Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Health Canada and Bill C-36

Health Canada's New Powers Put Canadians at Risk of Trespass and Raids
Written by Shawn Buckley
Monday, 29 November 2010
“Bill C-36 is sold to us as necessary for our safety,” says Buckley, “but if I’m correct, this bill represents one of the most unsafe legal moves – certainly in my lifetime.”
Responding to outrage from consumers and vendors of natural health products, the government and MPs from all parties backed off, specifically exempting natural health products in the latest version – Bill C-36.
In spite of the exemption, Buckley remains concerned that Bill C-36 is still a ‘Trojan horse’ that will ultimately pave the way for government to re-introduce the same sweeping provisions that by-pass the rule of law to apply to Canada’s natural health industry, which has been under siege since natural health products (NHP’s) were included under the Food & Drug Act in 2004. As a result of Natural Health Product regulations, thousands of products have become unavailable to consumers, restricting access to healthcare alternatives.
Buckley is giving a cross-country lecture tour–Freedom in Crisis—November 18 to December 7 to alert the public about the potential threat to rights and freedoms that Bill C-36 poses, as well as to the negative impact the Natural Health Product Regulations will have on NHP businesses and consumers as the regulations come into full force. Buckley will also be providing a guide for NHP businesses to help vendors understand their rights and protect their businesses in the event of a Health Canada raid.
Parliament ponders a bad bill
Written by National Post
Monday, 29 November 2010
Its title may sound harmless, but the Canadian Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) is an iron fist in a velvet glove. It is a bureaucrat’s dream come true, which would allow Health Canada and its inspectors access to private property without a warrant; would impose onerous reporting requirements on businesses; and would permit the divulgation of confidential information to foreign governments.
To date, the CCPSA has garnered few headlines, likely due to its all-party support and its voter-friendly theme. Its goal is laudable: Who could argue with safeguarding Canadian consumers and their children? Over the past few years, images of horrific infant deaths involving drop-side cribs, scary stories of kids exposed to cadmium-laced jewellery and the kerfuffle over BPA in baby bottles have sent parents into a panic, and politicians scrambling to respond.
The result is the CCPSA, or Bill C-36. It passed second reading in the Senate on Nov. 18, and is currently in committee.
It is scheduled for review on Dec. 1, with a report anticipated the next day. If unamended, C-36 could go to third reading as early as Dec. 7, and get Royal Assent before the Christmas break.
Why should Canadians be concerned about Bill C-36?
First, the new law removes the requirement for Health Canada inspectors to obtain a warrant to search and
seize private property at a place of business. Section 21 of the CCPSA provides that inspectors may “at any reasonable time enter a place, including a conveyance” (i. e., a vehicle) “where they have reasonable grounds to believe a consumer product is manufactured, imported, packaged, stored, advertised, sold, labelled, tested or transported, or a document relating to the administration of this Act or the regulations is located.”
Once there, inspectors can “examine or test anything–and take samples free of charge,” open packages, examine documents, seize products and the vehicles used to transport them, order the owner of a vehicle to move it, use computers on site to examine documents and, incredibly, order the people working there to “establish their identity to the inspector’s satisfaction or to stop or start the activity.” It further states that “[a]n inspector who is carrying out their functions and any person accompanying them may enter on or passthrough or over private property” and that people there shall give him any assistance he requires.
The new legislation also would require businesses to report all “incidents” of product returns involving injury — as well as the potential for injury — to both their supplier and Health Canada within two days. But as the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) noted in its submission on the CCPSA on Oct. 10, the bill fails to define its terms. Is that two business days or two consecutive days? What would be considered first notification of such an “incident”?
In addition, a study by the CFIB found that most products are not returned for safety reasons, but for customer dissatisfaction. Retailers simply issue a store credit or refund, and don’t document the return
beyond a receipt. In a 2010 survey of 500 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), “over half of the SMEs surveyed said they’d never had a defective product brought back to them.”
Finally, the CCPSA would allow the government to disclose personal and business information to foreign governments without the consent of the parties involved. While the bill says foreign governments are bound to respect the confidentiality of corporate information, this still represents a potential violation of personal privacy rights.
Canada already has strict regulations to ensure product safety and deter the manufacture and sale of harmful products. The Hazardous Products Act imposes fines of up to $1-million dollars and two years in jail. The Health Minister can ban or restrict any consumer product if there is significant risk to health and safety. Inspectors can search and seize products–with a warrant. And manufacturers and sellers can be prosecuted for criminal negligence or homicide in a court of law.
Bill C-36 loads small businesses with confusing paperwork and kowtows to foreign governments. And in its zeal to protect Canadians, the bill denies them their basic Charter rights.
Ultimately, it’s a dangerous piece of draconian legislation that is well worth worrying about–and watching.
About Bills C-36, C-6, C-51 & C-52 & Schedule F & The Natural Health Product Regulations Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom
Nov 26, 2010
Once again we have more evidence that the Will and Wishes of individual Canadians are not being respected with the Liberal and Conservative Senators.
Like greased lightening, Bill C-36 continues it's rapid passage into law in the Canadian Senate.
I spoke today with the Clerk of the Senate Committee to complaint about all grassroot voices being refused witness appearances and the inadequate time to provide a proper written brief and was advised that no more witnesses where being heard and that clause by clause was now occurring on December 1st and 2nd. Please read the set of questions below and then follow the instructions in the Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom communication below. These questions are the new and updated Peoples' E-Mandate Letter posted on the referenced websites for you to send. Even if you had sent one before, these questions have changed and you need to do the same again.
Please also help financially in our political and about to be legal challenge of Bill C-36. We need more GIA Freedom BeeHive Activists and monthly pledges in order to be able to continue challenging those that are conspiring so obviously to create a Fascist/Socialistic Police State in our country.
Stop the Fascist/Socialistic Bill C-36
The Fascist/Socialistic Parliamentary Bills C-51 & C-36 (formerly C-52 & C-6) show disdain and disrespect by the party leadership of the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP & Bloc for the individual Canadian's most fundamental ancient rights, freedoms and liberties. Each of our fundamental principles and values under the De Jure English Rule of Common Law has been completely ignored.
The end result of these Bills is the equivalent to the 'Boston Tea Party' which had caused the creation of the U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776.There has been speculation in the Canadian media of what would cause a Tea Party Movement to emerge and effect Canadian politics at the provincial and federal levels and it is these bills [see,,,, and].
These bills and the arrogant manner in which the Peoples' elected and appointed Public Servants are ignoring the expressed will of the People has raised a very significant question that needs to be answered. Has Canada been stolen from the People of Canada and turned into a Fascist/Socialistic Police State?
This question then leads to other questions that I need your help in answering personally in writing.
Our Canadian Tea Party Movement has updated our 13 critical questions that need to be reviewed and answered by every elected Member of Parliament and appointed Senator.The responses need to be answered in writing that will be posted on our website so that the Canadian people can fully understand their federal representatives' cooperation or non-cooperation.It is time for the Canadian people to see how well our governmental representatives understand and promote our fundamental principles and values and justify to their employers the substantial invest all Canadian made in their government Public Servants.
Our questions are separated into three categories which are: (1) The relationship between a constituent and the MP and between a MP and the Canadian people; (2) The outstanding issues surrounding Bill C-36; and (3) Democratic reforms attempting to improve MP and Senator accountability to the People of Canada that they are hired to serve the best interests of.
Section 1: The relationships of a MP between their constituent and the Canadian People.
1.Please advise whom you view yourself as working for in your role as an elected Member of Parliament or appointed Senator?
2.Why do the four major parties' Whips mandate their members to vote collectively as a caucus on such important and controversial pieces of legislation that possibly change the social, legal and constitutional nature of Canada forever?
3.Would you personally support mandatory recorded open votes on all matters before the House of Commons, the Senate and their committees?
4.Why are a number of members within the House of Commons and the Senate permitted the passing of Bills which destroy our fundamental rights under Common Law that has evolved through Judeo-Christian values and principles?
Section 2: The outstanding issues surrounding Bill C-36.
1.Please confirm whether you have personally read the proposed Bill C-36 in its entirety? If yes, when was the first time this proposed Bill was read fully by you?
2.Do you support Bill C-36 in its original form as was introduced on June 9, 2010 to Parliament by the Minister of Health?
3.Are you aware of any Business Impact Study completed by Health Canada prior to the introduction of Bill C-36 on June 9, 2010?Are you aware of what implications will arise for Canada's economy with its jobs and small businesses if Bill C-36 is passed?
4.How was it possible that the Department of Justice permitted the drafting of Bill C-36 without taking into consideration the experienced legal opinions from the Senate records regarding the drafting flaws identified on Senate record pertaining to Bill C-6?
5.Why does Parliament, through its Prime Minister, Deputy Minister of Justice and the Clerk of the Privy Council, allow this type of legislation to change the entire nature of criminal law in Canada?What has happened to the presumption of innocence, the right to not incriminate, the right to a fair and objective hearing by a jury, the right to specific language creation of all criminal offenses, preferably in the Criminal Code of Canada, etc.?
6.Why was no early administrative dispute mechanism included in Bill C-36 allowing individuals and corporations to be protected themselves from unreasonable, malicious and/or erroneous criminal investigation, prosecution or harassment?
7.Why were leading spokespersons for the grassroots' organizations such as Friends of Freedom International, Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom, Freedom of Choice in Health Care, People First Republic Party of Ontario, etc. opposed to Bill C-6 denied witness appearances in the Senate?Why is the same thing being done in both the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and the Senate Committee currently reviewing Bill C-36?
Section 3: Democratic Reforms.
1.Would you personally support expanding the scope of responsibility and budgets for the Standing Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations (REGS) to include mandating that all future new legislation must be approved prior to first reading in the House of Commons or Senate?
2.Do you agree with the concept that it is the Canadian people who pay for and elect their Members of Parliament similar to how an employer hires an employee to represent them?If so, do you agree that the Canadian people should have the right to 'fire' their elected Member of Parliament through a mandatory recall system, which is similar to the one used in British Columbia and in the U.S.?
3.Would you support a change in the Supreme Court of Canada Act to allow the citizens of each province and territory to directly elect one judge for an 8 year staggered term allowing the creation of a 13 judge Supreme Court that is an independent judicial system nationally?
4.Why has no democratic reform of the Senate occurred?
5.Why has the House of Commons and the Senate failed to reinstate a poison control center or establish a national death registry to ensure consumer safety is evidenced-based criteria to effectively predict and monitor hazards from actual evidence collected by coroners, health care practitioners and health care facilities? Why was this not built into the draft of Bill C-36 currently being reviewed.
As occurred in December 2009 with Bill C-6, experienced and highly respected grassroots' spokespersons are being denied the participation of witness appearances in the House of Commons and Senate committees.This legislation will impact 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 consumer products, over 100,000 businesses and result in both tax increases and cost increases, as well as restrict availability for most consumer products to all Canadians.
During the witness appearances before the Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee in the Senate between October 21, 2009 and November 26, 2009, of all 20 witnesses only 2 witnesses were against Bill C-6.Witnesses for Bill C-6 included senior officials and bureaucrats from Health Canada, Canada Manufacturers' Associations, Privacy Commissioner of Canada, etc.There was no leading grassroots' organization opposing Bill C-6 represented.One of our concerns is that this is going to happen again in the Senate committee with Bill C-36 and if and when it returns to the House of Commons committee.
It seems to be a reasonable concern due to the rapid push made by the House of Commons and the Senate to finalize Bill C-36. We have provided the Senate with a copy of our detailed analysis that brings to the forefront Bill C-36 and its similarities to its predecessor Bill C-6 [see Exhibits 5].
Your written replies to these critical questions are required within one week please.These questions need to be answered in order for me to make an Informed Freedom of Choice decision about whether there should even be a Senate and who I will vote for in the next federal election.I am considering supporting the Tea Party of Canada Movement of the People First Republic of Canada, if none of the established federal parties are prepared to be accountable to their constituents and the citizens in the government corporation created in 1867 named the Dominion of Canada (a.k.a. Canada, Crown, etc.).
If you and your staff need more information on any of these questions, please contact the following websites:,,,, and There is also a weekly newsletter entitled Health Freedom News Network that discusses similar topics [See].
I would also advise you that Trueman Tuck is authorized to meet with you and/or your staff in Ottawa and speak for me on these issues. You can contact my lobbyist – Mr. Trueman Tuck by telephone at (613) 771-1797, or by e-mail at
1 Bill C-51 Part A, Part B,Part C
2 Bill C-52 Part A, Part B
3 Bill C-6 Part A, Part B
4 Bill C-36 (Highlighted)
5 Analysis of Bill C-36
An Update from the Senate in Ottawa in regards to their deliberations of the Fascist/Socialistic Police State Bill C-36
Canadians today are at a very critical crossroad. Our Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom is involved in one of the most important Freedom battles of our life. We are losing and we need your immediate intervention in order to help turn the tide.
On June 9, 2010, Bill C-36 (formerly Bills C-52 & C-6) was introduced in the House of Commons for 1st Reading. It quickly passed 2nd Reading by October 7, 2010. After its referral to the Standing Committee on Health on October 26, 2010, it was carried to the House of Commons. After its 3rd Reading on October 29, 2010, it was referred to the Senate for 1st Reading. After 2nd Reading on November 18, 2010, it was referred to the Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee.
In our 15 years experience, we have never seen such a significant bill be processed this rapidly. Bill C-36 will impact 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 consumer products, over 100,000 businesses and over 10,000,000 individuals. The party leadership of the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP and Bloc are all conspiring to force Bill C-36 into law with no regard to the will of the Canadian people. There has been no specific budget or Business Impact Study prepared or discussed. Both the Parliamentary and Senate Committees are refusing to allow witness appearances from the most experienced and knowledgeable representatives of concerned Canadians and small family businesses.
We were successful last December when the government attempted to introduce and pass Bill C-6 in getting the bill reviewed and stopped. After reviewing Bill C-6in its entirety, the Senate returned the Bill to the House of Commons with their suggested amendments. Only a very minor few of these amendments have been incorporated into Bill C-36. Once again we have provided a detailed analysis of the many faults found within Bill C-36.
In this analysis have the Bill C-6 Senate debates, along with our technical analysis.
Yesterday, November 24, 2010 was the first day of deliberations for the Senate Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee. It reconvened on November 25, 2010 at 10:30 a.m. It is critical that we get the opportunity to testify as witnesses against Bill C-36 before the Senate Committee reviewing Bill C-36. If you do not actively participate now in helping us stop this totalitarian Bill, you will see more bills of similar design. This includes Bill C-51 which will restrict your rights of Informed Freedom of Choice in natural health products.
Please visit,, and/or and send the new E-Mandate People Action letter to all members of the Senate Committee, who are as follows:
Patrick Brazeau, Conservative [Tel: (613) 947-4231 Fax: (613) 947-4228]
Catherine S. Callbeck, Liberal [Tel: (613) 943-0686 Fax: (613) 943-0639]
Andrée Champagne, Conservative [Tel: (613) 995-3999 Fax: (613) 995-4034]
Jane Cordy, Liberal [Tel: (613) 995-2409 Fax: (613) 995-8432]
Dennis Dawson, Liberal [Tel: (613) 995-3978 Fax: (613) 995-3998]
Joseph A. Day, Liberal [Tel: (613) 992-0833 Fax: (613) 992-1175]
Nicole Eaton, Conservative [Tel: (613) 947-4047 Fax: (613) 947-4044]
Art Eggleton, Liberal [Tel: (613) 995-4230 Fax: (613) 995-4237]
Yonah Martin, Conservative [Tel: (613) 947-4078 Fax: (613) 947-4082]
Kelvin Kenneth Ogilvie, Conservative [Tel: (613) 992-0331 Fax: (613) 992-0334]
Judith Seidman, Conservative [Tel: (613) 992-0110 Fax: (613) 992-0118]
Carolyn Stewart Olsen, Conservative [Tel: (613) 992-0121 Fax: (613) 992-0124]
Marjory LeBreton, Conservative [Tel: (613) 943-0756 Fax: (613) 943-1493]
Gerald J. Comeau, Conservative [Tel: (613) 943-1448 Fax: (613) 943-1556]
James S. Cowan, Liberal [Tel: (613) 995-4268 Fax: (613) 995-4287]
Claudette Tardiff, Liberal [Tel: (613) 947-3589 Fax: (613) 947-3609]
These can be reached at their toll free number (800) 267-7362. After completing your E-Blast, print it out and fax your letter to each of the committee members confirming receipt. Ask them for a written confirmation that all the Freedom witnesses will be heard. Then email and fax your letters to your own MP. Call your MPs office and set up a meeting with them to get direct answers to your questions about Bill C-36 and why ordinary Canadians are being denied witness appearances once again.
To keep updated on what is happening in the Stop Bill C-36 GIA Beehive Freedom Campaign be sure to visit the People First Republic Party of Canada website at, the Health Freedom News Network at and the Tea Party of Canada Movement at
The current status of Bill C-36, as well as, meeting schedules, committee proceedings, reports and contact information can be found at
While we were sleeping …
By Dee Nicholson
National Health Federation of Canada
Posted September 29, 2010
Over the past ten years or so, I’ve been an activist with one overarching concern, that of stopping Codex Alimentarius, a WHO brainchild, from foisting draconian rules for food safety on Canadians… including me. Codex has been on the table in one form or another since about 1962; it has been looming over us with a promise of useless potencies in natural supplements, ridiculously low allowable dosage limits, and the requirement of prescriptions for simple vitamins, for a start.
The rules go on and on, each of them removing some right or other to choose what form of nutritional supplement you want to take, and in what amounts, and all of them are to be synthesized under “Good Manufacturing Processes” to assure “quality”. This, despite the longstanding proven safety and efficacy of all these products, as well as the fact that anything synthetic is not well-tolerated by the human body.
Now, all along, we health freedom buffs (Health Canada once called us “Nutri-terrorists”) were aware that the Codex guidelines, once accepted by our government, would be enforced by trade sanction via the World Trade Organization. And because our nation is signed to the WTO Agreement, Canada could be dragged kicking and screaming into the morass of international food standards which do nothing for health but ensure its diminishment, or pay millions for our non-compliance.
This triggered a few stalwart individuals, this writer included, to spot the fact that Canada’s own health legislation would become meaningless under these guidelines, yet we were practically helpless to stop the process, being obligated by our signing of the trade agreement. I’ve said it before and will say it again: trade agreements are enforceable international contracts, not social clubs.
Boy, we thought we were smart. But we all got hornswoggled here, big time. That Codex freight train is not the only one on the track, and something else is appearing on our radar as a more immediate threat. It’s a whole other train, and we can already see the headlights.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that Codex is not a threat. It definitely, absolutely, really, really is.
But Codex is only half baked, and is not likely to be in any enforceable form for a good couple of years. Meanwhile, CETA, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union, currently under negotiation, has in its back pocket the European Union’s own version of Codex Alimentarius, guidelines as bad as Codex or worse, which have been in place since 2005.
Bear in mind, CETA has been much more than a twinkle in the eye of globalists everywhere for ten years now. It’s only recently that word got out about what was on the table: Opening up Canada’s water utilities to privatization by foreign bidders; privatizing Canada Post; energy plans by the provinces; domination by Monsanto of our agriculture and forced acceptance of genetically-modified seeds. When they said “comprehensive”, they meant it. But somehow, none of us even thought about those EU food guidelines, probably because we didn’t see a mechanism by which they could be applied to Canada…. until we heard about CETA.
You’ve got to understand how simple it is for multinational influence to worm its way into our governance system. One trade agreement = one enforceable contract = disappearing sovereignty. It’s easy. Wherever our laws run counter to what a trade group wants enforced, a majority vote at the table forces us to govern the sovereignty of our nation according to the wishes of the group, as the WTO forced the USA to alter its corporate tax law, some years back.
The World Trade Organization is indeed a prime example. There are about 193 nations in that group, and Canada has only one vote. Our delegate goes to the meeting, presumably (but not necessarily) to present the wishes of the Canadian people, translated by our MP’s, to the assembly. If more than half of the guys at that table, each presenting their own nation’s stance, happen to disagree with Canada, Canadians are forced, by law, to surrender to their decision, even if it means repealing or amending our laws. And remember, the WTO is the enforcement arm of Codex Alimentarius.
Now the rubber meets the road: Canadian legislation, shaped, ostensibly by our votes, is rendered obsolete and of no effect, the moment the group says something different. At that point, what happened to our sovereignty, our ability to decide and make and enforce our laws?
It’s as obsolete and toothless as that lost vote, by contract.
Consider this: Canada is signed to ten international trade agreements, and is negotiating twelve more, including CETA. What possible areas of our sovereign legislation might be overturned because of them? And when all these agreements are in place, of what use is your vote?
And this: For whose benefit are these “agreements” (contracts) signed? It sure isn’t ours. Hint: they’re called
“trade” agreements. Since the government does not engage in trade, but only promotes it, and since if one wants to find a prime motivator, one should follow the money, only one group can possibly benefit, and that group is made up of multinational corporations. These are the same multinational corporations whose head honchos regularly consult with our elected “representatives”. Some are members of our Privy Council.
Now might be an appropriate time to mention an old quotation from the King of Fascism, Benito Mussolini: “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”
So Big Oil, Big Energy, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture triumph, and get to set their own rules, while we are left scratching our heads over how democracy has gotten so weird lately.
It isn’t weird. It’s non-existent. And it’s being rapidly swallowed by Mussolini’s dream, and our worst nightmare.
Back to CETA, and how it threatens, at the very least, our health freedom. And to cover all the bases, we need to examine how our own Health Ministry is opening the door to legitimizing CETA’s influence and those EU guidelines, through a clause in Bill C-36, soon to have its second reading in the House of Commons.
The Legislative Summary of Bill C-36* states: “the definition of ‘government’ in this bill encompasses not only federal and provincial governments in Canada, but also federal Crown corporations, Aboriginal governments in Canada, foreign governments, and international organizations of states, such as the United Nations.”
It also says, “Clause 3 provides the bill’s purpose, which is to “protect the public by addressing or preventing dangers to human health and safety” posed by consumer products. This clause expresses the federal government’s constitutional authority to enact this bill. Because it has a “public protection” purpose, Bill C-36 likely falls under the ambit of section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867,14 the federal government’s criminal law power.”
My lay person’s translation of all that is first, our Health Ministry is mandating itself to take direction from foreign entities (Notice, they mention the UN, but not trade groups… do you think they want you to grok that trade groups are “international organizations of states” too?), and second, since they’re talking about “public safety”, Constitutional rights don’t mean a whole hell of a lot either. In case that doesn’t sound familiar, you might recall the “notwithstanding” clause in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms: sounds like they just tacitly invoked it, to me.
This nation is a democracy, you say? How could it be, with our own government having kicked it into an early grave and shoveled dirt on the only thing that makes democracy possible, which is our sovereignty!
While we were sleeping, somebody stole our democracy. And I hate to tell you, but that “somebody” is us, just like the old Pogo cartoon said. You read right, we’re to blame here, because we not only slept like Rumpelstiltskin through the entire metamorphosis, but now are awakening to a fascist nightmare.
Bill C-36 must not pass. That doorway to health serfdom must be closed, and CETA must be stopped. Together, they pose more than a threat to our treasured, but waning, freedom to choose what is done to our own bodies, and those of our children, which by itself is a dismal enough outcome: they end a piece, a precedent-setting piece, of our democracy.
The clock alarm is blaring. Are you going to hit the snooze bar and roll over? Or are you going to remind our government that we never gave permission for anyone to sneak our democracy out the back door, and give them a broad hint that to you, it sounds a wee bit treasonous?
Choose it, or lose it.
*You can read the Legislative Summary of Bill C-36 for yourself: