Madam Speaker, there are six amendments in Group No. 6. Five of them are from the NDP and one is put forward by Reform.
Our amendment, Motion No. 38, deals with the definition of endocrine disrupters in clause 43. When we talk of endocrine disrupters many Canadians today are still uncertain as to what they are. This is for a very good reason. Hormone disrupters is a relatively new concept that has only come to light in recent years. It is still a matter of intense study and research. Hormone disrupting substances were first made popular by Theo Colborn in his book, Our Stolen Future , published around three years ago.
Hormones are produced and released into the blood stream by a variety of glands. Hormones are essential for regulating many of our biological processes. They guide the development of sexual characteristics, the immune and nervous systems, the brain, and behavioural characteristics.
Our hormones and our glands together make up our endocrine system. That is what we have been talking about: the endocrine system, our hormones and our glands. Hormone disrupters allegedly disrupt the endocrine system and may cause birth defects, cancer, genetic damage or even death. This is now a matter of international study and research.
As I stated when addressing the Group No. 4 amendments, when Bill C-32 was originally tabled in the House it contained a definition of hormone disrupters which was consistent with the internationally accepted definition. This working definition of endocrine disrupters was adopted by the OECD in the United Kingdom in December 1996.
Unfortunately some members of the standing committee voted to come up with a new definition of hormone disrupters. This new definition puts Canada at a disadvantage as we will be out of step with the rest of the world. Canada should move forward in unison with the rest of the world to tackle key emerging endocrine issues. However, as our definition will be inconsistent we will not benefit as well from research and studies conducted elsewhere. Similarly our results and experience will not benefit others in the international community. Canada will benefit little, if at all, by going on its own in this very serious issue.
In conclusion, there is one significant amendment in this group which must be considered, and that is to ensure that Canada's definition of endocrine disrupting substances is consistent with that of the rest of the world.