Health Committee on June 16th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome you once again to the health committee.

I would like to welcome representatives from the Department of Health.

Today is a very important day because we're going to get through another piece of legislation on which the health committee has worked extremely hard, as has the Department of Health. Let's begin.

You all know the people from the Department of Health, so I don't need to introduce them today.

I like your hair, Mr. Dufour. You've had a new hairdo since the last meeting. Have you noticed? There you go.

[Nicolas Dufour, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Sorry, but I just forgot my....

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

We noticed, Mr. Dufour.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), we want to go to clause-by-clause consideration. Clause 1 is postponed.

(On clause 2)

I understand that Dr. Bennett was thinking of putting forth an amendment but she wasn't certain about it.

Ms. Murray, do you have any knowledge about the amendment?

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

I think we've circulated it. Does everyone have it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Everyone has it.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

The intention here, consistent with the advice of members of the affected industry, is to have wording that does not catch cigars that happen to be small. The wording based on weight catches cigars that are rolled in a tobacco leaf and marketed to adults. They are not intended to be what this bill deals with, in terms of products and flavourings aimed at children. This is an exclusion to reflect that these small cigars would be otherwise caught by the legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Mr. Glover, would you like to make a comment on that amendment?

[Paul Glover, Assistant Deputy Minister, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the question and the opportunity to respond.

We are very cognizant of this issue and the presentations that were made previously by different organizations to the committee. Upon further consideration, the department's position remains as it was when we were before you the last time. Any move we make to change the way it is written will create a loophole that will continue to allow small cigars and cigarillos into the marketplace in the flavours associated with them. In essence, this amendment would create a problematic loophole, in the view of the department.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Is there any discussion?

Ms. Murray.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Are the products that this amendment is designed to exempt marketed at children? Are they predominantly used by children, or was the representation made that these are actually products smoked by adults in an industry that has legal products? Could you comment on that?

[Paul Glover]

I would refer to the handout we provided at the last committee appearance, particularly figure 2. It showed, if this amendment were to move forward, the types of products that would continue to be allowed in the marketplace that have a wide range of flavours, from chocolate to other things.

Given that it is prohibited to sell them to minors, the vast majority of tobacco products tend to be used by adults. We understand that by the very definition. However, we see, and our research has shown, that these flavoured products are attractive to youth. So while they are never in the majority, it is something we see and it is a trend we are trying to address with this piece of legislation.

(Amendment negatived)

(Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to)

(On clause 4)

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

There is an amendment on clause 4.

Dr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

We want to ensure that the federal departments and provinces and territories have the ability to use colour markings should they require them for educational or contraband purposes in the future. This amendment is required to ensure there is no conflict with federal legislation.

What I would recommend is this. I would propose that Bill C-32 in clause 4 be amended by replacing line 27 on page 2 with the following:

tobacco product or to display a marking required under this or any other Act of Parliament or of the legislature of a province or for any other prescribed purpose.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Is there any discussion on this amendment?

Mr. Glover, would you like to make a comment?

[Paul Glover]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just for the record, I wish to make clear that the amendment as proposed does not cause concern for the department in terms of our ability to implement it should it pass. In fact, through informal discussions with a number of jurisdictions, there has been interest expressed about this type of potential usage, so from a provincial-territorial relationship point of view, it would be helpful in the long run.

(Amendment agreed to)

(Clause 4 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 5)

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

The clerk is advising me that the vote will carry to amendment G-2 for clause 5, and I'm not familiar with that. We will apply that vote to amendment G-2, if that is okay with the committee.

Dr. Carrie, do you want to speak to amendment G-2 on clause 5?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

It is basically for consistency. I propose that Bill C-32 in clause 5 be amended by replacing lines 35 and 36 on page 2 with the following:

product contains a colouring agent used for a purpose referred to in subsection 5.1(2).

(Amendment agreed to)

(Clause 5 as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I am going to go through clauses 6 to 8. There are no amendments there.

(Clauses 6 to 8 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 9)

On clause 9 there is an amendment from the Bloc. Who would like to speak to that?

Go ahead, Monsieur Dufour.

[Nicolas Dufour, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. This amendment is only aimed at making sure that the Governor in Council has the power to amend the schedules if something has to be added.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Is there any discussion?

Go ahead, Dr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I was wondering if we could have comment from the officials. I understand that the amendment proposed is duplicative because the Governor in Council can already amend the schedule for this purpose. Could we have comment by the officials, please?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Would you comment, Mr. Glover?

[Paul Glover]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to comment on this amendment.

The amendment as proposed is, in many respects, duplicative. It neither adds to nor detracts from powers already in the bill. From a drafting point of view, it raises some concern for us in that in another clause it is introducing powers that are already present. It neither adds to nor detracts from powers that are already present in the bill.

(Amendment negatived)

(Clauses 9 to 18 inclusive agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you.

We will move on to the schedule. We have an NDP amendment. Who would like to speak to that? There is just one of you today.

Go ahead, Ms. Wasylycia-Leis.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yes, but I'll speak like there are thousands behind me.

I'm going to actually withdraw this amendment and the next one.

If I could speak to the withdrawal, we did hear considerable testimony around the need to include smokeless tobacco in the bill. In particular, the young people we heard, who appeared before us and made presentations, were very concerned about the impact that chewing is having on the health and well-being of their friends and colleagues. However, from discussions with my colleagues on the government side I understand that pursuing this amendment at this time would complicate matters and would perhaps come in the way of speedy passage of this bill. As it is, assuming the House will rise by Friday, we'll have some difficulty getting through all the stages, and it will require some unanimous actions on the part of all of us in order to accomplish that.

So I would like to withdraw the amendments, but on the understanding--and I'd like to get some comments from the department--that this issue, for which we have little data, will be studied, that data will be collected around the usage of smokeless tobacco and the ingredients within those products, and that there will be the possibility of draft amendments to the regulations to allow for these products to be added to the list of prohibited products at some point in the future.