Evidence of meeting #39 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:30 p.m.
Director General, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
The way the legislative and regulatory framework is set up is that all of the exemptions or excluded areas are done through regulation, so we exempt things through regulation, not through the legislation.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I have a final question, Chair.
The issue is that we walk out of here [Technical difficulty—Editor]
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
[Technical difficulty—Editor]...reason why it can't be done in legislation, as opposed to regulation.
6:30 p.m.
Director General, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
I'll let my colleague Jason respond to that.
May 29th, 2014 / 6:30 p.m.
Jason Wood Director, Policy and Program Development, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
My colleague Mr. Morales has additional information to add, but essentially, the amendment being proposed is redundant to the existing sections of the bill as proposed.
Currently, proposed section 14 says that if you're going to import a product, it needs to be compliant with the regulations. The amendment being proposed is adding some text indicating, “unless exempted by the regulations”. The effect of that amendment is essentially nothing. There's no additional impact of that amendment. Essentially, it would still cause us to have to create, in the regulations, the exemption we're talking about now. So the exemption raised by the Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association with respect to labelling a product after it's been imported would still have to be created in the regulations.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
In other words, you're not actually disputing their concern. You want to put it in the regulations, not in the legislation.
6:30 p.m.
Director, Policy and Program Development, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
In the exact same way that all other exemptions are currently dealt with, and will be dealt with in the proposed regulations.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
All right. I don't want to keep on going around the circle on this.
6:30 p.m.
Conservative
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Briefly; I think Mr. Wood touched on it right at the end. If this is the standard practice, then it offers some assurance. But the question about this is the sequencing as to when the label goes on. Is that my understanding of what Liberal-14 is trying to accomplish?
6:30 p.m.
Director, Policy and Program Development, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
That's our understanding.
Based on our conversations with industry, that's their concern. Currently, there's an existing provision in regulations that allows someone to bring a product in that's not properly labelled, on the condition that it be properly labelled once it arrives in the country.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Any risks to that current system? Has the department found any flaws in which the labelling in-country as opposed to at its source has caused any mislabelling, or Canadians to be exposed to hazardous materials?
6:30 p.m.
Director, Policy and Program Development, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
Essentially, there are conditions in place that currently require a company that's importing a product to identify an inspector in the jurisdiction in which it's being imported to ensure that the product is actually controlled safely until it's been relabelled.
Now I understand that the current amendment that's being proposed by the Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association is suggesting a slightly different approach to that. Again—as Ms. McDonald mentioned—there is a significant consultation process that would occur, so not only listening to industry but also our provincial and territorial colleagues about their concerns with respect to safety.
6:30 p.m.
Conservative
6:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
All in favour of Liberal-14?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll go to PV-7.
Ms. May, a brief comment, please....
6:30 p.m.
Green
6:30 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
—in 60 seconds, starting now!
This is a chance to make sure we've banned asbestos across Canada.
I propose we delete proposed section 14.1, subsections (1) and (2), so that each one of those sentences reads, “Despite section 13, no supplier shall sell a hazardous product that contains asbestos and is intended for use, handling or storage in a work place in Canada”, period.
No “unless”. I can't see any reason that we want to provide exemptions to allow the use of asbestos in Canada, because as far I understood, the use of asbestos in Canada was illegal.
6:35 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Through you to the officials.
I mentioned this to Ms. May privately before, but I'll say it publicly now. If the intention is around this one known carcinogen—something certainly the New Democrats have been spending quite a number of years fighting its development and exportation from Canada—can officials...?
Here's my concern. I'll just lay it on the table. Is there any cross-effect on other products that we don't see currently? Could there be the rule of unintended consequences here? Whereas PV-7 is attempting to ban asbestos, does it have any other impact on any other materials or products that we use in this country?
6:35 p.m.
Director General, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
I think you're asking if we were to adopt the amendment—
6:35 p.m.
Director General, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
—would there be unintended consequences?