Health committee  The chemicals management plan looks at the cumulative effects, and the risk assessments we do also look at cumulative effects.

Health committee  Thank you for the questions. The bill is intended, through the three principles that I enunciated in my opening remarks--active prevention, targeted oversight, and rapid response--to be, as my colleague Charles answered in response to the last question, something that will evolve to the market.

Health committee  Our intention in drafting this bill was not to double the number of inspectors. We analyzed the marketplace and saw its many problems and its complexity. We realized that the present number of inspectors was not sufficient to meet the current challenges. It was not a matter of just doubling the number of inspectors, but of being able to meet the challenges.

Health committee  The short answer is “no“. The natural products situation is somewhat unique. Some people are very concerned by the matter and by the legislation that deals with it. We wanted to make things clear. This really is the only situation like that.

Health committee  Thank you, Madam Chair, for the questions from the honourable member. I counted five questions, and I'll try to weave one answer through all of them while touching on each of the specific questions. We have had, and continue to have, extensive consultations on consumer product safety in general, and the act specifically, on a regular basis.

Health committee  Sure. Thank you, Madam Chairperson, for the invitation to appear before the Standing Committee on Health to provide an overview and to answer questions about Bill C-6, the proposed Canada Consumer Product Safety Act. My minister has asked me to convey to the committee her regrets.

Environment committee  Two points. My apologies to the committee if my remarks created any confusion, so let me attempt to reiterate. Health Canada is risk-based, so we do not respond solely to the hazards. We are not questioning the hazardous properties of these substances. The question, and what drives our regulatory actions and approval of substances, is the extent to which there is exposure that creates real risk for Canadians.

Environment committee  Furthermore, with respect to the substitution issue, what we are suggesting and what this committee has talked about during CEPA review is the notion of not replacing one substance with another without fully understanding the risks that substitution can create.

Environment committee  With respect, I believe I've answered that. We are finding those, and we intend to take action to prevent that.

Environment committee  To respond very directly to the question about pop bottles, our current evidence is that, no, it is not the case. Phthalates are used in a range of substances. On our test of products, though, we have concerns that we intend to act on with respect to children's toys that are not intended for the mouth, but which we know are being put in mouths.

Environment committee  Again, it's a very broad question. I think it's been answered that you can turn it over and look at the number on the bottom. In terms of your specific question on pop bottles, from the evidence we have today, the answer is no.

Environment committee  Yes, I will, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members. It's a pleasure to be here and to have the opportunity to speak to this bill. As you are aware, Health Canada is responsible for helping Canadians maintain and improve their health while respecting their individual choices and circumstances.

Environment committee  If it pleases the chair, just briefly, with different pieces of legislation, Canada has had different types of experience. Under CEPA, for example, our new substances notification program is viewed around the world as one of the strongest pieces of legislation for dealing with new products.

Environment committee  Are my answers ever really quick? I'll go as fast as I can. There are three parts I'll cover very quickly. First, that's why it's important for us to work internationally with other countries to make sure that what we don't like and what we've chosen to regulate in this country we put on international lists for which there is an international agreement not to use those things.

Environment committee  The short answer is yes. We would use different words, but I think the concept is the same. The challenge function launched on Friday is about having industry likely do with new substances what we would like them to do with existing substances, which is demonstrate to Environment Canada and Health Canada that they can use that substance in a way that does not cause harm to the environment or to human health, and that will include all the ranges.