Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 19
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Health committee  It was the Toxics Use Reduction Institute's studies on the Massachusetts program, so certainly that information will be provided. That's the closest we have.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  Certainly.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  You've opened a huge area, but I'll try to get really focused, to the point. Again, I think the experience we've had historically with children and exposure to lead in communities is illustrative of the problems of trying to achieve what you're talking about, and there's also th

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  The challenge you pose is that it's hard enough getting the resources, as has been raised in this committee, to enforce the legislation in the first place. To then get the money for surveillance to ensure you can actually draw some connection between the two is even more difficul

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  I agree in part with what has been said about the importance of resources. That is a critical thing. I wouldn't agree that the bill as currently proposed provides for the most efficient use of the resources. The requirement for some form of pre-testing or spot-audit process gives

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  The comment I wanted to make was to follow the line of thought that I perceived you were taking, which is that in a situation where the product already has a recognized standard—and electrical products would be a good example—then that's your pre-test. But for those products that

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  I wanted to encourage you in the direction you're going with your questions, because I think where you're coming from is that in consumer products legislation, shouldn't those products contain labels that provide people with the information there are toxic chemicals in them? What

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  None at all.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  That's the heart of the first of the recommendations that we make, which I tried to make in our presentation. It has already been noted that the biggest challenge for us in Canada has been the imports, and really the only way you can have assurances to try to prevent that in adva

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  Wow. I think the response that was given by a previous witness on the question of using GHS as an alternative to putting labelling in the act is well stated. We've been hearing about this for a long time. There have been all sorts of things that have stood in the way. It may not

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  Thank you for the question. I think part of the problem is in the language we use, because it's hard to understand from my perspective what the confidentiality issue is dealing with this. “Confidentiality” is a broad word. A trade secret I understand; it is something that's spe

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  I very strongly concur. As was mentioned earlier, part of the problem is that there are not enough inspectors. There's also not a requirement that there be a strategy to utilize the inspection resources effectively in the mandate of the act. I think it's the two things together.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  That's right. That's our position.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King

Health committee  Well, certainly you're right in this particular context. CMP is a different strategy for different purposes.

June 2nd, 2009Committee meeting

Andrew King