Health Committee on Sept. 27th, 2023

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

There have been 5,200.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

There have been 5,200 over the last 54 years.

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

That's for over-the-counter products, yes.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

That's for over-the-counter products. It seems low, but there you go.

You're saying the contraindications that could happen with those products are serious ones.

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

We'd have to come back to you. The ratio of adverse events to the products is very similar between the over-the-counter, non-prescription pharmaceutical products and natural health products. They're very similar.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

All right.

There's nothing that's disproportionate. It's roughly the same.

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

That's right.

These products often are side by side on shelves. They're often treating the same things. They are often making the same claims. They're just under two different regulatory frames.

We know from talking to consumers that they're not really aware that they're under two different frames. Again, the overall level of risk is very comparable between those two categories.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I see.

In an international comparison, is that about right as well, or in your experience, in terms of...? Canada is not producing something that's an outlier in terms of this ratio.

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

The challenge in the international comparison with respect to natural health products is that there are very different regulatory schemes in different countries. There isn't really a country that has the same system that Canada has. The United States is different. Europe treats them differently. Australia treats them differently. The U.K. treats them differently.

It's a bit like apples and oranges making those comparisons.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I'm going to see if I can test the patience of the chair and slip in one more.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Fergus. You're past the time. You used his 17 seconds.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

There you go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I'll try to make a little summary.

When I ask you if you have any impact studies on pricing, you answer me by talking about Treasury Board guidelines. That's what we have.

When I ask you if you have any evidence as to the development of mitigation measures for regulatory impacts, you respond by talking about Treasury Board guidelines again.

I also wanted to know if you had any environmental impact studies with regard to labelling. According to Health Canada documents, the department doesn't have any and didn't believe it should. Health Canada points out, for example, that the industry has not proven that there would be impacts as alleged. So far, neither of you seem inclined to pursue this further.

Moreover, you want to develop your labelling requirements over six years, and you claim that the means of labelling you advocate won't be obsolete at the end of that period. You know, there's a way to use a QR code to display a lot of the information you want to see, while still having, on the box, important indications for people's health about the product. You can distinguish the interesting information that should be there when you look at a product's packaging. Just as there are bar code scanners, there could also be QR code scanners. In short, I think your reform is already outdated.

I also asked you if Health Canada was open to changes. Environmental impact is important. It's impossible not to understand that, if we have to display all the necessary information on a bottle or can, this will cause an increase in waste. This seems to me to be common sense. Since environmental impacts are important, is Health Canada open to proposals from people in the field to modulate these requirements?

I'd like to say one last thing. You mentioned inspections. You've started doing them, and you've identified problems. However, have you provided the industry with guidelines so that they can comply and respond well to inspections? What we want is for people who haven't been inspected for years to know your criteria so they can comply. We have to be proactive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, your question took three minutes.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Oh, really? Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're very kind.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

You had two and a half minutes, so there's not enough time left for a response, unless it's very brief.

[Linsey Hollett]

I will try. I have two very quick things to say.

We could not agree more. When a sector is inspected for the first time, the actual inspection provides an opportunity not only to assess but also to educate and promote compliance. Two, to help in that cause, we have worked and we continue to work with industry to produce guidance, such that industry has clarity and consistency on what Health Canada expects in order to meet regulatory requirements.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Hollett.

We'll go to Mr. Davies, for two and a half minutes for the questions and the answers.

Oh. I see Dr. Sharma. Go ahead.

[Dr. Supriya Sharma]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just on the first part very quickly, on the labelling, as part of the labelling proposal, a regulatory impact assessment was done. A cost-benefit assessment was done. Then there are also provisions for small packaging. All of that is part of the proposal.

It's now completed and it's going to be implemented. If there are changes that need to be made, we're open to those, but we believe it has taken all of that into consideration.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

We have Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you. I have some short snappers.

I think you talked about the money you'll need to support the program. How much money do you estimate you'll need to support the program?

[Dr. Celia Lourenco]

Our current estimated cost for the program, with the improvements, is about $100 million.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

It's $100 million.

[Dr. Celia Lourenco]

Yes.