Editor's Note: globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.

Dawn Calleja: Welcome, Mr. McCain, and thanks for joining us today to take questions from the readers of globeandmail.com. Since we've got so many questions, we'll start right away.

Dave Wilkinson from Morden Canada writes: I know that it would cost a lot of money, but will Maple Leaf ever consider downsizing their main plants in Canada and replacing them with smaller units spread across the Nation which would be able to handle or contain contamination problems easier?

Michael McCain writes: Hi Dave, thanks for your question, and it's a good one. While on the surface it may seem like smaller plants can deliver smaller scale contaminations in the event of a tragic breach, the reality is this isn't the case. Smaller plants and a more complex total network, is substantially more difficult to control the discipline required to deliver food safety on a daily basis. In fact, this would increase risk, not reduce it.

This is a pretty common misconception. In a larger plant, we can focus on the best people, the best protocols, and it's much tighter to control. Food safety is about these things - disciplines. While our protocols were the best in the country before this tragedy, we have learned and changed because of it, and they are that much better now. For example, we have doubled our testing in our facilities, we have significantly enhanced our sanitization procedures, we have hired a new Chief Food Safety Office, we have new protocols to ensure product won't leave our plants if we have concerns, and many other things.

Justin MacKinnon from Toronto Canada writes: Did you establish a crisis communications team and if so who was on it and how did you go about crafting your communications strategy? Also, is that strategy still on-going and how do you think it will effect your communications/PR in general from now on?

Michael McCain writes: Hello Justin. We have a communications group in our company on a regular basis, and we have a person from outside that we have worked with for over a decade. Collectively, including our management team, we just tried to figure out what was the "right thing to do" in the middle of this terrible situation. It really isn't about a complicated strategy. We have a highly principled set of values in our company, and they guided us throughout, including putting consumers interest first and being clear about accepting accountability. Thanks for your question.

James Thompson from Burlington Canada writes: Thank you for taking the time to speak to me. Maple Leaf is a large, successful Canadian company that employs thousands of Canadians. Why out of the blue was this happening your company has been manufacturing packaged meats for many years. What changed, and what has been done to correct it? How can I be sure it won't happen again?

Michael McCain writes: James, these are really, really important questions and ones I ask myself about all the time. Here is what I believe to be true. First of all, it is important to know that listeria is around us all the time, and listeriosis has been with us for thousands of years! It is one of the world's OLDEST living organisms, I am told by scientists. Also, around the world, listeriosis is an illness that in fact occurs each and every month. In Canada, the rate of this illness (and it comes from ALL ready to eat food sources) is about 3-4 in 1 million (about the same as the US, and lower than Europe). That's 100 to 150 cases per year - each and every year. Health Canada says that 1 to 10% of ALL ready to eat food may contain listeria. In fact, if you eat a carrot straight out of your garden, it is likely you will ingest it!

But, while this sounds absolutely AWFUL, the fact is that the vast majority of us - healthy adults and children - are immune to this - completely immune. The 3-4 in 1 million are not a random 3-4, they are a "targeted" 3-4….those with immune dificiency, elderly, or pregnant. The risk is really, really LOW, even though we in fact, ingest listeria as healthy Canadians each and every week. And, the rate of listeriosis is coming DOWN - in fact, our food today, is safer than it's ever been in history!! !

So, your question is this….what made this outcome different? Well, the first thing is that the science of DETECTING and TRACING sources has improved substantially over recent years. That is a GREAT thing, because now we have technology to find the source and linkage, for things that have been with us for thousands of years. And, in our case, we had a specific piece of equipment - a slicer - that had a harbourage point deeply inside that equipment (this is like a space deep inside the wing of an airplane, where the manufacturer of that equipment was not recommending we dissassemble it, to sanitize). So, while we cleaned that equipment 6-8 hours PER DAY, because the harbourage point was on the inside, and not supposed to be disassembled, the growth in the bacteria avoided our cleaning processes. We have dramatically changed our protocols to correct this in the future.

Thanks for your question. Michael

David McCarthy from Ottawa Canada writes: Given that Maple Leaf cannot control how cold meats are handled and stored once establishments and consumers buy them, it is possible that they represent a potential health risk no matter how careful you are with commercial preparation and packaging? Is cooking before serving the only true solution?

Michael McCain writes: Hey David, let me give you some statistics first. I really think it's important to always remember that the risk in listeria is exceptionally small. Here are some of the facts.

1) It exists in the environment all around us
2) Health Canada has suggested that maybe 1-10% of all ready to eat food - produce, seafood, ready to eat meals, meat, etc - likely contain listeria
3) The risk of contracting listeriosis is around 3-4 in one million
4) And those who have that risk are very targeted with immune deficiency, pregnant or elderly.

Healthy adults, and healthy children (in fact, the science says that children have the HIGHEST immunity), ingest listeria every week with no effect. As one scientist said, we have learned to co-exist with this bacteria for millions of years.

So, everyone should manage this risk in a way that matches there own concerns or personal risks. For example, a healthy adult need not worry. But, if one was in a high risk category, cooking food well is absolutely the best answer. But, I don't think this should be prescribed to suit everyone. A scientist told me recently that one of the highest concentrations of listeria may possibly be just walking out to your garden, pulling out a carrot and eating it. That said, as a healthy adult, I would still be inclined to do just that. But, if I was immune deficient, I would NOT do that, and would cook my food thoroughly.

Hope this helps. Michael

Randy Marko from Canada writes: Good Afternoon. Unfortunately, my father was one of the first confirmed cases of Listeria reported. We would appreciate being provided the opportunity to contact Mr. McCain and speak directly with him as to the impact and ongoing difficulties this situation has presented to our family. Best regards.

Michael McCain writes: Randy, you have my deepest condolences. I would be pleased to talk with you whenever you choose. Feel free to contact my office anytime. Michael

Kelly Patrick from Saskatoon Canada writes: Mr. McCain, I worked for Hawk Communications in Sackville, NB, and got to know well the reputation and respect McCain Foods built up by good business practices. I sincerely hope you get past this. However, I heard that you moved all equipment from the Toronto Maple Leaf plant where the listeriosis was found to the Saskatoon Maple Leaf plant. Is this true? And why would you not get rid of it altogether?

Michael McCain writes: Hi Kelly. I am very familiar with Hawk Communications, being from New Brunswick. This was certainly a topical matter, but allow me to explain. We move equipment around quite frequently, to match demand. In this case, we had demand in Saskatoon, and less in the east. That's why the equipment was moved.

The more important part of your question is "why this slicer"? Please know that this equipment is in operation in many sites throughout the world, by many different companies. Why the deep harbourage point occurred in this specific piece of equipment (and potentially not in others) is almost impossible to determine - it could be something as simple as a loose bearing in a moment in time, that broke a seal in the equipment. But, we have developed all new rigourous protocols to deal with that equipment, just like we have implemented for the SAME (and other) slicers across our network of plants. Here is what we are doing differently now….

1) Refurbished the entire equipment from end to end, including all the manufactures latest service bullitens
2) Created easier access to potential internal harbourage points, to ensure our sanitization procedures reach that level
3) All of these slicers are now subject to a deeper level of dissassembly than before, to verify elimination of potential harbourage points.
4) We have new stringent sanitizing and testing protocols, including product quarantines

Kelly, these have applied to ALL our slicers and equipment, whether in Saskatoon, Bartor Road, or any of our other 22 plants in the network.

Enjoy Sackville…. Michael

Chris Pereira from Brampton writes: First, let me express my sympathy for ML Foods. In my opinion, this tragedy could have happened to any food processing establishment. My question is: Why not drop the Maple Leaf brand and present a new, fresh and modern brand to reflect your commitment to a newer and better approach to producing safe food products?

Michael McCain writes: Hey Chris, this is an important question. We have asked this of ourselves often. But, we keep coming back to the fact that a brand truly has to reflect a trust. The Maple Leaf brand has over ONE HUNDRED years of history, and had built up amazingly high levels of trust with our consumers. We clearly breached that with this event. But, we came to the conclusion that if we continue to follow the path of "doing what's right", we could seek to re-earn that trust in the future, and this was a better and more honourable path than just trying to re-package something. That's the reason we chose this direction.

Vanessa Nero from Toronto Canada writes: During the peak of the crisis, did Maple Leaf Foods employ social networking and/or social media tactics (i.e. blogging, Twitter, podcasting)? If so, can you comment on how successful they were in helping with public outreach and corporate communication on this crisis?

Michael McCain writes: No, not really….we just posted our messages on YouTube. I don't think we're that tech savvy!!! We tried to be open and accessible in person. Thanks for the question, Vanessa! Michael

Heidi Croot from Canada writes: Your response to this crisis has been lauded as textbook perfect. You've certainly won my admiration and support for the way you've navigated things. What two or three pieces of advice would you share with executive teams of other companies facing a crisis, to persuade them to take your approach vs. the more popular closed kimono approach.

Michael McCain writes: Thanks for your kind words, Heidi, although we have made it quite clear that we aren't allowing ourselves any luxury or opportunity for "back patting" in such a terrible situation. We have just tried to handle it in the most responsible way we knew how, by putting consumers' interest and public health first.

As for advice, that's hard to give, as every situation is different. In our case, we only knew what came natural to our culture and DNA.... First, be open and transparent. Second, accept accountability and don't waiver on that. And third, take action to fix a tragic wrong. In our culture, we try to behave that way every day. It serves us best, in times of challenge.

Paul Collins from Canada writes: We saw SARS happen and Bird Flu is right around the corner. Is Maple Leaf Foods going to consider more natural ways of producing their foods? Do they encourage green farms? Are there government grants funding green farms? Will the term "eco friendly" be emblazoned on every package that Maple Leaf Foods sells?

Michael McCain writes: Thanks for the question, Paul. In fact, today we do have many "green" products including organics, focused farm products or eco-friendly products or packaging. Our goal is to respond to consumers needs in this regard, and where there is demand we seek to fill it accordingly, although please recognize that not everyone demands these types of products (although it is growing).

But, the most important point is this, Paul. These types of products have NO LESS exposure to the risk of food safety - absolutely zero less risk - than products not made this way. For example, listeria in a contaminated environment can attach to an organic product just as easily as a non-organic one! That's why our protocols for food safety - and we have substantially tighter and new protocols today - is focused on the disciplines of sanitization, of inspection and testing, of analysis of trends and potential risks, of technology to reduce risk, etc.

Hope this addresses your question, Paul. Have a great day. Michael

Vanessa Nero from Toronto Canada writes: Due to the fact that constant and consistent communication was critical during this crisis, what was the governance process to vet the external communications through your legal counsel prior to issuing to the public?

Michael McCain writes: Whew…that's a tough question because my lawyers may not like the answer!!!

The candid response is that the governance process was "me", and in most instances my governance was "try not to pay attention to them". Historically, the demands of the legal process and risks of exposure incent companies to avoid taking direct accountability. We rejected that perspective, as you know. Once the lawyers got their head around this as our core principle, then the advice and what vetting we did ask for, became much more balanced. Even in those cases, the senior group and I always reserved the right to avoid the "purely legal" advice, and just focus on what the "right message was" regardless of legal exposure.

So, for all the lawyers in the crowd - I apologize in advance for this possibly harsh view…. Michael

Shannon Hill from Guelph Canada writes: In light of the recent listeriosis outbreak, what changes are being made to the testing procedures, and what new plans have been or are going to be implemented in order to assure that this will not happen again?

Michael McCain writes: Hey Shannon, this may be the most important question of all. What's changed? Well, a lot, is the summary answer…..here are the major things, but remember Shannon, food safety means reducing the risk to its absolute lowest possible level, while it is impossible to eradicate listeria from our food supply.

First, we have more than doubled our testing events in our plants, and we have substantially enhanced the nature of the testing to dramatically improve the probability of finding a problem.

Second, we review those results and findings with substantially more rigour. Each and every day, our teams of experts - including microbiologists - review the reports from that day to analyse the results of the testing.

Third, we have increased the amount of sanitization, including the dissassembly procedures for equipment like the slicers that were at the root of this situation. We sanitize this equipment for 6-8 hours per day! And, we have changed the approach to how this sanitization occurs in the plant.

Fourth, we recognize that this is a long term commitment. Food safety gets better and better each and every year. There is new technology, and new approaches every year. To make sure we stay on top of this - in the front all the time - we have hired a new Chief Food Safety Officer (A Phd/Microbiologist). The person we have hired is possibly one of the best in the world in this field. His job is to lead this effort for Maple Leaf, to keep us at the front of this and amongst the best in the world - and he will report directly to me.

Lastly, we are developing a future looking food safety covenant for all 23,000 people on our team to endorse and commit to, recognizing the responsibility we all share - regardless of the very low risk - for providing safe, nutricious food.

We have food safety first at this company! Thanks for asking your question. Michael

Dawn Calleja writes: I'm afraid we're out of time. I'd like to thank everyone who sent in questions — I'm sorry we couldn't get to all of them. And I'd especially like to thank Mr. McCain for taking the time to participate. Have a great day.

© The Globe and Mail