Health Committee on April 6th, 2017

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Over the last number of years, I think before the current government, there were a lot of reductions to research funding. There were cutbacks to CIHR support, there was a slow degradation of research capacities at universities, health science centres, and across Canada.

Do you have any sense of where we're at now? Do you track the number of Ph.D.s we have, the number of Ph.D. students on track? Are we recovering as a centre of health research here in Canada, or are we still in that area where we were losing more than we were gaining?

[Michel Perron]

Thank you for your question, an important one indeed for us in the research community. You're quite correct that since approximately 2007 and 2008, the CIHR's budget has been effectively stable at approximately a billion dollars. This has resulted in a loss of purchasing power in terms of inflation.

That said, we've been able to offset some of these shortcomings by leveraging significant investment from many of our external partners. For instance, the investment levels from non-federal partners have grown by more than 50% to approximately $96 million in the fiscal year 2014-15.

As you know, federal budget 2017 also addressed two significant issues, climate change adaptation and the substance abuse area, for which there are investments of funds. Of course, we are waiting for the soon-to-be-announced review of fundamental science, and will be working with the minister and the government in terms of the information there.

If there are specific questions around the number of Ph.D. graduates and the like, we'd be happy, through the chair, to provide that information to you at a—

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

It would be great just to get a report on the status of the health of the human resources we have at the academic level in health science research.

[Michel Perron]

If you permit, Mr. Chair, a follow-up, I should mention that in budget 2016 we also allocated a specific.... I'm going to back up. It's important that as we look at the research enterprise we understand the entirety of the continuum of researchers and the importance that we continually invest on a year-to-year basis to ensure these young graduates make their way into the health research community.

We have committed a specific amount, $30 million, to ensure that early career investigators are particularly focused for ensuring granting around health research to ensure that pipeline maintains its growth going forward. We are doing that, along with other initiatives, whether it be in our post-graduate programs or working with the institutions there.

I'm happy to provide additional information—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you.

Mr. Kang, very quickly.

[Darshan Singh Kang, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to ask of the federal government, the Minister of Health, that funding designated for mental health and home care should only go to mental health and home care initiatives. I can speak from experience, and mental health clinics and home care in Calgary do a great job. They're doing a wonderful job to keep the patients out of the hospitals. I'm speaking from personal experience. That funding should be designated to mental health care and home care, and that's where that funding should go.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you very much.

Dr. Carrie, you're going to split your time with Mr. Webber, I understand.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Yes, I am. Thank you very much.

Mr. Kennedy, could you clarify something for us. My colleague talked about the change for the health accord, the collaborative approach.

Could you confirm if all the provinces have signed on to the health accord?

[Simon Kennedy]

At this point, there are still ongoing discussions with Manitoba on this issue.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Okay. I just wanted to clarify that collaborative approach.

I was questioning the minister about mandatory testing, and I just wanted to clarify because I didn't quite understand your answer on it. The question is this. Is the testing of medical marijuana mandatory, yes or no? The reason I'm asking is it actually says in the article that Health Canada gave no clear answer in its brief as to why it wouldn't make testing mandatory for licensed producers. One reason given by the senior official was that he believed there are only about three labs in Canada that could perform such testing, and there would be a backlog.

Given the ramping up of the medical marijuana field, is it mandatory now? If it's not, is it because you're worried about a backlog?

[Simon Kennedy]

It is mandatory that licensed producers who wish to use pesticides on their crop only use of one of the 14 chemicals available. There is a short list. The rules require that if they wish to use pesticides, those are the only ones they're allowed to use. That's a condition of their licence. We do regular inspections to make sure they're doing things as appropriate.

We have not, until recently, had a program as the inspection kind of agent to be specifically testing lots of the product to ascertain whether or not they are staying within that legal requirement. We have started randomized—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

So the answer is no?

[Simon Kennedy]

No, the answer is that we've started randomized testing to determine whether people are complying with the rules as they exist.

As I mentioned earlier, we've had a very good track record of compliance with the rules generally. We've had a couple of incidents recently involving pesticides. I would note that in each of those cases there were recalls initiated, all of the clients were contacted, and the department did a risk assessment. The risk assessment determined that the risk presented by these breaches was actually very low.

The pesticide involved—the one that you're referring to from the media article—is called myclobutanil, which is actually used on food crops. We did an assessment about one of the concerns that had been raised, which has been in the press and is about what happens if you burn this. We looked at that, because obviously people inhale—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Yes. It turns into hydrogen cyanide, which is extremely dangerous—

[Simon Kennedy]

Yes, but—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

—and that's why I'm asking. From your answer—

[Simon Kennedy]

But—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

If I can clarify, because I have some more questions I'd like to ask you, I asked if you do mandatory testing, and you said that the companies have a list of things they can use—

[Simon Kennedy]

That's right.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

—but you haven't required it. Health Canada does not go in there and “mandatory-test” these companies. If they have, how often have you done the random testing? I'm just wondering. If you don't have those numbers for me, I'm okay with that. You can get back to us.

[Simon Kennedy]

We agreed that we would certainly provide those numbers.

I think what I would say, though, is that if you were to ask about the inspection regime and the regulatory regime of not just Health Canada but indeed most regulatory agencies, there's a risk-based element to it. You focus your resources, because obviously you can't do everything at all times everywhere. It would be prohibitive. You focus on where you see risk.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

With pharmaceuticals, for example—

[Simon Kennedy]

If I could—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

—I believe there is certain testing done, and—

[Simon Kennedy]

Right.