Evidence of meeting #57 for Health in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was human.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
I'm wondering where to begin.
On your first question on why to consider harmonization, international cooperation and harmonization is potentially a smart way to do business and to gain access to all the best knowledge and best practices around the world. We have to do it.
I would say we have an incredibly high level of scientific expertise in Canada. We're very well respected for the quality of the work we do and the quality of the decisions we make. It's why we're at the table, with countries around the world, having these kinds of discussions. They respect our opinions and our perspectives on this.
On potential trade issues, the maximum residue limits occasionally result in trade issues at borders because one or the other country is concerned there are residues above a limit on imported foods. The question is this. Are those concerns always based on a health concern, or is it simply because there is an administrative difference or a very small difference in the numbers that is causing a trade issue?
It's right to say we need to do a lot more research and information gathering on the extent to which these trade issues are substantial and important. We've said human health is our primary importance and trade won't trump human health.
In terms of citizen engagement, I want to mention that in our agency we certainly recognize that we all have to do more collectively to engage our constituents and our stakeholders in what we're doing. About six months ago we set up a specific stakeholder engagement section within the agency. Its specific purpose is to make sure we do enough outreach to engage stakeholders, to inform them as much as possible on some of the proposed changes, and to be as open and transparent as we can be within the kinds of discussions we're having.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Bonnie Brown Liberal Oakville, ON
You said stakeholders. What about average citizens or the lady next door, as somebody pointed out?
4:55 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
To the extent that we can, we make our work public and transparent. Our consultation documents are in plain language and are as readable as we can make them. We strive to make those widely available.
4:55 p.m.
Director General, Health Evaluation Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
In response to your question about extrapolating or doing a cumulative assessment on interactions with other chemicals, and so on, this is certainly why we sometimes need to talk to our colleagues in the agency. It's a field that is very complicated.
But one other thing we do, in part of the assessment, is look at the metabolism, the behaviour of the chemical in our bodies. For example, it's one of the approaches we take for all the organophosphates, when we know their activities and the behaviour is similar. In that case, it would allow us to do the cumulative exposure assessment.
When doing the human risk assessment for residues, we look at the total diet. For example, it means we look at somebody ingesting a tomato that may contain a certain minimal level of residues, versus lettuce that contains other residues, and so on. When we do the overall assessment, we take all that into consideration on the total diet. It's how we look at the various potential interactions or the cumulation of the various chemicals, and so on.
I must say the science, at this point in time, is to look at the total complex mixture. I always look at my stomach as a chemical reactor. It is very difficult to identify every one of those things to see how it behaves.
In the pre-assessment, we look at the individual, and we look at the mechanisms or the action of activities in the body to figure out how it will behave. We then take that into consideration when we do the risk assessment.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
I would like to talk to you about breast implants. These devices are now back on the market in the United States and Canada has also lifted the ban on silicone gel breast implants. In the opinion of the Bloc Québécois, there have not been enough independent studies done on the side effects of silicone gel breast implants. There is considerable talk at this time of possible harmonization, in the context of ever stronger continental integration.
Were Canada and the US cooperating while the two agencies, namely the Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, were studying this matter? I do not quite understand. Studies have shown that these implants pose a health risk for women. We were fairly disappointed with the people who came before the committee...
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
I think your question might be best addressed by Health Canada, but no one here is from Health Canada.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
The issue of one of quality control and the safety of the products on the market. I think the question can be put to one of our witnesses.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
What can you tell us about the studies that have been done? Have there been any independent studies into the effects of this type of breast implant? We asked several questions of Health Canada representatives, but we did not get any answers. We were rather disappointed.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Let's give it a try and see if there's anyone who wants to answer.
4:55 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
I would just confirm, of course, that the Pest Management Regulatory Agency's mandate truly is pest control products and pesticides only. I can't speak to specifics around the breast implant issue.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
What do the research analysts think? Can our witnesses answer this question?
5 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
To clarify, our researchers and scientists are a very separate group of scientists and researchers from the regulatory scientists who would have been looking at that question.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Very good question, Madame Gagnon; it's just to the wrong people, I believe. That's the problem.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
We are discussing continental integration and the harmonization of certain standards. Was an agreement negotiated to allow this type of product into the country? I thought that in this context, they might be able to relate to the question.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
We have two more questioners.
We'll go to Ms. Priddy, then back to Ms. Kadis.
5 p.m.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I was very pleased to hear people say, as I would have expected, that health is paramount. If there were some kind of a trade agreement or protocol—I will ask this of SPP, but I want to raise it here as well—who gets to be the queen of the hill and say trade will override health or health will override trade? Do you have the right to say that if we find this is unacceptable, raising them, which I think I've heard people say, would not be acceptable? Do you get to be the final arbiter, or would somebody else be able to overrule your decision and say they have this other agreement and it's been called a trade irritant? I think that's the phrase I read in the paper. It would seem more like a fetal irritant than a trade irritant. But would you, as Health, which should be primary, have the right to override the decision of someone else who had a trade decision they wanted to put forward? That's the first question.
Secondly, if I were to go to your website—and I will, and I thank you for letting me know that this information around public consultation is on it—have you any idea how much information I would find from Aunt Millie? Aunt Millie is the example I always use about, if you will, next-door neighbours and ordinary citizens. Of all the consultation information that's on it, how much might come from, if you will, Aunt Millie?
Dr. Aucoin, I think those are probably for you.
My third one is for Ms. Watts. When the pesticide folks say to you, it's a trade secret, and they provide a summary of supporting documentation, how do you judge whether indeed it does qualify as a trade secret and that the public should not have access to it?
5 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
I'll start with your first question.
As I indicated in my earlier comments, our mandate under the Pest Control Products Act is essentially to make sure that pesticides sold or used in Canada do not pose unacceptable environmental or human health risks. Also in that process is the establishment of maximum residue limits that are protective of health. That is what we do, and that is where our responsibility ends, if you will.
This is what's necessary to protect human health. All major decisions the agency makes with respect to new pesticides are consulted on publicly. The current process and future processes for setting maximum residue limits are also consulted on, and they're based on the latest human health science.
5 p.m.
NDP
5 p.m.
Chief Registrar and Director General, Registration Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency
We're the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, and we make our decisions based on the best available science.
5 p.m.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
I guess that's the only answer you can give. I still worry about who gets to hold trump in the end.
The second part of my question is this. How much would I find was actually from the public?