Evidence of meeting #208 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was payment.
A video is available from Parliament.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
How different is this new procedure from the current process for handling claims for exemption from the requirement to disclose the ingredients of a formula to the minister?
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
It's the same process as the one currently in place, the purpose of which is to review all information that must be presented to workers. As I mentioned, the idea is mainly to make minor improvements to the process. We want to make it more effective and efficient both for us at Health Canada and for the industry and to provide better protection for workers.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
In what instances can someone claim an exemption from the requirement to disclose all ingredients?
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
All businesses are entitled to file a claim for exemption, and we usually grant them. We at Health Canada take the time to review all the information accompanying a claim for exemption and the information the business proposes to disclose to workers. We thus ensure that this information is fair and accurate so that workers can be better informed about any problems that might arise from exposure to the chemical products in question.
NDP
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
Fees for filing claims for exemption depend on the number of claims filed. A single claim will cost $1,800. If several claims are filed simultaneously, fees will be $1,800 for each of the first 15 claims, $400 for each of the next 10 claims, and $200 for each of the claims filed after the first 25.
The cost to us to review and process claims is greater than the fees we take in.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Are there any provincial or territorial considerations in this kind of a policy change?
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
That's a very good question, Chair. Yes, there is. Obviously, the federal government is not the main player when it comes to occupational health and safety. The provisions that exist in other acts—in the Hazardous Products Act—requiring the presentation of this information.... Although it's a matter of federal jurisdiction, it's something that provincial and territorial inspectors and authorities benefit from significantly: the uniform requirement to present information on these products.
We worked and consulted quite closely with the provincial and territorial regulatory authorities to ensure that the changes that were being proposed as a result of the consultation we engaged in with industry met, I think, with their approval and their consensus.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Yalkin, are we talking about having companies keep on their database images of hazardous materials so that they can be accessed on a continuous basis? Is this what this proposal is aiming at?
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
No.
Liberal
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
Maybe. I suspect that you're probably thinking about the true copy requirement under the Hazardous Products Act.
Liberal
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
Yes. These amendments relate to the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act, which is really the act that sets out the process we go through when a company wants to obscure the information it would otherwise have to present on its label.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I have some familiarity with true copy, and what you're talking about shares some similarities with true copy, at least in the way you describe it. This has nothing...? We're talking about apples and oranges, are we?
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
They are two different issues. The documentation retention requirements under the HPA, the Hazardous Products Act, are totally unrelated to these particular amendments that are being proposed. They are different topics.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
All right. I just wanted clarification. Thank you.
Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
It's a pleasure.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you.
Next is subdivision I, Canada Transportation Act, proposed regulatory modernization.
Sylvain Souligny Director General, Legislative and Oversight Management, Department of Transport
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Regarding the feedback we gathered from the regulatory review and the contributions of many transportation sector stakeholders, to which Ms. Ritchot referred earlier, Transport Canada is proposing two amendments to the Canada Transportation Act.
Clause 214 is in support of improved modern service delivery to Canadians and industry. Here we are seeking discretionary authority for the Minister of Transport to allow digital equivalency in cases in which existing legislation or regulations still require physical documents, for example, wet signatures, original copies, in-person transactions.
An example of this is in our marine personnel regulations. They currently require seafarers to provide original copies of medical examination reports. With this proposed amendment, the minister would be able to allow electronic submission.
We anticipate significant efficiency gains.
We also project reduced administrative burden, but importantly, an improved experience for Canadians and industry in transacting with Transport Canada.
Clause 215 is proposed in the context of transportation sector growth, which is based on new technologies.
For this particular clause, we're seeking authority for the Minister of Transport to grant, upon application, time-limited exemptions—five years—for the distinct and limited purpose of research, development or testing in the transportation sector.
This is not for certifying new products. The overarching objective is to allow for regulatory sandboxes and pilot projects so that industry may test new technologies, prototypes, processes or business models in a safe and controlled environment. This includes innovations that could produce safety, security or environmental protection benefits.
Exemptions would be subject to the necessary public disclosure. I want to point out that Transport Canada already has a robust exemption regime. This proposed amendment is not about seeking an authority that does not exist. It actually ensures a structured, consistent, transparent approach across all transportation modes and programs, putting much sharper focus on innovation.
In addition, the proposed amendment includes a number of safeguards to protect public safety, such as including a public interest test; providing clear authority for the minister to establish conditions and set enforceable safety and security parameters; allowing Transport Canada to maintain oversight; and providing the authority to repeal the exemption at any time, should there be safety or security concerns.
This will conclude my remarks. Thank you.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
This last point concerns exemptions and public interest criteria. When the minister must authorize an exemption, is he required to publish the exemption and related conditions so the public can also monitor that technology?
Director General, Legislative and Oversight Management, Department of Transport
Exactly.
The intention here is completely transparent with respect to the process. The conditions will be made public, regardless of whether the claim for exemption comes from a single entity or a group.