Foodlaw: What does “organic” really mean?

From the beginning there has always been a widespread problem with the credibility of the “organic” claim. Unscrupulous producers took unfair advantage of farmers who tried to do things differently, and fraud at the retail level was fairly rampant. A few years ago a health food store in my neighbourhood bought rolls of orange “organic” stickers and plastered them on all kinds of products. When I asked the owner about it he replied, with a cynical smile, they were not, after all, “inorganic” and if people want to pay for them, why shouldn’t he sell them? For these reasons (and to export “organic” wheat to Europe) the organic industry changed its mind about six years ago, and from demanding that there be no federal regulation, the industry insisted that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) step in with a national regulatory regime. The CFIA has finally done this. The new federal regulations come into effect at the end of next month. There will now be a comprehensive regime for products traded interprovincially and internationally using a new Canada logo based on third-party accreditation. This is a positive step that should cut down on some misrepresentation but not all. The federal regulations do not apply to products grown and sold within a single province and we will still have a multitude of symbols because the new federal logo is voluntary. And with no product testing, there will still be a lot of room for unscrupulous producers and retailers to get around the rules.

Organic. What does it mean? Not much.

Ronald L. Doering, BA, LL.B, MA, LL.D, is a past president of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. He practices food law in the Ottawa offices of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP, and can be reached at: Ronald.doering@gowlings.com