Health Committee on Oct. 26th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fletcher.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much to the witnesses for their very interesting presentations.

In particular, I found the recommendation on crime and the ability to feel safe in one's neighbourhood, which I think was in Dr. Oliver's presentation about neighbourhoods, or maybe it was one of the other gentlemen's, an interesting one. I believe that's on page 12 of your slides, and certainly there's a feeling that over the last decade or so that neighbourhoods are becoming less and less safe.

I think it's a good reminder for our friends over in Justice that perhaps some of the work they're doing in conditional sentencing, or trying to take that away, or raising the age of consent and ensuring that sexual predators don't enter our country, such as has happened in the situation that we find ourselves in, in Ontario.... But my question goes to things about.... You said subsidized transportation, and we do have a tax credit going toward transportation, mass transportation, that was also part of our platform commitments. I would be interested in the comments of the panel on that.

Also, there is a bill in front of the House right now, Bill C-283, that deals with the labelling of food products, asking companies and producers to show what is in the foods. There is some question about the practicality of that bill and if it would actually have an impact. I wonder if some members of the panel could comment on Bill C-283.

I found the comment about Singapore interesting. Singapore has a unique reputation. I think I wouldn't want to be caught chewing gum there.

However, I wonder if a comment could be made about how we could in Canada do things that are tangible. I think we're all sold on the need to deal with childhood obesity, but what, tangibly, can the federal government or provincial governments do that will make an impact on the lives of children, that will improve their health outcomes?

I'll throw those out on the table and look for your replies.

[Lisa Oliver]

Sure. The first question was about neighbourhood safety.

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

Yes.

[Lisa Oliver]

I was very surprised when I looked at my data and saw such extreme differences among parents, in that around 27% in the low SES neighbourhoods report that there is a lack of safe parks and playgrounds in their neighbourhoods, compared to 9% in the high.

I think if you do want to encourage children to be active in their neighbourhoods, something needs to be done to address the issue of neighbourhood safety, so parents feel confident that their children will be safe outside. There are real hazards for children being outside, such as high-traffic neighbourhoods where children can be hit by cars. So there are real physical dangers to children's health in many neighbourhoods.

There is also the idea of a fear of crime, and crime in parks especially I think for many parents. One policy that could be implemented at the municipal level is to have supervised park hours, so maybe two hours after school there would be a parent or an employee of a community centre there watching, so that parents feel safer having their children in this environment for a couple of hours after school so they can run around and do activities.

I think we need to address the issue of safety and the neighbourhoods in which children are living to encourage physical activity.

I think transportation is one barrier, especially among children, to get to physical activity programs. A recent paper just published using the same data set that I used, the national longitudinal survey of children and youth, found that children where both parents are working full-time have higher rates of obesity and I believe less participation in sports. It is thought that with the parents both working so many hours, they cannot transport children to school. Funding, for example, for municipalities to hire a school bus and drop children off at their homes and pick them up might be one way to support families in having their children be active.

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

Would--

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Your time is gone, but I don't know if there's anyone else....

Are there are any other panellists who want to answer? I'll allow that, but no more questions.

[Dr. Arvi Grover]

I wouldn't mind answering on the labelling issue. The labelling issue is actually a form of behaviour modification.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Go ahead then, very quickly.

[Dr. Arvi Grover]

I think it is practical. In the different communities I've seen, both South Asian and other communities, where they have begun labelling them from the source, it has made the consumer aware of the exact caloric intake. The consumers and the public in general need to be aware that a certain number of calories equals a certain weight. For example, 3,500 calories is roughly equal to about one pound. That is a gauge system. It is an auto-feedback system, and it is a form of behaviour modification. I strongly agree with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you.

Mr. Martin, you have five minutes.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses.

I represent a very low-income riding. It is actually the poorest, statistically, in Canada, where 47% of all the families and 52% of all the children live below the poverty line, so I'm heartened in a way to hear that there seems to be a growing consensus about the association between low income and this health condition that you called an epidemic or a pandemic, Doctor.

I'm really concerned. Largely the face of poverty in my riding is aboriginal. It's North American Indian, off-reserve people who are leaving the desperation of the reserves and trying to find a better life in the inner city of Winnipeg. The conditions that you're talking about are just rampantly apparent in that population. There are more and more people in wheelchairs because of amputations due to diabetes, due to the health conditions, due to diet.

We're looking for concrete recommendations to put into a report. The first thing I'd ask you about is this. We worked very hard in the last Parliament to get a ban on trans fats. We worked with Dr. Yves Morin, a senator, and Dr. Wilbert Keon, also a senator--both known cardiologists--and we got it through Parliament. Parliament did vote not just to label trans fats, but to ban them. Then we struck a task force; it spent eighteen months and finally came back with a recommendation: ban them. Don't just label them--ban them.

But I can't get any witness, when I've been here at this committee--doctors, professors, PhD students--to say as a directive to this committee that our report should ban trans fats or that the report should say to implement the recommendations of the task force to ban trans fats. Can you please help me get it on the record to ban trans fats?

[A voice]

That wasn't very subtle.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I've tried subtle. It didn't work with any other witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Is anyone going to help him out?

[Dr. Valerie Tarasuk]

You bet. I don't know that there's a relationship between trans fats and childhood obesity, but I know enough about trans fats to be completely supportive of your recommendation to ban them, and I know enough about nutrition labelling to know that labelling foods “trans fat-free” does not remove trans fats from the diets, particularly of low-income people. So if you want a health measure that is actually experienced across the board, rather than a measure that simply exacerbates health inequities, then banning is the right thing to do.

However, if you get to the point at which this government agrees to ban trans fats and actually takes action, it's really important to make sure there are measures in place so that the prices of foods do not rise as a result of particular sectors of the food industry having to incorporate new production methods. For example, we've done a lot of work in my group on the prices of margarines, and right now we know that the cheapest margarines you can buy are the margarines that are laden with trans fats. We know that the people in our study are most likely to buy those cheap margarines. If this ban ever comes into existence, it will be really important that the price of margarine not triple.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

That's a good point. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Does anyone else care to comment on the trans fats side of things?

[Dr. Arvi Grover]

I would love for it to be banned. Just practically, realistically speaking, all the crackers and junk food make up probably about 20% or 25% of most grocery stores, and their income is dependent on that. I agree with the previous comments that once you remove such a large income source, they are going to want some form of retribution.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

You'd still have cookies, but they wouldn't be made with partially hydrogenated vegetable oils.

[Dr. Arvi Grover]

Yes, it's easy to put in theory....

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

I would like to say to the committee that we will have the Canola Council coming. I believe the Canola Council has a solution for where we're headed on this. I think we'll have a more extensive debate on trans fats and some of the solutions—like our Canadian invention, which I applaud.

Mr. Batters.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Ms. Dhalla talked earlier about the child fitness tax credit. I'd like to ask your reaction to the government's universal child care benefit. This is the $1,200 per year given to parents for each child under the age of six. This benefit is taxable in the hands of the lower-income spouse, which for low-income Canadians means it's a tax-free amount of money—$100 a month for each child under the age of six. We've established that there is a clear link between the level of income and the quality of a Canadian's diet. I think the links are clear, and you've presented good evidence to back that up.

Nutrition and nutritious food have to be considered an important part of child care. If someone takes their child to a neighbourhood day care provider, nutritious food is vital as part of that child care. This benefit is going to help all families in Canada.

We on this side of the table believe strongly—and I think all members of Parliament would agree—in an effective social net for those who need help in this country. That's critical. There will always be a scarcity of resources. When I ask for your comments in thirty seconds, I suspect that part of the answer will be that there needs to be more. We will always say there needs to be more. But I'd like your reaction to the universal child care benefit. It provides direct money to parents, which will improve their income and thus their diet.

We know that increased income equals an increased quality of diet equals a reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and, frankly, bypass and angioplasty business for Dr. Grover and his colleagues.

That's my question to all three of you. Will the universal child care benefit help in this equation? It's true that there's always a scarcity of resources, and there could always be more. But will that amount of money help combat what we're talking about here today, which is better health outcomes for Canadians?

[Dr. Valerie Tarasuk]

You've structured the question to get us to say yes. Of course, if you give poor people more money, they'll have more money than they had before you gave them some. You're talking about $1,200, and that means $100 a month. I'm talking about deficits that amount to several hundred dollars a month. You're asking if the child care benefit will help their diets. Honestly, I wouldn't want to try to evaluate the impact of such a trivial increase in their income on their dietary intake. It would be impalpable.

The levels of deprivation we're talking about are substantial. These tax credits you're describing are politically attractive, because they're across the board. But honestly, if you want to address these problems, you've got to do the math and figure out how much money people really need to put food on the table. An arbitrary amount that's calculated through some gross population-level thinking doesn't necessarily net the kinds of impacts we need. We're describing serious problems. You're saying resources are always scarce. I want to tell you to show us some leadership. We have a serious problem, and all our data show that the problem is getting worse.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Sure, but in my province of Saskatchewan, this government has now delivered, in terms of child care, four times the money the Liberal government had delivered in terms of their child care plan. That's leadership. As I prefaced in my question, granted, as you're going to tell me, we can always be doing more, no question, but this is real money that's going to help in this equation.

I wonder if the other two panellists would like to comment.