conveyed between those provinces.

Definition of unmet slaughter capacity

(4) For the purposes of this section, unmet slaughter capacity means a situation in which, in a region of a given province, the establishments where food animals are slaughtered for human consumption are unable to meet the slaughter needs of producers in that region, which limits the sale of meat products.

Additional conditions

176 The Minister may, at any time, make any exemption referred to in subsection 174(2), 175(2) or 175.1(2) subject to conditions.

8 Section 177 of the Regulations is renumbered as subsection 177(1) and is amended by adding the following:

Subsection 175.1(2)

(2) An exemption referred to in subsection 175.1(2) is valid until the end of the day that is 4 years after the day on which the exemption is granted. No subsequent exemption is to be granted.

9 Paragraph 178(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (b) in the case of an exemption referred to in subsection 175(2) or 175.1(2), the Minister is of the opinion that to not cancel the exemption may result in a risk of harm to interprovincial trade or export; or

10 Paragraph 282(1)(a) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (a) the inspection legend set out in Figure 1 of Schedule 2, if the edible meat product is to be sent or conveyed from one province to another or exported; and

11 Paragraph 287(1)(a) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (a) the inspection legend set out in Figure 1 or 2 of Schedule 2, if the prepackaged edible meat product is to be sent or conveyed from one province to another or exported; and

Coming into Force

12 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

• contain personal information
• contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
• express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
• contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
• contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
• constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
• encourage or incite any criminal activity
• contain external links
• contain a language other than English or French
• otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that communication by email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.