Share your thoughts re: C-51
I’ve written to several Conservative MPs expressing readers’ concerns (and my own) about Bill C-51 and am very pleased to have received this response from Cambridge MP Gary Goodyear (whose assistant gave me permission to post his reply):
…Thanks for taking the time to get in touch with me regarding Bill C-51 an Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.
There is a tremendous amount of misinformation circulating about what the bill says and proposes. I am currently working directly with the Minister on this bill. I am unable to make a final decision on my position until I have heard from all my constituents who wish to express a valid position to me and I have seen the final version of the bill.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me with your concerns. Your input is very valuable and will be taken into consideration during my deliberation process.
Kindest regards,
Gary Goodyear, M.P.
Cambridge/North Dumfries
Thank you , Gary.
To my readers, I suggest that If you have concerns about this bill, now is the time to express them to your own MP or the Government. Please let me know if you receive a reply and if you have obtained permission to have it posted on this blog. Thanks.
* * * *
Saturday Update : Natural health products facing tighter regulation - CTV:
…The bill was put before Parliament on April 8, and is an attempt by the government to update regulations for food, drugs and cosmetics and includes "medical devices, drugs, cells, tissues, organs, vaccines and veterinary drugs, as well as natural health products," Health Canada spokesperson Paul Duchesne told CTV.ca.
One main point of contention is that the word "drug" would change to "therapeutic product." That will fold vitamins, supplements and herbal products into the same category as prescription medications…
…"Under Bill C-51, Canadians will continue to have access to natural health products that are safe, effective and of high quality. The Bill will not limit access to natural health products nor does it call for a change in their regulatory status (from over-the-counter to prescription)…"
May 8th, 2008 at 10:58 am
I have worked in th food industry and have no concerns whatsoever. Could the powers be abused? Yes, but so could any powers granted to government officials. In one place I worked, I was the QC. I was responsible for seeing that the company’s products met our own standards as well as any additional standards demanded by our customers. I was also responsible for insuring that our products met the government standards for health. With this experience, I am well aware of what the food inspectors do, and what powers they need to be able to insure the food products you buy in the grocery stores is safe. They need these powers if the food in the supermarkets is to remain safe.
May 8th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Maybe the government should scrap the proposed legislation IF the consumer activists sign an agreement not to proceed to sue the government if/when a problem arises, asking for millions in compensation for the poor victims who were not told personally by the PM that ingesting untested products could be harmful to their health.
May 9th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Good point Gabby. Is fear of litigation the motive behind this and and many other ‘new’ laws?
May 9th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Has anyone tried to read this bill? This is the first bill I’ve tried actually reading rather than depending on what I hear from the media and I can’t believe how long it is and how difficult it is to understand all of the legal jargon. Are all bills like this? It seems to me like they are trying to pack too much into this one bill. Being as it does seem that there are some good things in the bill as well as some concerning things, perhaps it would make sense to scrap this bill and replace it with some segmented bills.
May 9th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
“Are all bills like this?”
Apparently, yes.
If they are not, why were MPs surprised at the inclusion of the immigration bill within the budget implementation bill? The opposition claimed they were not aware of it when the budget was allowed to pass.
Maybe the government’s rationale for including it in the budget, given it’s in a minority position, was to ensure it gets through the House without its being watered down.
But even the changes made to the Elections Canada rules regarding identification of voters was apparently not very clearly expressed, given the various interpretations of the new rules by various people.
I suppose those who’re employed to write up the bills are trying to protect their jobs, like many others in make-work projects in other governmental and para-governmental departments, be they municipal, provincial, or federal. And I imagine that kind of padding must go on in the private sector as well.
And as for fear of litigation, I have no special knowledge of this, it’s simply an observation on my part. We seem to have become a nation of “victims” looking for someone or something to blame whenever anything goes wrong, and immediately the cry goes up for some form of government compensation for our “suffering.”
So, I can’t blame the government for trying to have products widely tested before they go on the market to make sure they are not injurious to one’s health.
Also, some of the investigative reports about how some foodstuffs and natural health products are actually produced abroad would be a cause for alarm.
I know that one such report about a fish processing plant abroad has put me off eating fish, maybe for life.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
[...] the natural health products industry regarding Bill C-51 (An Act to Amend the Food and Drug Act ). As previously noted , Cambridge MP Gary Goodyear is also trying to address [...]