On Wendnesday, April 28 2010 Daniel Katz interviewed Shawn Buckley on DanTown.
Shawn and Daniel discussed the current issues stemming from the Natural Health Product Regulations.
CLICK HERE and scroll through to START at 27 minutes and 30 seconds.
Shawn Buckley’s at the Total Health Expo Toronto, March 2010 – Part 1 of 6
Click Here to view all video clips of the Total Health Expo Presentation.
By Shawn Buckley
March 2010
As I write this, many in the natural health product industry are upset with the recent news that pharmacists may stop selling unlicensed natural health products. This has come about because the National Association of Pharmacy Regulatory Authorities adopted a policy that directs pharmacists to stop selling unlicensed products. The upset caused by this policy is understandable. Imagine the impact to the NHP industry if a large number of pharmacists follow the new policy.
If you think that is upsetting, consider this: what would happen if Health Canada inspectors targeted a handful of large health food store chains, seized all the unlicensed products they were selling, and charged the owners with criminal charges.
How many stores would they have to raid, and how many owners and managers would they have to charge criminally before the majority of stores would step into line and stop selling unlicensed products? I think the number “will” be surprisingly small. Once store owners realize the time has come for enforcement of the NHP Regulations, they will not be able to afford a large part of their stock being seized. Nor will the small stores be able to afford the cost of defending themselves against criminal charges. When faced with bankruptcy and jail, I think the majority will be scared into submission.
Some may think this is a hypothetical worst case scenario that cannot happen. I think it is inevitable. It is no secret that over the past couple of years Health Canada has hired more inspectors. It is also no secret that there was an enforcement initiative planned for this year on the assumption that the NHP licensing back-log would be eliminated. The industry celebrated when this enforcement initiative was “delayed” until the back-log is cleared. It should be crystal clear to everyone that once the licensing back-log is gone, Health Canada will be taking enforcement action to remove unlicensed products. The transition period will be over and more products will disappear. Health Canada has no choice, they are mandated to enforce the Regulations.
Similarly, it should not be a surprise to anyone paying attention that the NHP Regulations as they are currently drafted can only lead to the loss of the majority of NHPs that we have traditionally had the freedom to use. Under our current regulatory regime, all natural health products are deemed by law to be dangerous and illegal. The starting point is that all must be removed from the market. The only exceptions are those products that can overcome a number of barriers created by the Regulations. The barriers will change over time, but anyone thinking that changing them will solve the problem is missing what is happening.
The over-regulation of the NHP industry is not an accident. It is not a mistake. It is not due to any misunderstanding of the meaning of the NHP Regulations. The death of the NHP industry as we knew it is the inevitable result of the Regulations as they are currently written. Doing nothing, or trying to achieve minor concessions can only lead to the result we are witnessing unfold.
If we continue to go down this path, we are going to lose 75% of the products we have enjoyed access to. Half of the license applications fail. There are a large number of products for which no attempt to license will be made. Health food stores have lost access to thousands of foreign products. The character of products available to us will also change. We will have access to single ingredient products. Many of the innovative multi-ingredient products we rely on for our health will disappear. Innovation into new multi-ingredient products will be stifled. Eventually we will face cost recovery. Many quality firms and practitioners will not survive.
The transition of the natural health community from what it was, to Health Canada’s truncated version is more than a over-regulation problem. It presents us with an ethical problem. The NHP Regulations, and their enforcement, are in theory for our “safety”. At the same time, Health Canada has never done a risk analysis to determine the risk of removing natural health products from people who rely on them. There has been no risk analysis to determine what the risk of forcing us into the pharmaceutical model is when NHPs we rely on are no longer available. There has not been a comparative risk analysis done by Health Canada to see if NHPs pose enough of a risk to justify the strict regulations that have been imposed. The truth is the government is pretending NHPs are dangerous and need strict regulations. The government is also pretending that there is no health risk to removing natural health products.
If natural health products are delivering the health benefits that Canadians taking them say they do, then we are participating in a dangerous game. We are also acting unethically by allowing our brothers and sisters to be put at risk. Finally, we are letting down the next generation. Will our children have access to the safe and effective natural health products that our generation has enjoyed? Not unless we do something.
The question is: have we had enough yet or do we need to lose more NHPs before we are willing to act? The only reason Health Canada has been so effective in taking NHPs away is the complacency in the natural health community. There has been no concerted effort to stop the regulations. Many do not know what to do. Many do not believe Health Canada can be stopped. I disagree. The passion that we witnessed from Canadians who opposed Bill C-51 convinced me that we do not have to compromise. There is no reason why we cannot have reasonable and balanced regulations which protect our access to products we rely upon. There is no reason why as adult Canadians we cannot choose how we are going to support our health.
When faced with an unpleasant future, there is a tendency to disbelieve that the unpleasant future will arrive. This leads to inaction until there is an absolute crisis. It could be that Health Canada raids on health food stores will be the wake up call the natural health community needs. Unfortunately, at that point it will probably be too late. Health Canada is unlikely to enforce the NHP Regulation licensing requirement until the licensing back-log is cleared. That is not likely to happen in 2010. With producers and practitioners disappearing yearly, will we have enough voices in 2011 to bring about change?
 Farmer Michael Schmidt and Constitutional Lawyer Shawn Buckley |
 Ralph Moss, PhD (left), Helke Ferrie, Shawn Buckley LLB (centre), Michael Schmidt, and Shiv Chopra, PhD (right). |
By Natural Health Products Protection Association
December 2009
Many in the industry are understandably relieved with the publicity that Health Canada will not start its strict compliance plan against unlicensed natural health products until 2011.
The industry has also been thrown another concession, a review of a handful of the Schedule F (i.e. prescription drugs).
It is frightening that these are seen as “positive” developments. They are “positive” in the sense that the industry is being granted a few concessions. What is frightening, however, is how grateful and complacent the natural health community becomes when Health Canada slows its drive to re-shape the NHP industry into something that only the larger companies want.
The natural health community has become so afraid of Health Canada that a slowing of the “inevitable” death of the natural health product industry as we knew it becomes a cause of relief.
The reality is that:
What is perhaps most troubling is that Canadians who rely on NHPs that will be lost are going to suffer health consequences. This is an ethical crisis that we face. We know that the natural health community is more than a marketplace or a business environment: it is a place where many find healing and relief. We also know that by rendering the majority of NHPs illegal, that many will suffer health consequences. Most of us are standing by and watching as this happens.
The over-regulation of the NHP industry is not an accident. It is not a mistake. It is not due to any misunderstanding of the meaning of the NHP Regulations. The death of the NHP industry as we knew it is the inevitable result of the Regulations as they are currently written. Doing nothing, or trying to achieve minor concessions can only lead to the result we are all witnessing happen.
The NHPPA is not willing to celebrate minor concessions while NHPs continue to be relentlessly driven from the shelves.
The natural health community is facing a crisis of belief. Many believe they have to settle for the truncated industry that Health Canada will allow. Many believe that we cannot have a vibrant industry that celebrates innovation and common sense. Many believe that putting vulnerable Canadians at risk as vital health products are taken away cannot be stopped. Many believe that Canadians cannot have the freedom to access natural health products that they previously enjoyed. The NHPPA does not subscribe to any of these beliefs.
In its short history the NHPPA has demonstrated the power of positive action and belief.
The NHPPA does not believe that the natural health community needs to settle for the bleak future Health Canada is offering. The NHPPA does not believe that we can ethically pass this challenge by accepting complacency and fear. Indeed, complacency and fear are necessary for Health Canada to succeed.
The public supports this industry and is passionate and motivated about protecting access to natural health products. We do not have to settle. We can re-focus and move forward.
The NHPPA is calling on the entire natural health community to shake off complacency and fear, and work towards ensuring we have a vibrant and growing future.
On Wednesday, January 6 2010 Jon Hansen interviewed Shawn Buckley on Blog Talk Radio.
Click Here to listen to the interview, Doing What Comes Naturally: Are Natural Health Products Being Held to a Higher Standard?
Shawn Buckley’s Nov. 25 appearance before the Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology concerning Bill C-6 – Part 1 of 10
Click Here to view all video clips of the Senate Committee Session.
Trading the Rule of Law for Safety – a Dangerous Game
By Shawn Buckley
December 2009
The Senate is about to vote on Bill C-6, the Consumer Product Safety Act. As I mentioned in the Senate hearing, Bill C-6 represents Health Canada’s attempt to circumvent the rule of law in the name of safety. The problem is that circumventing the rule of law is never “safe”. Bill C-6 represents a fundamental change in the power dynamic between the citizen and the state that I am concerned about passing onto our children.
Under the rule of law the state cannot take control of persons or property without the supervision of independent courts. Without the rule of law the state can imprison citizens or seize property without court supervision. I do not want our children being subjected to state control of their persons or property without court supervision. I side with political philosophers who warn of the dangers of sacrificing the rule of law.
Some might think it is ironic that we are being asked to sacrifice a fundamental freedom that protects us against the state so that we can be “safe”. I don’t find it ironic at all. Whenever citizens are asked to sacrifice their freedom, it is in the name of safety. One only has to review the laws enacted in the U.S. following 9-11 to see this mechanism in action.
The impetus of trading freedom for safety is difficult to resist. What lawmaker can vote against safety? Citizens demand to be “protected” and governments acquiesce by passing laws that erode our freedoms. I am not against safety. Nor am I against improving our consumer safety legislation. My position is that we can structure consumer protection laws to protect Canadians against unsafe products while at the same time safeguarding our fundamental freedoms. Consumer products are not suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice fundamental protections. Bill C-6 threatens our property rights and our right to private enjoyment of property.
Under Bill C-6, inspectors can seize property connected to the manufacture, distribution and sale of consumer products. This seizure can occur without court supervision. There is no limit to the amount of property that can be seized. There does not have to be a “safety” risk to justify the seizure. There are no defined time limits limiting the length of the seizure. If you are charged with an administrative offence, you cannot have a court hearing. The Minister decides if you are guilty. The same Minister can keep any seized property if he/she determines that you are guilty.
Bill C-6 also abolishes the law of trespass. Inspectors can enter onto any property or into any place except a private home without a warrant. They are exempted from the law of trespass. We do not give the regular police, who investigate much more serious matters, this exemption. Are consumer products suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice the right to enjoy our property without the incursion of state agents?
This generation is responsible for protecting the rights of our children. Do we think our children will be safer in a Canada without the rule of law? Will they be safer in a Canada where the state can take their property without court supervision? Will they be safer in a Canada where they can no longer require state agents to leave their private property? These are fundamental questions that must be answered.
Consumer safety is an emotional issue. We are told we need to protect our children from defective cribs and lead in their toys. I agree. We can, however, protect our children from these dangers with court supervision and the rule of law. We can protect our children from the dangers of consumer products without giving the state free range over our private property. We can protect our children without surrendering freedoms previous generations ensured were passed onto us.
I expect that Bill C-6 will pass through the Senate. I expect that Bill C-6 will later be viewed as a major turning point in favour of state control. I expect that many will eventually regret the fundamental changes that we will bequeath to our children.
The Senate Committee on Social Affairs has reviewed Bill C-6 clause by clause*. The Committee has agreed to Bill C-6, with amendments and will present its Committee Report to the Senate for a 3rd vote.
CLICK HERE to read the unofficial transcript from the December 2nd session.
*A clause by clause review is to take each section of the bill and have amendments or observations attached to it.
On November 25, 2009, constitutional lawyer Shawn Buckley spoke to the Senate Committee on Social Affairs regarding his concerns for the rule of law and due process, if Bill C-6 is passed.
CLICK HERE to read the unofficial transcript of the November 25th Senate Committee Bill C-6 session.
The Natural Health Products Protection Association is federally incorporated as a non-profit company with the sole object of:
Protecting access to Natural Health Products and Dietary Supplements.
By limiting its purpose to protecting access to Natural Health Products and Dietary Supplements, the NHPPA will focus on identifying and responding to threats facing the Natural Health Product and Dietary Supplement industry.