Evidence of meeting #95 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Marie-Hélène Sauvé
James Van Loon  Director General, Tobacco Control Directorate, Department of Health
Anne-Marie LeBel  Legal Counsel, Department of Health

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

All right.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON

I think it's just “urgent”, so it's “...undertake an urgent study of no fewer than three meetings....”

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

All right.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings]

Now we will vote on the motion as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

It's interesting that as the health committee, we deal with urgent issues here. It doesn't matter where they come from. If they're urgent, we deal with them in the proper way, and I think that was the proper way to do that.

Thank you very much, everybody.

Now we go back to Bill S-5. I was hoping to get to a bit of pharmacare today, but it's looking like we might not make it.

We're on clause 71. There are no amendments.

(Clauses 71 to 74 inclusive agreed to)

Go ahead, Ms. Gladu.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

You will recall that at the last discussion of Bill S-5, we brought an amendment on acetate tow. It was ruled out of order because it called for changes to the excise tax law in order to be implemented. It's been reworded, so in order for it to be considered, I would ask for unanimous consent to reopen clause 8.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

All right. We need unanimous consent to reopen clause 8 so we can amend it. Do we have unanimous consent?

4:05 p.m.

An hon. member

No.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

We don't have unanimous consent.

(On clause 75)

Now we'll move on to clause 75, which has an amendment, LIB-16.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

We propose that Bill S-5, in clause 75, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 44. This is with reference to refillable vaping containers, to provide industry with time to develop refillable vaping devices that meet child-resistant closure requirements. There's no clarification on how toxic the liquid is. As Health Canada plans to introduce regulations that would deal specifically with these risks, amendment is necessary.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Is there any other debate on Liberal amendment 16?

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

I'm just wondering if ministry staff can explain a bit more the impact of this amendment, please.

4:05 p.m.

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

This amendment would simply create.... As it stands right now, if all of these vaping products become subject to the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act, they will also be subject to all the act's regulations, including the Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations. This is the thing that's going to require containers of nicotine-containing fluids to have child-resistant closures on them. It just so happens that the way “container” is defined in the Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations would also capture refillable vaping tank devices, the big, hand-held jobbies that you see people standing outside vaping on, which are the ones that successfully deliver enough nicotine to supplant tobacco for some users. These would have to have child-resistant closures.

As we have heard from industry over the last year, they don't have the technology to put child-resistant closures on those devices. We're concerned that if we proceed as is now, those devices will not be conforming with the Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations and won't be available on the market. One of the big purposes of this act is to give those things a viable pathway to market. That said, the department is looking at what regulations should be in place. Industry has informed us that they think they might be able to have child-resistant closures for those devices within a year, so we'll be moving to regulate on those over the coming period. It basically creates a bit of space for industry to adapt.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Thanks very much.

Is there any further debate? All in favour of amendment LIB-16?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall clause 75 carry as amended?

(Clause 75 as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clauses 76 to 79 inclusive agreed to)

For proposed new clause 79.1, we have amendment LIB-17.

Go ahead, Mr. Ayoub.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to point out that the purpose of the amendment I am going to propose is to exclude vaping substances that contain cannabis, as well as cannabis-related devices that are not tobacco products, the focus of the bill on tobacco and vaping products. In this way, vaping substances containing cannabis and the majority of cannabis-related accessories would only be subject to Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act. This amendment would only come into effect when the relevant provisions of Bill C-45 also come into effect.

And so I would like to move the following motion:

That Bill S-5 be amended by adding after line 14 on page 47 the following new clause: “79.1 If Bill C-45, introduced in the 1st session of the 42nd Parliament and entitled An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts, receives royal assent, then, on the first day on which both subsection 204(1) of that act and section 3 of this act are in force:

(a) the definition accessory in section 2 of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act is replaced by the following:

accessory means a product that may be used in the consumption of a tobacco product, including a pipe, cigarette holder, cigar clip, lighter and matches, and also means a water pipe. It does not include cannabis accessories, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Cannabis Act. (accessory)

(b) the portion of the definition vaping product in section 2 of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act after paragraph (d) is replaced by the following:

It does not include devices and substances or mixtures of substances that are excluded by the regulations, cannabis, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Cannabis Act, cannabis accessories, as defined in that subsection, tobacco products or their accessories. (produits de vapotage)“

That is the change I am proposing.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Are there any other comments on that amendment? All those in favour of the amendment?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall clause 79.1 carry as amended?

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

No, Mr. Chair, it's an amendment and it carried.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

There's nothing like a new clause.

(On clause 80)

On clause 80, we have CPC-12.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

This amendment is there so that industry will have an opportunity to respond effectively to the coming into force so that they can be in compliance.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Is there any other discussion?

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

It's my understanding that government tobacco regulations currently take six months. That's the standard. That's the usual thing. The manufacturers have historically been able to accommodate that. Given that the objective of plain and standardized packaging is protecting the health of young people, particularly from being subjected to inducements to use tobacco, I think that this longer period for implementation would be detrimental to that goal.

There is also a development process once the regulations are gazetted in the Canada Gazette that gives people a chance to give feedback for them. I think there is ample time for manufacturers to respond. I will oppose this amendment.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Go ahead, Ms. Finley.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

From an operational perspective, the ability of the manufacturers to comply is going to depend to a large degree on what type of packaging is prescribed. Right now, most Canadian cigarettes are packaged in a flip-top package. That said, there has been a lot of talk I've heard about going to the push pack.

The push pack is what is commonly used for contraband cigarettes. The reason they use it is that it's manufactured on equipment that was thrown out by the large manufacturers many years ago. That equipment is no longer made.

If all of the manufacturers are going to have to go out and buy new equipment, they have to be able to design the equipment, place the orders, and find someone who will make it for them, because this equipment is not manufactured anymore. Otherwise, they will not be in compliance despite whatever best efforts they can put forward.

If we're going to demand that they comply, then I think we need to give them the opportunity to do so, given the very strong likelihood that we could be demanding that they use outdated equipment.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Ms. Gladu is next.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

First, I think it's rich that the government, after waiting until the third year of their mandate to get around to this bill, would suddenly be in such a hurry. With all due respect for the stakeholders who testified, they are going to need time to convert over. In some cases it's equipment and in some cases it's compliance with the various regulations. I agree that the regulations will take some time, but I think we should respect the input we heard and accept this amendment.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Go ahead, Mr. Davies.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm wondering if the ministry can help me out with an explanation of how the rollout of this bill is intended to happen as it is presently drafted. When will it come into force, and how much time does that give the industry to respond?