Mr. Speaker, in the last Parliament, the Liberals put forward Bill C-47, a budget bill that had buried within it provisions that attacked access to natural health products and attacked the natural health product industry. This was not stand-alone legislation. There was no consultation with the people who were affected. It was simply an effort to sneak through legislative changes attacking natural health products, buried in a budget bill.
Conservatives opposed that budget. We opposed the fiscal direction the government was taking, and as part of that, of course, we opposed the attack on natural health products. We tried to bring attention to this legislatively sneaky and substantively harmful action by the government of attacking Canadians' access to natural health products. Following that, my colleague from the Red Deer area put forward legislation to reverse the changes.
Now, in the new Parliament, there is a bill trying to restore the previous situation with respect to access to natural health products. That is now Bill C-224. I commend my colleague for this important work to restore the long-standing, well-functioning, pre-existing system for access to and regulation of natural health products and to undo the sneaky Liberal changes that were contained in their massive omnibus budget legislation.
At issue here is whether natural health products are subject to the same levels of regulation, administrative burden, etc. that are associated with pharmaceuticals. In many cases, when we are talking about natural health products, we are talking about vitamins and minerals, which people take to replace what may be deficiencies in their diets. There are certain nutrients, vitamins and minerals that we are designed as human beings to have as part of our diet, but for whatever reason, perhaps it is where we are, what we eat or aspects of what foods we have access to, some people have certain deficiencies in vitamins or minerals, which we seek to make up for through this kind of supplementation.
However, in the case especially of vitamins and minerals, we are talking about the very natural effort to restore what had historically been part of our diet as humans, to ensure that we are taking in products that are naturally required for the normal, healthy functioning of the human person. One example that gets cited often is vitamin D. We live in a cold country, if anyone had not noticed, which means that people spend relatively less time outside here, living in Canada, than they might have in other places and times, where our ancestors came from.
This means that generally we have lower levels of vitamin D, which is a vitamin we can get through exposure to the sun. In fact, I think there was a lot of good data during the COVID period identifying that there were greater risks associated with COVID for people with vitamin D deficiency. I think this was well established and well documented, and I encouraged the government at the time to share and promote this information.
Many Canadians, recognizing the importance of having the vitamins and minerals that we are supposed to have, and recognizing the risks of deficiencies, choose to supplement their diet with theses kinds of natural health products. Applying the levels of regulation that are associated with pharmaceutical interventions just does not make sense. It clearly is a miscategorization, an application of the wrong kind of regulation, and I think this is widely understood and widely appreciated.
The changes the government snuck into its omnibus budget bill did not make sense substantively and did not respect the choice of Canadians. Regardless of an individual's particular opinion about a natural health product, we have the means of accessing information about them, and individuals can and do make considered choices about this. We do not need an overly paternalistic government telling people that they must have the same regulation for vitamins and minerals as is applied to pharmaceutical products.
I am strongly in support of this bill. It aligns with choice. It recognizes the realities of the benefits of these products, benefits that many Canadians have seen and understand.
Briefly, I want to comment on a related issue, which is access to training for allied health professionals. In the course of my work as the shadow minister for employment, I have been speaking a lot with people in the field of traditional Chinese medicine who are very concerned about a change that was snuck into this year's budget bill. The government is proposing to cut off student grants to students attending private for-profit institutions, which is where the vast majority of students in Canada studying to become traditional Chinese medicine practitioners go.
We have a situation where the government is making changes, buried in a budget bill, that attack access to natural health products. Then we have a case where, again buried in a budget bill, the government is attacking access to training for those who are practising traditional Chinese medicine. This makes it very difficult for people in the Chinese community but also for people outside the Chinese community who benefit from or rely on traditional Chinese medicine to access these kinds of services.
In a free multicultural country, we want Canadians to have choice and flexibility and to be able to access the wisdom and experience of other cultures and other traditions. I think there is value in people having the choice and the flexibility to do that without the government proceeding with multiple attacks against these communities, which are always, it seems, buried in budget bills.
I commend my colleague for undoing or seeking to undo the damage the Liberals have done in terms of access to natural health products. This bill, Bill C-224, is a great bill that is trying to undo that damage. We will continue this work as we see more persistent attacks from the Liberals on this community.
Of all the problems we face in this country, it is hard to understand why it has been a priority for the Liberals to make life more difficult for people who are trying to take vitamins or trying to access acupuncture but are worried they would not be able to as a result of these changes to student grants. I would ask the government why, with all the problems in this country and all the problems in the world, it chose this attack on responsible, law-abiding citizens who simply are trying to exercise choice and trying to be healthy. That is a question that maybe we will hear an answer from the government on at some point.
I look forward to hearing from my colleague, the sponsor of this bill. It is a great bill. I look forward to supporting it and supporting the people in my riding and across the country who rely on natural health products to maintain and manage their health.