Evidence of meeting #22 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was consumers.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Richard Kinar  Board Member, Preventable Injuries and Health Safety, Brain Injury Association of Canada
Kim Ayotte  Deputy Chief, Ottawa Region, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
Ondina Love  Executive Director, Canadian Association of Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists
Shannon Coombs  President, Canadian Consumer Specialty Products Association
Joe Schwarcz  Director, Office for Science and Society, McGill University
Chantal Kealey  Director of Audiology and Supportive Personnel, Canadian Association of Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists
Joel Taller  Legal Counsel, Canadian Health Food Association
Jeff Hurst  Chair of the Board, Canadian Toy Association
Lucienne Lemire  Chair, Health and Food Safety Committee, Consumers Council of Canada
Gail Campbell  Director, Consumers Council of Canada
Geneviève Reed  Head, Research and Representation Department, Option consommateurs
Anu Bose  Head, Ottawa Office, Option consommateurs
Don Burns  Vice-President, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
Arthur Kazianis  Technical Committee Co-Chair, Canadian Toy Association
Tawfik Said  Research Officer, Compensation and Policy Analyst, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada

5:50 p.m.

Geneviève Reed Head, Research and Representation Department, Option consommateurs

Madam the committee Chair, vice-chairs, committee members, the clerk of the committee and analysts, let me begin by thanking you for giving Option consommateurs the opportunity to appear before you on Bill C-6, An Act respecting the safety of consumer products.

Option consommateurs has been in existence since 1983. We are a non-profit association whose mission is to promote and protect consumers' interests and ensure that they are respected. Our head office is located in Montreal, and we also have an office in Ottawa. Ms. Bose is responsible for it.

We intervene on matters of public policy at both the federal and Government of Quebec levels. We have a long and abiding interest in the safety of consumer products, first because we publish an annual guide to toys, in collaboration with the magazine Protégez-Vous; second, because we sit on the Committee for Consumer and Public Interest of the Standards Council of Canada; and thirdly, we conduct research on all aspects of toys, including sound levels.

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Go ahead, Ms. Bose.

5:50 p.m.

Anu Bose Head, Ottawa Office, Option consommateurs

Members of the committee, the consumers of Canada need Bill C-6, but it is only a first step.

Every day Canadians buy a variety of consumer products that are imported into Canada from all over the world. These include toys, clothing, tools, and electronics. Their number is legion. Unfortunately, in recent years we've seen several product recalls, and this has had a negative impact on consumer confidence. We are convinced that the regulatory regime for consumer products available in Canada should be both strengthened and modernized. Therefore we believe that Bill C-6 for the most part responds to the concerns of Canadian consumers.

We particularly welcome the inclusion of the ban across the board that will affect each and every player in the production chain. Furthermore, it will enable the Minister of Health to take prompt action to remove dangerous products from the shelves of stores and supermarkets. This bill will also give more power to inspectors, including the power to order a recall. We hope that these inspectors will be given the necessary resources and the department will be sufficiently staffed to exercise these enhanced powers.

The obligation of each and every party that manufactures, imports, or sells consumer products to report incidents is also particularly important. We hope that this reporting requirement will be accompanied by strengthened cooperation at the international level between the office of the consumer product safety division of Health Canada and its European, Asian, and American counterparts. We also hope that maximum effort will be made to pool information on all recalls from the respective countries. Finally, we trust that this measure will lead to the creation of a national registry of recalls that will enable Canadian consumers to directly participate in the recall process.

The product safety program of Health Canada within the healthy environments and consumer safety branch must therefore be given the necessary resources to further increase awareness among Canadian consumers. Consumers should be able to promptly report any information they have related to a given product.

May 28th, 2009 / 5:55 p.m.

Head, Research and Representation Department, Option consommateurs

Geneviève Reed

We are concerned, however, by the non-inclusion or rather, the disappearance, of section 18 of the previous Bill C-52. This section stipulated:

18. The minister may disclose information to the public on a danger to health or human security that any consumer product poses.

We would like this section to be reinstated. To allay the fears of certain stakeholders that the scope of this section could have an adverse impact on the ability to protect commercial information, we recommend that creating a new clause entitled “Communicating with the public” and inserting it in the texts of section 18 of the former Bill C-52.

Canada's main trading partners, the U.S.A. and the European Union have both opted for proactive disclosure on recalls related to health and safety of consumer products. We recommend that a similar system of reporting recalls and the corrective measures taken by government be implemented in Canada. Such a move would go far to bolster the confidence of Canadian consumers. In order to make such a system more user friendly and easily accessible to Canadians, it should be constructed as a single Internet portal where one could, with minimum effort, find information on recalls of all types of products sold in Canada, whether it be consumer products, food, medicines, cosmetics or cars. See, for example, the U.S. government site, www.recalls.gov, for a model.

Inasmuch as Bill C-6 allows the minister, through regulation, to adopt the measures necessary to implement this law, we believe that at least the two above-mentioned measures should be acted upon without delay.

You may recollect that there was a flood of recalls of Fisher-Price toys by Mattel in the summer of 2007. Option consommateurs conducted a flash survey of the retailers and the manufacturer to find out how these recalled products could be returned. We discovered then that there was total confusion all round and that all consumers were not treated alike.

We trust that, with the passage of Bill C-6 on consumer product safety, the minister will be able to quickly focus on setting up a recall system that would reflect the interests of consumers, particularly those most vulnerable. Any recalls policy should clarify the steps to be taken to compensate and properly inform consumers of the product that was subject to recall. It should also be accompanied by a guide for manufacturers and distributors so that they could undertake the necessary corrective measures, including recalls, to ensure the safety of products. This guide should be developed in close collaboration with consumer associations, as in Europe.

Toys represent the largest proportion of recalled products in both Europe and the United States. In fact, very strict rules governing toy safety have been adopted across the world in recent years. These include: legislation on chemicals potentially harmful or carcinogenic, lowering of the permitted thresholds for certain hazardous substances, such as lead or mercury, and strengthening the rules regarding the use of tiny parts in toy manufacture.

In 2004, we conducted a study on noise levels in toys for children between zero and three years of age, and we recommended that a stricter standard than the existing one be adopted. Canada can benefit from the experience of other states when creating regulations which are both tailored to the realities of the market but at the same time are effective in protecting consumers.

We hope that the minister will use the power of regulation granted to her wisely and make Canada a safer place for children and for consumers.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your attention and we will be happy to take your questions.

6 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Thank you so much.

We'll now go to the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada and Mr. Burns.

6 p.m.

Don Burns Vice-President, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada

It is a pleasure to be here this evening. We welcome the opportunity to present our brief.

The Professional Institute represents 57,000 professionals across Canada in the public sector, many of whom work in the area of product safety.

Bill C-6, the proposed act addressing the safety of consumer products, gives Health Canada increased authority to protect the public's health and safety from unreasonable dangers posed by consumer products, whether manufactured in Canada or imported from abroad. The bill provides new authorities and tools to enforce compliance. The institute applauds the government's foresight in proposing this bill, and in broadening Health Canada's regulatory authority over consumer products. However, the institute is concerned that the funding is not sufficient. Present allocations may not allow Health Canada to hire enough product safety inspectors to successfully manage the increased responsibilities and obligations related to ensuring product safety.

There has been an exponential growth in the number of product recalls in Canada over the last few years. This is due to the increased number of imported products as well as the increased vigilance of product safety inspectors. Health Canada will become even more involved in providing safety rules and regulations for products—not only at the point of sale, but also during development, manufacturing, importing, and advertising. This stronger oversight role will be accompanied by increases in the reporting of dangerous incidents, product defects, labelling deficiencies, and recalls from other jurisdictions. There will also be increases in inspections of consumer products, seizures of consumer products, ordering of corrective measures, carrying out of recalls, and verifying of compliance. All reports will have to be reviewed and analyzed, and the physical in situ inspections and seizures will need to be stepped up.

Bill C-6 provides Health Canada with expanded powers to search, seize, and possibly destroy private property or take control of businesses if it has been determined that the act has been violated and unreasonable danger to the public health exists. Bill C-6 states that a review officer “shall complete the review within a reasonable time", and that the person who has requested the review is to be notified "without delay". This requires trained staff. It requires professional, qualified product inspectors. The work of a product inspector is exacting and demanding. Nowadays, citizens are requesting more information about the merchandise they buy for their families, and producers, importers, and manufacturers are urging timely action. It has been reported that some stakeholders are concerned about the amount of time it would take to review inspectors' orders for corrective measures. In light of this, we ask the following question: will there be sufficient inspectors to make sure that the new legislation is applied in a timely manner?

We are also concerned that the existing legislation already includes the provision to impose fines, but that these are rarely imposed. This is no doubt due to the lack of personnel needed to carry out the necessary follow-up in such cases. There are simply not enough inspectors.

There are over 630 scientific regulators, the SG group, across Canada, over 60 of whom are consumer product inspectors. Almost all SGs, 95%, are at the working level, with only 5% at the training level. Having so many experienced regulators is a positive, but the situation does not bode well for the future. As with the public service as a whole, a wave of retirements is about to take place. The time required to effect a proper transfer of knowledge is growing short. The loss of the corporate memory will make it difficult for Bill C-6 to be enforced.

The work of inspectors is becoming more technical. There are more demands placed on them, and inquiries are becoming lengthier. Moreover, the number of complaints is growing. It takes three to four years for a new hire to become independent in his or her work. A new product safety inspector will already have at least an undergraduate degree in science, perhaps combined with a few years of experience outside the federal government. More inspectors need to be hired, and experienced inspectors on the brink of retirement need enticements to stay on. This needs to happen very soon.

A clear Health Canada strategy is needed to deal with imported products at the border. Recurring problems are known to exist with some commodities. These need to be seized before they enter the Canadian market or need to be prevented from being imported. Recalls must be avoided. A coordinated effort on the part of the Canada Border Services Agency, or the CBSA, and Health Canada is required.

For example, some government departments and agencies prohibit certain goods from entering Canada. Other goods are controlled, which means that permits, certificates, labels or federal authorizations are needed before they can be released by the CBSA, which otherwise holds them until the importer meets the requirements. All parties must be trained to meet the requirements of Bill C-6. Increased controls must be in place before consumer products are imported into Canada.

Canada is a world leader in terms of food, health, and product safety. With regard to both food and health safety, federal regulators are involved in international education and policy-making. Canadians would benefit from the federal government hiring enough regulators and product inspectors to similarly help educate officials in other jurisdictions. This would reduce the likelihood of hazardous products being imported into Canada and subsequently being used by unsuspecting Canadians.

Our recommendations are for increased funding for Health Canada to allow it to fulfill its broadened mandate; a recruitment strategy to attract and train new inspectors; a retention policy to encourage current staff to remain in place longer in order to retain the corporate memory needed to train the new recruits—and the Expenditure Restraint Act's impact on public service salaries until 2011 is no help in this regard; and a coordinated strategy with the Canada Border Services Agency to prevent unsafe products from entering Canada.

Thank you.

6:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Thank you very much.

We are now going to go into our question and answer period. We have seven-minute rounds of questions and answers, beginning with Dr. Duncan.

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, everyone, for your presentations. They were very interesting.

I wonder if I can ask the group a question. If someone disagrees, they can say who they are and why they disagree.

Do you agree that consumers should be entitled to information about chronic health dangers in consumer products?

6:05 p.m.

Chair, Health and Food Safety Committee, Consumers Council of Canada

Lucienne Lemire

I would certainly agree with that. If you just want the people who disagree to speak up, I'll be quiet, because I agree.

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Is there anyone who disagrees with that statement? Are you okay with that? Thank you.

I'll ask it the same way this time as well. This one is a little more challenging. Do you support legislative prohibitions on priority categories of toxic substances in consumer products, particularly where safer substitutes are available? Is there any disagreement?

6:05 p.m.

Arthur Kazianis Technical Committee Co-Chair, Canadian Toy Association

Just a clarification, maybe. We agree with the proposal, provided that the safer substitutes are equally evaluated as they exist in products that have been used. By that I mean that science has evaluated the proposed substitutes.

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Thank you.

Are there any other comments to that?

6:05 p.m.

Legal Counsel, Canadian Health Food Association

Joel Taller

Can you also address the issue of economics behind it? In other words, when you talk about a safe alternative, is it so economically unfeasible to use that safer ingredient that it would be tantamount to banning the substance of concern in the first place?

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

You'd like us to note that in general there appears to be agreement for safer alternatives, if you're able and it's economically feasible.

6:05 p.m.

Legal Counsel, Canadian Health Food Association

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Does that meet with everybody's approval?

6:05 p.m.

Chair, Health and Food Safety Committee, Consumers Council of Canada

Lucienne Lemire

I think what we have to keep in mind is that safety of the consumer is paramount. I think most consumers will say that their health is more important than what it costs.

That said, I think it's a question of common sense. That probably needs to be something worked out between the scientists and the people who produce the product, in a very healthy discussion, but I don't think it should be a matter of, “Well, that's going to be more expensive; therefore, that excludes it.” I think most consumers would be prepared to pay for safety.

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Okay. Thank you.

6:10 p.m.

Technical Committee Co-Chair, Canadian Toy Association

Arthur Kazianis

In our business, obviously, safety is the top priority. Therefore, the cost will become secondary.

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Thanks to all of you for that.

I'll ask another question. We know that certain chemicals that are suspected carcinogens have been found in consumer products. Some international health authorities have said there's no safe level for these chemicals. I'm wondering if any of you could comment. Are these chemicals found in any of your products or are you aware of products they're contained in? For example, phthalates, lead....

6:10 p.m.

Technical Committee Co-Chair, Canadian Toy Association

Arthur Kazianis

Again, in the toy industry, obviously, we'd like to think that we're being very progressive in identifying and following some scientific information to remove potentially hazardous chemicals from the products. In the case of phthalates, for example, phthalates are not regulated to zero level; they are regulated to a thousand parts per million. For us, to do business globally, we have been compliant with those regulations ever since they became effective in Europe in 2007.

The point I want to make is that they are not regulated to zero levels. They are regulated to a thousand parts per million. Particularly for that reason, there have been scientific studies that say it's impossible technologically to regulate those types of chemicals down to zero levels.

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

You have another minute, Dr. Duncan.

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Where we have the use of these chemicals, we have stricter regulations--for example, in California and Europe--so if you produce the product, are you meeting the standards in California and Europe? Would anyone like to comment?

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Who would like to answer that question?

6:10 p.m.

Technical Committee Co-Chair, Canadian Toy Association

Arthur Kazianis

I don't want to monopolize the answering portion of this, but we produce products that we do sell in California, and we do sell them in Europe. We have not been the subject--and I'm only speaking on behalf of my company now--of any violations either in California or in Europe on those chemicals.