Health Committee on Nov. 25th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Ms. Fry.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Sorry. I'm still not getting the answer I want.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

No, that's fine. Thank you.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

“Looking at it” is not a good answer. I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you.

We'll try to keep our time here now.

As per the routine motions—actually, we’re through all the rounds and now we're back up to the top of the order again. We're back to a seven-minute round.

Ms. Morin will lead off, and then Mr. Marston will split the time.

Go ahead, please.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have one quick question, and I will share the rest of my time with my colleague.

Mr. Mayers, you told us about the three P triangle in public health: promotion, prevention and protection. Promotion seems to be very important. As the minister said earlier, a great deal is done to promote healthy food, nutritional value and so forth. Prevention and protection require regulations. How would you balance these three aspects? As fas as I know, there is no balance. One seems far more important for the department than another.

We know that European standards are considerably higher than ours. Why can't Canada have the same standards as Europe when it comes to healthy food?

[Paul Mayers]

I might disagree that the European standards for food are significantly different than they are in Canada. Certainly among all countries, one finds modest differences. But the reality is that our European colleagues work very closely with us in the area of food standards under the United Nations Committee Codex Alimentarius, the international standard-setting body for foods. Canada, like the European Union, often bases its standards on Codex Alimentarius standards. Our European colleagues have a very rich trading relationship with us here in Canada, and while there are certainly some modest differences across many areas of the food supply, we are recognized by the European Union as equivalent. The focus is on not identical but equivalent outcomes, and that's critical to our success.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I do not quite agree with what you said about standards.

Since we do not have much time and I would like to leave some time for my colleague, I would like you to tell me about the relationship between promotion, prevention and protection. After which my colleague can have the rest of my time.

[Paul Mayers]

The question you pose on promotion, prevention, and protection is not a question solely for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, because all the agencies represented here have and play an active role in that regard.

As Canada's largest regulator, we at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency are particularly focused on the prevention and protection elements of the framework. When you posed the question about balance, the balance is achieved across all three partners, as opposed to only one partner.

At CFIA, we are more heavily focused on the regulatory elements, regulatory requirements, and enforcing those requirements, while others in the portfolio use promotion, so it is the balance achieved across all three that ultimately reflects the full suite of activities under the framework.

In our context, the Safe Food for Canadians Act and its regulations form our core.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll pose my first question to Mr. Da Pont.

There's been a lot of commentary lately that some departments have not spent their full budget from 2012–13.

Has this department spent its full budget in that budget year?

[George Da Pont]

No, we had a bit larger than usual carry-forward. Every department doesn't spend its full budget every year. Last year Health Canada had a larger carry-forward than normal, and that was due largely to some change trends in the first nations and Inuit health program, where spending didn't develop as we had projected.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Health Canada right now is requesting almost $3.2 million in additional funds to prevent, detect, and respond to food-borne illnesses. It shares that role with CFIA and others. What I'm interested in is, what activities are associated with prevention, detection, and the response to these illnesses? What will those dollars buy?

[George Da Pont]

It complements the response that was given by CFIA to the earlier question. The Health Canada role is to set standards and policies, and then CFIA implements those standards and policies. The specific funding and the enhancements for Health Canada are to work on reviewing standards. It's to increase our capacity to do health hazard assessments. When you have a potential food recall, it's Health Canada that assesses the risk, and then CFIA takes appropriate action. Finally, some of the money is also spent on the scientific side to develop new tests and models that would help us to detect some of these pathogens faster than would otherwise be the case.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Is any part of that added cost related to the fact that CFIA is now in the health portfolio?

[George Da Pont]

No, there's been no change in the responsibilities between Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, and CFIA, so it was not generated by that. In fact, those are responsibilities that the various departments and agencies shared prior to CFIA's coming to the portfolio.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ben Lobb]

Thank you, Mr. Marston.

The last questioner of the day is Ms. Adams.

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

Thanks very much.

I noted that the supplementary estimates reflect a rather sizable increase for patient-oriented research and food inspection and a decrease for travel in the ministry. Could you speak to that last item, the decrease in travel expenses?

[George Da Pont]

I can do that for Health Canada, and colleagues may wish to respond for their own elements.

You'll see that there's a decrease of about $1.1 million in travel. Within Health Canada, we work very hard to try to find the best efficiencies we can. What that means is that we're using far more video conferencing. We're looking at alternatives to get our job done without doing as much travel as we did before, so it reflects an efficiency savings.

We do, however, undertake all of the critical travel that's required. We put in place an internal process to monitor that and ensure that the critical stuff gets done.

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

There are still investments being made to patient-oriented research, for instance. Would these be new moneys?

[George Da Pont]

Yes, and I think colleagues would want to speak to that.

Jane.

[Dr. Jane Aubin, Chief Scientific Officer and Executive Vice-President, Research and Knowledge Translation, Canadian Institutes of Health Research]

The patient-oriented strategy led by CIHR on behalf of the government was initiated in 2011. Through our collaborations with the provinces, we've ramped up activities and made great progress over the last year. The new moneys are to allow us to continue to roll out the specific programs that come under the patient-oriented strategy, including, as the minister mentioned in her remarks, the support units that are jurisdictionally based, provincially based, and territorially based. The first four have been adjudicated by an international panel. The first was announced in Alberta just about a week ago, and announcements on the others that have been adjudicated will be coming up shortly. Others are sending in their business plans, which will also be adjudicated. We need to continue to roll them out across the country.

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

Thank you.

One final question: when it comes to prescription drug labelling, could you advise us of the changes that Health Canada has made?

[George Da Pont]

I will ask Mr. Glover to respond to that.

[Paul Glover, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Health]

With respect to prescription drugs, we are working to make sure that the information that's contained, both for physicians and for consumers, is significantly easier to read. So we're introducing a series of steps. By means of these, the prescribers can make sure they have the information to determine the appropriate course of action for the patient. They know when to use it and when not to use it. They will know the potential side effects so they can make an informed choice. We're also working to make sure that this information is easier for consumers to understand, so they can participate in a dialogue with their physicians.

In addition, as the minister said, we're looking to make summaries of our drug safety reviews available. We hope to have the first one later this fiscal year. That's an important step in furthering transparency.

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

I will ask one final question and split my time with the Honourable Laurie Hawn.

Finally, the investments that we'll be transferring to the provinces will reach an historic $40 billion by the end of the decade.

Could you briefly speak to the assistance we're providing to provinces and territories so that they can roll out their priorities, especially when it comes to health human resources?