Health Committee on Nov. 27th, 2014

[Shanu Mohamedali]

As part of that process, I think regulation for this industry is obviously for the benefit of everyone. As you know, there's a lot of information out there and a lack of information as to the types of regulation that may occur. Obviously, we're on the side that says these products should only be used by people over the legal age.

But I think part of the bigger process is really taking apart the e-cigarette, understanding all the components that are involved, and ensuring that those components are safe to be brought in. What we know today is that it's mostly the lithium ion batteries that are used in electronic cigarettes.

Whether it's our laptop or our cellphone, there are processes that are in place to ensure those batteries are safe, and we should have the same processes to ensure that it's the same with electronic cigarettes: ensuring that they go through the UN 38.3 testing, making sure that the chargers that are available for electronic cigarette chargeable products follow the CSA or CUL certification, and making sure that the way that the product is constructed ensures that loose or frayed wires are all covered in electrical tape, all taped around the battery.

These are the intricate processes that we all need to ensure that these products are safe for use in the marketplace.

[Inderpreet Rai]

Over the years, I think we've found that in selling our product without nicotine in it, we've had consumers who have come back to us and said they've had some really good benefits from the product. As you know, public health has opened up its view on electronic cigarettes, with nicotine and not, in conversations with people such as Dr. Charl Els.

We did feel that there was a potential to do some good with this product with nicotine in it. Therefore, as a company, we have actually sent in a CTA to Health Canada to study our product and the pharmacokinetics of nicotine within the product. We are in the process of answering some of the questions that were sent back by Health Canada in regard to the study.

But once again, to date we still do not sell our product with nicotine in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Does that conclude your remarks? Do you have anything else you'd like to present?

[Shanu Mohamedali]

I think that concludes our remarks.

[Inderpreet Rai]

That gives a bit of a history. Whatever you need to ask us, we....

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

That's great. Thank you very much.

Next up, from the Canadian Convenience Stores Association, we have Mr. Alex Scholten.

Go ahead, sir.

[Alex Scholten, President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. We appreciate the opportunity to speak before you today.

My name is Alex Scholten. I serve as president of the Canadian Convenience Stores Association. Our association represents the over 25,000 convenience stores operating in Canada that employ 217,000 Canadians. Our stores serve over 10 million Canadians each and every day. Last year, the industry posted sales in excess of $55 billion.

We support customers based in urban and rural communities across the country. Our stores offer a wide array of products, including age-restricted items such as lotto tickets, tobacco, and, in some provinces, alcohol.

Today I'll be speaking about the sale of tobacco in our stores, our approach to the sale of e-cigarettes, and our recommendations on how we believe the sale of these cigarettes should be regulated by the federal government.

Convenience stores are the largest retailer of legal regulated tobacco products in Canada. The sale of tobacco in our stores is heavily regulated, and we take very seriously the responsibility of selling those products. To give you an idea of some of the requirements that our retailers have to comply with, I'll go through some of the things we do when we sell products.

First and foremost, tobacco products are hidden behind displays so that they are not visible to youth. Secondly, in order to prevent youth from being exposed to tobacco advertising or promotion, the marketing of legal tobacco products is strictly prohibited in Canada and, as such, there are no signs or images that promote tobacco inside or outside of our stores. When legal tobacco products are purchased, the packaging of these products is almost fully covered by warning labels that detail the consequences of smoking. Retailers are also required to check the age of consumers before selling any tobacco products, to ensure that youth do not acquire such products.

The Canadian Convenience Store Association actively discourages the sale of any tobacco product to minors, and this message is shared by our members. We offer retailer training on how to properly conduct age-testing when selling tobacco products, and we have our members sign a code of conduct whereby they commit to checking ID when selling tobacco products, and they agree not to sell tobacco to youth. We consider ourselves an active partner in government tobacco control strategies and believe our efforts in enforcing strict age checks have been instrumental in reducing youth consumption rates to all-time lows.

For several years, convenience stores have been selling electronic cigarettes that do not contain nicotine. It is a rapidly growing category. In the United States, sales of these products have doubled in each of the past three years. In Canada, there has been a sharp increase but not to the same degree as the United States, as there has been regulatory confusion on how the products are handled and sold.

In accordance with Health Canada rules and regulations, our stores have not been selling electronic cigarettes containing nicotine, nor have we promoted any potential health benefits associated with those products. In August of this year, our association proactively created a suggested retailer best-practice recommendation document specifically for the handling and sale of electronic cigarettes. That document is attached to our submission for committee members today.

The purpose of the document was to answer retailer questions on this new product category and also to promote what our association believes to be responsible retailing practices, just as it has done with the handling and sale of tobacco products. Our association's recommendations to this committee are primarily derived from the best practice document that is included in your package.

I'll go through some of those details now.

First and foremost, we recommended to convenience store owners across the country that electronic cigarette products should only be sold to adults. This approach was also adopted by the Ontario government this week when they released proposed legislation regarding the sale of e-cigarettes. We have already sought to implement these age restrictions in our stores and actively encourage all our retailers to follow what is outlined in our best practice document.

To be clear, the Canadian Convenience Store Association fully supports a ban on the sale of electronic cigarettes to youth. We already comply with bans on tobacco sales to youth, so convenience store staff are well trained to comply with those types of restrictions.

ln order for electronic cigarettes to fulfill their true potential as a viable or healthier option to cigarettes, we believe they have to be widely available where smokers buy their cigarettes. We believe that allowing the sale of electronic cigarettes in our stores presents this type of opportunity.

Not only do our stores provide a controlled and regulated environment for the sale of these products, but we have also heard consistently from our customers that e-cigarettes are more effective options than nicotine replacement therapies such as patches, gum, lozenges, and inhalers, because they replicate the behavioural aspects of smoking cigarettes and, as we've been told, they are less expensive options than some of those other products.

The reality is that Canadian consumers are already accessing e-cigarettes with nicotine in large numbers, not in our regulated and monitored stores, but through the many vape shops that are operating across the country and through online sales that are technically operating outside the law, although the law is not being actively enforced. This continues to put our law-abiding retailers who comply with Health Canada regulations at a disadvantage.

Our recommendation to government is to clarify the retail framework for e-cigarettes to create a level playing field for all retailers and to do so in a way that recognizes consumers want access to these products. There is nothing to be gained by imposing severe restrictions so that a black market for e-cigarettes is then created to go along with the already thriving black market in tobacco products.

While we agree with the Ontario government in limiting the sale of e-cigarette products to youth, we do not agree that these products should be treated in the same way as regular cigarettes. They are not tobacco products, and therefore we believe they should not be subject to display bans. Given the reduced harm potential for these products, it would be counterintuitive to hide these products from smokers looking to switch to these products.

As we understand it, there is a growing acceptance among public health professionals of the potential of nicotine-containing products to aid smoking reduction and cessation. As such, it would be more beneficial to permit broad freedoms for marketing to adult smokers and users of other nicotine products. If e-cigarettes are proven to be a less harmful alternative, then it is in the public interest for smokers to have easier access to them than regular cigarettes, which would be better accomplished by not restricting their display and advertising.

Our recommendation in that regard is that e-cigarettes should not be subject to retail display bans. This is a new category and we need to be able to educate adult consumers on the varieties and products available.

Finally, our stores need the government to quickly approve all e-cigarette products, including products with nicotine that are available in the United States, so that we can begin to sell them legally in a controlled environment. Right now, customers are acquiring e-cigarette products with nicotine from the Internet and from vape shops, and it's really the Wild West right now.

There are regulations, but they're not being enforced. I can tell you stories of smokers who have switched to e-cigarettes containing nicotine and don't come to our stores anymore. They tell us the reason is that we don't offer those products. As our stores look to find ways to wean customers off regular tobacco products, we need e-cigarettes approved so that we can begin to offer alternative products in our stores in a controlled and regulated environment.

Therefore, our recommendation is that the federal government move quickly to approve these products, including those containing nicotine, for sale in Canada so they can be regulated and controlled through already existing channels.

Thank you very much. I welcome any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you very much.

Next up we have 180 Smoke and Mr. Boris Giller.

Go ahead, sir.

[Boris Giller, Co-Founder, 180 Smoke]

Thank you.

I'd like to thank the Tobacco Harm Reduction Association for all their support. I'd also like to thank this committee for allowing me this platform. Unlike the various provincial and municipal regulations that came out of closed discussions, this is a very welcome initiative.

I'm going to be presenting on behalf of 180 Smoke from a vendor's perspective and as an ex-smoker and ex-vaper myself.

First, I'd like to declare that I am a co-founder of 180 Smoke. I do have an interest, along with Dr. Gopal Bhatnagar, who presented here more than a week ago. We are a socially conscious crowdsourced company. We do not engage in any lifestyle advertising of any sort. Part of this presentation is based on my experience in interacting with thousands of vapers and ex-smokers.

I'm an ex-smoker and ex-vaper myself. I failed miserably four or five times with patches, gums, and conventional methods. My mother is an ex-smoker and current vaper and my father passed away from a heart attack due to smoking, so this is a very personal issue for me, beyond the financial incentive.

I would also like to ask all of you to recognize opposing interests and financial incentives when reading statements made by the Canadian Cancer Society and other organizations in the media. They are funded by pharma corporations that are actively advertising. For example, the Canadian Cancer Society issues a statement and, at the same time, they're being sponsored publicly by Johnson & Johnson, and Johnson & Johnson pays for advertising against vaping. It's similar to the Lung Association, which is sponsored by Pfizer. It is also no longer a secret that the drug industry is lobbying against e-cigarettes, as shown in the Bloomberg article. I would ask you to treat those statements with the same filter of skepticism as you would treat mine.

First, as a basis, the full extent of how safe e-cigarettes are is yet to be determined; however, I doubt that I can find anybody who would argue that they're more dangerous than tobacco cigarettes. With that in mind, I would ask you to view them as a transitional tool and a harm reduction tool, not necessarily as a smoking cessation tool.

I would also ask you not to neglect the non-quitters. Right now, we're looking at a paradigm of people who are smoking and people who are quitting, so it's a quit-or-die paradigm. We ask you to take a look at the people who are not interested in quitting, or who are not able to quit in their mind, and to empower those people.

The rest of the presentation is based on the assumption that it is in the best interests of the government not to discourage these smokers who are not quitting from switching to this safer alternative. With this assumption, we ask you to make switching more appealing by supporting the vaping value proposition, compared to cigarettes, by providing a regulatory advantage to vaping compared to cigarettes.

As somebody who markets these products, I'm going to tell you about the reasons and the motives of smokers who choose to switch.

Savings is a big one. Smokers save more than $3,000 a year by switching to e-cigarettes. As you know, smoking affects the lowest socio-demographic group the most, so the poor are most affected. This would be a great saving. They would have more money for food and for everything else.

We would recommend that e-cigarettes are not taxed and are instead incentivized, the way the insurance companies currently incentivize switching to e-cigarettes by lowering life insurance premiums.

Smokers switch for harm reduction. We're currently not allowed to advertise these harm reduction benefits due to our fear of making health claims, so we'd ask that we be allowed to at least state the harm reduction claims—not smoking cessation claims, but harm reduction claims.

The biggest reason that many vapers who are not interested in quitting are switching is the convenience, the fact that they can vape indoors. It's one of the top reasons why people do it. We ask that you don't ban indoor vaping as long as there's no proof of second-hand vaping harm. Research shows that more particles and fumes are released from the candles on your tables, fireplaces, and carpets.

We also ask you to consider existing air quality research, and there's a lot of it. It shows that e-cigarette second-hand vape is well below the occupational hazard threshold in air quality, so we would ask you to allow indoor vaping at the establishment's discretion and not send ex-smokers outside to breathe second-hand smoke. Those are people who are trying to quit. Putting them together with the smokers is counterproductive.

The biggest taboo is that people say the flavours are targeting children. I would like to argue that this is a myth, and it is ageist. One hundred per cent of our customers are over the age of 19. We've implemented the 19-plus policy from day one, and the vast majority of them prefer non-tobacco flavours. They cite that they try to disassociate the nicotine hit from the tobacco flavour. My mother has a personal story. After two weeks of vaping non-stop, she tried a cigarette, and it just tasted bitter to her. She disassociated that flavour with that sense of satisfaction.

Going forward, we recommend allowing non-tobacco flavours.

Another thing I would like to address is the “gateway to smoking” myth. Many people are concerned about the never-smokers, the people who have never tried smoking: what if they get addicted to this and move on to smoking? Well, the data shows the exact opposite. A very large U.K. study posted by the Office for National Statistics says that e-cigarettes were used almost exclusively by smokers and ex-smokers. Almost none of them had never smoked. So the data doesn't support this argument. We ask that you do not ban advertising and promotion, but rather restrict it to smokers and non-lifestyle advertising.

With respect to the suggestion of regulating it as a medicine and prescription, this would be detrimental to the innovation and the variety of products available. Seven years ago, all that was available were those cigalites. They would run out very quickly and produce very little vapour. Also, as soon as the battery ran out, a smoker would go and grab a pack of cigarettes. That's what happened with my dad and my mother.

In the last seven years this has become a totally different product. The battery capacities are better. The quality is better. The tanks are better and they last longer. The uptake and availability are much better, and people get a product that's way more suited to them, which increases the uptake rate.

Based on our experience as an omni-channel brand, we recommend the following regulation. Other than the obvious labelling and the childproof caps, we ask you to give vaping an incremental advantage over cigarettes and help us compete against big tobacco.

We ask you to allow them to be sold in specialized vape shops, where a person can get a consultation on how to use the product and get proper instruction, and in 19-plus areas, to allow them to be displayed.

We ask you to set standards for pharmaceutical-grade ingredients and manufacturing practices.

Also, we ask that you set online age verification requirements so we can verify their age online. I'd like you to know that Canada Post and other couriers do allow for 19-plus verification upon delivery.

I would like to also give some perspective and a reality check. While we're dealing with these hypotheticals—what about the children and will they get addicted?—smokers are actually dying. Since the Health Canada advisory of 2009 was issued, 248,000 Canadians have died from smoking. In the same time, as an industry we were able to convert more than 300,000 smokers to vapers. We still have 4.6 million to go. That's more than 93%. I think that's a huge opportunity, and we have to move on this as fast as possible.

I also urge you to ignore the statistics and hypotheticals for a while and actually listen to vapers and testimonials. There's an overwhelming amount of testimonies indicating that it is a life-saving technology. I have hundreds and hundreds of those, and I would be able provide you with more if requested to. Many people cite that their health is better, that their sense of smell is back, that they can run now, and that their lung capacity is better. You cannot simply ignore these.

I also would like to urge you to think about the unintended consequences of a ban. I know that we're also considering advertising restrictions, but that would kill competition. It would reduce the appeal, compared to cigarettes. It would harm innovation and limit the recruitment of smokers....

If you ban flavours, again it would reduce appeal, and it would drive the market underground, because people simply will not accept the tobacco flavours. They will start making their own in their garages, and this is where the real danger happens.

If you ban indoor vaping, again, it would promote relapse, and you would expose ex-smokers who are trying to quit to second-hand tobacco vapour.

Also, imposing pharmaceutical-style regulation would definitely harm innovation and limit availability and uptake. Again, I urge—well, beg—you to please view the Clive Bates presentation, as it's currently the most comprehensive presentation so far. It's been submitted to the committee in the past, but we'll just ask again if you could review his presentation as well.

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you very much.

We're going to have to cut down the length of time for the rounds, but we can try to get in five-minute rounds.

Mr. Morin, you're up first, sir. Go ahead.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

My question is for Mr. Giller.

Do you think the government should play a slightly more dynamic role and deal with this as a public health issue, and weigh it as being a solution to a real problem like smoking?

I admire the motivation of all the witnesses we have heard from. They have shown motivation and a sense of purpose.

You have a vision in mind for solving a problem that is close to your heart.

Would it not be the government's role to determine the direction of a public health policy?

[Boris Giller]

Thank you so much for the question.

Yes, I do. I think it is a public health issue, and I think it is an urgent public health issue. The current policies have failed. The smoking rates have been remaining around the 20% rate in the past. A new technology presents an opportunity to convert and to have a much larger impact much, much faster.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

My other question is for Mr. Scholten.

The question is similar.

Isn't it strange that it is the merchants and retailers who are educating and monitoring themselves to ensure the public's safety? Shouldn't this have been done a long time ago?

[Alex Scholten]

If I understand your question, retailers are already acting in that manner through their controlled sale of tobacco products, so we would be acting in the same way through the sale of electronic cigarettes.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I appreciate the effort that your organization is making, but shouldn't this have already been done by the governments, who put in place a regulation? Shouldn't they have decided to do it as soon as possible to reassure consumers?

[Alex Scholten]

Absolutely. These products have been around for several years. I think that as we're seeing or hearing today, and through the testimony given to the committee previously, there are public health benefits that can be achieved, so absolutely I think something should be done. This should be a health issue that is addressed very quickly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Adams, you're up next.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thanks very much.

If I might put my first question to the doctor, what do you think, in your estimation, should be the appropriate health and regulatory standards for e-cigarettes and e-liquid? What percentage of nicotine should be permitted?

[Inderpreet Rai]

When it comes to e-liquid manufacturing, I think there should be some standardization in the process, as well as in where the chemicals are coming from that are being placed into the liquid solution, so there are a few answers to that question.

As for the amount of nicotine that should be in the product, that would depend on the absorption rate of the nicotine itself. If you look at any NHP nicotine products, you're looking at less than 4 milligrams absorption. You're looking for something like that within the electronic cigarettes.

Typically, from the studies that have been done in the United States with the different levels of 15 milligrams, 10 milligrams, 8 milligrams, and 6 milligrams, you're still not achieving that level within electronic cigarettes. The major reason for this is that the majority of the absorption that takes place is actually taking place orally through the mouth, rather than through the lungs, which is what most studies are starting to show. So there are a couple of answers to that.

Again, nicotine absorption would depend as well on the element and the amount of heat produced, and also the acid-based composition of the product, so each solution can be a little bit different.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

We also heard from a physician from the Montreal Chest Institute who felt that e-cigarettes with nicotine ought to be sold only at specialized shops. He felt that consumers really couldn't properly add the correct level of e-liquid to a vaping device, and that if we are truly looking at harm reduction, this ought to be sold only at specialized shops. Do you agree or disagree with that?

Then I'd like to put the same question to the Convenience Stores Association.

[Inderpreet Rai]

I would disagree with that. I think that if you're really looking at it from a public health standpoint and you want consumers of traditional tobacco products to have access to electronic cigarettes, they need to have as much access as they have to tobacco. My feeling is that if a smoker can walk a block to get their pack of cigarettes, they should be able to have access to electronic cigarettes within that same distance.

As far as education goes, there are two different types of products. You have your disposable electronic cigarettes, which are packaged with everything—you're not placing your vapour or your solution within the tank system—and then you have your tank system as well. Your traditional disposables come pre-packaged; there's no solution being placed in them. Right now, those without nicotine are sold by retailers across the country. I would say that this should continue, because I believe this creates access, and that limits the amount of tobacco purchases.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you. If I might, I'll put the same question to the Convenience Stores Association.

[Alex Scholten]

I fully agree with the previous answer. Accessibility should be promoted as much as possible. I think that having the products available wherever cigarettes now are sold would be very important.

As for having specialized staff or knowledgeable staff, we can certainly train our staff to do those kinds of things. We train them on selling other products.

In addition to that, the products can be sold with instructions and recommendations on how they should be used.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Let me put another question to the Convenience Stores Association.

Currently, there are e-cigarettes without nicotine readily available. We've heard some testimony that is quite concerning. It's that if e-cigarettes were to be permitted for sale and were regulated and only available to adult consumers, we've heard from some folks who have come forward to say that they'd like to see the e-cigarettes without any nicotine continue to be made readily available and that there should be no restriction on that.

I think many of us, though, share a concern that this would be very confusing, and that in fact, really, those e-cigarettes, even without nicotine, ought to be regulated so that it's very clear when you see a child smoking one of those, whether it has nicotine in it or not, that the child should not have that access. Would you agree with that?

[Alex Scholten]

Absolutely.