Debates of June 10th, 2016

Question No. 158

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Finance has not purchased any advertising for budget 2016.

Question No. 163

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

With regard to the details of any consultations undertaken or advice received by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, his office, or his Department, for the period of November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016, regarding a royal regime for farmer saved seed under the Plant Breeders Rights Act: for each consultation, (i) what was the date, (ii) which people were present, (iii) were there any recorded positions on this issue taken at this meeting?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, including the Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency, did not conduct any consultations with respect to a royalty regime for farmer saved seed under the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act between November 4, 2015, and April 22, 2016.

Question No. 170

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

With regard to the disposition of government assets, for the period of November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016: (a) on how many occasions has the government repurchased or reacquired a lot which had been disposed of in accordance with the Treasury Board Directive on the Disposal of Surplus Materiel; and (b) for each occasion identified in (a), what was (i) the description or nature of the item or items which constituted the lot, (ii) the sale account number or other reference number, (iii) the date on which the sale closed, (iv) the price at which the item was disposed of to the buyer, (v) the price at which the item was repurchased from the buyer?

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Mr. Speaker, PSPC has not repurchased or reacquired a lot that has been disposed of in accordance with the Treasury Board directive on the disposal of surplus materiel in the period indicated.

Question No. 173

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

With regard to the Safe Food for Canadians Act, Bill S-11, 41st Parliament, First session, what is the status of the implementation of regulations related to this Act?

[Jane Philpott, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, while developing the new regulatory framework for food safety, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has undertaken extensive engagement with stakeholders.

The CFIA hosted two large forums, the Food Forum in June 2013 and the Healthy and Safe Food Forum in June 2014, along with extensive webinars and opportunities for written input to gather stakeholder feedback on proposals for the next regulatory framework.

In 2015, the CFIA released a revised proposal to solicit further feedback and undertook in-depth engagement with micro and small businesses to better understand the potential burden for these businesses and what they would need to comply with the proposed regulations. The comment period on the preliminary draft text closed on July 31, 2015.

Four years of engagement and analysis with more than 15,500 stakeholders has resulted in over 500 written submissions on the proposed safe food for Canadians regulations. The CFIA has undertaken detailed review of this extensive feedback and is preparing the regulatory package.

Under the regulatory process, www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rtrap-parfa/gfrpg-gperf/gfrpg-gperf02-eng.asp, the next opportunity to engage on the draft regulations will occur when the regulatory text is published in the Canada Gazette, part I in late fall 2016.

Question No. 174

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

With regard to the findings of scientists at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada with respect to sugar: (a) what scientific evidence exists regarding the biological difference between naturally occurring sugar and added sugar in food; (b) what ability does the Department have to detect the difference between naturally occurring sugar and added sugar through standard food testing methods; (c) is the Department aware of any health benefits of a labelling requirement for added sugar on consumer food products, and, if so, what are they; and (d) and is the Department aware of any potential problems that may be encountered in requiring separate labelling for added sugar on consumer food products, and if so, what are they?

[Jane Philpott, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to helping Canadians make better food choices for themselves and their families. This includes taking action to improve food labels to ensure that Canadians have the information they need to help them make more informed and healthier choices, including more information on sugars.

With regard to (a), the scientific evidence related to sugar metabolism indicates that there is no biological difference between naturally occurring and added sugar. All sugars present in food are digested and absorbed as one of three monosaccharides, glucose, fructose, and galactose, whether they naturally occur in foods, such as fructose in an apple, or are added to foods, such as fructose in a fruit-flavoured beverage.

With regard to (b), it is not possible to distinguish naturally occurring from added sugars in a food product using standard analytical methods.

With regard to (c), a healthy eating pattern, such as that recommended by Canada’s food guide, leaves limited room for added sugars in the diet. To help Canadians make informed food choices regarding their consumption of sugars, Health Canada proposed two new measures for the labelling of sugars as part of its proposed regulatory amendments to nutrition labelling regulations, published in Canada Gazette, part I, in June 2015.

First, Health Canada proposed that the nutrition facts table include a declaration of the % daily value, DV, for total sugars, based on a DV of 100 grams, to help consumers identify if there is a little sugar, which is 5% DV or less, or a lot of sugar, which is 15% DV or more, in their food.

Second, Health Canada proposed to group sugar-based ingredients, such as molasses, honey, and brown sugar, under the common name “sugars” in the ingredients list. Grouping sugar-based ingredients together provides a clearer indication of the amount of sugars in the food product relative to other ingredients, as ingredients are listed in descending order of their amount in the product.

This would raise awareness of both the sources and the contribution of all sugars, added or naturally occurring, to the total composition of the foods to the consumer.

With regard to (d), analytical methods cannot distinguish between naturally occurring and added sugars, making it a challenge for the verification of information on the nutrition facts table should there be a requirement to declare added sugars. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which is responsible for enforcing the regulations, would therefore have to rely on record-keeping to verify compliance with the requirement to declare the amount of added sugars.

Question No. 175

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

With regard to the log books for personal use of ministerial executive vehicles, for the period of November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016: (a) what is the total number of entries for each executive vehicle, broken down by vehicle; (b) what are the dates, time, and length for each entry; (c) what is the trip description, if any, of each entry; (d) what is the identification, if available, of the family member or member of the household that was the driver for each entry; and (e) what is the total number of kilometres travelled for personal use?

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

:Mr. Speaker, with regard to parts (a) through (e) of the question, the Privy Council Office has no information to provide regarding the log books for the personal use of ministerial executive vehicles for the period of November 4, 2015 to April 22, 2016. When processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the Privacy Act and the principles set out in the Access to Information Act, therefore certain information has been withheld on the grounds that it constitutes personal information.

Question No. 177

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

With regard to any consultations by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, his staff, or officials at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, concerning amendments to the regulations concerning the humane transport of animals, from November 3, 2015, to April 22, 2016: for each consultation, identify (i) the persons and organizations consulted, (ii) the government officials present, (iii) the date of the consultation, (iv) the positions presented by those consulted?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, between November 3, 2015 and April 22, 2016, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency provided updates to stakeholder groups on the proposal to amend the health of animals regulations regarding humane transportation; however, no consultations took place.

The CFIA has been consulting with stakeholders about the regulatory proposal since 2006. Stakeholders included national industry umbrella organizations, livestock and poultry transporters, and retail organizations, as well as animal welfare and animal rights groups. The CFIA carried out a pre-consultation with targeted groups in 2013, and followed up with two economic questionnaires to over 1,100 individual stakeholders in 2014.

In addition, the CFIA continues to gather data from specific industry groups to validate the cost-benefit analysis portion of the regulatory impact analysis statement.

The proposed amendments will be pre-published in the Canada Gazette, part I, in fall 2016 as outlined in the CFIA forward regulatory plan 2016-18, available at www.inspection.gc.ca/about-the-cfia/acts-and-regulations/forward-regulatory-plan/2016-2018/eng/1429123874172/1429123874922. This will provide all stakeholders with another opportunity to comment.

Question No. 180

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

With regard to court cases between the government and Aboriginal communities and organizations, as of April 22, 2016: (a) how many court cases is the government currently engaged in with First Nations, Métis or Inuit communities or organizations as either an appellant, respondent or intervenor, and what are these cases; (b) how many court cases is the government currently engaged in with First Nations, Métis or Inuit communities or organizations in which the government is the respondent; (c) how much is the government paying to engage in court cases with First Nations, Métis or Inuit communities or organizations as either an appellant, respondent or intervenor, broken down by (i) year, (ii) case; and (d) how many lawyers does the Department of Justice employ to work on Aboriginal court cases?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, this request poses challenges that cannot be overcome.

The information required is not readily available. It would require extensive consultations with all government departments. Each department’s inventory would have to be manually searched, and files dealing with aboriginal claims separated. The large number of files involved make this unfeasible.

Justice lawyers are not assigned to work solely on the types of cases addressed by the question so an accurate response to part (d) is not possible.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 126, 127, and 140 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is it the pleasure of the House that the aforementioned questions be made orders for return and be tabled immediately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 126

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

With regard to the sale of marijuana products, since November 4, 2015: (a) how many licensed dealers have been approved by Health Canada to sell marijuana for medical purposes; (b) how many inspections of licensed dealers have been completed; (c) have there been any changes to the number of inspectors available for this work; (d) have there been any changes to the amount of funding available for this work; (e) how much marijuana has been reported lost, stolen, or wasted from all licensed dealers; (f) how many licensed dealers have been authorized to sell products other than dried marijuana; (g) how many inspections have taken place for the dealers identified in (f); (h) have any reviews taken place to ensure that edible products have not increased risks to children, and, if so, were any recommendations made; (i) how many reports of adverse drug reactions have been received by Health Canada or licensed dealers, and what were the health impacts; (j) what measures have been taken to address illegal advertising by marijuana compassion clubs and other unauthorized dealers; and (k) has Health Canada initiated or asked for a legal opinion for whether or not the government restricts the sale of various forms of marijuana and, if so, which forms of marijuana are available for sale and which are not?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 127

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

With regard to supervised injection sites approved or in process of application since November 4, 2015: (a) how many supervised injection sites did the government receive applications for in (i) total across Canada, (ii) Toronto, (iii) Ottawa, (iv) Montreal, (v) other municipalities; (b) has the government followed the Respect for Communities Act in this plan; (c) when planning the establishment of supervised injection sites in Canada, (i) has the government consulted with communities, neighborhoods, local stakeholders, elected officials of the municipalities, and local police services; (ii) exercised the authority within the Respect for Communities Act to publicly post applications for any existing and future supervised injection site exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; and (d) how many times did the Minister request amendments to the application in order to improve health and safety controls?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 140

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

With regard to Minister’s permits issued by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration for the period of November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016: how many were issued, including for each, (i) the date the permit was issued, (ii) the circumstances for the issuance of the permit, (iii) the reason the permit was required, (iv) the justification for issuing the permit?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.