Bill C-460 (Historical)

Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada Act

An Act respecting the implementation of the Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada

The purpose of this enactment is
(a) to implement the Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada;
(b) to establish the Sodium Reduction Advisory Committee, the mandate of which is to advise the Minister of Health on the progress made in implementing the strategy; and
(c) to require the amendment of the Food and Drug Regulations.

Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada Act

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support Bill C-460 that would implement a sodium strategy that would be clear, concise, accountable, reportable and in fact achieve the goal of reducing sodium intake among Canadians.

Why do we need this bill? Personally, I do not think we would have needed a bill like this if the government had been doing the work it was supposed to do. The Government of Canada has a responsibility, through the Minister of Health, to protect the health of Canadians and to prevent disease where possible. That is the clear mandate of the Minister of Health and the federal government.

As we heard from the hon. member who introduced the bill, high sodium intake creates hypertension or high blood pressure, as it is called, and heart disease and strokes. We know these have caused some of the highest numbers of deaths and disease in this country and cost a huge amount of money.

I noted that my colleague across the way, the hon. parliamentary secretary, talked about costs. The cost to the health care system from hypertension, stroke and heart disease is actually inestimable when one compares it to what it would cost to implement this bill.

In 2007 the government, under the then health minister, set up a sodium working group to look at the issue of the amount of sodium Canadians were taking. The group heard it was three times the amount that Canadians should be taking to keep them healthy and that it should do something about that. That was what the Minister of Health and the government did in 2007.

The sodium working group was set up, and in the interim the then Minister of Health suggested that there would be some voluntary guidelines put in place by industry to bring down the amount of sodium. Why industry? It is because the government cannot come into my kitchen and tell me how much salt I can put in my food. We know that 77% of high sodium intake in this country comes from processed foods. The Minister of Health said that the government would ask processed food manufacturers, the food industry and certain restaurants to look at this and voluntary diminish it until they heard from the working group.

The working group did that, coming down with its report in 2010, three years later. The working group decided it wanted bring down the current sodium intake by Canadians. It was already clearly defined by the working group that by 2016, 95% of Canadians would actually reduce their very high level of sodium consumption and have a set level of sodium.

In the working group there were the food industry, academics and health care professionals. It is most important to note that there were two levels of government at the table. There were federal and provincial governments. They all had a role to play. The only government that had a role to play in ensuring that regulations were put in place to decrease the amount of sodium was the federal government. The provinces were there at the table because they have to take on the high cost of health care when people get sick, so they have a vested interest in this. Only the federal government could have done the job.

That is why I said that this bill should not have been necessary. In 2010, when the report came down, it was found that the work in the interim that was being voluntarily undertaken by industry to bring down sodium levels was not working. Nothing was happening. In 2010, all of the people and groups within the sodium working group, including health care professionals and the provinces, looked to the federal government and suggested getting an implementation strategy moving.

Nothing happened. In fact, the current Minister of Health moved very swiftly to disband the group so that nothing could happen, so that no follow up could be done. I do not even understand why a minister of health would do that.

This is not new. Members have seen the same Minister of Health and same government, who have a mandate to protect Canadians' health and decrease the amount of disease in Canada where possible, fail abysmally on the sodium strategy. They have done nothing, except to say they will educate people.

That is good, but education is only one part of any kind of strategy to bring about a decrease in certain risky health behaviours. We all know that. We have seen that with tobacco and with practically every other thing that used to cause death a long time ago and now has changed. There is evidence that tells us that this is how things work.

The minister has had a result from the sodium working group. She has had reports from her own health department. Provinces and territories have asked her to do something about this because voluntary initiatives are not working. The minister disbanded the working group and has done absolutely nothing. This is now five years later. This is 2013. Nothing has happened. Imagine how many people continue to increase their intake of salt and continue to be at risk and get hypertension, heart disease and stroke. Obviously this does not seem to matter.

I heard the parliamentary secretary say that it is totally useless to regulate. One of the tools the government has is regulation. Governments exist for that. They do not exist to tell me how much salt to put in my pot. Governments can educate me but they have the duty and the responsibility to regulate foods for Canadians' safety, to regulate the content of harmful ingredients in any food. Governments around the world have been doing this for years.

Let me tell members what some governments are doing. The United Kingdom has a food standards association that holds the government's feet to the fire as it has now put in regulations to reduce salt consumption by adults. Finland has taken legislative action and is a world leader in population-wide salt reduction primarily through punitive high salt labelling. It punishes industry that goes above the levels. Then there is Ireland, which does not punish but rewards industry. It uses a positive reinforcement methodology where it legislates and regulates and then it advertises those companies that meet the standards. Ireland has used one tact and Finland is using another. At the end of the day, governments are using their legislative authority and their regulatory authority to change the salt content in food.

In Canada we have a medicare system where we pay for everyone's illness and disease when they get sick and they need medically necessary care. The cost to the system will be extraordinary if we do not take steps to do this.

Once again, I do not understand why the government has not done it with sodium. I do not understand why it has not done it with trans fats. The government has had every single advisory group, including the health department, tell it that it must regulate trans fats in processed foods. It has not done it.

Then we have the issue of energy drinks. The president of the United States has taken this on as a personal agenda, to look at what that country can do to regulate or legislate energy drinks. Canadians have died from drinking energy drinks. The minister moved to do one thing. She said the allowable amount of caffeine in energy drinks will be dropped to a certain level, but the point is that even that level is unacceptable. All people asked for was for them to be sold behind the counter in pharmacies, but that is too much for the government to do.

Obviously the government and the minister seem to favour not getting industry angry at them. If the Minister of Industry was doing that I would understand. That is his mandate. The Minister of Health's mandate has nothing to do with industry. The Minister of Health's mandate is to protect Canadians and prevent disease. Why has she not done anything about it? Now the hon. member for Vancouver East has to bring forward a bill to tell the government it must do what it is supposed to do.

The working group talked about governments working collaboratively with health professionals, academia, industry and provincial governments to bring about a strategy. Provincial governments are waiting. Everyone is waiting to see what will happen.

The hon. member has brought forward a bill. I support the bill but nothing is going to come of it. We have a majority government that could and should have the political will to do what it must to help Canadians with their health, to help them prevent disease, to help protect them from illnesses, but that is not happening. I support the bill but I do not think it will get anywhere, and that is a very sad indictment of the Conservative government.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I think everyone in this House can agree that sodium reduction is an important goal when it comes to the health of Canadians. The Government of Canada is committed to helping Canadians move toward healthier diets. We do this in many ways, one of the most notable being Canada's food guide.

When it comes to sodium, our government has already taken meaningful action and this approach is working. That is why I will not be supporting Bill C-460.

For a bit of background, the government established a sodium working group in 2007, which included representatives from food manufacturing and food service industry groups, health-focused non-governmental organizations, the scientific community, consumer advocacy groups, health professional organizations and government. The working group produced the report, “Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada”.

The report recommended that the government adopt a voluntary approach to reduce the average amount of sodium that Canadians consume from 3,400 milligrams per day to 2,300 milligrams per day by 2016. It was also recommended that the approach engage different kinds of stakeholders, including the food industry, provincial and territorial governments and Canadians themselves.

Let us be clear: our government is totally willing to co-operate with our partners in order to achieve that goal. Our government has already begun implementing a voluntary system meant to reduce the average amount of sodium that Canadians should consume.

Our approach is based on three main pillars: increasing awareness and educating Canadians; guiding the industry towards reducing the amount of sodium in processed foods; and research.

I will discuss our government's approach in more detail a little later.

Bill C-460 references the sodium working group's report but proposes a much more heavy-handed approach. Instead of a voluntary approach, the bill calls for new legislative and regulatory measures to implement the sodium reduction strategy for Canada. Sodium levels in foods would be heavily regulated and industry would be required to report the sodium content in prepackaged food so that a public registry of this information could be established and maintained.

There are several problems with the bill. There would be financial costs to taxpayers, industry and Canadians. There may also be unintended risks to food safety and health. We would also lose the current balance that has been struck between the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders. Finally, the measures proposed in this bill could not feasibly be regulated or enforced. Let me examine each of these issues in more detail.

First, the cost to taxpayers to implement these measures would not be insignificant. New resources and regulations would be required to develop, implement and maintain a public registry for well over 100,000 products sold domestically. It is also not clear how this registry would be used. Foods that are low in sodium are not necessarily healthy foods. We would not want Canadians to think that any food that the registry says is low in sodium is healthy. Additional resources would also be required for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for compliance and enforcement activities.

There would also be a significant burden to industry, the costs of which would likely be passed on to Canadians. Adopting this bill would take money out of the pockets of small businesses across the country and add layers of red tape. This would not be a good approach to take, especially during a time when the economy remains fragile.

The costs of implementing this bill go beyond financial impacts. Let me address two of the key health and safety risks that implementing this bill would pose.

First, the 90-day coming into force period would not afford industry the time needed to extensively reformulate food products. This is a significant oversight, as sodium is not only used for flavouring but also for food preservation and control of pathogens in food. The result could be unintended food safety consequences to Canadians.

Second, the warning statements proposed by the bill may be misleading to Canadians when they are trying to choose healthy foods. Products with no sodium warning statement could be perceived as healthy choices, even though they may not in fact be nutrient-rich foods. Nutrition labelling must cover all the bases if it is to have the desired positive effects.

We already have the nutrition facts table on prepackaged foods that provides information on various nutrients, including the sodium level in a serving of food and the percent daily value. A warning label for sodium alone could divert attention from this valuable tool.

The government wants Canadians to have choices, and to have the information they need to reduce their sodium intake. To achieve that, we need to take more ambitious action than this bill proposes.

In addition to financial costs and potential health risks, the adoption of Bill C-460 would not respect the important balance with stakeholders that has been struck in the work our government is already doing. Sodium reduction is a shared responsibility among the food industry, the Government of Canada, provincial and territorial governments and Canadians themselves. We need to continue with this balanced approach by engaging with all our partners and avoid shifting the majority of the burden onto any one stakeholder.

Finally, I mentioned that one of the problems with this bill is that the measures being proposed could not be feasibly regulated or enforced. Let me explain what I mean.

In seeking to enable industry to provide Canadians with healthier choices, the Government of Canada engaged interested stakeholders to develop guidance to the food industry to reduce sodium in processed foods. This guidance was released less than a year ago. Bill C-460 calls for this guidance to be put into regulation. Not only is that not feasible, but it is unnecessary. In order to understand why this is the case, I will take the House through the core elements of the guidance.

The guidance serves as a guide for the food industry to reduce sodium in its products by outlining sodium level benchmarks for processed food categories. The benchmarks have two components that must work together to be effective, a sales-weighted average and a maximum limit.

The Government of Canada has recognized that reducing sodium levels in the more popular products within the food category, such as bread, would have a greater impact than only targeting those with the high sodium levels. The sales-weighted average does this by taking into account the sales numbers across an entire food category, so that sodium levels would be reduced in products that are the most popular with Canadians. At the same time, the maximum limit targets the products within a food category that might otherwise remain high in sodium, such as salt and vinegar potato chips, to help decrease their sodium levels as well. It is the combination of the sales average and the maximum limit that will effectively reduce sodium content.

In addition, the guidance cannot be put into regulation as it is not possible to enforce an average. Flexibility is needed to help ensure that the sodium in the more popular foods is reduced while still providing Canadians with the food options they expect.

The food industry is an active partner in achieving our collective goal. A regulatory approach is not required.

We can see that there are many concerns with Bill C-460.

The Government of Canada adopted a different approach to reduce the amount of sodium consumed by Canadians. Our approach favours awareness and education, so that Canadians can make informed decisions regarding the food they eat.

In February 2012, the Minister of Health announced $4 million for new activities as part of the healthy eating and awareness initiative. A component of this is a social marketing campaign to raise awareness of healthy eating, including reducing sodium intake. The goal is to both educate and motivate Canadians to make healthy food choices. In addition, the food industry has already demonstrated willingness to put more healthy choices into the Canadian marketplace. As Canadians' demand for lower sodium options grows, industry will respond to that demand. We are also working with industry to collect information. Imposing mandatory reporting is simply unnecessary.

In fact, I am pleased to say that early progress toward the 2016 goal is already evident. The government carried out a small monitoring project to estimate changes in the sodium levels in three food categories that are popular with Canadians: bread, canned soups and cereals. The results of this project indicate that the majority of new products being introduced in these three categories have sodium levels below the 2016 maximum and existing products in these categories have seen reductions that will have them well placed to reach the goal by 2016.

We have already seen the results that the bill says it would achieve. In fact, adopting the bill would jeopardize progress already being made through the current collaborative approaches. The Government of Canada continues to be committed to helping Canadians move toward healthier diets and creating conditions that make healthier choices easier choices. We are already beginning to see positive results. The heavy-handed approach proposed by Bill C-460 is not necessary.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

moved that Bill C-460, An Act respecting the implementation of the Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House today to begin the debate at second reading on Bill C-460, a sodium reduction bill for Canada.

I know that when we choose our private members' bills a lot of thought goes into it because we basically get one shot at it. I did put a lot of thought into what I would bring forward for my private member's bill. As the health critic for the official opposition for the NDP, I tried to think of a measure that would have a very significant impact in improving the health of Canadians.

After looking at a whole number of issues and talking with a lot of people, I decided that this was probably one of the single most important issues that could be brought forward because of the over-consumption of sodium in all of our diets. I selected the bill because there has already been an incredible amount of work done on a sodium reduction plan for Canada. The provinces and territories and experts have basically come together and said that we absolutely have to do something in terms of reducing the amount of sodium that Canadian ingest. That is why I brought forward the bill.

Over-consumption of sodium is a major contributor to heart attacks, strokes and other illnesses in Canada. In fact, StatsCan estimates that Canadians currently consume about 3,400 milligrams of sodium per day, which is more than double the recommended intake of 1,500 milligrams. It is estimated that 77% of the sodium consumed by Canadians comes from prepackaged food.

Anyone of us could go into a grocery store and see Canadians poring over labels and trying to figure out what it is that they are eating. People do want to make healthy choices, but the way things are constructed now and the amount of sodium that is in the food that we are eating is really quite astronomical.

The bill seeks to reduce sodium levels in the food supply by implementing the sodium reduction strategy for Canada. This is not a strategy that I came up with, it is a strategy that already exists. It was developed by the expert sodium working group in 2010. It was a group that was set up by the minister. Their report was released in 2010, but it has not yet been implemented by the federal government.

The core of my bill is to implement that strategy. The bill also prioritizes a number of areas where work needs to be done by ensuring that the amount of sodium in prepackaged and restaurant foods is reduced to safe levels. It will improve the labelling of sodium on foods. It will help protect children from being deceived by advertisements for high-sodium foods. Here I want to use Quebec as a model. Quebec has a very successful program around advertising as it affects children. This is a model that we should be using in all of Canada to protect children from the junk food and high-sodium content that they are ingesting without even knowing it.

The bill would establish the Government of Canada as the leader in monitoring and ensuring progress is being made by food companies to achieve sodium reduction plans. All the details about how this will be done are in the bill. It is very clearly laid out. As I say, the core of the bill is to implement the strategy, which already exists from 2010.

In developing the bill, I had tremendous support from across the country. I have been working with different organizations on the bill. I just want to quote from some of them.

Bill Jeffery, national coordinator of the Centre for Science in the Public Interest, has done incredible work on this issue over many years. In fact, he was a member of the sodium working group. In his press conference yesterday, he pointed out that this year as many as 16,000 Canadians will die needlessly of heart attacks, heart failure and strokes caused by excess dietary sodium, three-quarters of which is added to foods by food manufacturers and restaurants.

As well, the Canadian Medical Association and its president, Dr. Anna Reid, said:

Canadians consume an average of 3,400 milligrams of sodium daily, well above recommended levels. High sodium levels in food are responsible for almost one-third of hypertension cases in Canada. Hypertension is a major cause of heart disease (heart attack and heart failure), stroke and kidney failure, and it is an important contributor to premature death, disability and health care costs in Canada. It is estimated that 7.5 million Canadians have been diagnosed with this chronic condition, with an estimated 1,100 new patients being added every day.

It goes on to say:

The Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada Act is an important piece of legislation that can lead to healthier lives for all Canadians, and we urge all Members of Parliament to support it.

One of the main advocates of action in this strategy for Canada has been Dr. Norm Campbell who is the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Canadian Institutes for Health Research chair in hypertension and prevention and control. He is from the University of Calgary.

In his letter, he says:

The bill provides concrete measures for reducing the amount of salt food processors add to food. The measures proposed in the Bill include close government monitoring and oversight and mandatory labelling of foods that fail to comply with sodium targets. If passed, Bill C-460 will for the first time provide Canadians an opportunity to even know if they are even making a healthy or unhealthy food choice.

He goes on at length about what is in the bill, but that is a particularly pertinent comment.

I also point out the breadth and depth of the work that has been done on this issue of sodium reduction. Some members in the House may remember that a year ago we all received a letter that was addressed to the Prime Minister and was signed by 17 major organizations across Canada, including the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Medical Association. That letter was a real convergence of medical and scientific individuals, experts and organizations who came together with a very significant letter to the Prime Minister. In their letter of January 2012, they said:

—we are concerned that recent federal decisions not to endorse the federal, provincial and territorial sodium implementation report, presented at the November 2011 Health Ministers Summit meeting, will be seen as a signal to the food processing industry and food service establishments that our national government is not serious about the need to commit to the 2016, as well as interim, targets. The argument that the sodium implementation plan would fail to garner commitment from industry sends the clear message to Canadians that private interest takes precedence over food safety and [the] health and wellness [of Canadians]...

This was a very thoughtful and well-worded message to the Prime Minister.

In addition, since we have been developing this bill and it was introduced a number of months ago, we now have close to 40 organizations and key experts across the country who are supporting it. They include: the Canadian Medical Association; the Canadian Public Health Association; the Dietitians of Canada; the Canadian Nurses' Association; the Canadian Pharmacists Association; Public Health Physicians of Canada; Canadian Federation of Nurses Union; Hypertension Canada; the Kidney Foundation of Canada; Food Secure Canada; Canadian Institute for Child Health; Canadian Society of Internal Medicine; the Canadian Women's Health Network.

I have just read a very few of the endorsers. These are organizations, and also a number of individuals, that have specifically endorsed this bill.

I am very interested to hear the comments of government members and of other opposition members. Rarely, in public discourse, is there a time when a number of different interests come together where there is a very strong consensus and that is what we have seen on sodium reduction. Let us remember that there was an expert working group put together by the Minister of Health. It produced a report by consensus. It was a unanimous report. It included industry representatives. That report came out and there was no follow-up from the government.

In addition to that, the provinces and the territories, in their own meetings, have considered this issue. They too have called on the federal government to take action on implementing a sodium reduction strategy.

We see the body and the weight of all of these organizations across the country. It seems to me that we are at a particular time where there is a very broad consensus about the need to take serious action and to show we do put public health and public interests as the top priority. If this plan were implemented, there have been estimates that we could save something like $2 billion a year in health costs.

I am also concerned about the kids. We think about our kids and what they eat. I know many us here are parents who have young children and we do the best we can to make sure our children eat well; yet, it is so difficult to do with the array of products that are around us.

When we think about the health of our children as they grow into adults, sodium is not the only issue. There are many factors to a healthy lifestyle. There are things we can do ourselves, and that is certainly something that is part of the bill, by advocating for education and proper information and disclosure. However, it seems to me that the need to ensure there is a sodium reduction plan that is real, meaningful and takes proper steps is absolutely essential.

Many other countries have done this. The World Health Organization lists it as a priority. The sticking point is probably going to be whether it is voluntary or whether there is a plan that has clear target reductions, as my bill would lay out.

We have had a voluntary regime and opportunity now for many years, and frankly it has failed. It is now imperative that we see this as a public health issue that impacts all of Canada and all Canadians. The federal government must demonstrate its leadership and commitment to follow through on the incredible body of work and the plan being produced. That is a duty. It is a public responsibility, and anything less than that is a cop-out.

I want to argue today that continuing on some kind of voluntary path has not produced the results we need to see. The bill would move us in a direction to adopt the plan that was agreed to by the expert sodium working group. It is a reasonable proposition. The steps contained within it are reasonable, and I think it is achievable.

I would encourage all members of the House to not dismiss the bill because it has come from the opposition, but to look at the merits of the bill and who supports the bill. These organizations are non-partisan. They base their decisions on merit. They base their decisions about what they do on evidence, on medical information. When they say they are supporting the bill, maybe they do not agree with everything, every word—if it goes to committee, we will take a look at that—but the principle of the bill and what it is trying to do is there, and it is showing it has very broad support.

I am happy we are having this debate, and I look forward to the debate. I certainly encourage all members of the House, from all sides, to look at the bill in all seriousness. I want members to consider what we are here for and what we do to uphold public health, the public interest, to represent our constituents, and most of all, the future generation of kids, who we want to make sure have the best opportunity to grow up healthy in this wonderful country.

Heart Month

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, February is heart month in Canada. Cardiovascular disease causes many preventable deaths. Heart disease and stroke take one life every seven minutes and are the leading cause of death among women.

Many factors contribute to heart disease, including lack of exercise and poor nutrition. Sodium is also a major factor. Canadians consume double the amount recommended by Health Canada. By reducing sodium intake, we can prevent at least 10,000 deaths and 23,000 cardiovascular disease events per year. That is why we need a national sodium reduction strategy, such as the one laid out in Bill C-460, which was introduced by my colleague from Vancouver East, to help people make informed choices about heart health.

[Michel Bédard]

Bill C-460 would implement a sodium reduction strategy for Canada.

This bill does not concern questions outside federal jurisdiction. It does not clearly violate the Constitution, including the charter. It does not concern questions that are substantially the same as ones already voted on in the current session, and it does not concern questions currently on the order paper as items of government business.

Health

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I move that the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Health presented on Friday, May 18, be concurred in.

I am pleased to rise in the House today to debate this report. I will be splitting my time with another member.

I do find it much more valuable that we are debating this important report from the Standing Committee on Health rather than yet another time allocation motion that the government tries to push on the House. We have now had 29 time allocation motions, in addition to two closure motions, as well as other motions that were simply designed to limit debate in this House.

I am happy today that at least we are debating a report of substance that has to do with chronic diseases related to aging, health promotion and disease prevention. The report comes from the Standing Committee on Health and was tabled in the House in May 2012. This is much more substantive work than trying to deal with yet another time allocation motion from the government.

The report we are debating today deals with the very serious issue in Canadian society of chronic diseases as they relate to aging and to old people. The Standing Committee on Health had a very fulsome debate on this. We heard from witnesses from October 2011 to February 2012. We heard very credible witnesses who told us that chronic diseases cost the Canadian economy about $190 billion annually. The committee was also told that the treatment of chronic diseases consumes 67% of all direct health care costs, which is a staggering figure. How often do we talk about this issue and consider what the cost considerations are?

We need to have a health care system that responds to people's health care needs but there is now a growing body of evidence that tells us that we need to manage how the system works and we need to manage a lot better on disease prevention and health promotion. If we did those two simple things, we would save the system billions of dollars.

We need to focus better on primary care. We need to ensure that people have access to a family doctor through a community health centre. We need primary care that focuses on a multidisciplinary approach to prevent people from having to go to the emergency room and stand in line for hours and hours or go through procedures that might have been prevented if they had community accessible, community based health care based on health promotion and disease prevention.

The committee heard from a number of witnesses but the report that finally came out was somewhat disappointing. As we have seen with a number of committees, the government members did everything they could to write a report on a sort of A-plus on everything they believe the government has done, in many cases, ignoring what witnesses said in terms of what actually needed to be done to improve the system.

I am very proud that, in this particular report, the NDP members on the committee also submitted a minority report and put forward what we believe were the clear suggestions and recommendations that came from the witnesses we heard.

I will take this opportunity to go through some of those very important recommendations that we have put forward.

First and foremost, we have to go back to the 2004 health accords. These were accords that were signed by the provinces, the territories and the federal government and laid out a plan for 10 years about how we would approach our health care system. They built upon the royal commission that was conducted by Mr. Roy Romanow and his report of 2002 that was called, “Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada“.

If we go back to the health accords in 2004, we see that there were some agreements. A consensus was arrived at by the provinces, the territories and the federal government on what needed to be done to refocus the priorities of our health care system and to ensure that we were getting health care services and support to people earlier, instead of waiting for the onset and management of chronic diseases.

One of Mr. Romanow's key recommendations in 2002 was to have a home care program. As we can see today, many seniors who live alone and do not have the necessary support often end up in emergency rooms or in acute care when they should be getting community-based support and care, including home care. It seems to me that these are very logical provisions that should take place. It was very disappointing for us when participating in the committee and the report that was done to find that a number of these key recommendations were ignored by government members and it was up to us to bring them forward. It was key to actually go back to the Romanow report and look at what he had so soundly put forward about what needs to be done, a key one being home care.

Another issue that was clearly agreed to by the provinces and the territories was to implement a national pharmaceutical program. We know that many Canadians are finding the exorbitant cost of prescription drugs becoming very unaffordable for them. One of the key indicators of rising costs in our health care system is the cost of prescription drugs. It was interesting to note that, in the 2004 health accord, there was an agreement that this would be worked on and we would come forward with some kind of national program that would ensure that prescription drugs were affordable and accessible. One of the most obvious things that could have been done was to ensure that all levels of government worked together for a bulk purchasing plan for prescription drugs. It has been estimated that would save us about $10 billion annually in our health care costs. We are talking about very big numbers here.

This was a very key recommendation that the NDP put forward in this report on chronic diseases because we understand the need to address some of the inequities in the system and some of the incredible costs that people are facing, for example, with prescription drugs. It is something that needs to be worked on. It is an area of work where we have seen the federal government basically walk away. If we look at the agreements in the accords from 2004 and examine what has taken place since that time, the most obvious and glaring thing is the fact that the federal government has basically abandoned the recommendations and the agreements that were made in that accord. Is it any wonder that we are now facing higher and higher costs for chronic diseases because we are not paying attention to what it is that we need to do in our health care system and we are not paying attention to what was actually agreed to in 2004?

It has been very disappointing to see the failure of federal leadership in this field. Not only have the Conservatives not shown the leadership that is required on the accord, but then we had an incredible situation last year where the Minister of Finance unilaterally came out with a funding formula for health care that, as we know from the Parliamentary Budget Office, will shortchange the provinces and territories by over $30 billion in the long term. This is very shocking information. The fact that it was unilateral is usually a matter of discussion between the provinces, the territories and the federal government in terms of what those health transfers will be. The fact that the Minister of Finance made a unilateral decision and then the Minister of Health and the Conservative government as a whole basically said that it was not the federal government's business, that it was up to the provinces to decide what do.

I want to be very clear in the House that we in the NDP understand that health care is a federal responsibility under the Canada Health Act. We understand that there has been a very strong role for the federal government. It is absolutely correct that the provinces deliver health care, but the role that the federal government plays in terms of transfers and of showing leadership to bring about agreements, such as we saw in the 2004 health accord, this has been a very important role for the federal government to play. The fact that now we have a Conservative government that has completely abandoned this responsibility presents us with a very serious situation.

I want to end by saying that one other area of the report that we highlighted was the lack of action by the federal government on the recommendations that came from the working group on sodium reduction. I want to mention this because it was really shocking to see that there had been an expert advisory group, the provinces and territories had even agreed and, lo and behold, it was the federal government that disbanded the group, moved away from the recommendations and basically abandoned its leadership.

I am very proud to say that we in the NDP have now tabled Bill C-460, which, if approved, would implement the sodium reduction strategy that was put forward in good faith and worked on for so many years. Again, this is a very critical issue around health promotion and disease prevention. It is an issue that affects those with chronic diseases. This was a very important recommendation in our report, which we will continue to work on.

Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada Act

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-460, An Act respecting the implementation of the Sodium Reduction Strategy for Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce my bill, an act respecting the implementation of the sodium reduction strategy for Canada. The bill addresses a critical public health issue in our country. Right now we are facing an epidemic of sodium related diseases driven by the high sodium content in pre-packaged foods, which accounts for approximately 75% of our sodium intake.

The bill would help Canadians make healthier choices and reduce the sodium in their diets. It would implement the recommendations of Health Canada's sodium working group, as set out in its sodium reduction strategy for Canada.

I thank all the organizations that asked us to bring this issue forward and help create the bill. They told me that reducing the amount of sodium in our food would substantially decrease the incidence of cardiovascular disease events and, in turn, the deaths of thousands of Canadians each year.

I also thank my colleague from Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert for being here today to second my bill and who, as a physician, understands the importance of preventive health measures, such as reducing sodium intake. That is why the bill is so important. It would improve the health of Canadians and it would save lives. I hope that all members will support the bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)