Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Sacy and Ms. Paradis, thank you both for your compelling presentations.
The purpose of the committee's study is to identify lasting solutions that the government can implement. Some recommendations were put forward back in 2007, as you mentioned. I'd also like to thank you for bringing up the fact that the CRTC rules date back to 1996.
There is no denying that, in 2018, we still have a problem. It is clear that manufacturers of these products care about only one thing: making money. It is true that, in an effort to respond swiftly and responsibly, a convenience store owner voluntarily pulled certain alcoholic beverages off his shelves because, in his view, they should never have existed. The fact remains, those products did wind up on store shelves.
What emerged clearly from our discussion with the Health Canada officials who were here before you is that the federal and provincial governments have been passing the buck back and forth. That's nothing new. What I really care about is achieving some regulatory consistency. I would like to see some consistency around product availability and drinking age, for instance. Quebec's regulations should, at least, be as stringent as Ontario's or those of another province.
You've studied the problem. What kinds of regulatory measures do you want to see from the federal government?
Of course, the provinces should be able to retain some autonomy, but there are major differences across their regimes.
As far as alcohol consumption goes, it is clear that provincial borders are porous. Young people engage in certain activities. We were talking earlier about spring break. Quebec's spring break isn't at the same time as that of other provinces. Young people go off on organized trips and drinking is commonplace.
Could you tell us, in very specific terms, how the federal government should deal with situations like these? Would you care to go first, Mr. Sacy? Then, I'd like to hear from Ms. Paradis.