Health Committee on March 28th, 2023

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know we all want to do good things for our children. As my colleague said, the obesity rate is going very high. I remember when we were talking about the calendar last week, we were planning that. As Mr. Davies said, in 2018 we heard from many witnesses, I think 18 witnesses. It's all there in Hansard. Today we can ask Mrs. Lattanzio questions, and then in the implementation phase there are going to be consultations and a lot of things are going to happen.

Let's work together. We are already working together on many things. This is a very important topic for our children. I think we should ask Mrs. Lattanzio questions. I really want to say thank you to her for bringing this bill. Without delay, I think we should all work together towards our children's health.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Dr. Hanley.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

I wanted to reiterate a few points for the record.

One is that I think Mr. Davies and Mr. van Koeverden have both spoken eloquently. I won't reiterate their emphasis on the need to proceed with urgency, but it is important.

Because this is about the point of order and not the evidence, I think it would be useful to be able to listen to our witnesses, because the effect of marketing on children is clear. There is substantial evidence.

As a committee, although we have an obligation to hear from all sides of a question, we also have an obligation to build on knowledge that we have already accumulated, and there is an urgency to proceed with this bill after years of delay. To echo Ms. Sidhu's final point, there will be room for organizations to have a voice in this, both in the Senate and in the regulatory process, so this is not the last chance for organizations to provide input as to how this will ultimately be published in regulation.

Thank you for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chair, I suggested a compromise earlier. I didn't turn it into a motion because I wanted to give my colleagues a chance to speak and hear where everyone stood. Now I'm going to turn into a motion.

We have a right to undertake focused consultations. In my opinion, there is a new factor, and it's the only one. For me, it's going to be this compromise or nothing.

Therefore, I move that the Association of Canadian Broadcasters be called to testify before the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Thériault.

This discussion began with a point of order. According to procedure, we aren't allowed to introduce a motion during a discussion like this. The committee has not yet finished the discussion.

It's entirely appropriate to introduce a motion when you have the floor, Mr. Thériault, but you may not do so at this time while we are discussing a point of order.

When someone rises on point of order, I really prefer to have a focused discussion. I regret that the current discussion has gone much further than it should have. Normally, this kind of discussion is over very quickly, but in this case, a lot of people want to say something.

You have the floor, Mr. van Koeverden.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wasn't going to say anything, because I already put my two cents in, but we veered out of the lane of saying we should hear from everybody. We haven't yet heard from some folks who are on the record speaking on this issue not that long ago.

To Dr. Ellis, outright challenging the science on this, we have Dr. Sharma here. Questioning whether or not it's efficacious to move forward with this type of legislation, and whether or not this will actually lead to healthier outcomes, is counterproductive to why we're here today.

We're not here today to challenge the science or to suggest that maybe the science is unclear on whether or not marketing to kids leads to unhealthy outcomes for them. Hearing from all sides is different from challenging the very well-documented facts that are out there if one chooses to look.

I would ask that if we have any questions on the science, Dr. Sharma is here.... She happens to be an expert on the issue and can speak to the science on it. Otherwise, I think we should move forward, because this is, quite frankly, a waste of time, and we've already been through this. We've already decided that we were going to come here today to listen to the sponsor and move forward on the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We've also veered a long way from the original point of order, but I'm quite reluctant to cut this discussion off when people still want to speak on it.

I think it would probably be better to proceed formally with the commencement of the meeting and introduce a motion, along the lines of what Mr. Thériault suggested—or otherwise. However, I didn't seize control sooner, and this is where we're stuck.

Dr. Kitchen, you're next.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate Mr. Thériault's opportunity to present a motion and, perhaps, a compromise. That's a great thing. I was initially going to suggest we suspend for about five minutes, so we can discuss it, but that was purely at the time. I think I'll defer, at this point in time.

I am done. Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

There are no further speakers on the list. We will now—

There is now a speaker on the list.

Do you wish to speak, Mr. Thériault?

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I'd like to introduce my motion, Mr. Chair.

Have we finished discussing the point of order?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

You will be able to introduce your motion when it's your turn to speak. You will be the third person to ask questions. At that time, you will be allowed to speak.

For now, Ms. Goodridge has the floor for the next six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hearing some of the conversations around the table, I respect and appreciate the compromise brought forward by Monsieur Thériault.

I would like to move a motion that the committee hold a one-hour witness meeting for Bill C-252 prior to clause-by-clause, to be held this Thursday, March 30, so as not to delay any further. I think that's a very reasonable compromise. It allows people to bring forward a very limited number of witnesses. This is not about delaying the bill, as was suggested by the opposition and the Liberals.

[A voice]

He's not the opposition. He's part of the government.

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

Well, sometimes, you can just wait your turn and interject when you have the floor, quite frankly.

I think this is something quite reasonable. This is a space where we can find some compromise on this and make sure it's going towards the space it is, hear from witnesses on some of the amendments, and see whether there are other, very simple amendments that could be made, possibly, to strengthen the bill to ensure we're bringing forward the best possible legislation for Canadians and our kids.

This is something critically important. As a young mom.... This is something pressing. This is a conversation that happens in all the “mom” Facebook groups, on a regular basis. I think it's incumbent upon us, as legislators, to ensure we're doing the work and hearing from the witnesses to make sure it's meeting the standards.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mrs. Goodridge.

The motion is in order. The debate is on the motion.

Go ahead, Mr. Thériault.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As I said earlier, in my opinion, there's only one new factor. This would not delay our work, and it would help us along if we could ask questions to Association of Canadian Advertisers representatives. The minister did mention the association, among others, in her speech.

Therefore, I move that an amendment be made so that the only group the committee calls to testify for one hour be the Association of Canadian Advertisers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We have an amendment to the motion, which is in order: that the only witness be the Association of Canadian Advertisers. I believe it's the sector council for that.

The debate is now on the amendment.

Go ahead, Dr. Powlowski.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

My concern with that is that you're going to get one side of the story. You're going to get advertisers who are primarily concerned about limiting advertising, without hearing all the evidence in support of limiting that advertising. I think you'll get quite a biased hour, which observers.... Looking at what happens subsequently, they may be overly influenced by having just one speaker beforehand. It seems to me as if....

I agree about not reopening this can of worms at all, and to open it a little just so the advertisers can get their objections in doesn't seem fair to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. van Koeverden, go ahead on the amendment.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

I was reticent to entertain even the idea of more meetings on this. If we're going to hear from only one side, then I'm completely against it.

It took me one second on google to find that advertisers have already come here and spoken to this. The Honourable Nancy Greene Raine was an amazing senator and awesome Olympic champion too. She was a Conservative senator, I might add. This has been done—been there, done that. It takes 10 seconds to google it.

Actually, the chair of HESA at the time was also the MP for Cumberland—Colchester. It's pretty easy to find on the Internet, and I would encourage anybody who is interested in the position of any advertisers, marketers and the Canadian Beverage Association to do so. Their position hasn't changed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

It's one thing to know that these individuals have already testified; it's another to be able to ask them questions about the code and guide they have developed. They take effect in July and the minister talked about them.

This bill will limit advertising, so it's very topical that this group appear, because we will be able to ask them all our questions about the code and its purpose.

Personally, I feel we need this bill. However, those we hear from may point us in some directions to improve the bill, because they claim to share our goal.

I believe we would need more than 10 minutes to hear these individuals. On the eve of passing a bill, when we're on a fast track, it's entirely democratic that we at least hear from the key stakeholders, so that they can become partners in achieving the goals.

That's what I had to say in response to Mr. van Koeverden, who is kind of insulting everyone's intelligence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Ms. Goodridge, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate everything Mr. Thériault said. It's extremely important that we refrain from insulting the intelligence of the people here on the committee. It's truly preposterous; it's an insult. At my age, I know how to use Google, and I've used it before today. However, the realities out there have changed since the last time we talked about a similar bill. It's important that we have the highlights today, not from five years ago. To say that we don't need to hear from witnesses because it's already been done ignores the possibility that things have changed. I feel they have changed, because there is a code now. Changes have been made and I feel it's very important that we hear from people about all of this to make sure that we have the best possible bill for Canadians.