I did mention in my comments—and I'd be happy to provide you with a copy of them—that the interpretation section of the bill specifically includes chronic health effects, which I believe is what you're referring to in the definition of “danger to human health or safety”. That's very important and is a clear signal of the intended direction of the bill. The disappointment is that there's no explicit provision for enforcing that intent. If we rely on the general prohibition, we don't have any indication from Health Canada. It's difficult to imagine how that could be effectively implemented to prohibit chronic health risks. It gives the government the tools to require incident reporting, but chronic health risks don't lend themselves to incident reporting, because they occur as a result of an accumulation of exposure.
On June 2nd, 2009. See this statement in context.