Madam Speaker, I am rising today in support of Montion No. 319. I must tell members and my colleague from Ottawa—Orléans that my support for this motion is tepid. It is tepid because the motion itself is tepid. I support the motion only because it is better than nothing and the issue of childhood obesity requires a response, and an urgent one at that.
Knowledge of something that creates harm creates an onus on us to respond. That is not just a principle of health promotion or disease prevention. It is just a principle and it is a principle from which we cannot waiver, a principle that is imperative to follow. When those who are being harmed are unable to protect themselves, such as with the case of childhood obesity, it is of critical importance.
So here is what we know. We know that childhood obesity is an enormous problem. As of 2007-08, data indicate that one in four Canadian adults were obese, 60% of adults were overweight or obese and that is 14.1 million Canadians. Overall, 26% of kids aged two to seventeen are overweight or obese. Childhood obesity rates have nearly quadrupled in the past three decades and the rate of obesity among aboriginal children is significantly higher than it is for others. We know also that obesity in children and adults impairs health in some very serious ways. It has been suggested that 90% of type 2 diabetes, 80% of coronary disease and one-third of cancers could be prevented by healthy eating, regular exercise and non-smoking. It has been estimated that the health cost most consistently linked to obesity is about $4.6 billion to $7.1 billion annually. Those costs represent an enormous increase of estimates over just a decade earlier. Most shockingly and importantly, it is estimated that as many as 48,000 deaths per year in Canada are related to poor nutrition. The disappointing and disheartening, if not outright tragic, thing about what we know is that we have known this for a long time.
In 2007, the Standing Committee on Health presented its report entitled “Healthy Weights for Healthy Kids”. It was a report about this very subject, childhood obesity. That report begins with this very clear statement. It says, “Childhood obesity has become an 'epidemic' in Canada”. In response to the question, “How serious is the problem?”, the report says, “The committee was shocked to hear how much overweight and obesity rates among children and adolescents in Canada have increased over the past three decades”. It goes on to state, “The situation for Aboriginal children is the most alarming”.
What followed was a list of 13 recommendations. The report talked about establishing targets; establishing a comprehensive public awareness and promotional campaign, which is obviously useful; implementing mandatory, standardized, simple front-of-package labelling about nutritional values on food; establishing regulations limiting trans fats; collecting data; creating knowledge exchange; creating a research capacity and a research focus on the issue of childhood obesity; leadership mechanisms, including federal leadership of all things; assessment and reporting; evaluation; establishment of a reliable baseline to assist in the research and management of this process; the provision of standards and programs; and so very importantly, funding. The final recommendation called for new and dedicated infrastructure funding to facilitate access to varied options for children with respect to quality physical activity and healthy food choices. All of this was to be done in collaboration with provincial and territorial partners. It was such a sensible response to such a critical problem, but what happened?
I am the father of three kids. I used to be an attentive father before I got elected to this place, but I still do most of the family shopping when I am home on weekends. If we were making progress on these recommendations, I dare say, as a father, I would know about it. However, it has eluded us. All we hear about are programs, et cetera, in speeches from folks on the other side of this place. The recommendations of that committee have not been acted upon, certainly not in any discernible, meaningful way. I know the government has been involved in creating the Declaration on Prevention and Promotion and Curbing Childhood Obesity but what is incumbent on us is action.
I heard my colleague from Ottawa—Orléans respond to a question earlier in the House that he always responds first with pedagogy. That is an important component, without question, but hardly a substitute for action, action based on the kinds of rigorous principles expressed in those 2007 report recommendations.
The kind of action that this motion contemplates does not at all reflect the serious nature of this issue, nor the full knowledge that we have of the causes and the outcomes, both health and financial, of childhood obesity.
In this motion my colleague proposes to continue dialogue, to encourage discussion, to encourage individuals and organizations, and to consider. It is hardly an adequate response, hardly a principled response in light of what we know about childhood obesity and its impacts on children and our health care system.
The NDP has made a call for action. It has consistently called for regulations on trans fats in foods to reduce the contribution to poor diet and to childhood obesity. A colleague of mine from the NDP caucus has introduced previously a private member's motion to regulate the level of trans fats in foods.
The NDP has consistently questioned the Minister of Health about regulation of processed foods, including why the minister cancelled the plan to lower trans fats in foods and why the minister has not listened to the call to lower sodium in foods.
We have heard today from the other side a lot about programs and steps and so on. However, as I mentioned before, I am a father to three kids, and it is important to this debate today, because if meaningful action was taking place on childhood obesity, if it was real, I would know about it as a parent.