Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2008-05-01 11:55:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Paul Szabo",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"1063672\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, it is an excellent question. As a matter of fact, when the minister was here to propose the bill, it was a question that I posed to him at that time. There were a number of examples, particularly coming out of China, for instance, where product safety issues were raised. In fact, I think I quoted from a letter from a constituent who asked me why we did not have these things, every one of them, checked before they got onto the shelves for Canadians. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063673\" data-originallang=\"en\">I think I addressed it to some extent in my comments by saying that we could protect the safety of Canadians 100% by putting into place absolutely everything we can possibly think of, including rigorous testing on every product, but we do not do that now. The member asks a good question: why do we not do more or should we be doing more to protect the safety of Canadians with regard to consumer products?</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063674\" data-originallang=\"en\">However, we do establish guidelines and requirements for the materials that are used, for the content. The lead content would be an example that people would understand. Products coming in with leaded paint is one example. Those are proscribed. We have to understand that if somebody is importing that product, where does the liability lie? Where does the responsibility lie with regard to imported components or finished products for distribution and sale in Canada in ensuring compliance with Canadian law and Canadian standards? That is where it is.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063675\" data-originallang=\"en\">I think the member probably would agree that if we have an indication that a certain distributor or certain kinds of products become clearly problematic, and that is where some of the issues have arisen, there may be some middle ground where in fact there is a monitoring process of those areas in which there have been examples of product safety violations, as it were, or risks to product safety or the health of Canadians from products.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063676\" data-originallang=\"en\">However, the question still becomes whether or not we want to guarantee 100% protection. I can tell the House that in the case of the U.S. Army, its threshold is to look at and check about 1%, I believe, between 1% and 4%, of products it purchases. Of course, it is one of the major consumers within the United States in terms of product acquisition, and statistically that is as effective as checking 40%. It is kind of interesting. I do not know what the science is and all of these other things, but I think we have to be careful about imposing requirements that may in fact have some serious unintended consequences on the economic side and may not get significant benefit improvements in terms of the safety side.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"1063672\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, la question est excellente. Je l'ai m\u00eame pos\u00e9e au ministre lorsqu'il a propos\u00e9 le projet de loi \u00e0 la Chambre. Un certain nombre d'exemples de produits qui soulevaient des questions de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 ont alors \u00e9t\u00e9 mentionn\u00e9s, notamment ceux provenant de la Chine. Je crois m\u00eame avoir cit\u00e9 \u00e0 ce moment-l\u00e0 la lettre d'un \u00e9lecteur qui me demandait ce qui nous emp\u00eachait de v\u00e9rifier tous les produits avant leur mise en vente au Canada.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063673\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je crois avoir fourni la r\u00e9ponse dans une certaine mesure en disant que nous pourrions prot\u00e9ger la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 des Canadiens \u00e0 100 p. 100 en \u00e9tablissant toutes les mesures possibles, y compris la mise \u00e0 l'essai rigoureuse de chaque produit, ce que nous ne faisons pas \u00e0 l'heure actuelle. Donc, la question du d\u00e9put\u00e9 est fort valable. Pourquoi n'en faisons-nous pas plus ou ne devrions-nous pas en faire davantage pour garantir la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 des produits destin\u00e9s aux consommateurs Canadiens? </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063674\" data-originallang=\"en\">Cependant, nous imposons des lignes directrices et des exigences pour les mati\u00e8res ou le contenu. Le cas de la teneur en plomb, par exemple, est facile \u00e0 comprendre. Les produits enduits d'une peinture au plomb, par exemple, sont interdits. Il nous faut cependant comprendre o\u00f9 se situe la responsabilit\u00e9 si quelqu'un importe un tel produit. En effet, pour les composantes ou les produits finis import\u00e9s pour distribution au Canada, o\u00f9 se situe au juste la responsabilit\u00e9 de garantir la conformit\u00e9 aux lois et aux normes du Canada? Voil\u00e0 ce qu'il faut \u00e9tablir.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063675\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le d\u00e9put\u00e9 serait d'accord pour dire, je crois, que si nous savons que tel ou tel distributeur ou telle ou telle cat\u00e9gorie de produits pose probl\u00e8me, comme cela est arriv\u00e9, nous pourrions trouver une solution interm\u00e9diaire, soit celle d'appliquer un processus de surveillance dans les domaines o\u00f9 ont \u00e9t\u00e9 constat\u00e9es des violations des r\u00e8gles de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 ou des situations \u00e0 risque pour les Canadiens. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1063676\" data-originallang=\"en\">Cependant, il nous reste toujours \u00e0 nous demander si nous souhaitons des garanties de protection \u00e0 100 p. 100. Dans le cas de l'arm\u00e9e des \u00c9tats-Unis, par exemple, je sais que le seuil de surveillance consiste \u00e0 v\u00e9rifier environ de 1 p. 100 \u00e0 4 p. 100 des produits qu'elle ach\u00e8te. Il s'agit \u00e9videmment de l'un des plus grands acheteurs aux \u00c9tats-Unis et, sur le plan statistique, cela est tout aussi efficace que de v\u00e9rifier 40 p. 100 des acquisitions. Voil\u00e0 qui est plut\u00f4t int\u00e9ressant. Je ne suis pas au fait de toutes les th\u00e9ories sous-jacentes, mais il me semble que nous devons \u00eatre prudents avant d'imposer des exigences qui risqueraient d'avoir des cons\u00e9quences impr\u00e9vues graves sur le plan \u00e9conomique, sans pour autant donner des avantages nettement sup\u00e9rieurs sur le plan de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2008/5/1/paul-szabo-9/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/paul-szabo/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/3198/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "2446376",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Canada Consumer Product Safety Act",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2008/5/1/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2008%2F5%2F1%2F"
    }
}