If we go to page 168 of the budget, we will see the figure of $51.2 million in new resources under “Strengthening Food Safety” in big letters. That $51.2 million is over two years, split between three different agencies: the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Health Canada and the Public Health Agency. By my reckoning, that is about $8 million a year if it were distributed evenly.

If we go to the fine print on page 261, which my friend from Welland noticed, we see $2 million less this year, $10 million less the next year and on an ongoing basis $56 million less. Does my hon. friend agree with me that there is less money for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, relying on the facts in the budget?

Malcolm Allen: Mr. Speaker, as much as the other side continues to say that opposition members do not read its budget, lo and behold, we do.

There is one thing I can say about being a Glaswegian, that when it comes to numbers and money I am always looking. I will always find if someone is trying to shortchange someone else, because a nickel or penny to us Scots is expensive, and we are going to hunt for it.

I found that the budget intends to give less on an ongoing basis, as we head forward. Yes, my colleague is correct. It is written in tiny print, but I do wear glasses and if I have to really work at it, I shift the bad lens to the bad eye to make it look bigger and I can actually see it. That is how I am actually read that tiny print.

The post Emergency Debate – Food Safety appeared first on Elizabeth May.

It has now been revealed that data were not released from a Calgary Health Canada monitoring station detecting levels of radioactive iodine in rainwater well above the Canadian guideline for drinking water.  This isotope was known to be released by the nuclear accident and also showed up in tests in Vancouver, Winnipeg and Ottawa.  Lower levels of contamination resulted in a don’t-drink-rainwater advisory in Virginia.

“Serious questions are arising about how Health Canada tests for radiation, and why it has failed to properly alert the public,” said May.  “We find out now that monitoring appears inadequate, Health Canada data does not agree with that from independent researchers, and no information is making its way to the public.  In effect, Health Canada has not allowed Canadians to take any preventative steps to reduce our exposure to this radiation.”

“We now ask, what changes will be implemented to restore public trust in our health regulators?” said May.

The post Health Canada failed to reveal radioactivity in rainwater appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Justice Michael A. Kelen invoked the precautionary principle in his decision, saying “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent adverse health impact or environmental degradation.”

Scientists have been cautioning that glyphosate mixed with the various so-called inert chemicals that make up Roundup may have toxic effects, not all of which are understood.  Roundup is used extensively in agriculture across Canada.

“Congratulations go to the West Coast Environmental Law Group and Josette Wier for their perseverance in this case,” said May.  “It’s a shame that private citizens have to go to court to get Health Canada to step up and protect public health but in this case, I am glad they took the initiative.”

The post Greens Happy about Roundup Review appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The Ombudsman of the European Union has launched an investigation into the lack of information European citizens have received about potential radioactive contamination of food due to fallout from the meltdown. This highlights the even greater lack of            communication from the Government of Canada about potential risks.

Health Canada monitors the level of radiation in the air and posts the results on its web site. However there is no information            posted to indicate whether the government is checking for radionuclide levels in Canadian food.

“We know that fallout from Fukushima reached our shores, but monitoring of airborne levels gives only a partial picture of the potential risk to Canadians,” said Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party and MP for Saanich Gulf Islands. “Radionuclides become concentrated in foods, particularly dairy. Is Health Canada monitoring this? If so, why is that information not being communicated to Canadians? If not, then why not?”

It is now known that damage to the coolant system from the March 11 earthquake and tsunami resulted in the meltdown of three reactors at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. Starting March 21, Canadian radiation monitors picked up an increase in radiation levels. Health Canada says the increase in airborne levels has not posed a health risk to Canadians.

Europe has seen small increases in airborne radiation since the disaster, but has also been monitoring contamination levels in foods. The European Union Ombudsman launched an investigation after numerous complaints regarding the lack of information about changes to maximum permissible levels of contamination.  The US government is also monitoring and publishing more data on radioactive fallout than that available to Canadians.  The US EPA and FDA are publishing data from rainfall and dairy.

“Europeans are concerned about the lack of transparency surrounding potential contamination. Canadians are receiving even less information than Europeans or Americans. We should be very concerned,” said May.

The post Greens demand more information about possible radiation risks appeared first on Elizabeth May.