Evidence of meeting #13 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
I just wanted to say that I don't think I can support this amendment the way it's written. I have some concerns with the last statement, “and respond to their observations”. We have the consultation process set up, and the advisory committee, that's scientific-based, with the experts. I think that's what we need to stick with.
I think we should call the vote on it.
4:40 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Dr. Tam, you told us that the process of consulting with those stakeholders or parties that might be affected by the bill would be carried out in concert with expert groups and the advisory committee and that the latter would take a science-based approach. So then, the process of holding consultations pursuant to the amendment to clause 9 would be complementary, not contradictory, to the consultation process.
4:40 p.m.
Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
I'll provide an initial comment, and my colleague might wish to add something. There's already in existence a consultation requirement for the development of regulations. The Public Health Agency has said repeatedly that we will honour that requirement and that we will be consulting extensively. I think that's already laid out in the development of regulations.
4:40 p.m.
General Counsel, Legal Services, Public Health Agency of Canada
It's essentially the cabinet directive on regulation-making. As well, there's a component on regulatory impact assessment, and it requires detailed consultations that are open and meaningful and balanced, and that is part of how the government intends to propose regulations under this section.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
It seems to me, though, that this is separate and apart from the regulations that will be drafted and adopted. This is to say that if and when there is a need to change the list--the schedule of toxins and pathogens--you'll have a scientific advisory committee that makes the decisions. I think, as Luc Malo just said, this complements that. It just means you have to consult openly, you have to share the results, you have to consult the provinces, and you have to answer their concerns. I don't see the problem in something that basic.
4:45 p.m.
Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
I think, in particular, it refers just to the schedules themselves. That's very specific. And the schedules, as you can see, in the way you read them, absolutely should be based on a scientific-based discussion.
I think, really, if the latest science on the risk of a pathogen or on changes in a pathogen, which only a scientific discussion can actually address, goes into the schedule, this current amendment does not speak to any other aspect of the regulation-making.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
I'm going to go to the vote on amendment BQ-5.
(Amendment negatived)
(Clause 9 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 10--Addition of Items)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
We now have amendment L-2 to clause 10. Who would like to move this motion and speak to it?
We'll go to Ms. Murray.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
I move that clause 10 be amended by adding subclause (3) and subclause (4) after line 6. It is similar to the amendment made to clause 9.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Thank you.
Is there any discussion?
(Amendment agreed to)
(Clause 10 as amended agreed to)
(Clause 11 agreed to)
(On clause 12--Inadvertent Release)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
We have amendment G-1 to clause 12. Who would like to speak to this one?
Go ahead, Dr. Carrie.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
What we'd like to do is add the words “from the facility” to subclause 12(1). It would read: “If a licence holder has reason to believe that a human pathogen or toxin has been released inadvertently from the facility in the course of an activity”.
Some of the stakeholders were concerned about simple spills, and this should address those concerns.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Is there any further discussion on this amendment?
(Amendment agreed to)
(Clause 12 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 13 to 32 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 33--Access to facilities)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
We have amendment G-2 to clause 33. Would someone like to move that and read the amendment, please?
Go ahead, Dr. Carrie.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Yes.
33. No person shall enter the part of a facility in which controlled activities are authorized in relation to human pathogens
--and then add:
that fall into Risk Group 3 or Risk Group 4 and are prescribed by regulation or toxins that are prescribed by regulation
We heard from the stakeholders that they prefer that security clearances do not apply to facilities with risk group 2 human pathogens, and PHAC has no intention of requiring this.
The government has agreed from the beginning that there should be no security screening for facilities that conduct controlled activities within risk group 2 human pathogens. So we'd like to make that amendment to clarify that.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Is there any more discussion?
(Amendment agreed to)
(Clause 33 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 34 to 37 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 38--Provision of information to Minister)
On amendment G-3, Mr. Carrie.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
I will read this:
38. (1) The Minister may order an applicant, a licence holder or a biological safety officer to provide the Minister, in accordance with any conditions that the Minister may specify, with any information that is under that person’s control, including personal information and confidential business information
--and then cross out “and that, in the Minister's opinion” and replace it with:
and that the Minister believes, on reasonable grounds,
The Privacy Commissioner did write us a letter, and changing it in this way will fulfill what the Privacy Commissioner has asked us to do. The change is consistent with the request of the Privacy Commissioner to add a reasonableness component to the section.
(Amendment agreed to)
(Clause 38 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 39--Disclosure by Minister)
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
It reads:
39. (2) Except in the circumstances described in paragraph (1)(b), before disclosing the information to any person other than Her Majesty in right of Canada or an agent of Her Majesty, the Minister must obtain the person’s written agreement that they will maintain the confidentiality of the information
--and then we'd like to add:
unless they are required by law to disclose it.
Again, the Privacy Commissioner had concerns with this section, and this follows the Privacy Commissioner's specific recommendation.