Evidence of meeting #47 for Health in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was midwifery.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Okay.
How does our act compare to other jurisdictions, in the U.S., say, or in Europe? Would you say that we're tougher on pest control or are we on par with others? Where are we at?
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
My assessment of my counterparts in other countries is that our legislation is very much in line with that of major OECD countries, including the United States, the U.K., and Australia.
January 27th, 2015 / 4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Thank you very much.
As we begin the statutory review, it's important that we have a detailed understanding of your work. When it comes to regulating substances like pesticides, many Canadians have concerns. The question sometimes arises about whose interests are being served when new pesticides are registered. How does your agency make decisions about pesticides? What gets approved? How are they allowed to be used? At what point would something be removed from the market?
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
Mr. Chair, as I indicated in my opening remarks, the process that's supported by this legislation is a very rigorous scientific risk assessment, both for human health and for the environment. We take a completely science-based approach to our decision-making. It's based on a foundation of data and information requirements that spans literally 200 studies or more that must come forward in support of an application to register a new pest control product.
We do an extensive risk assessment that is very similar to the approach used by major OECD countries around the world. Major players, including Canada, work very closely together through fora such as the OECD to make sure that we're aligned in the data and information requirements and the science we must have in order to approve a new pest control product.
At the end of a very detailed, long, scientific assessment, we ensure that we don't have any unacceptable risks, that we know exactly how these products are going to be used in the real world, and that there are no unacceptable risks both on the human health side and on the environment side. Every pest control product has a very prescriptive label on how it absolutely must be used; it's a legal document. We have a very robust compliance and enforcement program as well in Canada, which ensures that any pest control products used are used within that framework.
I think Canadians can be confident that Canada, like major countries—like the United States EPA, which is kind of our counterpart—takes a very close and detailed look at a pest control product pre-market, before it gets into the marketplace, to make sure that it meets our standards of safety before it is allowed into the environment.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Are there any examples that you could point to where you have taken action to remove products from the marketplace?
4:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
Yes. As part of the framework we operate under, the legislation requires us to do re-evaluations of older pesticides on a cyclical basis. We have been looking at a body of older chemicals, older pesticides that have been registered long before this legislation was in place. As we went through those products, we ensured that they were up to modern scientific standards.
Originally, I think there was a group of about nearly 400 older chemicals that we went through. As we went through it, about 25% of those chemicals did not meet our modern scientific standards and were either withdrawn by the manufacturers or, for a percentage of them, some of the uses were dropped off those chemicals because they no longer met our safety standards, so the way they were used was modified or the labels were changed.
Certainly, from an older chemicals perspective, we go back and make sure they meet our modern standards. We take action to make sure that they don't stay on the market if they don't meet them.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
I sat on the corporate board of an electricity corporation. We had many substations for our transformers across two municipalities. I guess back in the 1950s it seemed to be a reasonable practice to use arsenic as weed control, so you'd go around and dig up the arsenic from the soil that remained there 40 years later. Practices certainly do evolve. Our understanding and our best scientific practices obviously do evolve.
I guess Canadians just want to be assured that we're monitoring things continuously, that we have the very best available science.
I know that my colleague from the NDP asked how we are positioned in comparison with some of the leading international partners. Could you give me a sense of what the top nations would be? Is Canada among the top nations in reviewing pesticides and ensuring consumer safety?
4:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
I guess the short answer would be yes. Canada is one of the top countries.
We participate, for example, in an OECD working group. We are active in other international fora, including Codex, and the WHO. In fact, Canada chairs an OECD working group on pesticides that looks very carefully at all the data information requirements being requested by OECD countries to ensure the safety of products.
We're not only contributing; we're there at the table. We're very much playing a leadership role in trying to coordinate some of the international reviews of the science for pesticides to be sure we're all on the same page and we're all benefiting from each other's oversight on pesticides.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Sure. Are there any emerging trends you'd like to make us aware of?
4:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
As the new science evolves, we have to spend some time keeping up with that new science, making sure we are abreast of new developments, whether we're talking about, for example, the introduction of new technologies or new biological pesticides. Nanotechnology, as you've probably heard in other discussions, is one of the technologies that are starting to make inroads. We have no doubt it's a technology that will be used in the pest control product field—not yet, but probably down the road—so we have to keep an eye on that.
We're very active in some of the 21st-century toxicology discussions with other countries, looking at non-animal testing and whether we can expand our use of non-animal testing in a bigger way, yet still provide the safety we need.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Finally, Canadians are very concerned about neonics and their impact, in particular, on bee populations. Can you update us on your best advice and guidance when it comes to neonics?
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
In the context of neonics, first of all, globally there is a concern for pollinators and the troubles that pollinators like bees are having in terms of population declines globally. There is a concern about that. That concern is based on potentially a lot of factors, from climate change to diseases, pests of bees themselves, and possibly pesticides. Canada like all OECD countries, including at the OECD where we chair a working group, is having discussions about whether or not we can tease apart what is happening to the pollinator populations. If pesticides are a part of that, what can we do about that?
Within Canada itself we have had some bee mortality incidents with neonics, but they've been very much restricted to really high, intense corn and soybean growing regions of southern Ontario and a few in Quebec. We believe those incidents are probably the result of some of the agricultural practice that has resulted in dust going off those corn and soybean planting areas from seeds that were treated with the neonics possibly harming the bees.
We're working with stakeholders to try to mitigate that link. In the last couple of years we've worked very closely with agricultural stakeholders—the growers, the manufacturers, the beekeepers, the provinces—to come up with ways to mitigate those risks to bees. So far we've had some success. Last spring, for example, we saw about a 70% reduction in the bee mortality rate we had seen in the previous spring. We've had some success. We still have a lot of work to do to make sure we're protecting bees.
Together with the United States EPA, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and our international counterparts, we have been doing an extensive scientific reassessment and re-evaluation of these neonic pesticides right across their use spectrum to make sure they can continue to be used safely.
As I say, the only direct link at the moment is with corn and soybeans in southern Ontario.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Is there any jurisdiction that you're aware of that has—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Lise St-Denis Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Aucoin, in 2013, you carried out an online consultation regarding the Pest Control Products Act. What was the general outcome of that consultation?
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
As my colleague had indicated, the consultation on the act itself did not invoke any really strong reactions from any of the different stakeholders. I think for the most part, our stakeholders thought the act was relatively modern. I think they understood that some key provisions were in there. In terms of protecting environment and health, those were very solid. In terms of the openness and transparency, for example, before we make any big regulatory decision we do have to consult with the public on what's the basis for that decision, what was the science that we received so that we're proposing to approve this pest control product.
I think, writ large, the answer is that most stakeholders are satisfied with the administration of the act as it stands today, and we're not proposing any significant changes to it. Certainly when we looked at our analysis there are a few administrative places where you could say, “well, you know, maybe it would be better if this was clearer, or if that was clearer”, but we also arrived at a conclusion that some of the things people were asking for we could deal with through policy changes rather than legislative changes.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Lise St-Denis Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Are people aware of public health? Do you play a role in raising people's awareness when it comes to pesticides? Are people in favour of them, are they against them and do they react to this?
They reacted to the bees, but let's talk about other things.
5 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
From a more general perspective, not specifically the consultation on the act itself, I guess, yes, we deal in an area where there are quite a bit of opposing views on whether pesticides are safe or not. We do have a job to do in terms of communicating to the public the nature of the regulatory role we have, the extent of the science that we take in order to make our decisions, and the process that we use to ensure that when those pest control products are out there, there are no unacceptable risks to both people and the environment. It is absolutely clear that there are opposing views. There are very different viewpoints from different stakeholders. We endeavour to make sure that we can communicate to the public as much as we can, what the job is that we have, how we do it, and that it's based on the best science available both here in Canada and globally.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Lise St-Denis Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
How do you react to this opposition? Does it change things? Do you adopt different methods? How important is the public's concerns to you? Does that change anything?
You mentioned that a lot of people are against this and disagree with it. Does it change anything in your behaviour or in your practice?
5 p.m.
Executive Director, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health
All our consultations are with the public. We get a lot of responses back from industry of course, from users, retailers, lots of different sectors, but we very much listen to the public. We have to base our decisions on the best science that we have, but we do very much understand that the public has a view, and often the public has provided some very good information and direction for us. I guess what I'm trying to say is we base our decisions on science, but we still hear people. We do understand where their worries and concerns are. Sometimes that helps direct some of our communications and public outreach with folks, to make sure they do understand. If people are concerned about children, and perhaps vulnerable populations, perhaps sometimes we can explain better what exactly we do in PMRA to consider that. If children are going to be exposed to a pest control product, how did we take that into consideration in our decision?
