HEAL Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA SANTÉ

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, June 1, 2000

• 1534

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Lynn Myers (Waterloo—Wellington, Lib.)): Ladies and gentlemen, we'll call this meeting of the health committee to order. This is of course pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), consideration of the proposed tobacco regulations.

We have as witnesses this afternoon, from Van Nelle Canada Limited, Ralph Levine, the managing director; and also, from the Small Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Association, Monsieur Cantin and Joe Spriet.

• 1535

Do you want to lead off, Mr. Levine?

Mr. Ralph Levine (Managing Director, Van Nelle Canada Limited): Yes.

The Chair: Thanks very much.

Mr. Ralph Levine: Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and lady and gentlemen of the Standing Committee on Health. My name is Ralph Levine and I'm general manager of Van Nelle Canada Limited, a company established in Canada since 1970.

Van Nelle, whose head office is in Mississauga, is a small importer of specialty tobacco products. We import pipe tobacco from Holland and England and rolling cigarette tobacco from Holland and Ireland, cigarette rolling papers from Belgium and Wales, cigarettes from France and smokeless tobacco from the United States. Van Nelle employs 23 people, 16 in field sales across Canada and 7 at the head office. For the past 12 months our products generated $6.2 million in excise duties and taxes and over $3 million in provincial tobacco taxes.

I wish to express to the committee my company's and my suppliers' concern over some aspects of the proposed regulations on labelling and reporting. The issues are the disclosure of additives, the testing of hand-rolled tobacco, the overall testing requirements and their effects on small businesses like my own, and the reporting requirements and the effects on small business.

First, I'd like to mention the problems of pipe tobacco, a large part of my business. Canadian pipe tobacco sales have seriously declined over the past ten years. In 1990 there was volume of 300,000 kilograms and this year we expect it to be at 140,000, a decline of 54%. All indications are that the same decline will continue. Pipe smoking is enjoyed by senior males, mainly pensioners, and there is no evidence—and I'll repeat that, no evidence—that young Canadians are taking up pipe-smoking. My question is, why include pipe tobacco in the regulations? The cost will be extremely burdensome on this small sector, which is, in total, less than one-third of 1% of the total tobacco market.

My main issue is the disclosure of additives on the products I sell. All of the companies that supply their products to me understand that there is a wish to know more about their additives and they are willing to provide this information. However, there is an issue of commercial property. These companies and their own flavour suppliers have invested in developing flavour recipes. They would like to be allowed to declare the more substantial additives, such as humectants, by brand, but declare the top flavour ingredients in a common industry list provided by a third party, as is presently done in several countries in Europe. This way it protects the key recipe that flavour houses depend on, and if at any time Health Canada has any concerns about a particular flavour or additive, the company using that flavour or additive must and will provide details.

My second topic is hand-rolling tobacco. I believe Van Nelle is the exclusive importer of imported hand-rolling tobacco in Canada. Our product is strictly hand-rolled in a leaf of paper, not in a preformed tube with a filter. To date, there is no internationally accepted standard for the making and smoking of such products. For example, if 500 people were handed Drum roll-your-own tobacco with cigarette papers, no two cigarettes would be alike. Therefore, how can we expect to get consistent or useful test results?

Dr. Kaiserman, director of research, Health Canada, has reported that it is the characteristics of a preformed tube that basically determine tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide, and I would like to read an excerpt from his paper:

Therefore, smokers may be buying low-yield RYO tobaccos in the mistaken belief that it is the tobacco that controls the yields of toxic constituents. But, as the results of this work indicate, it is the tube and filter combination, not the tobacco, that controls the delivery of toxic constituents to smokers. Thus, to achieve the low-yield effect, smokers should be advised to make their choices based on the tube and filter combinations rather than on the tobacco.

• 1540

I will repeat, our tobacco is strictly hand-rolled, not tubed, with no filter and no tipping. Hand-rolling smokers choose how much tobacco to use, which could range from 300 milligrams to 500 milligrams, and the type of paper to use. Both of these affect smoke yields. So it's important that the test method help the consumer understand the effects of the choices he makes.

The International Standards Organization, ISO, is developing at present a measuring system to test hand-rolled cigarettes, following a major set of studies done by CORESTA, the industry standards body. Until that testing method is ready, we request that we be exempt from publishing potentially misleading information on smoke emissions, as required by the regulations. Only with a valid test method can emissions testing be carried out in a way that is meaningful for the consumer.

The testing of constituents and emissions as required by these regulations is of great concern to my suppliers. The fact that Health Canada requires Canadian standards to be used for the measurement of constituents and emissions, rather than international standards, could be considered discriminatory. Offshore suppliers may be obliged to comply with equivalent regulations in their other markets. This could create unfair barriers to trade according to GATT agreements. My French supplier, Altadis, has already informed the ministère français du Commerce extérieur and the World Trade Organization of their concerns on this, and the United Kingdom Department of Trade has also been informed.

My third topic is that the cost of testing requested by Health Canada might force Altadis and other small suppliers to cease selling their products in Canada. The brand-testing requirements would be extremely expensive, even if there were enough laboratories to do it, and would probably outweigh the profits for most of the brands I sell. The viability of continuing to do business in Canada would be very questionable. Furthermore, the costs of the reporting requirements would be horrendous. As defined, I believe it would take all of my 23 staff just to comply with them. This again could be an unfair burden on a small business like mine.

In conclusion, Van Nelle's business in Canada represents one-third of 1% of the total tobacco sold in Canada. We are one of the members of the Small Guys Tobacco Group, and we are trying to provide a niche in the marketplace and to keep our businesses afloat. I'm asking on behalf of my company, my employees, and other small businesses that you consider our request and amend the proposed regulations.

In closing, I would like to thank Karen Proud and her colleagues at Health Canada for listening to these arguments on behalf of small companies, which are spelled out in more detail in our earlier submissions. These will be circulated along with this presentation. We hope that dialogue can continue, and I have also attached the list of topics, which were referred to in this presentation, that we would like to be considered.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Levine.

We'll move on now to the Small Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Association. Who is going to lead off on this?

Mr. Joe Spriet (Member, Small Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Association): We've agreed that I would actually make the presentation. But we're certainly both going to be available for questions afterwards.

The Chair: Thank you. We appreciate that.

Mr. Joe Spriet: Members of the committee, we would like to advise that the Small Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Association is in fact the amalgamation of the companies of Bastos of Canada Ltd., Louiseville, Quebec; Choice Tobacco Inc. in Montague, Prince Edward Island; and Tabacs Tremblay Inc. in Quebec City. Its aim is to assert the viewpoint of the small tobacco products manufacturers having market shares of less than 2% of the total tobacco products sales in Canada.

Today we would like to state that we well understand the role of the Canadian government and your committee in setting up and putting in place regulations taking into consideration the well-being and health of all the Canadian people. However, we would equally like to bring to your attention that you must also have the responsibility to set up fair regulations for all participants in order not to place in peril the survival of small tobacco product manufacturers such as our companies, to the detriment of the major tobacco products manufacturers.

We strongly believe that the costs connected to the preparation of the different reports and analyses of the constituents and the emissions in the mainstream smoke and in the lateral smoke in tobacco products, as mentioned in the proposed new tobacco products regulations, are economically beyond reach for small tobacco products manufacturers having market shares of less than 2% of the total Canadian sales.

• 1545

May we point out that small manufacturers, members of the SCTMA, make approximately from five to eight brands of fine-cut tobacco and about twenty private label brands of cigarettes, available in regular and king size. This in fact represents disbursements of many hundreds of thousands of dollars for the analysis and the preparation of reports, even if these brands are regrouped into groups of identical brands as defined in the proposed new tobacco products regulations.

Since the fine-cut tobacco and private label cigarette brand market is completely different from the national products brand market and as we must face competition that is often very aggressive and sometimes even questionable, it appears almost impossible for us to absorb the extra disbursements required for the analysis and the preparation of reports by increasing our selling prices.

In order to reduce the economic burden that will be imposed upon the small manufacturers by these regulations and in order to assure all the participants in this field that the regulations will be fair, we suggest that you bring the following modifications to the proposed new tobacco products regulations for fine-cut tobacco and for cigarette brands having market shares of less than 2% of the total sales in Canada.

Part 2, paragraphs 11(2)(a), (b), and (c), ingredient reports, exemption to report the inventories of the ingredients for those purchased during the quarter concerned, those utilized during the quarter concerned, and those stored on the date of the report: We believe that the obligation to report our inventories of ingredients will not give any relevant information to the Department of Health and represents important labour costs for small manufacturers.

Regulation 11(4), ingredients report, frequency to file reports: When the manufacturing of a brand of fine-cut tobacco and/or cigarette remains unchanged, the only two factors that influence the data of the ingredients are the average weight of the tobacco and the average rates of the humidity. We suggest to report the ingredients on an annual basis whenever modifications are brought to the manufacturing procedure.

Regulation 12, constituents: Since fine-cut tobacco and cigarettes having a Canadian taste are made with practically identical Virginia tobaccos cultivated in Canada, it appears to us that the analysis of the constituents for brands having market shares of less than 2% of the total sales in Canada will not give a great deal more relevant information to the Department of Health, and the manufacturers of these brands should be exempt from the obligation to file a report on the analysis of the ingredients.

Part 3, regulation 14(9), emissions from designated tobacco products: Since the equipment used by the small tobacco manufacturers for the control of the weight of the tobacco is far less sophisticated, it is quite difficult to respect the tolerances of the emissions. For these reasons, we suggest that the brands with market shares of less than 2% of the total sales in Canada be exempted from the obligation to produce reports on the mainstream and lateral smoke of tobacco products, while leaving the Department of Health the possibility to carry out inspections whenever the department has reason to believe there could be a breach of trust. The obligation to report the emissions on the mainstream smoke of tobacco products will force the small manufacturers to acquire expensive equipment of control, in addition to the high costs connected to the analysis of emissions.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to make our presentation.

The Chair: Thank you very much. We noted those changes that were requested.

First question,

[Translation]

Please proceed, Mr. Ménard.

Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, BQ): Mr. Chairman, may I use the time allotted to the two opposition parties?

You are the first witnesses to openly voice some concern over the way in which data is collected and on the reporting process. This means that you are more concerned about your administration and your relations with Health Canada than you are about the impact of the new cigarette package labelling requirements. I'd like to understand your position a little better. You say that you manufacture private brands. Could you give me a few examples of the brands of cigarette that you manufacture?

• 1550

Mr. Gilbert Cantin (Member, Small Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Association): I'll answer in your language, if that's all right with you.

Mr. Réal Ménard: That's fine.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Bastos specializes in manufacturing different private label cigarettes for wholesalers or for grocery chains such as Loblaws and Provigo in Quebec.

Mr. Réal Ménard: Therefore, you manufacture cigarettes.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Yes, for different customers.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I see.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: We also manufacture fine-cut tobacco.

Mr. Réal Ménard: Are your brands similar to others in terms of tar content and the 30 or 40 ingredients they contain?

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: We produce different blends. If we go by the categories set out in the regulations, we manufacture 12 different blends.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I see. If I understand correctly, Health Canada is trying to obtain this kind of information because at a later stage, it wants to ask the Health Committee to examine the causes of addiction, including the link between tar, nicotine and different constituents. If your products in fact contain these constituents, why should they be exempted from meeting these requirements? I'm trying to understand the rationale behind your position. If I were your legal counsel and I had to argue in favour of granting you an exemption, what kind of arguments could you give me to support my case, aside from the fact that you hold a mere 2 per cent share of the market? Since you manufacture the same product, a product with the same constituents, my feeling is that Health Canada should demand from you the same information as it does from other manufacturers.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: First of all, I would tell you that small manufacturers are not at all in the same situation as the big manufacturers. We must sell our cigarettes for much less than the price of the national brands. Furthermore, the costs associated with preparing reports and chemical analyses would be much the same for us. While we manufacture fewer brands, the costs would be just as horrendous.

Mr. Réal Ménard: What exactly do you mean by that? Can you give me an example? I seem to recall your associate saying something about the costs you would have to incur to collate the data to be passed along to Health Canada. How many persons would be involved in this task over a period of a year? Can you give us some specific figures for future reference?

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: It would cost us approximately $1 million a year to draw up these reports.

Mr. Réal Ménard: $1 million a year.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: As we indicated in our submission, some of Health Canada's proposed requirements are unnecessary, for example, paragraphs 11(2)a), b) and c) respecting ingredient reports. One provision calls for us to report on our inventories. In my view, what difference does it make if Health Canada discovers that we have 2,000 or 500,000 pounds of tobacco in stock. In order to comply with this requirement, we would have to do an inventory every three months, listing our purchases and the amounts used in the manufacturing process. To do so would result in significant labour costs, just to supply to Health Canada information that in our view, serves no useful purpose.

Mr. Réal Ménard: When Health Canada officials return to testify at the conclusion of our hearings, we can ask them if that information is in fact relevant. I'd like to know how many workers in each of the companies that you represent would have to be assigned to this task?

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: We have 30 employees.

Mr. Réal Ménard: How many in total?

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Our association represents about 80 workers.

Mr. Réal Ménard: How many would be assigned to the task of preparing these reports in your respective companies? I'd simply like to have some idea.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Right now, outside firms are responsible for doing analyses and for gathering information.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I see. Therefore, you are genuinely concerned about the costs associated with compiling data.

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Our very survival is a stake.

Mr. Réal Ménard: Your position merits further consideration on our part. Once again, I think that all members are concerned. The point here is not to champion public health while causing problems all the while for companies. Moreover, you will agree that certain kinds of information can prove useful to Health Canada in terms of conducting tests in the future. Agreed?

• 1555

Mr. Gilbert Cantin: Small manufacturers are quite prepared to provide Health Canada with some information, based on the means they have. However, they should not be required to supply information that is of no importance. We're quite prepared to provide Health Canada with ingredient reports and with other pertinent information. We want to work with Health Canada, but only in so far as we can afford to do so. I don't have the resources to go out and hire two or three persons tomorrow morning to prepare reports.

I can tell you about our experiences in British Columbia where we currently sell three brands of cigarettes. I spend one week every three months compiling reports. I have other fish to fry. Reports like this are very costly to produce. We're willing to cooperate, but our survival matters as well.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I understand.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Ménard.

[English]

Are there any other questions?

Mr. Szabo.

Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Can you give us an idea of how much the costs of reporting are estimated to be? You said they're too high, so you must have an idea of how much they might be.

Mr. Joe Spriet: I'll just start off, Gil, for a moment. I'd like to give you a little sense of what our company is like in relation—

Mr. Paul Szabo: In fairness, you've made a representation that the costs would be prohibitive here, and therefore you must have some idea of what additional or incremental costs are going to be incurred by you as a result of reporting, as a percentage of your current costs of production, for instance, or on any other basis you'd care to advise us of.

Mr. Joe Spriet: My estimate would be 100% or more. The reason I say that is that your question is how much is it going to cost. I haven't gone through a step-by-step on the emissions, on the research, on the three-month reporting, etc. I don't even have manpower to do that, to take your regulations that are proposed at this time....

Mr. Paul Szabo: Okay.

Mr. Joe Spriet: But it appears to me, to answer your question, Mr. Szabo, that in small tobacco manufacturing you're going to have caught in your net, in excess of our company, 99.66% or better of the Canadian production. You're going to have huge tobacco companies like Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans and R.J.R. MacDonald, who have an immense revenue, and you're going to catch these people in this net if this proposal goes through, these proposed regulations, and you're going to have 99% of all of the tobacco covered. It's hard for me to comprehend why you would bring in regulations that might shut my door down in Prince Edward Island. We have 30 employees, sir.

Mr. Paul Szabo: I understand that.

Are your tobacco products any safer or more harmful than any other tobacco products?

Mr. Joe Spriet: Very similar.

Mr. Paul Szabo: They're similar. So the point is that you just kill a little bit and they kill a lot.

Mr. Joe Spriet: Well, no, that's not my point at all. I think you're misconstruing that. There are smokers in Canada who buy these products. Is that a given? Then you have suppliers. Are there people who drink alcohol? You have suppliers. Are there people who eat butter fats? You have suppliers.

I don't think that's a fair statement.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Okay. With regard to the broader tobacco question, the strategy the government is bringing forward here in the regulations about changing the messages, putting on some graphics, etc., have you thought of the impact that may have on the possible first-time smoker? In terms of a strategy, do you think it might work?

Mr. Joe Spriet: I think initially it will have a really big impact, but going down the road.... In retrospect, having looked at the last 20 years of regulations and health warnings, worldwide consumption and all of those things, I would imagine five years down the road you're going to have to triple the old warnings again to have the same impact.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Okay, fair enough. That's an honest answer, and I tend to agree with you.

Mr. Levine, your company is owned by Imperial Tobacco U.K.

Mr. Ralph Levine: Imperial Tobacco, yes, U.K. We have nothing to do with Imperial Tobacco Canada.

Mr. Paul Szabo: How big is Imperial Tobacco U.K.?

Mr. Ralph Levine: I guess Imperial Tobacco is a medium-sized British company.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Do you have any reason to believe that your products don't cause cancer, heart disease, or emphysema?

Mr. Ralph Levine: Basically, I look at what Health Canada wants and requires, and we're prepared to follow what they require.

• 1600

Mr. Paul Szabo: Are you aware of any health jurisdiction or authority that has done research that has concluded that your products, such as cigars, tobacco, etc., also cause cancer, heart disease, and emphysema?

Mr. Ralph Levine: No, I'm not aware of any.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Not even the Surgeon General?

Mr. Ralph Levine: You have to understand, we're basically a sales and marketing company here. I don't get involved with the manufacturing end whatsoever. We just import the product and we try to get it through our wholesale to retail.

Mr. Paul Szabo: I understand, and that's because you're a piece of the whole thing.

Maybe you want to comment on the same question I asked of the other witnesses with regard to the overall strategy. As you know, the Government of Canada is basically saying, I think, that we have to try to address this situation, particularly where young people are involved, to try to alert them of this. It means taking a little more space on the packaging for messaging and incorporating graphics on there. Generally speaking, do you think that strategy would likely work?

Mr. Ralph Levine: I would like to say I'm aware of the health warnings about smoking. That's been basically around for 40 or 50 years, I guess. When I was a young fellow, you know, they said; “If you smoke, it's going to hurt you. It's going to kill you.” I know smokers die younger and are more likely to get certain diseases, but truthfully, I don't know how the new proposed regulations will deter people from smoking. I think everyone is already aware that smoking is not good for you.

Mr. Paul Szabo: You're aware that Coca-Cola advertises everywhere around the world, constantly.

Mr. Ralph Levine: Yes.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Coca-Cola is the number one known brand symbol in the entire world, so why would Coca-Cola advertise at all and waste all that money advertising if it's the number one known symbol and product brand name known around the entire world? Why would they spend a penny on advertising?

Mr. Ralph Levine: To remain number one.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Because it works. If you don't pulse it, keep it going, you lose market share. Does that marketing principle not also apply—

Mr. Ralph Levine: Yes, I would tend to agree that it would apply. But I would also say that people have been aware and are aware of all the health dangers and aware of the warnings and people still choose to smoke.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Sure, but you have to keep doing it, because if you don't, then people will start thinking that maybe it's not as bad as they were always hearing.

Maybe for both of you this is a predicament. You always potentially have unintended consequences when you make changes. Obviously nothing is going to be a perfect fit for all parties, but you have to admit that you are both involved in products that have been, by health research, linked to health problems, and you are now swept in.

Do you believe that if you were to be exempted because of size, etc., that could potentially send an incorrect message or impression to users of your product, because you didn't have a warning that somebody else had to have, or that you didn't have to report on this and others did? Do you think the risk would be that people would think some are safer than others?

Mr. Ralph Levine: First of all, I believe, and my company would believe, that we're not against the health warnings. We'll follow the rules of the health warnings. The predicament that we're in, and that I'm in, is that I'm not in the manufacturing process. I buy some stuff from my own company overseas, but I buy from other companies too, and the costs.... If you look at the requirements that Health Canada is asking for, reporting of the ingredients and how much one uses, in some cases we're talking of a drop of a top flavour, and that would be to supply various countries around the world. How does one divide that one little drop of a top flavour and attribute it to the Canadian small market that I import for from these manufacturing companies?

The report on the type of water one uses.... Now, I know water has been an issue lately but.... It's so burdensome, so cumbersome, in the operation for an importing company and for someone manufacturing for many countries around the world.

Mr. Paul Szabo: I understand.

Mr. Joe Spriet: I have a question, Mr. Szabo. Is it at all relevant whether or not our small companies are able to survive economically and keep our livelihood? Excuse the expression, that's how we make our livelihood. Is it at all relevant to the committee here whether or not we exist?

• 1605

Our own company makes one-third of 1% of the fine-cut tobacco. That's fairly small. Since you are going to capture all the information you want from that 99% and since we're not objecting to having the public see that our product is the same as other products with the health warning and with the constituents that we agreed to report on.... Do you care whether we exist or not? Is an economic question not relevant here?

Mr. Paul Szabo: It certainly is relevant. You're probably aware of the situation of the printers, that the prescribed graphics, etc., may mean that many of the current printers of tobacco packaging would have to make either significant investments or the production would be shifted outside the country and they'd lose lots of jobs. That issue, in terms of the impact and the human resources costs, has been very much before this committee.

The other part of it, though, is that 40,000-plus a year die from this product. How do you balance the responsibility of Health Canada and, I guess, the Government of Canada on behalf of all the people of Canada to be responsible with regard to a product that does have direct health links and costs us enormous amounts of money, with the interests of those who are ancillary or occupy smaller shares of the market?

The question, to me, really comes down to whether you believe, as I do, that smoking or tobacco consumption of all kinds will continue to drop dramatically and that it won't be very long before the social unacceptability of smoking will in fact force a lot of these issues anyway. Therefore, I would ask you, what are you doing to plan for the future? Because your business days are numbered anyway.

Mr. Joe Spriet: First of all, my kids aren't in the business.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Okay, that's what you're doing to plan.

Mr. Joe Spriet: Secondly, I want to bring back your argument about people dying from the consumption of tobacco products. I guess that's a given; people die from many things. We can go to the last Dutch study that says smoking is good for Alzheimers, smoking is good for Parkinson's disease and for many degenerative diseases. That's on the record too. But the media doesn't like to hear that stuff, so it's kept fairly quiet.

If our recommendation were accepted by this committee, there wouldn't be one person more or less die from cancer by giving us these exemptions. You have captured all the information you require. That is my statement to you in respect to fairness to everybody involved.

Mr. Ralph Levine: If I may add to that, let's say he goes out of business. Those who are smoking will switch to another company's brands.

Mr. Paul Szabo: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much. Are there any other questions?

Thank you to the panel. We appreciate your attendance today.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: I have a question for you.

The Chair: Yes.

[English]

Thank you very much.

[Translation]

Mr. Ménard.

Mr. Réal Ménard: In fact, I have two questions for you, Mr. Chairman. What is the committee's agenda for next week? Are you planning to call meetings on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday?

Secondly, could you ask the clerk to provide us with a copy of a report similar to the one Health Canada is asking manufacturers to prepare so that we can get a better idea of what's involved and so that we can put questions to Health Canada officials when they return at the conclusion of our hearings?

[English]

The Chair: Yes. Certainly on the second part, we'll instruct the clerk accordingly. On the first, we are meeting on Monday and we are meeting on Tuesday and we hope to wrap up by then.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Monday and Tuesday, morning and evening? All day Tuesday, or only in the morning?

[English]

The Chair: Just in the afternoon.

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis.

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North Centre, NDP): I would like to ask a question I raised yesterday about getting some information around the two different consultants' reports and the whole question of impact in terms of jobs and businesses. I'm having a heck of a time trying to differentiate between the two reports and to glean the relevant information. Could we ask the officials to give us a summary, or justify the discrepancies in terms of the two reports, so we have some way to get the most accurate picture we can in terms of possible job loss or impact?

• 1610

The Chair: I think that's a good request, and certainly we'll instruct the Health Canada officials to prepare something for, I think, Tuesday at the latest. Maybe, Ms. Wasylycia-Leis, you can talk to Jane after the meeting on that.

Are there any other items?

Mr. Joe Spriet: I have a question on the process. When do your recommendations go back to the government?

The Chair: We're hoping to deal with that no later than Wednesday of next week.

This meeting is adjourned.