Health Committee on Feb. 12th, 2007

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you.

I'll ask Ms. Sally Brown about her report. Have you heard back from the federal government, other than the “thank you for doing it” kind of letter? Have you had a response?

[Sally Brown]

No.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Have you heard from any of the bureaucrats in Health Canada on whether they're doing anything to develop a response? I notice that you're suggesting that “Draft regulations be published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, by June 2007”. If they haven't started to move yet, that would be kind of a vain hope.

[Sally Brown]

Yes, it would.

We haven't heard. I think our message is—and just apropos of your former question—that we do believe that by the time we start and indicate that regulations are coming, it will be four years before all the bakeries are online. That is plenty of time to give to the industry. If you believe in market forces, then where there's going to be demand, there's going to be a solution.

Such a date is not possible now, but we're hoping that once it is announced, the dates will fall into place. Maybe it'll take a little less time, because I think the task force has done a good amount of the work in some of the areas, so maybe it can be done a little more quickly. In any event, there's plenty of time to develop alternatives, in our view.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Are you hoping the food service industry will move forward almost simultaneously with the development of the regs or do you think the regs will have to come down before they can go forward?

[Sally Brown]

If we look at what happened with labelling when it was strictly voluntary, I think it was very slow. As soon as it became apparent that they were going to be regulated and would have to do it no matter what, the progress sped up. I would suspect the same thing will happen.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

May I ask Ms. Reynolds about her membership? Do you have an estimate as to what percentage of your companies are already moving in this direction?

[Joyce Reynolds]

I don't know if I can put it in percentage terms, but I can tell you that all the large companies are certainly working on this issue. The smaller companies are very much dependent on their suppliers and on what they can provide.

One of our objectives with this document is to get them to put more pressure on the suppliers to provide some of those trans fat alternatives.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Good.

You also mentioned the other costs that the restaurant industry is facing. I think you said the salaries for food service workers rose 15% in the last couple of years. It seems to me they were never the best paid workers in the country. If they were making $8 an hour and they're now making $9.20, for example, I certainly don't think anybody would be too dismayed by that, when one considers what workers are making in other fields.

[Joyce Reynolds]

When you look at the food service industry, we provide first jobs or entry-level jobs. We provide lots of jobs for part-time workers who are saving for and contributing to their education.

If the wages increase too quickly, we then start to get inflationary pressures, and their buying power in terms of food becomes less as well. You create an inflationary spiral that becomes problematic for those who want to purchase food.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

It's the usual economic argument against giving poorly paid workers more money, but I'm very encouraged to hear that their salaries have gone up 15%.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you.

We'll now move on to Madam Gagnon.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

I have two questions concerning the Danish model.

As a result of the Danish experience, industrially manufactured trans fats were successfully limited to 2%. Why have we not been able to reduce the level of trans fats further in Canada? I can understand that it may be difficult for the industry and for restaurants. I also think that Canada is unwilling to apply these restrictions to meat.

We're all familiar with delicious Danish cookies and pastries. Have trans fat levels in Danish pastries been cut? Most likely they have. Why then do they still taste good? It hasn't been difficult to incorporate these steps into the strategy to eliminate trans fats. This would be more difficult to accomplish here in Canada because foods wouldn't taste the same and consumers would have a hard time accepting them. There seems to be some reluctance to act for fear that some food products would taste different. The Danes do not appear to share this concern, because they have taken it a step further than Canada.

I'd like to get your comments. Specifically, I'd like to hear what Mr. Hetherington, Ms. Brown and Mr. Marangoni have to say on this subject.

[Paul Hetherington]

Thank you for the question. Let me start off by commenting with regard to the threshold.

Denmark, as we know, has set a threshold of 2%, and I will respond now, as a member of the task force, that this was one of the questions we struggled with throughout our deliberations. Dr. Stender of the University of Copenhagen, I believe, if I have his name and affiliation correctly, presented to the task force and he was asked that specific question: why did Denmark choose 2%? His response was somewhat surprising to me as a member of the task force. He said, “Well, a 5% overall limit would have achieved the objective”. I found that somewhat interesting, being a task force member.

With regard to the product differential in Denmark versus Canada, first of all, we're dealing with two totally different marketplaces, one having a much smaller population, about a quarter of our size, if my memory serves me correctly, and different purchasing practices too. They purchase more on a daily basis than we do here in Canada. They also use a lot more butter, to my understanding, and as an alternative, they went into the tropical fat solution. In that case they were able to produce it. My understanding also is—and this is after conversation with my member companies—they don't necessarily offer the same product range as we do here in Canada. So they may be challenged there.

Also, in regard to some other applications of the other uses of trans fats, such as in icings, Europe allows for additional additives to the food products that we currently don't have here. I'm talking about in the way of emulsifiers.

[Sally Brown]

Perhaps I can clarify something as well. With respect to the Danish recommendations, by lowering it to 2%, they could not include mixed foods. By mixed foods, I mean foods with natural trans fat and processed trans fat. In Canada we have an awful lot of mixed foods that are sold at retail, every pizza or pot pie. We wanted to make sure that we captured all mixed foods, because we eat a lot of them, and the 5% captures all mixed foods. So they're tied by the output level, even if they contain natural trans fats. We felt that was very important.

Dr. Stender did say that could they change what they have done, they would do what we're doing. The other thing is that he made it clear that when they changed, they changed holus-bolus and nobody noticed the difference.

The only other thing I'd add is that in Quebec there is a restaurant chain known as Pacini. I don't know whether you know of it. They assumed the regulations were coming and so they changed all 320 of their products, I think it was, to be trans fat free. It was not 5%, but trans fat free. They worked with the University of Montreal, I believe. They did it over a one-and a-half-year period. They can't claim it. There are no claims. It cost them, they said, in the first year 3% of their budget. They did not pass it along to consumers and their consumers have never noticed the difference in taste. We were very, very struck—My co-chair and I met with the restaurant chain, and that said to us, if you want to do it, you can do it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Go ahead.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

I asked committee members to invite you here today because I had a question for you.

You mention labelling in your report and stated that there were limits when it came to increasing consumer awareness. With the exception of a very few people, most consumers understand labelling, more or less.

We're wondering if it's possible to put warnings on certain food product labels, as the UK does. These make it much easier to understand the trans fat content of food products.

Do you think this approach would work in Canada?

[Sally Brown]

I believe Heart and Stroke has been invited to come and speak to your committee next week about our health check program, so I won't speak to that. I guess my view is that labels are very, very important and they are difficult for consumers, particularly for ethnic consumers and those of lower literacy levels, to understand. They're not simple for me to understand. You really have to look at the serving size, and that's an important thing to educate consumers about.

I guess my view is, Heart and Stroke's view is, that for sugar and salt and everything else it's very important that the labels be there, that they be understood, and that people control their consumption of those ingredients. Trans fats are not an ingredient; they are a chemical produced by us that didn't exist previously, that has no benefit. They shouldn't be treated by labels; they should be removed. We did not put a label on paint cans to say there was lead in them; we took the lead out. Where there is a chemical that shouldn't be there, it should come out. It's very different from other ingredients in food, which should be labelled.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fletcher.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for coming today.

I am reminded of when the motion came forward. It was Pat Martin's motion, and I was health critic of the opposition at the time. Pat Martin and I sat down late one night around my office table, and we came out with wording that Conservative members could support as well. The motion came through, and the task force report moved forward. It took a little longer than we expected for that task force report, but it did come. I think that goes to what I'm sensing is a frustration that things may not be moving as quickly as some people would like, but that seems to be the nature of the beast in government.

The issue of unintended consequences has come up: if we ban trans fats and there isn't enough time to replace the trans fats; that in order to comply with a very well-intentioned law, people substitute substances that are more harmful than trans fats. They're complying with the law, but the result is completely opposite to what everyone in this room would like to see. I would like someone to comment on that.

I will ask my questions first, because I inevitably get cut off.

The other aspect is trade. What impact is there on our trade relations, both for exports and for imports of product? What would the elimination of trans fats mean to products imported from a long distance away or even from our southern neighbours?

Finally, we had quite an exchange about two months ago with the Canola Council and the Heart and Stroke Foundation. The exchange basically was about mandatory versus voluntary regulations. I see you quote the Canola Council in your brochure, but at that meeting anyway, they were advocating for voluntary measures. Unfortunately, they're not here today. I wonder if someone could comment on what window would be necessary for voluntary measures. Also, maybe you have a two-and-two solution, but what if it were extended to a three-and-three solution, or four-and-four solution?

Those are my questions.

[Sally Brown]

I'll try, then maybe some of my colleagues can enter in.

You started, Mr. Fletcher, by asking how much time it will take to get the alternative supplies on the market. I guess I'd ask how much time is enough. We're suggesting four years. Actually, no one on the task force thought that wasn't long enough, including my colleagues here. That's four years, with a market signal that in four years' time there will need to be a healthier product for wide consumption in Canada and elsewhere.

Dow is very supportive of a strong market signal through regulation. I'm sorry they're not here. Without it, a piecemeal signal will not be good enough. The market needs to know, because it'll take four years to produce the seeds, plant the seeds, grow the seeds, and have the seeds turned into alternative product. I'm not an expert, Mr. Fletcher, but I just don't see how a regulatory process with a four-year outcome.... If you're extending it to six years or eight years, you might as well not have regulation.

The task force took longer than you wanted it to because we did our homework. So I would say that.

On trade, we did have one trade—what was it?—opinion, and it's quoted in the report, saying that there was no evidence that limiting the amount of trans fats in the Canadian diet would not be seen as a legitimate objective under trade law, because it's to protect human health. We're also conscious of the fact that Denmark has not been penalized in any way. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academies in the United States and the World Health Organization also agree that there would be no trade implications. We have said in the report that if there needs to be a stronger look at this, that should happen during the regulatory process, but there was no evidence that this would be a problem. So I just repeat what was in the report with respect to that. Not being Dow and not being an expert, I can't say.

I think the feeling was that regulatory measures would also meet some of Joyce's concerns. You wouldn't need to have a trans fats free claim in the restaurant sector if it weren't allowed. So I would suggest that you probably don't need to do all the work to create a claim if you decide that within three or four years there isn't going to be any. It might be the easier way to go, because I've seen how long it takes to get claims through. So I would suggest that it's not the best solution.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay, our time is gone, but very quickly, go ahead, Joyce.

[Joyce Reynolds]

I'll answer the question on unintended consequences. Our industry moved out of sats and into trans—they thought vegetable oils were a healthy alternative—decades ago. So yes, there is a fear that they're going to move en masse to high oleic/low linolenic or some of the other new alternatives, and then somebody's going to say, well, gee, we didn't know at the time, but there's a problem. There's a little bit of a fear of that. We want to make sure that whatever we turn to will be healthy alternatives over the long term. We don't want to go back to saturates. That's something our industry is very clear about.

In terms of how long and the best approach, we want an approach that's going to provide access to a sustainable supply of healthy alternatives. We favour the quickest way, the best way, of having access to a sustainable supply of healthy alternatives. So that's just quick.

We're not trade experts. There was nobody on the task force who was a trade expert. That's one of the things we think government needs to look at.

[Paul Hetherington]

I need 20 seconds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay, you have 20 seconds.