Health committee  I think, in particular, it refers just to the schedules themselves. That's very specific. And the schedules, as you can see, in the way you read them, absolutely should be based on a scientific-based discussion. I think, really, if the latest science on the risk of a pathogen o

Health committee  The way I read it, there is no scientific basis to this particular amendment.

Health committee  We agree on an in-depth consultation process and that it should include a number of stakeholders. The provinces and territories make up a very specific and important aspect of the consultations. In addition, there is a need for science-based advice, as required, to inform the sch

Health committee  I'll provide an initial comment, and my colleague might wish to add something. There's already in existence a consultation requirement for the development of regulations. The Public Health Agency has said repeatedly that we will honour that requirement and that we will be consult

Health committee  Yes, this is new language that we haven't seen. The Liberal amendment proposed by Dr. Bennett is in line with what we are going to do in terms of establishing a scientific-based committee to ensure transparency in the process. I think the language in terms of Monsieur Malo's pr

Health committee  The regulatory framework document, as was tabled, looks at risk group 2 in some detail in areas where we believe a less stringent application is appropriate, and that doesn't just deal with the location of a laboratory. It deals with a number of areas, including what our intent i

Health committee  I think what we preliminarily read into part (ii) of (c) is a sort of form of self-attestation. The current human pathogen importation regulation actually sets out in some detail specific requirements in terms of information provided, which is not detailed in this particular sect

Health committee  We have spoken to the association itself and clarified with them that there are two provisions in the bill in terms of exclusions that would apply. When people talk about universal precautions, etc., they're talking about protection for the worker and how to handle the taking of

Health committee  I don't think I have major information to add to what I've just said, bearing in mind that the biosafety officers and others have indicated that the key piece they do not want to see for risk group 2 is security clearance. We hope this will be further addressed later on. The spec

Health committee  Yes. Paradoxically, I think, by putting specifics in the bill we're not allowing the consultation process to unfold in terms of the development of the regulations. We also know that individual laboratories sometimes have very specific variations and nuances that we need to take i

Health committee  Jane Allain has tried to explain what this could exclude.

Health committee  While we believe there should be less stringent applications for laboratories handling risk group 2, by inserting this piece, you'll have other impacts such as not having to report inadvertent release or thefts from the lab. I think it's very important for us not to remove some o

Health committee  The bill seeks to establish a national standard for biosafety and biosecurity, and that means all laboratories, be they private, provincial, research or academic. Having just received this amendment, the way I read it is that it would not be in line with the intent of the nationa

Health committee  As the parliamentary secretary has indicated, removing risk group 2 removes the whole essence and public health intent of the bill. As the agency and David Butler-Jones have stated, we believe in the importance of a national biosafety standard to ensure the safety of all Canadian

Health committee  Yes, it will be two years of consultations.