Evidence of meeting #48 for Health in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was conveyance.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Robert Clarke  Deputy Chief Public Health Officer, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness, Public Health Agency of Canada
Dennis Brodie  Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada
Howard Njoo  Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada
John Cuningham  Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON

Yes, but we wanted to have the best quarantine act in the world. We're not 100% sure that those standards are as high as.... They may be as high as most countries can reach, but they also could be the lowest common denominator. That's sort of irrelevant when we want Canada to be a leader in pubic health.

3:50 p.m.

Deputy Chief Public Health Officer, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Robert Clarke

The other factor in this is that Canada and the United States share a very common health status in terms of infectious disease. So the diseases we're primarily concerned about are ones that are exotic to Canada and would impose significant risk to Canadians. All people coming by land would be coming from the United States.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON

Of course I'm very aware of that, and I'm wondering if this isn't another screen for what is called “deeper integration”. Everything is so much the same that we might as well not have any rules.

I have one other question, on cargo.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

You have only 30 seconds.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON

Let's say a truck driver is bringing in foodstuffs, animals, vegetables, or maybe ingredients for dog and cat food, which we had a problem with lately. He has a sense there's something wrong with his cargo and it has been contaminated--it smells funny, or something like that. I think he should be required to report this ahead of time so there is somebody at the border who can decide whether or not to let the material in.

3:55 p.m.

Deputy Chief Public Health Officer, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Robert Clarke

In the case of animals and food, this is covered by the Food Inspection Agency. In fact, they have veterinarians located at these land border crossings to inspect animals.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON

But according to the Quarantine Act—

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I'm sorry, your time has gone, Ms. Brown.

Madame Gagnon, the floor is yours.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

I would like to return to the risk management issue. You said that it was a risk management issue. Do you think that people travelling by land are more likely to bring diseases into the country? You talked about the United States, Quebec and Canada, but you can also travel from Mexico to the U.S. and to Canada. Would it not increase the risk?

3:55 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

No. We're talking here about risk management. If a traveller is sick on a flight, we cannot send him or her to the hospital before landing at the airport. This is why it is important that the pilot notify the officials of the destination airport so that they can deploy the required resources and the quarantine officers before landing. If a person is ill on a bus going to Canada, we can always send him or her to the hospital before the bus reaches the border.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

I would like to come back to the reporting issue. Is it mandatory for someone travelling on a plane to inform the captain or the flight attendants that he or she could be contagious? In the case of ground conveyances, you do not have to report the diseases that you might be carrying.

3:55 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

The purpose of advance notification is to allow sufficient time to put in place the resources and the quarantine officers required before landing because the sick person might need medical attention and it is difficult to give it in-flight. If someone arrives by bus, it leaves you much more time.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

I am trying to understand the purpose of reporting. It is not to protect other passengers from possible contamination, but to support the sick person.

3:55 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

Yes. Under the Quarantine Act, we also have the power to intervene at the border. If the other passengers on that same flight need a follow-up, we can also put the necessary resources in place. The advance notification requirement is also to ensure a medical follow-up and support for the sick traveller.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

It has been said that there were already provisions in other acts such as the Customs Act. There is a specific requirement for travellers to report if they are carrying any viruses or communicable diseases. Might the Customs Act be sufficient to respond to the concerns expressed by this Committee this afternoon?

4 p.m.

John Cuningham Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

I do not want to refer specifically to the Customs Act, but I can say that they are two different things. Under Section 34, a mandatory requirement falls on the conveyance operator. Section 15 of Bill C-12 passed in the 38th Parliament says that each traveller must answer questions.

I do not know if it answers your question. In fact, there are two mandatory requirements. One must be fulfilled before arrival. It applies mostly to the conveyance operator. He can only base his judgment on what he sees or on his suspicions. However, the passenger has no obligation to report an illness to the driver. He or she might even try to hide it.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

It is probably what will happen.

4 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

John Cuningham

On arrival at a point of entry, each person, including passengers and the driver, will be submitted to a control by a custom officer.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much. Your time is up.

Mr. Fletcher, you have five minutes.

4 p.m.

Conservative

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For members of the committee, I would like to reframe this discussion a little bit and put it into context.

Under the International Health Regulations, which were revised at the same time the Quarantine Act was modernized, operators of ground conveyances are not required to report in advance. To repeat that, under the International Health Regulations, ground conveyances are not required to report.

Ms. Brown, in our debate, I think there was a suggestion about an amendment. It wouldn't be helpful in this case because Bill C-42 is a catch-all bill.

I would like to refer you to proposed subsection 34(1), which reads: “This section applies to the operator of any of the following conveyances”. We've been talking about watercraft and aircraft, but paragraph 34(1)(b) talks about “a prescribed conveyance”. It can be defined as anything, be it a bus, a train, a Segway, or whatever humans come up with in the future for land transportation.

I hope you guys will be able to elaborate on the points I'm raising to make sure I understand correctly.

On the other point I'd like to raise, under the Quarantine Act, customs officials are actually also screening officers. It is also another safety valve.

A prescribed conveyance actually deals with land conveyances, or transporters, or whatever we come up with. I think it addresses the issue and allows for the catch-all nature of Bill C-42, which was the whole purpose.

Could the officials comment on that understanding and address those concerns?

4 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

Thank you, Mr. Fletcher. I think you raised excellent points.

I think there might be a misunderstanding with the current wording, which does not require advanced reporting for operators of land conveyances. It's not the same thing as no reporting at all. There is still a requirement for them to report at the border.

The whole issue of advanced reporting from a practical point of view for risk management is really in a sense to make the necessary arrangements for medical services and so on, as I already responded to the honourable member of Parliament, Ms. Gagnon, in advance of someone arriving by plane or ship, which is not as practically possible compared to a land conveyance. But all operators are required at the border to declare illness. In that sense, it is consistent with protecting Canadians.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

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

I'm going to run out of time, but can you explain to the committee subsection 15(2), section 38, and subsection 34(2) of the act, which deal with the very issues we're discussing here? My understanding is that these sections deal with operators of land conveyances. These are catch-all sections.

4:05 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

John Cuningham

You're referring to subsection 15(2) of the act?

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

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

Subsection 15(2).

April 18th, 2007 / 4:05 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

John Cuningham

Okay. That's what I was referring to earlier, where you have the obligation on the traveller--every traveller--which includes the conveyance operator, to in fact self-report. If I can quote,

Any traveller who has reasonable grounds to suspect that they have or might have a communicable disease listed in the schedule or are infested with vectors, or that they have recently been in close proximity to a person who has, or is reasonably likely to have, a communicable disease listed in the schedule or is infested with vectors, shall disclose that fact to a screening officer or quarantine officer.

That's the obligation on every traveller at the entry point when they're screened.

The other section you're referring to is section 34?