YOUR MP REBUTTAL PACKAGE TOOLS, TIPS AND ADVICE ARE HERE!
Or you can view it in sections by clicking the links below. We have made the points searchable by topic and by MP, where a reply has been received.
GETTING IN TOUCH
If you would prefer to take the Rebuttal package to your MP in person, we have a page of advice for you here.
HOW TO PERSONALIZE YOUR PACKAGE
MPs need to receive something slightly different from each constituent, to ensure they don’t assume all the packages are computer generated. To achieve this, you will have to spend some time reading the information you are sending and addressing its contents in some personal notes. This is why there is space for your thoughts on the MP Rebuttal Packages outer mailers.
You have 3 options:
- Hand write or type your own rebuttal document. Draw from the points in Shawn’s analysis and ask the questions he suggests.
- Send Shawn’s analysis but highlight the areas and questions that apply to your MP. Add into your notes that you are sending the entire overview as well as a direct response to your MP’s letter because you thought it might be helpful for your MP to see how similar all the letters are and how the cut and paste replies varied by party.
- Add your own experience of the loss of NHPs in the space provided for personal comments the address mailers (links above) or send a letter you created and printed from your computer. You could:
- Address your own use of NHPs, how did they help you?
- Have you lost a product and what are the health consequences for you?
- Has someone you know suffered with a product loss?
- Do you now shop for NHPs over the border? What effect is that having for your local health store?
- Are you concerned about the impact on your health of losing a product you can still obtain?
- Has a product you rely on been reformulated to a less therapeutic dosage? Do you have to take a greater quantity now? How is that affecting your budget?
- Are you concerned for your business, or the closing of your favourite store? Has someone you know lost their livelihood?
COMPOSING YOUR OWN COVER LETTER
If your MP has replied to a constituent, you can begin by thanking them for their time but noting that their reply does not address the issues!
If your MP has not yet responded, you can begin by noting that you know they received a printed copy of the Charter at their constituency office last year. You can acknowledge that it is a weighty document but that it came in a package of short explanatory materials that you would be happy to arrange to re-send.
Some introductory issues to emphasize:
- Nobody is against Regulation of NHPs
- The problem is the way the current 2004 Regulations are written
- The solution for all Canadians, which includes regulation, sits on their desk
- The petition in support of the Charter of Health Freedom is currently the largest Federal petition in the last seven years (as at April 5 2014)
- The issues from Shawn’s Rebuttal document that address the comments in the MP’s letter. You may elect (and probably should) send Shawn’s entire response to them as part of your Rebuttal Package.
THE REBUTTALS POINT BY POINT
Shawn’s analysis of the MPs’ letters begins with a overview of the context within which they need to be read. He notes that:
What jumped out at me immediately, was that none of the responses mentioned or spoke of the Charter. One would think that when the Charter is dropped off, along with a summary of the Charter and a letter demanding action, that some mention of the MP’s thoughts on the Charter would be made.
His introduction continues to discuss:
- the consequences that flow from a legal presumption that NHPs are unsafe and ineffective;
- the level of risk analysis which would be required if consumer safety really was the government’s aim;
- the issue of out Charter rights and;
- the international context.
None of the MPs’ letters addressed any of these general issues.
2) Rebuttals per issue:
Click the link for suggested questions for those Conservative MPs who replied with a restatement of government policy regarding the intended purpose of the NHP Regulations.
A recurrent theme referred to the Regulations being necessary for our safety. Click the link for suggested questions which point out the fallacy that we are safer with the Regulations than without, and ask the MP to find out for themselves whether any evidence exists to support this claim.
While observing that several Liberal MPs sent letters which were almost verbatim copies of each other (begging the question of who really wrote them), in this section Shawn suggests two further questions to enable an MP to analyse the truth of what they are being told, and in turn what they are telling us.
Click for an analysis of this reasoning. Shawn posits a question that puts the relevance of adverse reaction claims in context.
Sometimes, MPs are just plain wrong. Click for suggestions of questions to put to an MP who replies with inaccurate or irrelevant points.
How do you answer the assertion that more licences are being issued now? It’s factually correct but evades the issue that licensing itself is the problem. Click the link for some questions to ask an MP who is thinking in this groove.
Another way to sidestep the point and baffle you with impressive looking numbers, the comparison with chemical pharmaceutical approvals. Click the link for a suggested question to illustrate that this is not an answer to your questions.
List of MPs who are known by NHPPA to have responded in writing or by email to the Charter delivery:
Bruce Stanton Conservative
Bob Rae Liberal
Carolyn Bennet Liberal
Hedy Fry Liberal
Lauri Hawn Conservative
Peggy Nash NDP
Gordon O’Connor Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative
Leona Aglukkaq Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative
Leon Benoit Conservative
Gary Schellenberger Conservative
Kennedy Stewart NDP
Stella Ambler Conservative
Megan Leslie NDP
Rick Dykstra Conservative