Health Committee on Oct. 29th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

No—

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Minister, please wait. Mr. Julian has the floor.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

His name is Rylan. It's a real story. You can visit him at Dalhousie University.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We'll go back to Mr. Julian, please.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

He's at Dalhousie. His name is Rylan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Excuse me, Mr. Julian has the floor. I recognize Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I asked two questions, and I'd ask the minister to respond.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

I think the facts are so clear in this case. I agree. It doesn't make a lot of sense to talk about this bill. It's an awful, terrible bill. I'm happy now, at this point, to take other types of questions.

It's true. The Conservatives said that the dental care program didn't exist, and we're about to hit a million people who've received care on the precipice of it. The last time I checked, a million people is a long way off from not existing.

In terms of pharmacare, just as we've been getting it done on dental care, we're going to do it on pharmacare. We have a lot of very interested provinces. We'll be signing deals.

I'll tell you why this is big. Take something like diabetes. Diabetes costs us $30 billion every single year, and it's going up every single year. People getting their medication matters. We have to be upstream. We have to be preventing, and—I'll bring it back to this bill—that includes preventing adverse outcomes that are entirely preventable. Vanessa's Law allows us to prevent people from getting sick by making sure that products that aren't safe are pulled from shelves.

Why on earth would we want people winding up in hospital from something that was entirely avoidable?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you.

You didn't actually answer my second question, but hopefully you can do that a little later on.

Coming back to the bill now, Blaine Calkins, who's the originator of the bill, came forward at this committee and said the following in terms of the powers that Health Canada already has:

They [have] the ability to stop a sale.... They have border power for personal-use imports, where they have the ability to seize any product that they want. They can revoke a site licence for any of the sites.... They can mandate a label change any time they want and add any warnings they want to products. They can inspect any site licence. They can inspect any product. They approved every natural product number that's out there, and they can revoke a natural product number and cancel the product.

That was his testimony. How do you respond to that? Are those all powers that Health Canada has now? If so, why aren't those powers being used?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

That's a great question.

The answer is that they are being used, but the problem is that we can't stop at retail. What Vanessa's Law allows us to do.... Let me use the example.... You talked about a foreign jurisdiction identifying a contamination problem. When the U.S. FDA said that there is a plant that is full of feces and urine....

It's right here, Dr. Ellis. It's a real case. This is a situation where—

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Interestingly enough, the characterization the minister makes is that a plant was “full of feces”. I would like to have him actually table the evidence of the plant full of feces.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

When you get the floor, you'll get a chance to ask him to do that.

Go ahead, Mr. Julian.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Maybe there's an acceptable level of rodent feces and urine that Mr. Ellis has for a natural health product facility. I don't have that. If rat poop and urine are in a facility, then you can debate how much it was. Maybe if there's only a certain amount of rat poop and urine, that's enough for you. It's not enough for me.

There's an instance that, when the U.S. FDA tells us this, yes, we can stop importing any more, but anything that's on the other side of the border and that's on store shelves, we can't do anything about it. Vanessa's Law allows us to take those products off the shelves. That's what's so critical. We lack the ability today.

Here's the second most important point. Let's talk about that facility. The maximum fine the courts can issue right now is only $5,000. I would say that's a cost of doing business. Why have a clean or healthy site producing products if the worst thing a court can do to you is to give you a $5,000 fine? The courts need the ability to scale those fines to make sure that bad actors are appropriately punished.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

You have one minute and 20 seconds.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I want to come back to revoking the natural health product number and cancelling the product, and the impacts that Health Canada has already—the abilities, the powers. I also want to follow up on Mr. Thériault's question about the 350 recalls that were voluntary in nature. Of those recalls, in how many did the company not co-operate? In how many was the company non-compliant? With regard to this bill and the impacts of this bill, I think we need to make sure that there is a problem, and part of that is whether or not companies have been compliant with voluntary recalls that have been issued.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

I'll turn to officials for the exact number; I can say that there's largely been compliance. The concern is that when there isn't, we lack the ability to do anything about it. As you could appreciate, if there is a really flagrant violation—and I just gave you an example of one right here that was very flagrant, and there are other examples that are flagrant—and if we don't have the ability in court to have a penalty that's commensurate with the size of what they did.... For example, you know, you may only have a very small number of cases where somebody commits a crime, but you still need a mechanism to deal with it when they do commit a crime. That deterrent effect is extremely important, and our ability to protect consumers when there is a flagrant violation is extremely important.

I don't know if you want to speak to the specific number.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Be very brief, please.

[Linsey Hollett, Assistant Deputy Minister, Regulatory, Operations and Enforcement Branch, Department of Health]

As the minister mentioned, the industry is very compliant and very co-operative, most regulated parties. What we have had are instances.... They are a small number, but they are serious instances where the time taken to convince a company to undertake a recall is weeks into months. Also, if a company refuses—again, a small number—we need to find a workaround, someone else in the supply chain who is willing to work with us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Hollett.

That's your time, Mr. Julian.

Next, we have Mr. Moore, please, for five minutes.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister.

Minister, does Health Canada commission studies?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Yes.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Does Health Canada expect Canadians to take value from those studies?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Absolutely.