Environment Committee on May 3rd, 2007

Evidence of meeting #55 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Bill C-307, An Act to prohibit the use of benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) in certain products and to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Sue Milburn-Hopwood Director, Risk Management Bureau, Department of Health

Mike MacPherson Procedural Clerk

Jean-Sébastien Rochon Counsel, Department of Justice

Supriya Sharma Associate Director General, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health

May 3rd, 2007 / 12:50 p.m.

Associate Director General, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health

Dr. Supriya Sharma

There are a number of different hospital associations, so there is an umbrella organization that represents all hospitals. Again, it's not a group that we would normally consult with, simply because they're primarily administrative. Each province has its own hospital associations, and they're very different in terms of how they interact with the individual health authorities, etc. So we actually go on a province-by-province basis and we see who their responsible associations are and how they function, and then we try to bring the best people to the table.

If there is a public health aspect of it, we would then either go to the ministries of health or we would go through the community, actually the public health officers. Again, it really is on a case-by-case basis, but we have to match who we bring to the table to the issue that we're there to discuss. It's a very varied stakeholder group, usually on a case-by-case basis.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bob Mills

Mr. Regan.

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think your point is well taken about the concern that obviously doctors have to make the decision. But I think what Mr. Cullen was looking for is that you're going to have one list of the products that contain phthalate, so why not also have a list of products that don't contain phthalate? You aren't making the decision for the doctors about which one they will use in the end. The point is that they at least would have a list available to them of what alternatives are there, and then it helps them make their judgment, it strikes me.

I think this seems like a reasonable suggestion.

12:50 p.m.

Associate Director General, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health

Dr. Supriya Sharma

I think that's why I was seeking clarification, because what I was understanding is that there would be an individual product and then an alternative suggested for that product.

In terms of the numbers, simply to go over it, when we're talking about all classes of medical devices, we're talking about approximately 650,000 devices. When we're talking about the products we're dealing with in the classes of 2s, 3s and 4s, it's in the tens of thousands as well.

When we're talking about a list, then, if we actually talk simply about a list of medical devices that are containing DEHP, we're already talking around a list of about 10,000 products. If the request is that we're making a list of about 10,000 products and then making a comparable list of 30,000 to 40,000 products, we start getting into a question of how useful those lists would be and the ability of an individual to really go through all that and make an assessment.

The last point about the list of products that wouldn't contain DEHP is that this would also include lists of medical devices that would never include DEHP because there would be no reason for them to. So I wonder--and again this is obviously for the committee to debate--whether or not it would be more confusing or helpful.

I think that's the perspective we're coming from.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bob Mills

I apologize, Mr. Bigras. I believe I cut you off earlier. You had one more point, I believe, and then we'll go to Mr. Cullen.

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

I had a supplementary question. In your opinion, if this paragraph 6(d) were passed, would it mean that the Minister of Health could deal directly with hospital associations without the need to go through public health authorities? What I read is clear:

6. The Minister of Health shall:

(d) take steps to facilitate the drafting by health professionals associations and hospital associations of clinical practice guidelines respecting the use of medical devices [...]

Do I understand that if we pass this paragraph, we give the minister the power to visit hospital associations directly in order to draw up guidelines? Am I mistaken?

12:50 p.m.

Associate Director General, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health

Dr. Supriya Sharma

I think that's correct. It actually speaks directly to those two groups. It doesn't speak at all to the ministries of health.

It doesn't prohibit us from doing that. Our normal practice is to go through those groups. I agree that the way it's worded, it doesn't specify that this needs to happen.