Health Committee on Feb. 28th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We'll call our meeting to order. This is meeting 94 of the Standing Committee on Health, pursuant to the order of reference on Tuesday, January 30, 2018, Bill S-5, an act to amend the Tobacco Act and the Non-smokers' Health Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. We're here to do clause-by-clause.

I'd like to introduce our witnesses who are our resource panel whom we will call on when we get in real trouble. Mr. James Van Loon, director general, tobacco control directorate; Denis Choinière, director, tobacco products regulatory office; Anne-Marie LeBel, legal counsel; and Saira David, director, tobacco labelling division and plain and standardized packaging division.

Thank you very much for coming. We'll be calling on you as we need you.

I have notice of a point of order.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I understand that the government is eager to push this legislation through. I'm all for efficiency. That said, this is important legislation. It is very comprehensive. It's very complex. We heard conflicting testimonies from a number of witnesses, and yet to do the clause-by-clause, I just received these documents last night and this morning. In fact, one of the amendments I was handed after I entered the room today. Now normally in my experience with committees, the amendments are handed out ahead of time so that the members of the committee have sufficient opportunity to review the documents on their own then to meet with their caucus members to debate and discuss the positions before they decide how they want to proceed. That opportunity has been denied us, and especially as this morning, we were all required to be in our caucuses. We often have commitments over lunch and then we've been required to be in the House of Commons. So there has been no opportunity whatsoever for the members to give these amendments the due diligence that they both need and deserve. I do believe that the broader purpose of putting forward good legislation would be better served is all of the members had the opportunity to give these amendments the attention they deserve, and if I respectfully request that we be given more time so that the quality of legislation is up to the standard that Canadians expect of us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

I'm going to turn down that request. It's important that we get legislation through. We often have amendments and proposals in committee with no notice. Last week, Mr. Davies made a presentation or proposed a motion with no notice at all, and we had three minutes and twenty-nine seconds that the Liberal side had to analyze it. So I'm going to turn down your request.

We'll go ahead with clause-by-clause.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Yes.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I want to make one small correction to the record. I had served notice of the motion that I moved in writing prior to the meeting, but we went into committee business, so it's not quite accurate to say that people just received it then. However, your point is well taken. I don't challenge your decision.

Mr. Chair, rather than wait until we get to this in the appropriate part of the bill, I have two questions that I think would be helpful for all committee members if we could have clarified. I am wondering if I could put them to the ministry staff.

One is whether this bill, as it purports to regular vaping, would also apply to cannabis products. In other words, are the vaping regulations there to regulate vaping regardless of the substance being vaped?

The second question that I had was whether a heat stick—we did hear evidence about heat sticks, and I know there are some amendments from Ms. Gladu on heat sticks—is covered by the definition of tobacco products or vaping products currently in the bill. That will help me to consider the amendments as they come forward. I'm wondering if you have answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Can we have some help here with that question?

[James Van Loon, Director General, Tobacco Control Directorate, Department of Health]

Sure thing. No, cannabis products are not covered in this act. They are carved out. There's an amendment in here that puts one final little detail on making sure that those interfaces are correct, but no.

Secondly, on heat sticks, yes. They are covered by the definition of tobacco product as it is amended in S-5. S-5 has an amendment to the definition of tobacco product such that—and I'm going to paraphrase a little bit—devices that are necessary for the consumption of a tobacco product are also tobacco products, and they are covered.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Does that satisfy your question?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Yes. If I may just have one follow-up question. I was looking quickly for the definition of vaping products. Are we 100% sure it won't cover cannabis products? You seem to be very definitive about that. I don't doubt it, but I want to be very sure.

[James Van Loon]

That would be in Bill C-45. It says the cannabis products are not subject to these.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We will proceed with clause-by-clause. I know of no amendments to Clause 1, so shall Clause 1 carry?

(Clause 1 agreed to)

I know of no amendments to Clause 2, so shall Clause 2 carry?

(Clause 2 agreed to)

I believe there's a proposed amendment to Clause 3.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Yes. One of the things I think is important is the technology is ever evolving. Vaping devices change. Different models come out. Heat sticks have come. There may be other products that come.

I wanted to make sure the legislation was as up to date as possible. I proposed a few amendments that add to the technology that exists today. This one is to define heat stick as a terminology that could have common understanding and add that under the tobacco legislation part of this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Mr. Oliver.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I don't know whether it's permissible or not in clause-by-clause, but if in the end the other amendments around heat sticks aren't adopted, then we really don't need a definitional element in the upfront of this.

Can we defer this particular amendment until we have dealt with the other three and then come back to it, or do you want to deal with it upfront?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

I just asked our legal counsel if we could reverse the order. He said it would be difficult.

What if Ms. Gladu agreed to this? Would that be all right?

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Absolutely. I'm fine to defer the vote on this until we talk about the other ones because if there are no heat sticks mentioned, then of course we wouldn't need a definition.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We're going to defer clause 3 until we get to the very end.

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Again, maybe it might help clarify this point too. That was the purpose of my question to Mr. Van Loon that if heat sticks are already covered under the definition of—I wonder what it would be, tobacco product—If we can get an answer from that. Maybe our legal counsel can advise us whether or not we need to have a definition of heat sticks if it's already covered under the bill.

[Anne-Marie LeBel, Legal Counsel, Department of Health]

I would like to turn your attention to the bill. It's in clause 3, page 2, the definition of tobacco product. If you read the definition, you'll see that in the second sentence it mentions certain things including “a device...that is necessary for the use of that product and the parts that may be used with the device”. That's the part that would cover the heat stick device.

In terms of the heat stick that goes into the device, it's a product made of tobacco, and it's captured by the first sentence of the definition.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Go ahead, Mr. Oliver.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

This is exactly the debate we were trying to avoid, having a debate about whether the existing definition is adequate to cover heat stick. We can have that debate now, but depending on the outcome of the other three amendments, we may not need to have that debate.

That's why I'm asking that we defer this particular amendment until we have dealt with the other three. Or we could have it now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

I'll go to Ms. Gladu, first, and then Ms. Finley.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

The reason I thought it was worthy of clarification is that it's obviously clear to the people who are expert in this, but I have heard from stakeholders some discussion about the fact that heat sticks should actually be under the vaping regulation because they are not combusted. I just wanted to have clarity.