Bill C-36 (Historical)

Canada Consumer Product Safety Act

An Act respecting the safety of consumer products

This enactment modernizes the regulatory regime for consumer products in Canada. It creates prohibitions with respect to the manufacturing, importing, selling, advertising, packaging and labelling of consumer products, including those that are a danger to human health or safety. In addition, it establishes certain measures that will make it easier to identify whether a consumer product is a danger to human health or safety and, if so, to more effectively prevent or address the danger. It also creates application and enforcement mechanisms. This enactment also makes consequential amendments to the Hazardous Products Act.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

We had some discussion last time around about clause 15, and we want to make it clear that the government is serious about protecting the privacy of individuals as well as the health and safety of Canadians. As we discussed last time, the release of personal information under Bill C-36 would be very rare and would be limited to a person or a government whose responsibilities are to protect human health and safety. We do have a letter from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, which was tabled here. They're comfortable with the regime. We have also heard from the Department of Justice officials that the Privacy Act would continue to apply along with clause 15 of Bill C-36.

In an effort to alleviate any remaining concerns opposition members may have with the provision to disclose personal information in Bill C-36, we are proposing that clause 15 be amended to clarify that clause 15 of Bill C-36 does not affect the provisions of the Privacy Act.

So I'd like to introduce the amendment, Madam Chair. I'd like to propose that Bill C-36 in clause 15 be amended by replacing line 12 on page 9 with the following:

15.(1) The Minister may disclose personal

and then add, after line 19 on page 9 the following:

(2) For greater certainty, nothing in this section affects the provisions of the Privacy Act.

That is the amendment.

(Amendment agreed to)

(Clause 15 as amended agreed to)

(Clauses 16 to 37 inclusive agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the health committee.

Today on our agenda we have the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-36, so we'll get right on that. I think there has been a lot of discussion among all parties, and I think we're going to be able to move through it quickly due to all the meetings that have taken place prior to our committee meeting today.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, October 7, 2010, we are considering Bill C-36, an act respecting the safety of consumer products.

We have as our witnesses, from Health Canada, Athana Mentzelopoulos, director general, consumer product safety directorate; Robert Ianiro, director, consumer product safety directorate; and Diane Labelle, general counsel of the legal services unit. They're here today to answer any questions we might have.

We will start clause-by-clause consideration. Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of the preamble and clause 1 is postponed, and we will start with clause 2. Everybody is very familiar with this bill, and there are no amendments until clause 15, so I'm asking the committee, shall clauses 2 to 14 inclusive carry?

(Clauses 2 to 14 inclusive agreed to)

Thank you. We will now go to clause 15.

Dr. Carrie.

(On clause 15--Personal information)

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I'm glad to hear that. Around the table today we've heard that Hallowe'en is coming up, and my colleague.... I also have an eight-year-old, and we're out shopping for the different toys. A lot of Canadians will be doing that this season. I think it is important that we do what we can to get this bill put forward.

I have one more question, for the Standards Council of Canada. In your view, will the new provisions in Bill C-36, such as the ability for the minister to request test reports to verify compliance, result in a safer marketplace for consumers?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Are there any other comments?

I also have a question for Safe Kids Canada. First of all, I want to thank you for all the input you've had with our committee in the past.

I was wondering to what extent consumer products pose a risk of injury to children. In your view, how will Bill C-36 improve children's safety?

[Michel Arnold]

Dr. Bose may perhaps be able to supplement what I'll tell you first of all. The danger of becoming what you so rightly call a dumping country is great because our neighbours have passed harsher statutes and regulations than ours. I hope the possibility of using monetary penalties under Bill C-36 will discourage delinquent companies. So I believe we have tools here that will prevent us from being exposed to this danger of becoming a dumping country.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Unfortunately, our country has been referred to as a dumping ground for unsafe consumer products. From your experience, would you say that this is correct, and in your opinion, do you believe that Bill C-36 will eliminate that?

[Michel Arnold]

We recommended this kind of national recall registry when the other bills were studied. Our understanding of Bill C-36 leads us to believe that it may not be possible to have a national registry as we were requesting, but that it will be possible to have a tool that will enable consumers to obtain information. I would say that what is even more important is that Bill C-36 gives the minister the authority to order recalls. That's really something we are calling for. In our view, that's a really important aspect of this bill.

However, to answer your question honestly, we would have to see whether this bill doesn't afford the opportunity to establish the registry that we suggested.

[John Walter, Executive Director, Standards Council of Canada]

Good afternoon, and thank you very much.

I am the executive director of the Standards Council of Canada. As a former vice-president of the Canadian Standards Association and CEO of the Technical Standards & Safety Authority of Ontario, I have been involved with standards and product safety for much of my professional career. Over the years there has been a steady increase in product recalls in Canada, from 32 in 2006 to over 250 today.

As Canada's national accreditation body, the Standards Council of Canada accredits standards development organizations and certification bodies, as well as products and services inspections and testing organizations, and we approve national standards of Canada. The Standards Council of Canada and those of our stakeholders who were consulted on Bill C-36 fully support and endorse this new act.

In terms of the current standardization landscape in Canada as it relates to consumer product safety, it is worth noting that the required networks of standards, legislation, and conformity assessment experts to ensure the safety and performance of consumer products is highly complex. Yet standardization is the most effective instrument to advance public policy objectives in this regard.

At the international level, the Standards Council is Canada's member body to the International Organization for Standardization, ISO, and to a number of international accreditation forums. The importance of this topic is recognized in Europe, Australia, and the U.S., which are all moving in similar directions, and Canada must ensure we have appropriate linkages.

Let me turn my attention to how standardization will support some of the key provisions of this bill. The prohibitions in clauses 5 to 11 will require standardization to help instill important guidelines for product manufacturers. The corrective measures provision in the act refers to recalls and allows for quicker government responses to address an emerging health or safety issue. And certainly with industry obligations, responsible manufacturers and distributors looking to promote a sense of accountability can rely on standards to clearly highlight what guidelines need to be followed.

In closing, let me reiterate that if the bill is passed, it will provide some of the necessary underpinnings for strengthening consumer product safety in Canada. I would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak today, and I would like to assure the Government of Canada that you can count on the support of the Standards Council and our network of standardization experts as we strive toward a safer marketplace for consumers.

Thank you.

[Pamela Fuselli, Executive Director, Safe Kids Canada]

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today and share Safe Kids Canada's views on the importance of passing Bill C-36, the consumer product safety act.

Safe Kids Canada is a national leader in preventable injuries. We work to advance the safety and reduce the burden of injury to Canadian children and youth. Our goal is to reduce unintentional injuries, which is the leading cause of death, and we welcome the opportunity to share with this committee our opinion that the revised and modernized system for consumer product safety is needed to safeguard the health of all Canadians, including some of its most vulnerable members—our children.

The measures contained in Bill C-36 update the current consumer product safety legislation and are designed to provide the government with a proactive and efficient means for responding to dangers posed by consumer products. The injuries inflicted due to unsafe products are preventable. They constitute a direct drain on the resources of our overburdened health care system and an indirect burden as a result of time lost in school and work.

Safe Kids Canada acknowledges that the consumer product landscape is complex and global. More and more products are now available on the market. Bill C-36 would close gaps in the current legislation to put Canada on par with our international partners.

The data on injury prevention and child health is revealing. Survey results have demonstrated that the vast majority of Canadians believe that if a product is available for sale on the market, it is safe and has been tested for safety. We know this is not necessarily the case.

Injuries to children from the use of consumer products are common, frequently serious, and sometimes fatal. According to CHIRPP, the Canadian hospital injury reporting and prevention program, which collects information on the emergency departments of 15 hospitals across Canada every year, over 14,000 pediatric emergency room visits are as a result of children under the age of 10 who have been injured by consumer products found in or around the home.

While some argue that consumer products have a low-risk profile, the potential health consequences from a dangerous product can be significant, affecting the individuals, their families, and their communities.

Parental concern, supervision, and vigilance are needed to protect children. Canadian parents deserve to be aided as much as possible in this by their government by the institution of a robust consumer product safety system.

Several examples demonstrate some of the limitations of Canada's current regulatory system. In 2006 Health Canada established a board of review in response to a request to rescind the ban on baby walkers. Safe Kids Canada and the injury prevention community presented the evidence and supported a ban to the board, and we were relieved in 2007 when the decision to uphold the ban, after reviewing the board's finding, was announced.

While this was a good outcome, the process was resource-intensive for both the federal government and the key non-profit and health sectors participating. The onus needs to be reversed. Producers, distributors, retailers, and standard developers should have the responsibility to build safety into the design of products before they reach the market and to take immediate corrective action when risks are identified with the items for sale.

Recent recall notices for such products as strollers and cribs have demonstrated that we continue to be reliant on the U.S. for notification about hazardous products on the market.

Bill C-36 is a positive step towards a proactive consumer product safety system in Canada because it includes three main pillars: active prevention, targeted oversight, and rapid response. These three pillars comprise the crux of Bill C-36 and ensure it will achieve its goal of safeguarding the health and safety of Canadians.

[Michel Arnold, Executive Director, Option consommateurs]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, committee members.

This is the third time that Option consommateurs has appeared before you. We are here to support Bill C-36, An Act respecting the safety of consumer products. As was said earlier, the present Hazardous Products Act dates back to 1969 and lacks the tools to provide adequate consumer protection in 2010.

As the minister said this morning, the world has changed since the Hazardous Products Act was passed 40 years ago. The products that Canadians buy today, toys in particular, come from around the world. By adapting the legislative framework for consumer product safety to the realities of the 21st century, Canada is aligning with its main trade partners, such as the United States and Europe. It is also providing the government with tools to order product recalls, combat counterfeiting and guarantee the quality assurance of products sold in Canada in order to increase the trust of Canadian consumers.

Thanks to Bill C-36, which incidentally constitutes an improvement to Bill C-6, stakeholders, from manufacturers to merchants, will be responsible for the safety of the products they market in Canada.

This new act will also enable the Minister of Health to intervene quickly for the purpose of withdrawing hazardous products from the market through better monitoring and quality control by the manufacturer, wherever products are sold.

In addition, the clauses concerning information disclosure are essential to enable the minister to react quickly where there is a danger to Canadians.

The obligation to inform authorities about hazardous products is an important aspect for improving market monitoring and risk management.

[Robert Simonds, President, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm the fire chief in Saint John, New Brunswick. I am appearing before you today in my capacity as the president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, a national organization representing 1,000 fire chiefs located in every province and territory.

CAFC estimates there are almost 3,500 departments in Canada; of these, 91% are volunteer departments. Of the 108,000 total firefighting personnel in Canada, almost 79% are volunteers.

A significant percentage of responses of every fire department have important consumer product safety implications. Stove-top fires, electrical fires or electrocutions, accidental poisoning and strangulations, and the careless use of candles as well as matches and lighters are a few examples in this regard. Special mention, however, should be made of the increasing use of chemical compositions in residential furnishings and in clothing.

We support the CCPSA because it will better protect Canadians from unsafe consumer products. There are several provisions that we regard as particularly beneficial. They include the ability to recall dangerous products, as this will allow the government to respond rapidly when the need arises to address unsafe consumer products; the provisions for the mandatory reporting of incidents, as these reports will be a key source of information about consumer products that are defective or have caused serious incidents or near misses, including fire-related incidents; the ability of the minister to request that manufacturers or importers submit test results to demonstrate that their products are safe; and the prohibition against false or misleading labelling of consumer products, which gives consumers the inaccurate belief that the products they purchase and use are safe.

We have seen a number of examples of counterfeited certified marks for consumer products such as electrical cords and light bulbs. They were falsely labelled as being compliant with Canadian requirements. Bill C-36 would make this an offence.

We ask the standing committee to send this bill back to the House unamended so that it can move quickly to third reading. It was in April 2008 that Bill C-52 was initially introduced. Since then, more than two years of improved product safety protection has been lost, despite all-party support in the House for the bill, for which all of you are to be congratulated.

Consumer product safety problems fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable elements of Canadian society: the young, the disabled, and seniors. That all Canadians, particularly those most at risk, are not protected by the best possible law is difficult for the Canadian fire service to accept. We hope that all MPs and senators will agree that Bill C-36 must become law prior to the Christmas break.

Thank you for your attention to my presentation. I look forward to taking part in the question-and-answer portion of this session.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I'm sorry, Ms. Davidson. I think our time is up now.

Minister, I just want to thank you so much for coming and for taking time out of your very busy schedule to present Bill C-36. It's one we've been waiting for and are anxious to get through Parliament to become law in our country. I thank you for that.

Committee members, we're going to suspend for five minutes, and then we will come back.

I also want to thank Mr. Glover and Ms. Mentzelopoulos. I can't say your name, but I thank you for coming today.

We will suspend for five minutes. Thank you.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Both you and Mr. Glover have referred to consultation with stakeholders and changes that will be coming forward with this new bill, as far as industry requirements are concerned. Could you tell me a bit about how you engaged the stakeholders and if there were concerns expressed about the new things that are going to be included in Bill C-36? Are there any concerns about the cost to industry or the cost of implementation?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

I think that's an extremely good difference. I think any time we can be proactive rather than reactive we are on the right track. I'm glad to hear that. I think that's very important.

I know that when we had the debate on the former Bill C-6 there were some who were concerned about the scope or the reach of the powers that this bill would give Health Canada. I just wondered if you could comment a bit about that and what you feel about the powers that Health Canada will have under this new Bill C-36.

I think one of the other issues when we talked about powers was the inspectors. Perhaps you could touch a bit on that as well. Do you have any concerns that inspectors might have too much power under this new bill?

[Paul Glover]

Madam Chair, if I may, I would complement the minister's response.

One of the things I would say that is fundamentally different between the legislation proposed before you and the current HPA is that the current Hazardous Products Act, while it's served us well, is reactive and the onus is on government to find, test, prove the product is unsafe, and then develop a regulation to control that. What we're seeing with other countries, and in Bill C-36, is a shift so the onus is on industry to make sure that the products they sell they know are safe. Then we can ask them for their test results rather than the government having to do its own testing. So it's a shift in onus and it moves from being reactive to proactive to provide for better safety for Canadians and their families.