Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)
Status
Report stage (House), as of Dec. 2, 2024 (This bill did not become law.)
Summary
This is from the published bill.
This enactment amends the Food and Drugs Act to provide that certain natural health products are not therapeutic products within the meaning of that Act and therefore not subject to the same monitoring regime as other drugs.
Elsewhere
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-368s:
C-368 (2017)
An Act to amend the Navigation Protection Act (Sooke River, Jordan River, Bilston Creek and Muir Creek)
C-368 (2013)
An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting age)
C-368 (2011)
An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting age)
C-368 (2010)
An Act to amend the Pest Control Products Act (prohibition of the use of chemical pesticides for non-essential purposes)
Votes
May 29, 2024Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-368, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act (natural health products)
This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below.
Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-368 aims to amend the Food and Drugs Act to ensure natural health products (NHPs) are not categorized as therapeutic products, thus preventing them from being subjected to the same regulatory and monitoring regime as pharmaceutical drugs under acts like Vanessa's Law. Proponents of the bill argue that current regulations are already sufficient, and that the changes brought about by Bill C-47 impose undue financial burdens on small businesses in the NHP sector, potentially reducing product availability and driving businesses out of Canada. Opponents contend that removing NHPs from the purview of Vanessa's Law would compromise consumer safety by limiting Health Canada's ability to mandate recalls of unsafe products and ensure accurate labeling.
Conservative
Against C-47 amendment: The Conservatives oppose the changes made to the natural health product regime via Bill C-47, arguing that it redefines natural health products as therapeutic products without proper consultation. They believe this shift grants Health Canada too much control, potentially harming the industry and increasing costs for consumers.
Regulatory overreach concerns: Conservatives express concerns that Health Canada's self-care framework, enabled by Bill C-47, will impose excessive licensing fees and product registration costs on the natural health product industry, leading to product loss and business closures. They argue that Canada already has the most regulated natural health product industry in the world.
Negative impact on businesses: Conservatives worry about the economic consequences of the new regulations, predicting significant job losses and business closures within the natural health product sector. They emphasize the disproportionate impact on women-owned businesses, practitioners, and consumers who rely on these products.
Existing regulations sufficient: The Conservatives argue that Health Canada already possesses sufficient powers to regulate natural health products, including the ability to issue stop-sale orders, seize products, revoke licenses, and mandate label changes. They view the push for mandatory recalls and stricter regulations as unnecessary and driven by a desire to increase government revenue.
NDP
Support for bill C-368: The NDP supports Bill C-368 because they believe the regulatory changes imposed through Bill C-47 were excessive and negatively impact both the natural health product industry and consumers. They believe it's important to correct the mistake made by including the provision in an omnibus bill.
Appropriate regulation needed: The NDP supports an appropriate regulatory category for natural health products to certify their safety and efficacy based on sound evidence, as well as to ensure that they are widely available for those who use and value them. Changes to the regulatory regime should not be snuck into budget omnibus bills.
Problem with omnibus bills: The NDP has long decried omnibus legislation because it allows for the inclusion of 'poison pills' that can have detrimental impacts without proper parliamentary scrutiny. The regulatory changes imposed on natural health products through Bill C-47, an omnibus bill, exemplify this problem.
Impact on small businesses: The regulatory framework imposed by Bill C-47 is more suited to the pharmaceutical industry than small businesses that market natural health products. This framework requires consultations, impact studies, and management fee studies, which the government failed to conduct.
Bloc
Supports sending bill to committee: The Bloc Québécois supports sending Bill C-368 to committee to review regulations impacting natural health products. They seek a balance between consumer access and government oversight, believing current regulations may be overly burdensome.
Regulation requires re-examination: The Bloc questions the decision to subject natural health products to Vanessa's Law, suggesting it might be excessive given the relatively lower risks compared to traditional pharmaceuticals. They want to verify whether this approach is the best way to regulate these products.
Lack of government transparency: The Bloc criticizes the government's lack of transparency and consultation regarding the regulation of natural health products. They feel the government has not adequately considered the impact on small and medium-sized businesses in the industry.
Flawed government methodology: The Bloc questions the government's claim that a high percentage of natural health products are substandard, arguing that the methodology used to reach this conclusion is flawed. They suggest a randomized approach would be more accurate.
Liberal
Opposes bill C-368: The Liberal party opposes Bill C-368, as it would remove the government's ability to ensure the safety and efficacy of natural health products (NHPs) by repealing the extension of Vanessa's Law to include NHPs.
NHPs are not risk-free: While NHPs offer potential health benefits, they are not without risk, especially if contaminated, misleadingly advertised, or improperly used. The government should have the power to mandate recalls of unsafe NHPs.
Protects Canadians: Vanessa's Law protects Canadians, but not at the cost of hurting Canadian businesses. It should have no impact on businesses that follow the rules in manufacturing and selling safe products to Canadians, since the powers are used only if a company refuses to co-operate in taking voluntary action to mitigate a serious health risk.
Industry non-compliance: Health Canada inspections of NHP manufacturers and importers revealed high levels of non-compliance with safe manufacturing practices. In 2021, Health Canada found that more than 1,600 authorized natural health products made illegitimate cancer-related claims in their advertising, indicating a need for oversight.
The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-368 under Private Members' Business.
Links & Sharing
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
