International Trade Committee on Oct. 31st, 2023

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I see you enjoy sayings and comparisons. When you say “completely different”, it's as though we're comparing apples and oranges.

Would you please tell us more about that?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

We are the only G7 member country that regulates its products through Health Canada and the Food and Drugs Act.

Consequently, no harmonization as possible.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Until now, we've frequently evoked the COVID‑19 pandemic in support of the proposed regulations.

Am I mistaken or did the United States say at some point that it would stop exporting sanitizing products and keep them for itself? I remember a time when there were empty shelves in the pharmacies.

So it was the SMEs from here that had no expertise in this area and that had to turn on a dime and develop sanitizing products.

In other words, Canadian and American businesses weren't fighting on an equal footing at all. Some multinationals based and operating in the United States since forever still aren't competing on an equal footing with SMEs that have been operating in the sector for two or three years.

Could regulations like those being proposed make the gap even wider?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

Yes, this could contribute to it.

We discussed innovation earlier. Quebec and Canadian SMEs can innovate too, and we shouldn't get in their way, make them pay more or saddle them with longer delays.

We also discussed product availability during the pandemic. We're still experiencing the same situation with regard to pharmaceutical products and generic drugs. The more we import, the more problems we'll have.

The day China and India want their marbles back, we won't have to go to war; Canada will be in a bad way.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Let's try using numbers to clarify the situation.

Let's say the proposed regulations come into force. If American businesses in general want to export their products to Canada, exactly how long will they have to wait to do so?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

That'll depend on the products to be exported and whether they enter the equation, but they won't have to wait as long as Canadian businesses as a result of the steps involved in the approval and recognition process.

Then American businesses won't have to bear the same burden of ensuring that their products are safe as Canadian businesses, which will be operating under a heavier burden.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

What elements of American products are truly subject to audit now?

There's a lot of talk about reciprocity of standards virtually everywhere. We are a committee that focuses on trade, and the term often comes up in connection with free trade.

Earlier you mentioned a protectionist policy introduced by Canada for the benefit of Americans, and I liked the allusion.

Beyond the fact that we say we apply the principles of reciprocity theoretically, what are we really auditing?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

You should ask Health Canada that question.

We aren't saying that American products aren't good. We have to be clear on that point.

However, we must at least not harm Canadian and Quebec businesses, especially SMEs.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

So you're calling for a moratorium.

Is that correct?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

That's correct.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

How long should it last?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

It should last at least two years.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Why do you think that?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

We have to examine all the aspects and really improve the system. That's what we want. We don't want to block the proposed regulations; we just want to improve the system without interfering with Quebec businesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, sir.

We'll go on to Mr. Cannings for six minutes, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thanks to you both for being here today.

I'm going to start with Monsieur Lévesque.

You stated in your remarks that American companies would have lighter application requirements than Canadian companies, that it would take a shorter amount of time. Can you explain that?

I don't understand exactly how that works. Canadian companies have to go through Health Canada and American companies have to go through the EPA. What's the process? How is that different in terms of time, in terms of what they have to go through versus what Canadian companies go through?

[Stéphane Lévesque]

The proposed regulations will actually make it so that products approved in the United States will receive expedited review, at lower cost, by Health Canada.

In addition, then they won't be subject to the same monitoring requirements regarding safety and efficacy.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Okay, but you just said that products that have been approved in the United States.... A company there that is manufacturing a product that it wants to sell in the United States has to go through a process to get it approved in the United States. In Canada, the same thing applies for your industry. You have to get it approved in Canada. You seem to indicate that there was some difference in the time it takes to get it approved in the United States.

[Stéphane Lévesque]

No, it's here.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Okay, but you said that they were having an easier time of it when, the way I understand it, they've gone through perhaps a difficult process. I don't know. I was asking you what process they have to go through and how that compares with the Canadian process, because that's where the fairness comes in, I think.

[Stéphane Lévesque]

What you're saying there is actually interesting.

We're setting a dangerous precedent, in that Health Canada is starting to withdraw from its main role by relying on third-country approvals. It's a dangerous precedent because it's the first step. Then it will be natural health products and, after that, generic and innovative products. What will be the purpose of Health Canada later on?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I understand that criticism. I understand that concern, but it's different from the concern around fairness in the time it takes a company to get a product approved.

It comes up with a new product it wants to sell. Whether it's in the United States or Canada, it has to go through fairly rigorous application processes before it would be available in Canada. Whether you agree with relying on the EPA or not....

[Stéphane Lévesque]

I don't deny it. Yes, the EPA does a very good job. There can be very good products when they're approved. However, we have an entity called Health Canada, and it shouldn't rely on foreign approvals to approve a product in Canada. Let me give you an example.

We're in Canada here, in the north. It's cold and the transport chain isn't the same. If we don't take that into account, products won't be the same once they get here. Some products are deactivated by cold, others by heat. If we don't audit that here, the product will be worthless.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

You also implied that after the products are approved in Canada, Canadian companies have more stringent requirements that follow, whereas American companies would not. I'm still not clear on how that works.

[Stéphane Lévesque]

That's actually a good question for my colleague, Mr. Côté, because he's the expert in that area.

You can see the difference in clause 9 of the Biocides Regulations, which includes points that American companies won't have to comply with.