Health Committee on Oct. 24th, 2006

[Mary Bush]

Not even out of our office.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

So if someone thinks you've missed the boat a little bit in certain areas, there are some opportunities for adjustments, then.

[Mary Bush]

I would only say to you that lots of people thought we missed pieces. That's what the consultation process was. So we've got that.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

I think you know where I'm going, though.

[Mary Bush]

Yes, I know where you're going. I'm just saying that it's not--

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

The finished product that you have right now still has to go through a few processes before it goes to Mr. Clement and before it's signed off on.

[Mary Bush]

Within the department; it's all within the department.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

So it goes through the department, it goes to the minister, and it's a done deal. There's no more public consultation, then, on this document.

[Mary Bush]

There's no more public consultation planned, no.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

You're not going to be back here at committee with your draft this year?

[Mary Bush]

Do you know what I would love to do? I would love to return to this committee when this food guide comes out, lay it out to you, and have you look at it and tell us whether or not you think we've done what needs to be done.

You say it's too late. In one sense, you're right. In 2007 we'll be here with the food guide. But there is always opportunity.

I can tell you, I go through the transcripts of what has happened here. From that, I'm going to say two things to you.

First, nobody you have heard from has seen where we have gone with this food guide. That's part of the process: you go out, you consult, you get the input, you evolve. You had the Nunavut food guide in your hand. One of the important things for you to know is that the very person who was involved in that is the person who Lori has working on the first nation and Inuit food guide.

We had a question on the multicultural evolutions to the food guide, or first nations, and the answer was that we don't have data. Let me tell you that the University of Toronto's Dr. George Beaton, who has been a rock in getting us started on this process and going through our protocols, said at the beginning that our first decision had to be whether we would look at creating new, de novo, food patterns, because if so--and when I say “new” food patterns, I mean based on the ethnic pattern that is followed, or the first nation and Inuit--we needed data. We needed data on what those people were eating or we couldn't do it.

So this is an imperfect solution when you come out with a food guide and you evolve it for a particular cultural group, because you're taking a food pattern developed for Canadians that's based on the food supply, what Canadians eat, their nutrient needs, and chronic disease prevention. You're asking those people who maybe have come from Thailand, who have a different pattern of eating, to face a pattern that was developed for the Canadian moment.

Somebody--I think it was Mr. Fletcher--made the suggestion that we have a link to all of these other food guides. I think it's a wonderful idea.

The Canadian food guide will be a food guide that is rooted in Canadian foods, in the traditional pattern that we have data on, because that's the only thing we can use. If we don't have data on what people are eating, we can't develop a de novo pattern.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Ms. Brulé, very quickly.

[Danielle Brulé]

I'd like to mention this very quickly, because I think it's a concern for people.

We said that the food guide would be coming out shortly, but I think we also said that we are committed to going back to Canadians to provide more messages. One of the pieces might very well be the children. We're prepared to provide supporting material that will be targeted to children.

So your recommendations, if they come, would not be lost. They would be accepted. We would incorporate them in future materials, because we are committed to going back to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Madame Gagnon.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Ms. Bush, you’re definitely tough and your defence of the Food Guide’s relevance is well put together, but I still have one question.

You’ve said that the individuals we named were consulted at the beginning of the draft stage of the process. They critiqued certain things and gave their advice on the matter.

Those people feel frustrated because their advice and criticisms were not taken into account, since they went against your interpretation. If I consult people and don’t take their advice, I criticize them and tell them they’re headed in the wrong direction.

One of the shortcomings identified by the Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research is that 25% of foods eaten are not included in Canada’s Food Guide.

Is it true that there’s another food category? This is important because we eat a lot of foods that could be bad for our health and are not included in Canada’s Food Guide.

Furthermore, with regards to the committee’s report, you are here today because I tabled a motion and wanted to obtain a copy of all of the deliberations.

Are you able to provide the committee with the report on the advice given by the various experts? In my view, the list of witnesses that was provided to us raises doubts about the objectivity of the food industry representatives, who may not have all they need to be considered experts, as Ms. Doran was saying.

Personally, I have a few doubts. Can you give us the evidence on which you based your decisions with regard to Canada’s Food Guide? And could you provide us with a copy? Are you willing to print all your recommendations? Perhaps they’re already printed by now and changes aren’t even possible. Why aren’t you providing the committee with a copy?

You’ve defended the Guide and you claim that it is good. If what you’re saying is true and you’ve taken the important advice, those who’ve critiqued the Guide will say that you listened to them. However, I don’t expect to see what these critics were saying included in the Guide when it comes out.

Are you telling us that we’re completely off the mark and that we’ve perhaps heard too many unfounded criticisms of the implementation of Canada’s Food Guide?

[Mary Bush]

I'll start with the last.

I can categorically tell you that when this food guide comes out there will be criticism, because this is such a complex file with such diverging views. There will be criticism because it's impossible to meet everyone's needs.

But I'm so glad you asked this question, because when you said...but you would be frustrated too, if you had opinions and those opinions weren't listened to. That's the crux of this issue. No one you've heard from knows whether we've listened to what they had to say or not because no one has seen what we've done with the consultation evidence that's come to us. I can sit before you and say categorically that there was nothing said to us that wasn't carefully considered.

You asked about energy, the 25% from foods that are outside the food guide. The chairman himself said he didn't like our food guide because we weren't going to be providing him with ice cream, cake, and cookies--and he's right. Those are foods, and that's the challenge. And one of the challenges you people have is that we all live in a society that has so evolved in terms of its food supply that you can't even go to Home Hardware without running into food. It is omnipresent--365, 24/7. And the food guide is trying to make its way in to tell you that healthy eating means changes in what you're eating.

As for the recommendations and the advisory committee minutes, we've already brought forward all of those. We saw that you wanted them; we've put them forward. They're out of our office and into the department to come to you so that you can see precisely who said what about what, and what it looks like. It will be there.

On the issue of bringing you a copy, I can say only that your request goes to the Minister of Health. It's not mine to bring. It's not mine to say yes; it's not mine to say no. You're tabling that you would like to see a copy, and it's beyond the authority of this table here to say yea or nay, because it's not part of the process that's under way. That's a decision for the department to make.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

That's fine.

Thank you very much. I think we understand that.

Your time is gone.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Chairman, she didn’t answer my question on the 25% of foods that are...

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We can have a very quick comment on the 25% of foods that are not included.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

...with regards to ice cream, for example.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

You don't have....?

[Mary Bush]

No, I'm just saying that the issue is very dead-on. Canadians consume a large percentage of their energy--22% for ages 4 to 18, that we know from CCHS 2.2--from foods that aren't part of your basic food supply. I will repeat what I said earlier. This food guide is talking about tough choices. We're talking about breads and cereals. We're not talking about croissants and muffins, because you can walk into almost any place on your way home tonight and pick up a muffin the size of a piece of cake and probably has that much fat and calories.

We're talking about making some very real choices here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Dhalla, you have five minutes.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mary, as I think my colleague Mr. Fletcher mentioned, we admire your passion. You have done a lot of work on it, and it's coming across as you answer all of our questions.

Once again, I do want to reiterate that we are trying to convey, and perhaps we are the messengers in this case, what we have heard from a number of stakeholders. They feel not that their suggestions have not been implemented--because none of us has seen the final food guide that will come out, and neither have they--but that they are frustrated with the type of consultation that was done, which was not on substance. You have given a couple of examples, in your answers, about the energy, the sodium and the salt content, but the frustration of stakeholders has been with the fact that they were not consulted on the substance of the issue. Their frustration has been with the type of consultation to which they were invited, despite their particular area of expertise.

I just want to have three questions answered very quickly.

First, you have no hesitation in putting forward to this committee and tabling a draft copy of the food guide? That's the first question. If you have forwarded it to the minister, are you okay with the committee's having a preview of it? That's the first question.

Second, we've asked for a list of the individuals who were invited for consultation, i.e., stakeholders, organizations, or individuals.

Third, could you forward to the committee both the type of questions, the nature of questions that they were asked or consulted on, and their responses and submissions?

You initially mentioned in November 2005 that you had forwarded information with regard to the food guide, which I assume would be at the pre-consultation stage. Could we perhaps have that tabled once again and then, after consultation, see what the food guide, which is in draft at the moment, looks like?

[Mary Bush]

Your last point was to table what?