Health Committee on Jan. 27th, 2015

[Richard Aucoin]

Well, as I think I indicated in my opening remarks, there are a lot of good provisions—some really good, solid provisions—and obligations in the Pest Control Products Act for us to be transparent and open with Canadians. Not only do we have to consult with Canadians on the data and the science we've used to make our regulatory decisions for new chemicals, but also for older chemicals, when we're looking at them, what we're finding, and how that science influences our decisions.

We also have been really open with, for example, what we are currently looking at in PMRA. What pesticides are being proposed for use in Canada? We have a public registry where you can find that information and ask what PMRA is doing right now and what they are looking at. A lot of information is on there now in terms of us having a compliance and enforcement program. What are we finding? Are there violations of the Pest Control Products Act? What are we doing about those?

As I forgot to mention right at the outset, I think this committee has received a copy of our annual report. That alone is a full disclosure of all our activities through the year, including, for example, our incident reporting program, what we are seeing every year in terms of the nature of the pesticide incidents that are being reported to us. We're very transparent and open in terms of what they were and what some of the actions are that we're taking as a result of those incidents.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

That's very interesting. Thank you for explaining that.

I want to ask you a question about brown bats. I think a brown bat can eat a kilogram of mosquitoes in a day or something like that. Mosquitoes are a problem in a lot of communities. The bats are dying off in droves because of a white fungus they get on their noses.

Are there any pesticides that help deal with mosquitoes when we're facing this fact that brown bats are dying off? Also, are there any potential treatments to help stop this fungus so the bat population doesn't disappear?

[Richard Aucoin]

There are certainly pest control products available for mosquito control. There are only a certain number of situations in which they're used extensively anymore. I think there's been a lot of public concern with the widespread use of those products. Some of you folks are probably aware that some areas such as Winnipeg and some other cities have had to resort to using certain products because frankly you can't go outside your house some days in some parts of this country if some kind of control measures are not used.

There are a number of alternative products on the marketplace for controlling mosquito larvae, for example, in ponds. As you can appreciate, mosquito larvae develop in standing water. There are quite safe chemicals now that can be used for that. Sometimes they're expensive but there are chemicals available for that. As far as the bats and the fungus go, I think you'd have to talk to some sort of more veterinary professionals who could likely help you out on that.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Okay. I just wondered if you had any insight into it, because it struck me as a serious problem.

What will your key challenges be in the coming two years?

[Richard Aucoin]

There is certainly communication. I have to say, to be very frank and candid, that at worst, communications with the Canadian public are a challenge. We're a scientific organization. The data and information we use to make our pesticide decisions are very complicated. They really are. I think one of my biggest challenges over the next couple of years is going to be to try to enhance communications with the public.

As I explained earlier, it's one thing to be transparent and open with the public. You also have to pay attention to whether you are reaching them. Are you truly communicating with Canadians? For us to put out a lot of scientific information is one thing, but we want to make sure Canadians actually understand better the basis for our decision-making. That's both a challenge and a priority for the next year or two.

A lot of what we do does not change from year to year. It's very solid health and environmental protection. We take very prescribed approaches to our work in terms of the data and information we need to do it. It's not going to change radically over the next couple of years. I would say communication is very important and it's very consistent with where our department is going.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

So if there's no danger, people lack interest, and then if they read an article in a magazine or there's a TV special on a certain risk, everybody wants to know all at once about the risk, right?

[Richard Aucoin]

That's correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you.

Mr. Kellway.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Aucoin, in your description of the act it seems to me you stressed a couple of things. One is that it's a kind of scientific rigour and that it's very much science- and data-driven. The other aspect is the practice of international cooperation and exchange with the science.

I want to look at the issue of neonics and test how science is used under the act. It seems to me that although the science is pretty well known—and I'm sure there's more developing all the time—I'm sure everybody knows what the state of play is in the science with these international efforts, and yet different jurisdictions have responded to that science with different actions. We see the European Union doing a two-year ban and I think South Korea is following a two-year ban. Australia has its own response. The U.S. has a federal strategy on pollinators and neonics, as I understand it. Even within Canada, Ontario is removing neonics from 80% of corn and soy crops. If it's all about the science and the data and the international exchange, how is it that all these jurisdictions have responded to this issue in a way that is different from the way the federal government here in Canada has responded?

[Richard Aucoin]

Certainly in Canada and in the United States we're very much aligned on the science, and as I think I indicated, for the neonics we'll be working very closely with the U.S. EPA and with California over the next year or two to completely re-evaluate and reassess all that science behind the neonics. I can't really speak very much for Europe, but I think in Europe there were some incidents as well, and Europe chose a path to deal with those incidents through simple suspension of those products. We didn't take that path and we're not proposing that path in Canada until we've fully assessed all the science.

In southern Ontario—it's very specific to southern Ontario—and a few places in Quebec, the incidents appear to be directly related to the pre-treated seeds for soybeans and corn. We've been working to mitigate those risks and mitigate those issues and we had some success certainly last spring. That's been our approach federally.

Ontario has put out a proposal to reduce the use of treated seeds to a very high degree. It is a proposal. It's certainly not based on the scientific assessment, which is not complete.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

So if the science is the science is the science, what is it about the act then that explains the different responses? There's clearly discretion somewhere in that act, so it's not entirely scientifically based. Someone has to make an assessment. Is it this notion of unacceptable risk that's in the act?

[Richard Aucoin]

The act, as you may be aware, lays out that we must do a scientific risk assessment, but it does not specify that it has to be done according to a very specific methodology. It has very specific provisions in there such that, for example, we must add safety margins for vulnerable populations. We must take into account certain things, but as for the actual scientific risk assessment that occurs, there's a certain amount of flexibility in there. That's why countries like Canada and the United States and most OECD countries are trying to align the work we do together at OECD.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Given that in different jurisdictions there are different responses to the science, are you comfortable with that flexibility in making decisions about what to do or about how to respond to the risk that certain pesticides obviously pose?

[Richard Aucoin]

Our approach has been to work with as many regulators and as many scientific organizations as possible so that we can get the best information and the best collective understanding of that science.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lunney, go ahead very briefly.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

I wanted to ask about viral pesticides. Do those fall under your purview as well? There was an attempt a few years ago to use baculovirus, a virus found in insect gut and also found in human liver and kidney cells. There was some concern because they were going to load it with a scorpion venom gene. It wasn't approved, thank goodness. Are there other examples of viruses being used as pesticides that have been approved in Canada?

[Richard Aucoin]

There are a number of viruses and biological organisms that are approved for use as pesticides in Canada. They are subjected to a very specific kind of risk assessment.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Can you give us an example of a virus being used?

[Richard Aucoin]

I don't have a name of a specific product for you.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

I know modified bacteria are used as pesticides, but I was wondering about viruses in particular.

[Richard Aucoin]

I could ask my colleague Connie Moase in case she happens to have that answer on the tip of her tongue.

[Connie Moase, Director, Health Evaluation Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health]

It would probably be better if we got back to you with specific products.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

I'd appreciate it. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Is that it, Mr. Lunney?

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Yes, thank you. That will suffice.