Health Committee on Oct. 31st, 2006

[The Chair]

Okay. There are two requests, then: one, to make it a friendly amendment to Ms. Dhalla's, and the other to have yours go first. If I don't see a direction fairly quickly, I'll make a decision on this.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

I do not think that is a good idea because if we add the point at issue, your motion will not be passed. I do not think that is a good strategy.

[The Chair]

Okay, fair enough. There's no consent for its being an amendment. This is my rationale: we have a motion on the floor left over from the last meeting. It was Ms. Dhalla's. If there's something further to that, I think Ms. Gagnon can add that as part of her motion, and we'll deal with it that way.

We had a considerable amount of debate on Ms. Dhalla's motion. It was introduced. There were two individuals who had their hands up when I called the meeting over. We will start with those two. One was Mr. Fletcher, and the other was Ms. Davidson.

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

Ms. Davidson can go first.

[The Chair]

Ms. Davidson, go ahead, please.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

If I can remember correctly from our last meeting, I think my questions were going along the line of asking Ms. Dhalla what the intent of this was. I wasn't sure where this was going. What were we going to do with it--just table it with the committee and leave it at that? We didn't have any time slotted in.

We also have a notice of motion before us today for different times of meetings and so on. Certainly we have nothing in our timeframe or our meeting schedule to do anything with this motion. So I was wondering what the intent of the motion was. Was it just to bring it and put it on the table before the committee, or was it to try to deal with it and scrutinize the three years of work that has gone into this?

[The Chair]

So the question is whether you want this paper document or you want to get some decisions and have witnesses. Is that the intent?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair]

Okay.

Ms. Dhalla, go ahead, please.

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

Once again, the intent behind the motion came to light from hearing numerous individuals and stakeholders who presented to us at committee, and who all stated one of two things: either they were consulted or they were not consulted. The ones who were consulted stated that they were consulted on what the diagram should look like and where the pictures should go on the draft food guide.

When Mary Bush came in and spoke so passionately about the issue, she stated that they had done over 6,000 consultations. Considering this process has been in review for over three years, I think we owe it to Canadians to ensure that we bring forward a list of the people who were actually consulted and the types of questions they were asked, and to be sure that we look at where those suggestions ended up and whether or not they were incorporated into the food guide.

I know that the clerk has also handed us copies of e-mails, which I referred to last time, from Dr. Freedhoff, who also mentioned, further what to Mary Bush said, that there is a discrepancy between what Health Canada is saying and what these witnesses had stated. So I think this is really a non-partisan issue.

Regarding Ms. Davidson's concern about the fate of the documentation that comes forward, I think we collectively, as a committee, are going to have to decide what we do with that evidence. It may be that they have incorporated some, but not all, of those suggestions. It may be that they have taken a look and have done extensive consultations, and perhaps we as a committee will not need to proceed further. I think it is imperative that members of our committee receive the information, do an assessment, and decide collectively.

In terms of the work plan that was put forward, I've just spoken to the chair, and I believe there is a meeting of the steering committee on Thursday morning at which there will be discussion of how we move forward as a committee and what issues will be discussed. We can take a look at the second motion at that particular point.

I think it's imperative that we receive this food guide. There are four million copies going to print, and I think we owe it to Canadians.

[The Chair]

We're just debating the motion itself.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Can I have one follow-up question just for clarification?

I understand why you brought this motion forward. I think we debated that very fully at the last meeting. So I'm still not quite clear, then. Your intent, I gather, from what you have just said, is to dedicate at least one meeting, and perhaps more, to reviewing this. Is that the intent?

[The Chair]

Depending on what we see.... Is that fair enough?

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

To be honest, yes, depending upon what we see, we may need more. We may need fewer. We may not need any. I think we have to make that decision once we receive the information.

[The Chair]

Okay, Ms. Dhalla, we got that.

Mr. Fletcher, did you have a comment?

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

There are three points to Ms. Dhalla's motion. One is the draft copy of the food guide. In the explanation, what the intent was still doesn't come across. I really hope there isn't an intention to start rewriting the food guide by committee, but that's the only logical outcome of the request. If you're going to ask for the draft copy of what is going to be released before it's released, you must have an intent to change it. That causes a lot of problems, in the sense that a lot of time and effort has already gone into it. Yes, Dr. Fry and Dr. Bennett are doctors and may be able to provide some additional insight, but many other people have been consulted.

Also, in regard to the list of stakeholders, there are privacy concerns, and so on. I'm sure most of them would have no problem in granting permission, but there is a whole bureaucratic exercise that we have to go through anyway to ask, and I'm just not sure it's practical or a good use of resources.

There are other ways of addressing some concerns. I think perhaps having the officials come forward again and asking some more questions is fine, but the actual motion is not practical. Therefore, regrettably, I can't support it.

[The Chair]

Okay.

Madame Gagnon.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

I do not understand why the members cannot see the importance of having more information about the Canada Food Guide that is about to be published. A lot of money has been spent on this. It took 14 years to rewrite the Food Guide. Will this take another 14 years? We all know how much influence a food guide can have, and we know that obesity causes a lot of deaths. The Food Guide seems inappropriate. There are obesity specialists here in Ottawa and even in the United States who have expressed major concerns about the Food Guide.

I recently received some information and the release of the Food Guide adds to my concern. I think that we have a responsibility as a committee. We are studying obesity, yet we are allowing the publication of a guide that might not be realistic given the current situation and given everything the supermarkets are selling.

Take the consumption of dairy products, for example. Mr. Chair, I do not know if you considered what Dr. Freedhoff sent us. I questioned Mary Bush, the director general, several times, and I was surprised at her answers. She seemed to dodge the tough questions. She was very good at it. I realize this is her baby, but I think that baby will get a bit too big if it follows the Food Guide she is recommending.

[The Chair]

Did that come through in English the same as it was said in French?

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Yes, I think it is the same thing. I wanted to lighten up the conversation, but this is a weighty issue. Let us be serious. Why should they not give us their last version and the one before? Why should we not hold our own consultations? What is the rush to publish the Food Guide? The publication date is a few months away, but how many millions have been spent so far? We have a responsibility. The committee was told—

[The Chair]

Okay, we got your point, and we made those the last time as well.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Yes, but I would like to shake you up a little.

[The Chair]

I'm shaking. I'm vibrating over here.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Chair, some members of the committee, especially the government members, do not seem to think the Food Guide issue is very important, and we are trying to raise some points that will change their minds.

[The Chair]

You'll have to ask him later, but not here now.

Ms. Priddy, you have a quick comment. Keep it to the motion and keep it tight and we'll move to a vote on this. I think it's fairly simple to see where everybody's sitting on it anyway, but go ahead.