Future-proofing Canada's Seeds Regulations for a stronger tomorrow – Proposals to modernize Canada's seed regulatory framework: Closed consultation

We are responsible for ensuring that each registration meets the requirements of variety registration. We do not have the authority to accept a variety registration decision made by a foreign jurisdiction. As such, an assessment must still take place, but we should be able to expedite the process. There is no guarantee that the process will be expedited should the information provided require additional scrutiny. In some cases, our requirements are different than other countries, so we need to maintain the ability to do a thorough review.

This applies to part 3 crops (for example, soybeans, potatoes and forages), which have the lowest level of registration requirements. Changes do not apply to part 1 crops, which require a merit assessment.

Registration requirements for part 3 crops are not changing. Applicants will still need to submit data like trait verification, pedigree details and breeding history. What's new is that if a crop variety has already been approved in another country, applicants can now highlight that foreign approval in their application. This allows the CFIA's Variety Registration Office (VRO) to streamline the review process by placing these applications into a less complex workflow. These types of applications are usually processed faster because the:

• crops themselves are simpler
• breeding methods are straightforward
• foreign approval means the variety has already gone through a rigorous review elsewhere

Currently, the VRO already streamlines applications based on crop type, breeding method and trait claims. For example, population breeding and hybrids are considered more complex. With this change, foreign-approved varieties can be streamlined regardless of crop type. But the CFIA can use its discretion regarding which varieties may be expedited, such as those listed on the OECD list of varieties eligible for seed certification. If at any point during the review an issue is identified, the application can be moved to the more complex stream.

This proposal and others create space for us to be more innovative and be able to adapt now and in the future. We want to respond to the Government of Canada's efforts to leverage foreign approvals to speed up domestic processes, which reduces regulatory burden and strengthen supply chains while still maintaining standards. In the future, this may be an area that could benefit from the use of artificial intelligence in specific parts of the review process.

We will not be changing the official service standard (8 weeks) for these applications. While they may be processed faster in practice, we require evidence of consistent performance data before updating the service standard.

Details for the registration of heirloom and heritage varieties need to be determined in collaboration with the variety registration expert recommending committees. Conceptually, we want to develop a process for a niche market variety for closed-loop systems. It is anticipated that these varieties will have limited production. This will be considered as we develop a solution to allow these smaller acreage niche market opportunities, while preventing harm to mainstream production.

Details still need to be worked out with the recommending committees in association with the Canadian Grain Commission. Release of this policy paper is your opportunity to let us know:

• what you support
• where you have concerns
• what should be considered for successful implementation

When you wish to bring forward a variety for registration as a heritage variety, you will need to provide the following information:

• variety description
• history
• evidence to support that it is eligible to be considered a heritage variety
• reference sample

Once it's determined to be eligible for registration, the submitted variety description will be used to describe that variety even if it may not be an exact match to what was registered in the past.

Similar feedback

• Would there be additional administrative steps for those who want to cancel? Varieties that are cancelled are still "legal" in the marketplace, they would just only be eligible for the lowest grade of a class when delivered at an elevator.

CFIA's response

No, it will not be a requirement for registrants to consider transferring their registration. There will be no change to the cancellation process when the registrant wishes to have a variety cancelled. But if they are approached by another entity who they feel is qualified and they want to transfer the variety to, a pathway will exist to help with that transfer.

Nothing will change in terms of cancelling a variety and providing a 3-year notification to ensure all seed stocks have been used and removed from the process. In cases where a variety has been cancelled, the grain may still be legal (under the Canadian Grain Commission's Grains Act and regulations), but you cannot sell or import seed of cancelled varieties in Canada (unless specific exemptions are met) as they are no longer considered a registered variety.

Initially, we request a reference sample to ensure that the variety description is accurate. From time to time, we continue to use a reference sample to compare it to the variety that is being sold on the market in the variety verification program to monitor the varietal purity of the certified seed. When our samples become depleted, the registrant must provide more.

In the context of this proposal, when the registrant can no longer supply us with a reference sample, the variety will be cancelled because we have no ability to ensure the purity of the variety in the marketplace.

Similar feedback

• To avoid market and grading implications, when a variety registration is cancelled (for any reason), will there be timelines throughout the supply chain that allow stocks to clear the system?

CFIA's response

We encourage you to share your implementation concerns, ideas and concepts about this proposal.

We want to ensure that the CFIA remains in a position to have oversight over varietal purity. If the CFIA moves forward with this proposal, we would take the same approach to cancellation by request in the respect that a 3-year notification of cancellation period would apply to varieties of all crop kinds except hybrid canola and rapeseed (which requires a 1-year notification period). 

This timeline enables the Canadian Representative and Breeder to ensure that seed stocks of the variety have been cleared from the market and that growers have been duly notified, well in advance, to clear seed stocks in farmers' operations. This will help farmers plan and minimize any financial risk to their businesses.

The CFIA and the Canadian Grain Commission are committed to communicating to farmers well before varieties are cancelled. Standardizing the period of cancellation will help prevent financial risk to farmers by avoiding the planting of varieties of field crops which will no longer be registered for sale in Canada.

It is not a requirement for registrants to consider transferring their registration. The original owner of a variety may decide to cancel the variety for commercial reasons. As the registrant, they are in control of the variety and can cancel it.

But this isn't a final decision. We're looking for your feedback. The proposal that we're currently conceptualizing is that this authority remains in the registrant's hand just as it is today. There could be situations in which someone steps up and says they would like to take over the registration, but the official registrant could still cancel if they choose.

When we have a variety put forward by the Western recommending committee, the Eastern recommending committees (Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic) will discuss amongst themselves and come back to us with 1 response on whether a variety needs to be restricted or if it's possible to have a national registration. It should happen as 1 simultaneous discussion, instead of a sequential process that takes more time.

We have started some discussions with the Eastern recommending committees.

The regulatory modernization has been a 5-year process. We used an experimental co-development process, and we wanted to explore the major parts of the Seed Program and hear from all parts of the seed value-chain during this process. All, but 1 of the future recommendations represent policy change and not regulatory change, which means that it can be further explored at any time outside of the regulatory review process. Proposals are marked for future exploration to:

• ensure that there are no barriers (as technology improves) to future changes
• ensure that the correct expertise is available to provide advice
• potentially realize other changes to the seed regulatory framework (in some cases, there was not enough stakeholder support to make changes now; but, there may be support in the future as other changes are realized)

We looked at all these recommendations throughout seed regulatory modernization with a government lens to determine which ones we could move forward with, and which ones could be explored more in the future. The advisory group will help direct and prioritize future revisions (such as, amendments to the incorporation by reference documents). Our goal is to future proof the regulations by having a regulatory framework that is flexible.

Similar feedback

• Should the CFIA be working to put money back into breeding organizations? Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's cutting public breeding funds and promotion of common seed means no money back to support these programs either.

CFIA's response

We would like to clarify that the interpretation of the common seed proposals as 'promotion' doesn't fully reflect the intent or anticipated outcome of the proposals. Proposals aim to protect farmers from low quality seed. Currently, common seed has fewer regulatory requirements than pedigreed seed. These proposals tighten requirements to ensure that there is more rigor on common seed.

We are looking to hear your thoughts on country of origin labelling, as part of this consultation process for seed. We would like to know if country of origin labelling needs to continue for:

• pedigreed seed on interagency tags
• corn seed
• alfalfa seed

We also want to know what crop types (if any) should be kept, added or removed from this proposed requirement on place of origin.

Current regulations require that the lower pedigreed status be used when Registered status and Foundation status lots of the same variety and crop type are mixed. This will be maintained and continued to be audited through the registered seed establishments program, so the CFIA can monitor and enforce as is currently done.

The only change is that there will no longer be a requirement for the issuance of a new crop certificate. No other procedures and requirements are changing.

Similar feedback

• When seed is treated, it is considered its own unique lot that's separate from the bare seed lot it came from. Germination testing would not be available for the registered seed establishments. Will this increase the burden on registered seed establishments to put in place agreements with customers ahead of the treated seed purchase to outline what the germination of the bare seed batch was and that the treated batch quality will be made when available?

CFIA's response

Our intention is to require the purity and germination data to be supplied to the purchaser upon request within 5 business days when the seed was sold with a grade name. If untreated seed was sold and graded to Canadian standards (for example, Certified No.1) and that seed is treated and delivered to the farmer, the results of the graded untreated seed could be provided as the sale was based on this labelled seed grade before the custom treating service.

Confirmation of germination after a custom treating service is not required under the Seeds Regulations, if graded seed was already sold to the farmer before treating. If this was a seed lot that was treated and then bagged (labelled with the grade name and sold with a Canadian grade name), the results to confirm the germination of the treated seed grade would be available before the sale and those germination results could be provided.

But if there are circumstances where untreated seed is treated, bagged and then sold, and this window does not provide adequate time, we encourage you to provide feedback during the Canada Gazette, Part I process.

Currently, we offer theory training (in individual groups) to licensed seed crop inspectors (LSCI). Following theory training, candidates must take a written exam. And for some groups, candidates must either complete:

• a practical exam, or
• a practical field day

This proposal means that we will no longer provide theory training to LSCIs. Candidates can self-study or there may be another entity (for example, an authorized seed crop inspection service association or the Canadian Seed Growers' Association) that may decide to offer theory training to LSCIs.

Once an LSCI feels prepared to write the exam, it will be administered by the CFIA. Once the candidate is successful in writing the theory component, the practical portion remains unchanged. The candidate must attend a practical field day or a practical exam.

The evaluation, for both theory and practical, are going to continue to exist for new LSCI, and for adding additional scopes, the requirements for meeting field targets will remain unchanged.

When the information task team reviewed QR codes, they felt that it could be a great marketing tool. QR code information ranges from basic information (for example, promotional information or company background) to in-depth details on the lot (for example, noxious weeds found in a sample or germination data). The market might dictate what information is valuable to purchasers.

QR codes will not be required by regulation, and they already can encompass any additional information that a company wishes to supply. But mandatory information still needs to appear on the label. Currently, companies are allowed to use a QR code for mandatory information and any additional information that they wish to provide.

Labelling requirements will be incorporated by reference, which means more information can be added on labels in the future. We are looking to explore more about mandatory information in QR codes. Requiring mandatory information in a QR code would require a legislative change.

Similar feedback

• During the consultation we talked about the QR codes and the information that's available there quite extensively. It's not only valuable to us to know the standard, the germination, the variety and things like this, but what's in that sample, so that you know what you're buying. It is so important now because of noxious seeds, weeds not only coming in from other countries, but also coming in from different regions of our own country or province.

No, specific fees are not overseen. Under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, not-for-profit entities are not prohibited from generating a profit, but they are restricted in how that profit can be used. Any surplus or profit generated by a not-for-profit corporation must be reinvested into the organization's activities that align with its stated purposes.

The Weed Seeds Order is subject to the Statutory Instruments Act and must be registered by the Clerk of the Privy Council. Recent efforts to update the Weed Seeds Order in a timely manner have proven challenging. The last update began in October 2009 and came into force on November 1, 2016. It took nearly 7 years to complete. Substantial delays resulted from:

• a federal election
• unclear requirements for registration by the Clerk of the Privy Council Office
• waiting for priority within the agency to bring forward a package to Privy Council for approval

Although the Weed Seeds Order cannot be incorporated by reference yet, text is being proposed so that it can be incorporated by reference in the future. Having the Weeds Seeds Order incorporated by reference will allow for a transparent and more efficient process to make updates. It will avoid the delays associated with the requirements to register the Weeds Seeds Order.

Seed imported solely for the purposes of purity and germination testing, and not intended for further propagation, is not subject to the requirements outlined in the Seeds Regulations. But additional regulatory requirements may apply depending on the seed crop type and origin as noted in the ABC's of seed importation into Canada. For example, a plant health import permit and/or a phytosanitary certificate may be required under the Plant Protection Regulations. If a plant health import permit is necessary, see additional information on the application process.

Note: single-use and multi-use permits are available depending on the type of import. Permits must be issued before seed is imported.