Hon. Tony Clement Comments on PMRA Leak:

39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

EDITED HANSARD * NUMBER 035
CONTENTS

Wednesday, June 7, 2006

Health

     Ms. Penny Priddy (Surrey North, NDP): Mr. Speaker, it was
revealed earlier today that Health Canada officials sent a document
supporting the use of 2,4-D, a dangerous pesticide, to an industry
group that is currently lobbying the government to allow the use of
this chemical in residential neighbourhoods. Health Canada is in the
middle of a safety review of this product, a review that is supposed
to be impartial.

     My question for the Minister of Health is, how can Canadians have
faith in the system meant to protect them from dangerous pesticides
when the government's own officials appear to be collaborating with
companies that use and distribute these harmful pesticides?

     Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Minister for the
Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I can tell the House that certainly the initial
investigation reveals that a document was inadvertently sent out. We
continue the investigation.

     Let me agree with the hon. member that it is unacceptable to send
out documents that are not meant to be sent out and we will continue
the investigation.

     Ms. Penny Priddy (Surrey North, NDP): Mr. Speaker, 2,4-D is
banned in most major Canadian cities and in the province of Quebec.
It has been linked to cancer, neurological damage and reproductive
problems, but Health Canada did not even contact leading researchers
before distributing this report and deciding whether the pesticide is
safe.

     What action will the Minister of Health take to ensure
regulations regarding the health and well-being of Canadians are
objectively based on scientific research and not biased by industry
lobbyists given that they turned down the pesticide regulation put
forward by the NDP?

     Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Minister for the
Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, or should know, the document
that was released was a series of talking points. It was not a
scientific investigation. It was not a scientific document.

    I will tell hon. members in this House, and I hope the hon. member
agrees with me, that we should make the decision based on science,
based on the advice of the best experts to protect the health and
safety of Canadian citizens. That is what this side of the House
agrees with. Certainly, we do not agree with rhetoric. We agree with
action to protect the health and safety of Canadians.
*   *   *


http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/035_2006-06-07/HAN035-E.htm#SOB-1577270