Evidence of meeting #23 for Health in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was income.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Lisa Oliver  Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Geography, Simon Fraser University
Valerie Tarasuk  Professor, Department of Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto
Arvi Grover  Cardiologist and Director, International Heart Institute, KMH Cardiology and Diagnostic Centres
Clerk of the Committee  Mrs. Carmen DePape

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

So one is saying one thing and one is saying the other.

Mr. Fletcher.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Fletcher Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, MB

Mr. Chair, first of all, this does seem to be similar to Madame Gagnon's motion, so I wonder if we're going to end up talking about this over and over again.

In regard to the food guide, just so we are all clear, extensive consultation activities have been undertaken as far as the revision process is concerned. The activities included two rounds of cross-country meetings with over 1,000 stakeholders and an on-line consultation involving over 6,000 respondents.

Health Canada is reviewing lists of stakeholders consulted during those meetings and lists of stakeholders who were invited to participate in the on-line consultation in order to determine whether it has permission to release any personal information on the lists, and we will get back to the committee on that. The synthesis of the report and questions from the on-line consultation and meetings will also be available.

Now, this has been a three-year revision process and it's nearing the end. There is currently a finalizing of the revised guide with, hopefully, a release date shortly, and the department will be pleased to share the guide with the committee at that time.

This has turned into a very complex exercise. A comprehensive strategy to deal with childhood obesity is partly why we are studying this issue as a committee. However, I think we have to be practical here, as with government, we do delegate these types of activities to officials and departments. I agree it's important for the committee to have the opportunity to question and ensure that the process and consultation have been undertaken.

However, as I mentioned at the last meeting, if we get into this, a camel is a racehorse designed by the committee. It's not going to be perfect, but it'll be better than what we have. So it would be most appropriate to leave it up to the experts, and they are the people in Health Canada who have developed it.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Le président Conservative Rob Merrifield

Ms. Gagnon.

5:20 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Several health specialists have presented observations and recommendations about Canada's Food Guide. We asked three or four people who are acting in an advisory capacity about it. The problem is that they have serious conflicts of interest because they are part of the industry.

Earlier, the Minister of Health was asked about the independence of a number of people who make decisions and who have an influence on the decisions made by ministers. We are in the same situation.

I would like us to have the initial 2006 preliminary version, as well as the 2007 version. I received another e-mail from some doctors telling me that the direction taken with respect to other foods goes beyond the question of calories. Other matters that were submitted to us would tend to indicate that there are concerns about Canada's Food Guide.

Generally speaking, does the guide meet people's expectations in terms of advice to combat obesity?

On the contrary, it would demonstrate transparency. You suggest leaving it to the experts, but if I were to leave it to people who are part of the industry, it's not the same thing. Those who have come to tell us these things are not just anyone: they are Dr. Freedhoff and Mr. Bill Jeffery. I respect the expertise of these doctors. In any event, we would like to be ready for the publication of the guide.

Ms. Bush, whose tenacity I respect, has led us astray. These two doctors tried to exert a degree of pressure in an attempt to influence the direction taken by the guide. She said that we could not make any changes to the guide. And yet, she told the committee at the outset that we could still make recommendations. Now we find out that the process is over, because that is what she told a number of witnesses.

This is worrisome. When Canada's Food Guide is published, I would like to be able to analyze the process and ask for some advice, as was mentioned by Mr. Fletcher, the minister's parliamentary secretary. It is understandable that he should want to reassure his minister, but we as a committee have some monitoring work to do. We need to be confident that the decisions being made are as well-informed as we are being told.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I just want to remind the committee that it's Thursday evening and many of us have to catch planes, so we are going to close at 5:30. We have three motions, so keep that in mind when we're having the debate.

Mr. Lunney.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Dhalla raised the issue of Yoni Freedhoff. Can somebody confirm for me whether he actually appeared before the committee? Okay. So it was his presentation that you referred to. I referred to it the last time as well.

He raises some very good questions about energy in and energy out. In fact, I asked that question to the Health Canada officials at the last meeting on this matter. So his views are certainly important.

I also asked the question because he sent us an e-mail from Boston, where he was attending the Obesity Society's annual meeting. He had brought along Health Canada's food guide and asked Dr. Walter Willett, who is another expert and chairman of the department of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, to comment on fats.

Again, he's raising some very good issues, and I agree with that, but the purpose of the committee is to address the issue of childhood obesity, not to redraft the Canada food guide. While I agree that what I heard about the Canada food guide--which is a small part of what we're trying to accomplish here in addressing childhood obesity--causes me some concerns, I have very grave doubts that this committee has a mandate to redraft the Canada food guide. We probably all agree that it would be a worthwhile and interesting pursuit if we had time to study it, but it's beyond the mandate of the committee at this stage.

I know members were concerned about having a few extra meetings to hear witnesses who want to appear to discuss the childhood obesity issue. I fail to see, with all due respect, the advantage we would gain from trying to get the Canada food guide here at committee prior to its release so we could somehow redraft it. I fail to see that we actually have the time or the mandate to address that. Therefore, I encourage honourable members to consider that.

We have heard about the extensive consultations Health Canada has undergone on the food guide, whether we agree with it or not, in order to get to this point. I would ask members to consider that in voting on this issue.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Ms. Dhalla.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

I don't think it's the intent of the committee to take over the mandate to redraft the food guide. The parliamentary secretary, Mr. Fletcher, stated very eloquently that the revisions have been there for the last three years. As we study the issue of childhood obesity, the food guide and the type of information being provided to Canadians is of paramount importance. We have seen from numerous presentations that the dietary advice being provided to Canadians has a tremendous impact, so I think the committee has a responsibility to ensure that adequate consultations have occurred.

I would request the chair to call the question.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

We have others, but the question has been called. Our time is just about gone, but if that's the will of the committee....

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Fletcher Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, MB

There hasn't been just one revision. I think it has gone through many iterations, so Dr. Dhalla's comment that revisions have been on the table for three years is not exactly accurate.

If the intent is not to revise the food guide--and not through the officials' work--what's the point of bringing it forward? That is of concern.

I can see the chair is looking forward to cutting me off, so I'll stop.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I just checked with the clerk, and you cannot call a question when there is other debate on the floor.

Ms. Davidson, Mr. Fletcher, and Ms. Gagnon are all on the list here, so I'm going to allow that debate to continue.... Actually, our time is gone. I don't see how we can do this in the next minute.

5:30 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

I would like a vote.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Just to let the committee know, the next meeting is on October 31. Half the meeting is on diabetes. In the next half, we could take up all of these motions in detail.

5:30 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

We can vote, Mr. Chairman. Otherwise, we will continue to stand our ground.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

We're not going to cut down debate until it's over, so I think that's fair.

5:30 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

We no longer wish to debate the issue. We know that you want to maintain your positions and we have ours. Nothing will change, even if we were to discuss it for a half hour on October 31.

I think that we need to vote now. That way, you will not influence us and I will not influence you.

We need to be realistic, don't we?

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Okay, that's your opinion.

Ms. Davidson.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Ms. Dhalla, I'm still a little confused. Was the article you said your motion was based on the same one Mr. Lunney was referring to? Was it the one we had at committee the last time? In the article, the doctor had sent the information in, and he had spoken with his colleague from the States. After looking at the draft, he thought some things weren't taken into consideration in the Canada food guide. Is that the document you're referring to?

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

My motion was not based on a sole individual or e-mail. The motion was based on hearing a number of witnesses in the committee who stated that they were not consulted about the food guide, aside from the pictures and packaging. We heard a different view from Mary Bush, who came in from Health Canada. The motion is based on ensuring that the food guide is reflective of the needs of Canadians.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

The comments we were getting were probably legitimate. The people who were making them felt they had not had an opportunity to contribute. But they were looking at a draft that was put out for comment. They were not looking at a version in which the comments had been taken into account. I think that was part of the confusion.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I can see debate continuing. I don't want to cut the debate. My honest uneasiness about this is that a letter that was referred to the committee, which I'm not sure all of the committee received—

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

Mr. Chair, my motion is not based on that particular letter or e-mail.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I realize that, but it was a significant part of your accusation that the information we had from the department was inaccurate. Because of that, I'm a little uneasy about calling for the vote if our time is gone and we still have debate. That's my uneasiness about it. On October 31, I think we would have that information. We could have a long debate at that time, because we'd have an hour to be able to discuss the three motions.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

The e-mail is irrelevant to the motion. The motion, as I have stated repeatedly, was based on testimony from a number of individuals and stakeholders. This committee is studying childhood obesity. We have a responsibility to do the right thing. If some of our colleagues on this side of the table want to pursue debate, I would request that we call the question so that we can move forward with other committee business next time.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I see more hands for debate. Our time is gone and I'm reluctant to go any further.