44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 30, 2023
- 11:14:53 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you very much, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
One thing we've noted here is that we have probably had more concerns from Canadians with respect to natural health products than anything else.
This is a sampling of those. When you begin to receive these stacks, it's like Miracle on 34th Street when you saw stacks of mail to prove who Santa Claus was. That's a small smattering thereof.
I do have a motion that I'm going to move, Chair.
I think Canadians need to know that we have heard them loud and clear on the importance of this topic, by virtue of the vast number of complaints that we've received from consumers. They want someone to stand up for them—we want them to know that's going to be the Conservative Party—for their freedom of choice and for the opportunity not to decimate an industry. Very clearly, we know that the cost is going up.
There's another analogy, Chair. It has been given multiple times in the House of Commons. It talks about how, when you tax the farmer who grows the food and tax the trucker who ships the food, the person who buys the food is going to have to pay more for that. We know very clearly that this particular case is the exact same situation. What we're asking here is that.... Producers, manufacturers and distributors are going to have to pay more in the natural health product sector. Obviously when that happens, there's a trickle-down effect and consumers will end up paying more.
We also know very clearly, Chair, that when consumers have to pay more, there will be less choice in the market, because there will be those particular manufacturers and distributors who are not able to sustain their presence in the market. We also know very clearly that, in this particular sector, Canada is the envy of the world when we look at the regulations around natural health products. When we see those things, it doesn't mean that Canada doesn't need to continue to improve. Even if you're a world leader, obviously you should continue to try to be better. With that being said, should you do that at the expense of an entire industry and also when Canadians clearly want to have their choice?
I was speaking to one of my learned colleagues today. When we talk about choice and about Canadians having to do their research.... Guess what. It snowed today. Winter is coming. We all need to put winter tires on our cars, and we have to do research there. That's an incredibly important part of being a Canadian and being a good consumer. It's about safety. It's about choice. It's about cost. We all have to do our own research there. We don't have government reaching into our lives and suggesting that it needs to be the final arbiter of what is right and what is wrong in everyone's lives.
I would suggest that this particular industry is somewhat akin to that. Yes, it is about personal choice and it's about having information available, but it's also about the fact that people need to have the ability to make those choices themselves. When that happens, that's very important. It is about safety, but it is also about freedom. Again, this is also tied to a significant industry here in Canada.
The motion is as follows:
That, given that the proposed cost recovery and labelling regulations on natural health products are expected to have negative impacts on both Canadian businesses and consumer choice, the committee call upon the Minister of Health to immediately revoke these changes, and that the committee report this motion to the House.
Why is this important? Again, it's about consumer freedom of choice. It's about Canadian businesses being affected. It's also about, perhaps, the unfair application of these rules to international companies.
Very clearly, we know that there's an international economy around natural health products. We also know, very clearly, that because Canadians want to continue to have choice, if they're not able to have that in the Canadian market, then it's very easy to purchase these products online and have them shipped to their homes in quantities for personal use.
They will not have the appropriate labels. They will not have the safeguards in place that the Canadian system does. Instead of tearing down a Canadian system, I suggest that it would be exceedingly important that we work with industry to continue to build up this incredible industry that has flourished in Canada, as evidenced by this gigantic stack of mailers that has been sent to every one of our offices, including, I know, my colleague's across the way. They specifically mentioned to me that this is probably the issue that the individual over there has seen the biggest amount of correspondence on in the entire two years that this Parliament has been in session. He or she shall remain nameless, just to be kind to them.
When we look at that and understand that Canadians are considerably concerned about their access to natural health products, and understand that Canadians believe that the regulatory framework we have at the current time allows them to access products that are safe and that they have the opportunity to look at themselves, then it is important. We do know very clearly that the Liberal government wants to regulate everything in our lives. They want to regulate the Internet—what we can see and what we can hear and what can be posted. We know very clearly that, yes, the Internet has ostentatious claims of this and that or the other thing. I was watching something this morning that said, “You shouldn't drink cold water before you eat.” There's some negative effect, but when we look at these things, people also have incredible access through the Internet, which is now being censored here in Canada, to good information as well.
I was thinking this morning about a reference I'd heard about how much protein you could possibly eat in one sitting, how that may or may not be absorbed, and how much you could have. You very quickly come upon a trusted source, the Mayo Clinic....
Chair, I'm not sure what our colleague is doing in the video feed. Maybe he was taking a picture, but I'm not sure. Maybe someone could communicate with Dr. Hanley to clarify that. It was very distracting, nonetheless.
Do you know what? There is great information available out there when people specifically want to attempt to find the information and know the sources that can be incredibly useful in our ability to do our own research. The sad part, of course, is that in Canada over the last several years, everybody has become their own expert. People don't want to believe doctors and scientists and folks like that anymore. They read something on the Internet and then suddenly it becomes true. I do believe that a lack of belief in science and scientific analysis needs to be corrected. I don't believe that regulating natural health products further and making them less available is the way to do that. I don't believe that in any way, shape or form.
Understanding very clearly that the stakeholders we've discussed these changes with, especially the cost recovery changes—
1271 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 11:24:47 a.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you very much, Chair.
Again, the arbiter of this committee has intervened, sadly, to want to give his opinion on how committees should run. This motion has been duly tabled before this committee. It was available for everyone to see, and it's an important motion. I would hope that my honourable NDP colleague would support the motion to defeat the Liberal government's, sponsored by his NDP colleagues, attempt to make changes to decimate an industry and remove freedom of choice from Canadians. That would be important.
Returning to the matter at hand, we have spoken to many stakeholders, as I hope that many of my colleagues across the floor have as well, to understand that the almost incalculable regulations that have been put forward by Health Canada make it difficult to understand exactly how much these regulations are going to mean to Canadian manufacturers and distributors of natural health products. However, we do know very clearly that, when attempting to give these estimates, many businesses could see losses in revenue of hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is what leads very clearly to the significant belief that many Canadian businesses would actually go out of business. The industry would estimate that one in five businesses in Canada would go out of business related to these unfair and overburdensome regulatory changes.
When we look at that, we begin to understand that there is good information available out there. Couple that with the need for Canadians to have freedom of choice and the ability to say that this is how they wish to manage their own health. Are Canadians going to make mistakes with respect to that? That is absolutely possible, but we cannot protect every citizen from every eventuality. That is not a style of government that any of us wishes to participate in.
We have governments that absolutely control every movement and every thought that you have—now, that is not a country that I would like to live in—or a government that attempts to meet every anticipated need that one could have in their life.
Therefore, in an industry such as the natural health products industry, which is underscored by the fact that people want to manage their own health—and have the ability to do so—I would suggest that the regulatory changes we see coming forward would be untenable, not just from a fiscal perspective but from a freedom perspective.
The other thing I would like to bring forward is that, when we had the panel from Health Canada here, and even in their follow-up information, which was provided to us in written format, they continued to talk about some 700 people who may have been harmed in some way by natural health products.
Chair, I would suggest that at some point, it would be quite fascinating if this committee sat together to attempt to access this database. There are no other words for it, but it's inaccessible and quite ridiculous in how it is framed. That then allows this Liberal government and Health Canada bureaucrats to be able to sit behind their numbers and say, “This actually does exist. There are 700 people, some of whom may have been harmed and may have been hospitalized.” When you don't have a database that is clear and searchable and would stand as a reference to say this is exactly where these numbers came from, that is not a helpful reference. Indeed, I would say it is a useless reference.
Certainly when you look at the experience that we have on our team, not just with our members of Parliament but with our staff, and still are unable to make any sense out of the main reference used to support these regulatory changes, I would say that it is nothing but a sham and a sleight of hand.
To underscore this, Chair—and I know committee members know this—I was a family doctor for 26 years. I wrote a lot of prescriptions, and I believe in the science that exists. It has helped people to live longer and suffer less. However, we know very clearly from a good reference that every year in this country, 50,000 seniors are hospitalized—not just harmed but hospitalized—by the use of prescription medications. Does that mean we should decimate that industry, that we should make it almost impossible, that we should add useless labels to people's pill bottles, that we should say people don't have the freedom to make their own choices with all of the same regulations and adding to them, even though they have perhaps stricter regulations than those on natural health products at the current time? Because that many more people just in the seniors group are hospitalized by prescription drugs, does that mean we can expect an assault on prescription drugs as well?
We know very clearly that prescription medications and over-the-counter medications have potential and serious side effects, but we also know there are benefits. Therefore, when we allow Canadians to have this freedom of choice in a sector, as I said previously, which would be the envy of the rest of the world, and we know clearly that is a desire Canadians have, and we have a shady database on which the decision-making was based, and we know this certainly is something that will decimate an industry, and we know very clearly that the industry is not in favour of said changes, then, Chair, I do believe we need to speak up loudly and vociferously on behalf of Canadians. We need to let them know clearly that Conservatives wish them to continue to have their freedom of choice and that we wish to fight the regulations proposed on their behalf. We wish to fight those regulations proposed by the Minister of Health and Health Canada.
That is the reason, Chair, we have moved this motion. I realize there are folks here to testify on this topic. I want to be respectful of that.
The other part of it though is, as my colleague has been wont to bring forward many times, this committee is the master of its own destiny. Therefore, if we wish to have further meetings on this topic and have more stakeholders present and more witnesses present, including members of the public, then we are certainly able to do this.
I would suggest, given this incredible stack of papers that everyone in this committee has received, adding more meetings to the study of the natural health products sector and the proposed draconian regulatory changes by Health Canada and by the Liberal government, supported by the NDP, would not be such a bad idea.
Chair, I shall leave it at that.
Thank you.
1143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 12:02:51 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Chair, I'd like to request a recorded vote, please.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 12:06:44 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
I'm sorry, Chair, but you said $8,250. Do we have an idea whether it will potentially be 10% or 20% more or less?
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
