Health Committee on Nov. 28th, 2024

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thanks, Chair. I appreciate Mr. Thériault's amendment. I would like to move a subamendment to that particular amendment, and it reads as follows: “That Bill C-368 in clause 1 be amended by replacing lines 7 to 11 on page with the following: Therapeutic product means (a) a drug or device; (b) any combination of drugs and devices; or (c) a natural health product within the meaning of the natural health products regulations that contains nicotine or its salts.”

(therapeutic product)

I believe the clerk has probably received this subamendment, in both English and French. That could be circulated to the members so that we can then have a conversation.

Perhaps, Chair, I can present my comments on this, or we can wait until it's circulated before. I'm in your hands.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I would encourage you to go ahead and offer your comments. I expect that members by now, or very shortly, will have an electronic version.

Mr. Thériault, if I understand correctly, you want to receive a paper copy of the subamendment.

Is that right?

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

No, it won't be necessary.

If I understood correctly, my colleague is proposing to change “and” to “or”, but I don't agree.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We are now going to—

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chair, I didn't think that, at this stage of the clause-by-clause study, we could move a subamendment to an amendment.

I thought we should withdraw the amendment rather than move a subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

No, it isn't necessary.

Mr. Naqvi, there's no need to suspend. Everybody has it electronically. If you want to speak to it, you go right ahead.

Mr. Naqvi, go ahead, then Ms. Goodridge.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I think Mr. Thériault and other members will see that this doesn't take away from the amendment that he's proposed, but in fact it strengthens it. This change is needed to ensure that the amendment is adequately defined to encapsulate all relevant nicotine-containing natural health products, including those that contain nicotine salts, which is important. I wouldn't mind asking the experts why a reference to nicotine salts is important.

Additionally, by relying on a specific type of therapy, like nicotine replacement therapy, this may open opportunities for tobacco companies to modify the indications of their product to bypass certain measures. This subamendment corrects that and captures exactly what Mr. Thériault is trying to accomplish. However, the addition of the salts part to nicotine is important.

Chair, I would like to ask our experts why that is important.

Mr. Lee, Ms. Godard, thank you for being here. I know you've been very patient at this committee. I'm glad that we're going through the amendments.

Can you please explain why specifically referencing nicotine salts in this bill is important?

[David Lee, Chief Regulatory Officer, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health]

Our understanding in the formulation is that this is to preserve the youth protection measures associated now with nicotine. If it just says nicotine, it means nicotine-free base. There are other forms of nicotine that can be made. We want to prevent the argument that they don't fall under the youth protections just because of a different chemical presentation. This is really to make sure it's very clear and the youth protections apply. That's its technical operation.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

That's great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We have Ms. Goodridge, please.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I just wanted to clarify that a little bit further. In reading through this, I found that nicotine salts are often used in vaping. It's unfortunate that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health could not have provided us with his subamendments in advance, because he very clearly had them, and that would have allowed us to save some time and possibly move through this unamended.

How could we expect the Liberals to be prepared for a meeting?

I will leave it at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We have Dr. Ellis, please.

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

I'll echo some of those comments. We are watering down Bill C-368 by these amendments because we learned here in committee very clearly that the current administration, the NDP-Liberal government, is unable or unwilling to amend the TVPA, the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act.

I think it's a shame that we have to water down a bill based upon the fact that the minister, whom we've had here at committee before, doesn't have a clue on how to amend the TVPA. We heard that from witnesses. We heard them say that this bill needs to be amended, because it would take too long for the NDP-Liberal government to figure out how to amend the TVPA. That's the job of a parliamentarian. However, that's obviously lost on the current federal Minister of Health, who is unable to do that, and clearly unable to do his job.

Therefore we're left with disappointing those stakeholders and those thousands and thousands of Canadians whom I know Mr. Thériault referred to, from whom he received emails, as did we on this side of the House, to say watering down this bill is not a great idea. They are very concerned about their access and very concerned about the collapse of the Canadian natural health product industry, as we heard from multiple testimonies.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Dr. Ellis.

Are there any further interventions with respect to the subamendment?

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chair, I initially thought we were replacing the word “and” with “or” in the rest of the sentence. Now, I understand that we want to add, “or its salts and is used in nicotine replacement therapy”.

I don't have the text in front of me, but my understanding is that (c) would read as follows: “(c) a natural health product, within the meaning of the Natural Health Products Regulations, that contains nicotine, or its salts and is used in nicotine replacement therapy.”

Is that correct?

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

No, the words “or its salts” would replace the rest of the sentence.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Okay.

By writing “or its salts,” we wouldn't need the rest of the sentence.

Is that really the case?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes, that's what is being proposed.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Is that what Mr. Lee said earlier? So we could remove the rest of the sentence and that would reflect exactly the same intention.

Is that correct?

[David Lee]

Mr. Chair, the inclusion of “and its salts” modifies nicotine because nicotine can be in different forms, so it just gets the whole set of nicotine. The rest of the phrase “in nicotine replacement therapy” is a different issue. That's what it's used for.

The caution there was just that there could be language that companies introduce to say that it's just for temporary stopping so that it doesn't fall within the measures.

We would give this a broad interpretation faithfully to say that it doesn't include, as you say, trace amounts in vegetables and so on. We understand the function of that, but the “and its salts” goes to basically the idea of nicotine, so they can't get around the youth protection. It's just to make sure that, whatever way you make it chemically, it's included.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

If we keep the words “and which is used for nicotine replacement therapy”, what will that take away or change?

[David Lee]

It would add clarity that it is not, as you say, trace amounts, because there can be the occurrence of nicotine in things that are not purposely made for smoking cessation.

We would need to interpret it very broadly so that, again...small language changes so that it's basically still a replacement therapy in spirit. We would need to interpret that, but I think we could.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I'm sorry, that may be a result of the interpretation, but I didn't understand what Mr. Lee was saying.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I didn't understand it in English either.

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

We didn't understand that either.