Health Committee on Oct. 21st, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Monsieur Thibeault.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you Minister, for being here today.

In relation to some of the questions I was asking on Tuesday, it goes to the cadmium situation that we have in the country. I always wear the two hats right now: one is the politician and one is the father, and the father one always seems to take precedence, which is important, because my three-year-old is chewing on kids' jewellery, which I think, as every parent across the country, we worry about.

Yes, I could express my disappointment as well with the process that's happened in terms of getting this bill out and into law, but how do we ensure that all of the issues that have been brought forward by stakeholders over the last six months are being addressed? And are you confident that the concerns being brought forward by the stakeholders are being addressed?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you.

As a parent of a two-year-old as well, I can tell you that when I go to stores I shop very differently, knowing there are products that are not safe on our shelves. I always made the assumption that when I went shopping products were safe, but that's not necessarily the case.

But having said that, am I confident that the stakeholders' concerns and what not are being...? In my view, yes, I'm confident that we've been able to address the stakeholders' concerns. This legislation allows us national mandatory reporting, investigation mechanisms, mandatory recall, but it also is working with the industry. We want to work in partnership with industry. We want to make sure that industry is supported in ensuring that their products are safe, and to work together. Some of those types of concerns raised by industry were also identified, so I'm confident that this legislation addresses that. But later on today you'll be able to ask that question of them as well.

You know, it's taken a long time to get to this point, but I think we've been able to address many of the concerns in making this a good bill for Canada.

Thank you.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

You've mentioned that you've had those consultations with stakeholders. How is Health Canada prepared to continue to have that dialogue with stakeholders to ensure that if there's anything that arises in the future they have a mechanism through which they can bring it forward?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

In support of this legislation, we have made an investment of approximately $70 million, over the next five years, to put the processes in place. The action plan that we established to start rolling this legislation out through Health Canada focuses on areas of prevention, which also includes the promotion of industry compliance. It also provides consumers with better information. There's a targeted oversight plan in place, monitoring in place, surveillance, but it would also give us the systems to rapidly respond. So if an industry were to provide an incident to us, we would be able to work with the industry to investigate that, or the consumer.

In my view, it's in the interest of the industry to ensure their product is safe, so it's very much a cooperative type arrangement. As well, to be able to get the information from the consumers is very important, so that once we do get the information we'll be able to go back to the industry and say we've received a complaint on this product--can we address that? There are mechanisms in place with this legislation to do this. We've also invested the resources of $70 million to ensure that we put the machinery in place to be able to develop the necessary network.

Thank you.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

You mentioned a couple of times, in your opening statement and in the first question, consumer expectations relating to when you're standing in front of.... I get to stand in front of Barbies, and I'm choosing Barbies, right? So it depends on what the e-mail was and how my daughters talk to me. We've had my colleague over here talk about a frying pan that's going to kill birds. Consumers want to be able to buy products they're confident about. I don't think most people stand in front of a display and wonder how much cadmium is in this children's jewellery, or if my frying pan is going kill a bird, which I still find interesting.

We know there are products out there and we know that something has happened, that cadmium or whatever is out there. We've heard that when a recall goes out, we're only getting about 10% to 15% of those products back--recovered, I think is the proper way of saying that. Have you considered including a mechanism to help increase those rates, and would you support looking at the inclusion of such a mechanism?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

There is no recall mechanism in the current legislation, and we need that. Once we have passed this legislation we will have a mandatory recall mechanism in place. We will also be able to follow up with industry or retailers to monitor whether those products have been recalled. Currently we have no authority to do any of that. We can warn people; that is the only authority we have.

This legislation before us will give us the authority to recall or take corrective measures to stop sales, or to relabel, as an example, for proper instructions on the use of a product. If there are further issues as a result of an unsafe product, we can go through the mandatory recall process. We don't have that right now.

The other thing we will have with this legislation is the ability to require the industry to produce evidence of how they have tested their product for safety and what not, and to show they've done the necessary testing to make sure it's safe. Shared information would be helpful to us in determining whether in fact it was properly used, whether it is safe and what not. As it is right now, we don't have that mechanism. This legislation would allow us to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Mr. Glover, would you like to make some comments?

[Paul Glover]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In addition, there are a number of other more technical elements that the bill would have. There would be a requirement for industry to understand their product and its supply chain, so that if we order a recall they could prove to us there has been effectiveness in the execution of that recall. They would know who they sold to, who the importer was, etc. So record-keeping for industry is another important mechanism to ensure we can monitor compliance with the recall.

Other important provisions of the bill include administrative monetary penalties, and an increase in some of the fines in the event we are seeing non-compliance.

There are other mechanisms in those rare instances when industry chooses not to cooperate and comply so we would have the necessary authority to act appropriately.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

One more minute, Mr. Thibeault.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

One of the scary things we've been hearing over and over is that Canada is becoming a dumping ground. It has been said a couple of times today. In your opinion, will this bill end that? Will we not be a dumping ground? I think that is important.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

I believe it would put us on a level playing field with our trading partners: the United States, the EU, and other countries. Right now we don't have the mechanisms even to monitor or do a mandatory recall. We don't have that, at all. It's very challenging for us to collect information to advise Canadians that there are unsafe products in the marketplace.

I believe this legislation would really assist in dealing with some of those challenges we face right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Minister Aglukkaq.

We'll now go to Ms. Davidson. You have ten minutes as well.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thanks very much, Madam Chair.

Thanks, Minister, for being with us again today. We certainly appreciate the time and effort you've taken to be here to explain this to us. Also, thanks to your officials who are back with us again today. It's always a pleasure.

We've certainly heard a fair amount of background on the bill this morning. That's good. Most of us at this table have been through this for quite a few years, and we look forward to it being passed.

Just this morning, I believe it was, I heard on the news about some strollers that are being recalled in the States because there's an issue; I think there were some deaths from this. And we're all aware of the cadmium issue, and the crib issue from some time ago.

I think we all look forward to this bill moving forward in a timely fashion. If we don't have young children, many of us do have grandchildren. So particularly for children's safety, it's of paramount importance to all of us.

Can you outline what some of the key elements of this proposed bill, the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act, will be?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you for the comments around the strollers we're dealing with, and the cadmium. It's almost like every week we are recalling some product from the market or advising Canadians not to buy. We don't have the recall power, but we are advising industry not to distribute.

Some of the key elements of this bill will be very good improvements to the current legislation we have. The 40-year-old legislation is so outdated. Among the key elements of this bill would be a section that deals with a general prohibition that prohibits the industry from supplying products that are unreasonably hazardous, so there's a prohibition clause where if it's hazardous then we have a mechanism to prohibit the industry from distributing the unsafe product.

The other element is that this legislation would give us recall authority in order to recall products from the market or take other corrective measures. For example, we can issue a stop-sale or order that a product be relabelled. Perhaps the instructions were not quite clear, so we can order relabelling of that product. And to be able to carry these out if the supplier fails to do so, then we have the mechanisms to follow up.

We also have mandatory reporting, which is very important, which requires not only the industry but also the consumer to report safety incidents or accidents and what not to us. Once we have this information we'll be able to better track what's out there and investigate.

It also requires the industry to be able to produce to us test results of products that they've produced, tested, and determined safe before distribution, so we'd be able to access that type of information to determine if a product is safe or not if an incident had been reported.

The industry will also have an obligation to maintain documents that outline where they have distributed this product so that if in fact we have to do mandatory reporting we'd be able to work with the industry to see where they sold this product and have a better idea as to the level of distribution of that unsafe product. They have to now demonstrate to us where that product was sent and sold for us to do proper monitoring.

These are big improvements to the 40-year-old legislation that will give us the authorities to respond quickly to protect the health and safety of Canadians.

[Paul Glover]

Madam Chair, if I may, I would complement the minister's response.

One of the things I would say that is fundamentally different between the legislation proposed before you and the current HPA is that the current Hazardous Products Act, while it's served us well, is reactive and the onus is on government to find, test, prove the product is unsafe, and then develop a regulation to control that. What we're seeing with other countries, and in Bill C-36, is a shift so the onus is on industry to make sure that the products they sell they know are safe. Then we can ask them for their test results rather than the government having to do its own testing. So it's a shift in onus and it moves from being reactive to proactive to provide for better safety for Canadians and their families.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

I think that's an extremely good difference. I think any time we can be proactive rather than reactive we are on the right track. I'm glad to hear that. I think that's very important.

I know that when we had the debate on the former Bill C-6 there were some who were concerned about the scope or the reach of the powers that this bill would give Health Canada. I just wondered if you could comment a bit about that and what you feel about the powers that Health Canada will have under this new Bill C-36.

I think one of the other issues when we talked about powers was the inspectors. Perhaps you could touch a bit on that as well. Do you have any concerns that inspectors might have too much power under this new bill?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

No, I don't have any concern that they have too much power. The inspection powers are very similar to what is in other legislation we already have in place. Examples of some of the legislation that has the same provisions for inspection powers are the Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Plant Protection Act. So the inspection powers and authority outlined in this legislation are no different from those in similar legislation that is already in place.

In my view, birds and plants have better protection than human individuals at this point in time, with 40-year-old legislation. In my view, this is an area where we need to have the inspection powers to ensure that there is compliance in carrying out the legislation once it is in place in Canada.

Did I miss anything?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Both you and Mr. Glover have referred to consultation with stakeholders and changes that will be coming forward with this new bill, as far as industry requirements are concerned. Could you tell me a bit about how you engaged the stakeholders and if there were concerns expressed about the new things that are going to be included in Bill C-36? Are there any concerns about the cost to industry or the cost of implementation?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

First of all, through Health Canada, we have invested $70 million to start the work of implementing legislation of this nature. We have the resources to work with the industry. My view is that this bill builds on years of consultation with stakeholders on how to improve consumer product safety. I understand that you'll be speaking to many of them later today, as well. You'll be able to hear first-hand directly from them. Ultimately, at the end of the day, it is about the safety of individuals and about protecting the health and safety of Canadians.

This legislation is, again, as Paul said, proactive. As it is right now, we act only when injury occurs or death occurs. This legislation would take proactive measures through incident reporting and so on and through testing so that before injury occurs, we'll be able to respond.

We are aware that valuable stakeholder input is critical to the success of this bill. The parties were consulted and continue to be consulted as we work on a policy and a guideline that will assist with the implementation should the bill be passed. As to the cost, as I mentioned before, we don't anticipate that there would be significant costs associated with implementing the bill. In our view, responsible industries have already been operating in a manner that is consistent with the proposed bill. I said before that it is in their interest to ensure that their products are safe. For the most part, we have industries that are cooperative and are interested in working with us to ensure that their reputations and their products are safe.

I would add that this bill enjoys support from a wide range of stakeholders. In my view, the consumer advocates and the industry associations are committed to protecting their customers, Canadians, and the environment.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I'm sorry, Ms. Davidson. I think our time is up now.

Minister, I just want to thank you so much for coming and for taking time out of your very busy schedule to present Bill C-36. It's one we've been waiting for and are anxious to get through Parliament to become law in our country. I thank you for that.

Committee members, we're going to suspend for five minutes, and then we will come back.

I also want to thank Mr. Glover and Ms. Mentzelopoulos. I can't say your name, but I thank you for coming today.

We will suspend for five minutes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I call the committee back to order, please. Let us begin.

We have our second round of witnesses. We're delighted to have with us Robert Simonds, president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs. Welcome, sir; we are glad to have you here.

We also have Michel Arnold, executive director of Option consommateurs, and Anu Bose, head of their Otawa office. It is so nice to see you again, Ms. Bose.

We also have Pamela Fuselli, executive director of Safe Kids Canada, and John Walter, executive director of the Standards Council of Canada. Welcome to you both.

We're going to start our presentations, and I'm going to ask each organization to give a three-minute presentation. I'm sorry, but that's the time that we have within the allotted time to be able to get questions and answers. Usually we have a little longer than that, but the clerk has told me that's what we have to do in order to get through our witnesses.

We will begin with Mr. Simonds.

[Robert Simonds, President, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm the fire chief in Saint John, New Brunswick. I am appearing before you today in my capacity as the president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, a national organization representing 1,000 fire chiefs located in every province and territory.

CAFC estimates there are almost 3,500 departments in Canada; of these, 91% are volunteer departments. Of the 108,000 total firefighting personnel in Canada, almost 79% are volunteers.

A significant percentage of responses of every fire department have important consumer product safety implications. Stove-top fires, electrical fires or electrocutions, accidental poisoning and strangulations, and the careless use of candles as well as matches and lighters are a few examples in this regard. Special mention, however, should be made of the increasing use of chemical compositions in residential furnishings and in clothing.

We support the CCPSA because it will better protect Canadians from unsafe consumer products. There are several provisions that we regard as particularly beneficial. They include the ability to recall dangerous products, as this will allow the government to respond rapidly when the need arises to address unsafe consumer products; the provisions for the mandatory reporting of incidents, as these reports will be a key source of information about consumer products that are defective or have caused serious incidents or near misses, including fire-related incidents; the ability of the minister to request that manufacturers or importers submit test results to demonstrate that their products are safe; and the prohibition against false or misleading labelling of consumer products, which gives consumers the inaccurate belief that the products they purchase and use are safe.

We have seen a number of examples of counterfeited certified marks for consumer products such as electrical cords and light bulbs. They were falsely labelled as being compliant with Canadian requirements. Bill C-36 would make this an offence.

We ask the standing committee to send this bill back to the House unamended so that it can move quickly to third reading. It was in April 2008 that Bill C-52 was initially introduced. Since then, more than two years of improved product safety protection has been lost, despite all-party support in the House for the bill, for which all of you are to be congratulated.

Consumer product safety problems fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable elements of Canadian society: the young, the disabled, and seniors. That all Canadians, particularly those most at risk, are not protected by the best possible law is difficult for the Canadian fire service to accept. We hope that all MPs and senators will agree that Bill C-36 must become law prior to the Christmas break.

Thank you for your attention to my presentation. I look forward to taking part in the question-and-answer portion of this session.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Mr. Simonds. The watch shows you're right on time. Thank you for your insightful presentation.

We now have Option consommateurs. Which of you will be presenting this morning?

It will be Michel. Okay, go ahead, please.