Addressing the Emerging Issues in Customs Conference: Canada's proposed food and consumer safety legislation

Speech for

The Honourable Tony Clement Minister of Health and Minister for FedNor

Addressing the Emerging Issues in Customs Conference:
Canada's proposed food and consumer safety legislation

April 22, 2008
Mississauga, Ontario

Check against delivery.

Introduction

It's my pleasure to talk to you all today, during a time when our government is taking important new actions to improve product safety and better protect Canadians.

In my time here today, I want to address some of our recent actions;

How they're designed to help Canadians;

How they connect with your business operations;

And how they are well-informed and targeted on countering high risks to the health and safety of the public with as minimal impact as possible on business.

Action on BPA

To begin, I'm sure most of you have heard about the action we're taking on bisphenol A.

It's a chemical used primarily to make polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins - and it's one of some 200 substances that we've designated for priority review under our Chemicals Management Plan.

On Saturday, we published the draft science assessment for a 60 day public consultation.

It tells us that most Canadians need not be concerned.

But, we have concluded that early development could be sensitive to the effects of bisphenol A.

While our science tells us exposure levels to newborns and infants are below the levels that cause effects, we're choosing to be safe rather than sorry.

Consequently, barring any new, relevant and compelling information coming forward during the public consultation period, it is our intention to ban the importation, sale and advertising of polycarbonate baby bottles.

Our decision reflects the fact that this substance is effective for making products like hockey helmets, CDs and DVDs. Likewise, people can keep using hard plastic water bottles and tableware if they so choose.

But when it comes to baby bottles, where adding hot liquids could cause the substance to leach from the products and be consumed by infants, this is where we're acting to protect Canadians.

In other words, we investigated, assessed the risk, and are taking targeted action to prevent problems.

Action Plan

This is consistent with the philosophy underpinning our Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan and proposed legislation to bring our product safety system up to speed with today's global, economic realities.

In taking action to protect health and safety, we couldn't do so effectively in isolation from economic factors.

On one hand, going too far would result in cumbersome, border-clogging, investment-choking regulation that would reduce Canadians' access to new, innovative products.

On the other, doing too little would risk Canada being made a dumping ground for substandard, unsafe items.

In moving to modernize our approach, we've consulted significantly with consumers, patients and industries.

As a result, we're focusing on:

• active prevention, to stop as many problems as possible before they occur;
• targeted oversight, so the government can play its appropriate role by keeping a closer watch over products that pose a higher risk to health and safety; and
• rapid response, so we can take action more quickly and effectively to problems that do occur.

To remodel our safety system along these lines, on April 8^th, we tabled Bill C-51, which seeks to amend the Food and Drugs Act; and C-52, which is a new, proposed Canada Consumer Product Safety Act.

And today I want to take some time to talk to you about our Bills and answer some questions you may have.

Bill C-51

I'll begin with Bill C-51, to modernize the Food and Drugs Act.

And please allow me to start by addressing the words of some ill-informed critics out there falsely saying our proposed legislation will weaken drug approval processes.

In fact, we propose maintaining a rigorous assessment of health products prior to making them available. In addition, we're proposing to gain the ability to continuously monitor the safety of products even after they are approved.

This represents a new way of doing business in Canada, and it's an approach that's been adopted, or being enacted, by our major trading partners.

Our intent is bringing Canada's requirements in line with other regulators, and providing solid support and guidance to industries as we do so.

On top of that, Bill C-51 would provide the authority we now lack to make a recall as soon as we know there's a problem.

Today, that's up to companies, and for the most part, problems have been rare.

But we're seeking to gain the new authority to reassure the public that the government can, and will, act to protect health and safety as early as possible.

In addition, we propose raising maximum fines to put us on even ground with major trading partners.

As a result, Globe and Mail health columnist André Picard wrote last week, "Bill C-51 is good public policy and long-overdue legislation."

Given the nature of this conference, I'm sure you're all far more interested in hearing about the food safety elements of Bill C-51, particularly as they relate to importing.

On food safety, our proposed new legislation will be updated to take earlier action - starting at the point of importation rather than the point of sale - so more problems can be prevented before they reach consumers.

This Bill also proposes allowing products, persons or establishments to be registered or licensed.

This would permit the Government to proactively identify food importers and the foods that they bring into Canada - information that's vital in the event of a safety incident.

It would also allow us to better focus on higher risk items without needlessly constricting the movement of lower risk ones.

Bill C-52

Now, let me move on to Bill C-52, the proposed new Canada Consumer Product Safety Act, to replace Part I of the Hazardous Products Act.

Under Bill C-52, we would implement a general prohibition on the manufacture, importation, advertisement and sale of consumer products that are dangerous to human health or safety.

In addition, we are seeking the authority to require mandatory reporting of health and safety issues, upon official request.

In proposing to move in this direction, we want to do so in a way that minimizes burdens on business as much as we reasonably can.

For example, to the extent possible, we propose harmonizing our information requirements with those of the United States - where mandatory reporting is already required.

We also want to gain the ability to take faster action than ever before to protect the public when a problem occurs.

That includes: the ability to order suppliers to take corrective action, including pulling unsafe consumer products from store shelves.

It also means government gaining the power to pull products when the supplier fails to act.

In saying this, let me be clear: we recognize that industry generally cooperates with us to address consumer product safety concerns when they arise.

And we look forward to working in the same way with cooperative companies in the future.

At the same time, we want to give consumers confidence that we have the ability to act in the rare events where a company doesn't cooperate.

And in doing so, we want to help level the playing field for law-abiding companies.

Altogether, this proposed legislation is designed to provide greater incentive for suppliers to think safety first and work to prevent problems more than ever before.

Of course, stronger penalties are the ultimate backstop, and Bill C-52 proposes fines of up to $5 million for serious contraventions, along with leaving the ceiling open to the courts' discretion when a supplier is found to act wilfully or recklessly.

Bill C-52 and the Border

Returning to the raison d'etre of this conference, I'm sure many of you want to know what effect Bill C-52 would have on importers bringing products into Canada.

And I'm here to say that border clearance will not be affected by the Bill.

Inspections will continue being done as they are now: according to a strategic risk assessment approach administrated by the Canada Border Services Agency.

Of course this is the same philosophy of our action for better product safety: protecting health and safety by focussing greater attention on higher risks and maintaining competitiveness by not ensnaring lower risk items.

Conclusion

In closing now, I want to say something businesses like yours know well.

Protecting health and safety is in everyone's interest. That includes Canadians, governments, Canada's trading partners, and industries.

Product safety is important to Canadian families - and to the economy.

In preparing our Action Plan and proposed legislation, we knew well that Canada's food industry employs over 200,000 Canadians;

That the health products industry employs over 60,000; and that more than 20,000 establishments - mainly small and medium-sized Canadian-owned enterprises - are engaged in manufacturing consumer products, employing more than 200,000 people.

These industries are important to Canada - and so it's in everyone's interest to ensure consumer confidence in the safety of their products is justly maintained.

And with our Action Plan and proposed legislation, that's what we want to achieve.

Far from getting in the way of law abiding companies, we want to level the playing field for them, and better protect the health and safety of Canadian families, from purveyors of substandard, unsafe goods who make a living by flying below the radar.