Finance committee  Thank you. If I may, I'll add to what was a very good question. One thing that I think we are all going to face with both this and, of course, the targets in the new modernization of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act is this: When you talk about non-animal testing alte

Finance committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's certainly a privilege to appear before this committee. I've known several of the members for some time. I knew Mr. Blaikie's father a long time ago, when I was in Manitoba, so it's a delight to be here. I'm in a rather enviable situation, in

Environment committee  Well, one, don't ensure any amendments that create duplicative regulation on finished consumer products. Two, I think there needs to be a real review within Environment Canada about how they administer regulations on finished consumer products and also how to become a lot more co

Environment committee  I can't get specifically into that matter, but generally speaking, when the CEPA process did the review, going back some years ago, of in-commerce substances, they did an assortment based on highest risk, medium risk and lowest risk, and they batched the highest risk and did the

Environment committee  We've just gone through, in the last few years, a major reform and modernization of labelling with non-prescription drugs with Health Canada, with natural health products and now with cosmetics. We've gone through this process. In each case, we've made a very strong case for enh

Environment committee  Yes. We're somewhere in $12 billion to $15 billion a year in retail sales. Very importantly, we're a major exporter of cosmetic products around the world, as well as a major importer. There were literally tens of millions of lipsticks made in Canada last year that were exported,

Environment committee  Yes. In the original draft of the bill, when we had gone through it we were very supportive of it. The concern with respect to CUSMA would be the addition of another set of labelling requirements under the CEPA legislation while we already have mandatory ingredient labelling and

Environment committee  Specifically for our industry, very little of the information we have is protected by patents or other copyright. The real question for us is, if you're bringing a new substance, and you provide data, etc. for the regulator, no one has any problem with.... The regulator should s

Environment committee  Yes. It's not to prevent people from seeing the data. The regulator should have it. It's allowing free riders on the work that has been done.

Environment committee  The gazetting process is a known, established means, and I wouldn't have enough feedback from my industry to give you a fair assessment of that provision.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. Under CUSMA, there's a cosmetics annex in the sectoral annexes that the Parliament of Canada endorsed. There were a number of principles with respect to how cosmetics are to be regulated. We're the only sector that has this provision in CUSMA. They i

Environment committee  We could, if you are interested.

Environment committee  I think what we're looking for is that there wouldn't be duplicative labelling requirements put on finished consumer products. Certainly, under CUSMA, that would be contrary to the commitments of the Government of Canada, endorsed by the Parliament of Canada, for cosmetic product

Environment committee  To some degree, it's been argued that the watch-list is kind of like the whole SNAc process of warning, etc. Some in industry are worried about it. I speak as a former regulatory minister for Manitoba, where I was responsible for several departments. If a list is flagging a sub

Environment committee  Pardon me. I wasn't able to hear you.