This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Horizontal Initiative |
|||||||||||||||||||
1. Name of Horizontal Initiative: |
2. Name of Lead Department: |
||||||||||||||||||
3. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: |
4. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: |
5. Total Federal Funding Allocation: |
|||||||||||||||||
6. Description of the Horizontal Initiative: Canada's Drug Strategy (CDS) was first introduced in 1987 to address substance use and abuse issues through coordinated activities by various federal departments, governments and non-governmental organizations. In 1992, following some initial successes in the areas of prevention and treatment, Phase II was launched with an emphasis on Driving While Impaired. During Phase II of the CDS, changing government priorities resulted in less than half of the funding being applied to the Strategy making it difficult to fully address complex issues related to both supply and demand reduction. CDS Renewed (approved by Cabinet in May 2003) is a comprehensive inter-departmental initiative to coordinate and enhance substance abuse programs, knowledge and partnerships in prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement. For more information, please refer to http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/activit/strateg/drugs-drogues/index_e.html.[3] Budget 2007 announced the establishment of a National Anti-Drug Strategy (NADS) that will focus on prevention, treatment and enforcement activities. Future reporting will be based on these focus areas. |
|||||||||||||||||||
7. Shared Outcome(s): Improved Leadership - Setting directions and creating environments that support local action and national action integrally linked to nationally defined objectives and priorities; Enhanced knowledge generation and management - Providing strengthened capacity to improve evidence-based policy and decision making by promoting leading-edge research, statistical monitoring of drug trends and evaluation of program effectiveness; Enhanced partnerships and interventions - Discouraging substance abuse, targeting illegal conduct that threatens the safety and security of Canadians, and assisting those at risk from the effects of drugs by supporting partnerships and programs that focus on prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement activities; Improved modernization of relevant legislation and drug policies - Ensuring that legal and policy approaches underpinning CDS are coherent with and support the Strategy, by reviewing legislation and regulations for responsiveness to current requirements. |
|||||||||||||||||||
8. Governance Structure(s):[4] Health Canada (HC) Health Canada is the federal lead for CDS. The Minister of Health is responsible for coordination across federal departments. Health Canada also partners with provinces and territories to provide national leadership and coordination, manages programs that reduce and prevent harm associated with controlled substances and participates in international fora in support of health-related supply and demand reduction activities. An Assistant Deputy Minister Interdepartmental Steering Committee is chaired by Health Canada. Working groups focusing on Communications, Research and Surveillance, Evaluation and Risk Management and Emerging Issues have been established to support decision making by the ADM Steering Committee and Health Canada provides a Secretariat to support these structures. Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) The Public Health Agency of Canada, through its Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control (CIDPC) and its Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder team, is responsible for conducting and disseminating research and surveillance information on public health indicators and illness related to substance use/abuse and injection drug use, as well as on the linkages between alcohol use during pregnancy and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Department of Public Safety Canada (PS)[5] The Department of Public Safety Canada is responsible for: a) coordinating the Public Safety Portfolio's drug control policies and initiatives to ensure that they are consistent with and complementary to the broader goals and objectives of CDS; and b) providing strategic advice to the Minister in fulfilment of the Minister's policy leadership role in policing and corrections. The Department also participates in international fora in support of law enforcement-related supply and demand reduction activities. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) The RCMP offers a balanced approach addressing both supply and demand issues. RCMP officers investigate illegal drug activities and organized crime groups. They disrupt criminal activities and networks related to the supply of illicit drugs. They also deliver a number of drug awareness and prevention programs targeted at youth, Aboriginal communities, drug endangered children and parents. Additionally, they coordinate specialized training of police officers in Drug Recognition Expertise to detect drug impaired driving. Correctional Service Canada (CSC) CSC provides substance abuse treatment programs to federal offenders with substance abuse problems and controls the supply of illicit drugs in correctional facilities through various security measures. In addition, the Addictions Research Centre of CSC conducts research on substance abuse issues of importance to federal corrections and develops programs to address the substance abuse needs of offenders. Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) The CBSA contributes to reducing the supply of controlled substances and illegal drugs through their detection and interception at Canadian ports/borders of entry. Department of Justice (DOJ) The Programs Branch of the Department of Justice, in collaboration with the Office of Demand Reduction of Health Canada, administers funding and monitors implementation and evaluation of the six federally-funded drug treatment courts. These courts are alternatives to traditional prosecution that integrate both criminal justice and drug treatment responses. The Federal Prosecution Service of the Department of Justice prosecutes drug cases. Drug cases comprise a significant part of the Prosecution's workload.[6] Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada represents Canada, in cooperation and coordination with other interested CDS partners, on the international aspects of CDS. The Department and its network of overseas embassies and consulates, covers major international meetings (United Nations, G-8, international regional organizations), represents Canada at international processes (Dublin Group, Paris Pact, transnational organized crime instruments), as well as advocacy, diplomatic and technical assistance activities with bilateral partners. The Department manages Canada's umbrella contribution agreements to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Organization of American States' Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD), and other drug cooperation projects under the Public Safety Envelope of its Human Security Program. |
|||||||||||||||||||
9. Federal Partners Involved in each Program |
10. Names of Programs |
11. Total Allocation |
12. Forecasted Spending for 2006‑07 |
13. Actual Spending in 2006‑07 |
|||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Promotion / Prevention and Public and Professional |
$ 14.83 M |
$ 5.85 M |
$ 5.85 M |
|||||||||||||||
RCMP | Education / Training | $ 18.46 M | $ 5.26 M | $ 5.26 M | |||||||||||||||
Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA) | Programs / Activities | $ 7.00 M | $ 2.45 M | $ 2.45 M | |||||||||||||||
$ 40.29 M | $13.56 M | $ 13.56 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007: Prevention activities under CDS include measures to educate people about the dangers of drug abuse and help them adopt healthy behaviours.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Treatment and Rehabilitation Programs / Activities |
$ 347.20 M[8] |
$ 87.10 M |
$85.3 M[9] |
|||||||||||||||
Correctional Service Canada | $ 69.80 M | $ 19.10 M | $19.20 M | ||||||||||||||||
Department of Justice | $ 10.20 M | $ 3.80 M | $2.30 M[10] | ||||||||||||||||
$ 427.20 M | $110.00 M | $106.80 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007: Treatment-related activities under CDS focus primarily on provision of treatment programs and services to targeted populations such as offenders, women and youth, and First Nations communities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Research and Surveillance Programs / Activities |
$ 42.46 M |
$ 11.04 M[12] |
$ 9.63 M[13] |
|||||||||||||||
PHAC | $ 4.50 M | $ 1.50 M | $ 1.50 M | ||||||||||||||||
CSC | $ 8.10 M | $ 2.00 M | $ 2.10 M | ||||||||||||||||
CCSA | $ 6.40 M | $ 1.30 M | $ 1.30 M | ||||||||||||||||
$ 61.46 M | $ 15.84 M | $ 14.53 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007: CDS invests in the generation of new knowledge and improved knowledge management to enhance capacity to address existing and emerging substance abuse/use trends by contributing to the development and sharing of knowledge on more evidence-based approaches to substance abuse.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Contributions Programs |
$ 33.88 M |
$ 14.78 M |
$12.90 M[14] |
|||||||||||||||
Foreign Affairs Canada | $ 10.8 M | $ 2.90 M | $ 2.90 M | ||||||||||||||||
Public Safety | $ .51 M | $ .10 M | $ .10 M | ||||||||||||||||
$ 45.19 M | $ 17.78 M | $ 15.90 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Coordination and Collaboration Programs/Activities |
$ 13.16 M |
$3.37 M |
$ 3.37 M |
|||||||||||||||
Public Safety | $ 2.51 M | $ .63 M | $ .45 M[15] | ||||||||||||||||
$ 15.67 M | $4 M | $ 3.82 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Policy and Legislative Review and Development Programs/ Activities |
$ 5.70 M |
$1.55 M |
$ 1.55 M |
|||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Health Canada |
Enforcement Programs/ Activities |
$ 55.74 M |
$ 14.26 M |
$ 14.26 M |
|||||||||||||||
RCMP | $ 310.01 M | $ 79.07 M | $ 79.07 M | ||||||||||||||||
Canada Border Services | $ 327.60 M | $ 81.90 M | $ 81.90 M | ||||||||||||||||
Correctional Service Canada | $ 23.90 M | $ 5.90 M | $ 5.80 M | ||||||||||||||||
Justice | $ 255.44 M | $ 64.50 M | $ 60.24 M | ||||||||||||||||
$ 972.69 M | $ 245.63 M | $ 241.27 M | |||||||||||||||||
Planned Results for 2006-2007:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Achieved Results for 2006-2007: Enforcement activities under CDS include measures to halt the unlawful import, export, production, distribution and possession of controlled substances.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Total $1,568.2 M |
Total $408.36 M |
Total $397.43 M |
|||||||||||||||||
16. Comments on Variances: Comments on variances are provided in footnotes at the bottom of each relevant section. |
|||||||||||||||||||
17. Results Achieved by Non-federal Partners: |
|||||||||||||||||||
18. Contact Information: Colleen Ryan Manager, CDS Evaluation, Risk Management and Reporting (613) 957-2867 |
19. Approved by: Andrew Adams |
20. Date Approved: |
1 CDS was initiated in 1987 and has undergone a number of reiterations in the past 17 years. CDS Renewed was approved in May 2003.
2 The financials presented reflect a start date of May 2003 and an end date of 2006-2007. The funding allocation during this four year period is inclusive of both the enhanced funding received under CDS Renewed ($245 million over five years and ongoing) and A-base funding pertaining to activities undertaken in demand and supply reduction.
3 In light of the announcement of a National Anti-Drug Strategy in Budget 2007, the CDS website, which is a component of the Health Canada website, is in the process of being updated.
4 The governance structure may change under the NADS. Any changes will be discussed in the 2007-08 DPR.
5 The Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada has been changed to Public Safety Canada.
6 On December 12, 2006, the Federal Prosecution Service of Justice Canada became the new federal Public Prosecutions Service of Canada (PPSC) as a result of the Federal Accountability Act and related enactment of the Director of Public Prosecution Act. The PPSC is now independent of the Department of Justice and reports to Parliament through the Attorney General of Canada.
7 The CDS website was launched in August 2005. As such, statistics from last year were only available for August to December 2005.
8 During 2006-07, this total was revisited and .68 M was moved from Treatment and Rehabilitation Programs to Contributions Programs to reflect Health Canada’s component of the Drug Treatment Courts.
9 $800 K was removed from the original $14 M budget under the Health Canada component as part of the $1 B Expenditure Review.
10 The difference of $1.5 M between forecasted and actual spending reflects the amount allocated to Health Canada’s contribution to the Drug Treatment Court Funding Program.
11 Completions include those offenders who remain until the end of the program, both successful completions and those who attend all sessions.
12 The identified amount represents a combination of the enhanced funding provided to Health Canada under the renewal of CDS in addition to funds already being invested in research and surveillance activities prior to the renewal and prior to the separation of the Public Health Agency of Canada from Health Canada.
13 The difference of $1.41 M between forecasted and actual spending is due to a lapse of funds related to operational delays in delivery of research and surveillance activities, including approximately $500 K in lapsed funds related to delays in the contracting process with PWGSC for the Canadian Alcohol and Drug Monitoring Survey and approximately $900 K for projects that were postponed or cancelled due to changing priorities and delays in the approval process at the provincial/territorial level; monies unspent due to publications not receiving Ministerial approval; as well as monies not being transferred to other agencies due to delays in production of their reports.
14 Health Canada figures represent total allocation amounts for the Drug Treatment Court Funding Program ($2.78 M) and the Drug Strategy Community Initiatives Fund ($12 M). The variance is due to a lapse in funding for DSCIF in the amount of $223,104 due to unspent funds at year-end under contribution agreements; monies not dedicated to specific projects; monies unspent due to projects not receiving Ministerial approval as well as the $182 K reduction from the $1 B Expenditure Review and transfers from other departments. The variance for DTCFP was $1.5 M due to a $1.5 M contribution to the Expenditure Review.
15 Due to unusual operational delays in obtaining required information and approval related to planned contributions, a percentage of the contribution funding could not be expended. In addition, human resource-related issues resulted in less than complete use of operational funds.
Table 17 Horizontal Initiative
1. Federal Strategy on Early Childhood Development (ECD) for First Nations and Other Aboriginal Children | 2. Health Canada, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch | |||||
3. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: ECD - October 2002 Early Learning and Child Care (ELCC) - December 2004 |
4. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: ECD - 2006-07 and ongoing ELCC - 2007-08 and ongoing |
5. Total Federal Funding Allocation: ECD in 2002 - $320 M over 5 years ($65 M ongoing) to enhance and expand various federal ECD programs ELCC in 2004 - $45 M over three years ($14 M ongoing) to increase integration, coordination, access and quality of two ECD/ELCC programs |
||||
6. Description of the Horizontal Initiative: The Federal Strategy on ECD for First Nations and Other Aboriginal Children was announced on October 31, 2002. The Strategy provides $320 million over five years to: improve and expand existing ECD programs and services for Aboriginal children; expand ECD capacity and networks; introduce new research initiatives to improve understanding of how Aboriginal children are doing; and work towards the development of a "single window" approach to ensure better integration and coordination of federal Aboriginal ECD programming. In December 2004, as the first phase of a "single window," Cabinet approved an additional $45 million over three years ($14 million ongoing) to improve integration and coordination of two ECD programs, (Aboriginal Head Start On-Reserve and the First Nations and Inuit Child Care Initiative), beginning in 2005-2006. The objectives of these funds are to increase access to and improve the quality of ELCC programming for First Nations children on-reserve, and improve integration and coordination between the two programs through joint planning, joint training and co-location. Joint planning will also include Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) funded child care programs. |
||||||
7. Shared Outcome(s): The funding, approved in December 2004, to enhance child care and work towards the first phase of a "single window", complements funding released to provinces and territories under the March 2003 Multilateral Framework for Early Learning and Child Care to improve access to early learning and child care programs and services. |
||||||
8. Governance Structure(s): Interdepartmental ECD Assistant Deputy Minister Steering Committee; Interdepartmental ECD Working Group. | ||||||
9. Federal Partners |
10. Names of Programs for the Federal Partners |
11. Total Allocation |
12. Planned Spending for 2006-07i |
13. Actual Spending in 2006-07 |
14. Planned Results for 2006-07 |
15. Results Achieved in 2006-07 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a) Health Canada (HC) |
(a) Aboriginal Head Start On-Reserve (AHSOR) |
$21.5 M $7.0 M |
$20.6M 1 $8.3 M |
$26 M |
Program expansion and enhancement |
See details below |
$15 M |
$14.9 M |
$14.3 M |
Program expansion and enhancement |
See details below |
||
(c) Building Capacity and Networks |
$1.02 M |
$.95 M |
$.66 M |
Building capacity and networks |
See details below |
|
(d) Horizontal Training |
$1.3 M |
$1.3 M |
$1.3 M |
|
See details below |
|
b) Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) |
(a) Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities |
$ 12.6 M |
$12.6 M |
$12.6 M |
Program expansion and enhancement |
See details below |
(b) Building Capacity and Networks |
$500 K |
$500 K |
$500 K |
Program expansion and enhancement |
See details below |
|
c) Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) |
(a) First Nations and Inuit Child Care Initiative (FNICCI) |
$9.14 M $7 M |
$9.14 M $7 M |
$16.14 M |
Program expansion and enhancement |
See details below |
(b) Aboriginal Children's Survey |
$3.44 M ongoing |
$6 M2 |
$6 M (est)2 |
Consultations, finalize content development, collection, data processing and promotional activities development. |
See details below |
|
(c) Understanding the Early Years - Aboriginal component |
$700 K |
$700 K |
$03 |
Understanding the Early Years Call for Proposals to encourage applications from Aboriginal communities |
Held consultations with national First Nations, Metis and Inuit organizations |
|
d) Indian Affairs and Northern Development
(INAC)
|
(a) "Single Window" Work |
$0.879 M |
$0.879M |
$0.879 M |
Better coordination and integration |
See details below |
(b) Building Capacity and Networks |
$0.131 M | $0.131M | $0.131 M |
|
See details below |
|
|
|
Total $80.21M |
Total $82.27M |
Total |
|
|
16. Comments on Variances 2 Aboriginal Children's Survey: 3 Understanding the Early Years (UEY) - Aboriginal component: |
||||||
17. Results Achieved by Non-federal Partners - see details below | ||||||
18. Contact Information Geoffrey Gurd, Manager, ECD, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, Health Canada Postal Locator 1920D Tunney's Pasture, Ottawa Telephone: (613) 952-5064 Fax: (613) 952-5244 |
19. Approved by Kathy Langlois Director General Community Programs Directorate First Nations and Inuit Health Branch |
20. Date Approved |
i The allocations, planned spending and actual spending figures (above) include only incremental funding provided under two initiatives: the 2002 Federal Strategy on ECD for First Nations and Other Aboriginal Children and the 2004 initiative to enhance child care and working towards the first phase of the "single window." These figures do not include base allocations to programs.
Aboriginal Head Start On-Reserve (AHSOR):
Details on results achieved in 2006-2007 are not available, as the AHSOR National Office will not receive the AHSOR regional progress reports until November 2007. In 2005-2006 reports, regions committed to some of the following activities:
The following can be said regarding 2006-2007:
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder - First Nations and Inuit Component:
Building Capacity and Networks:
As part of the 2002 Federal Strategy's capacity-building component, Health Canada funding is provided annually to five national Aboriginal organizations: the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, Métis National Council, and Native Women's Association of Canada. As well, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is providing annual
funding to Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada. This funding enabled these national Aboriginal organizations to contribute through strategic planning and capacity building in their own organizations.
Funding also continued to support development of an Aboriginal service providers' network, called the Aboriginal Children's Circle of Early Learning (ACCEL). Departments were assessing the effectiveness of the network, and started to explore alternate ways of meeting community needs for networking and providing access to program resources. Culturally specific ECD materials were developed by the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and the Métis National Council for inclusion on the ACCEL website.
Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities (AHSUNC):
Aboriginal Children's Survey (ACS):
Understanding the Early Years (UEY) - Aboriginal component:
In preparation for the 2006 UEY Call for Proposals and fielding of the ACS, UEY staff consulted with federal colleagues in HRSDC, INAC, PHAC and HC to discuss a strategy for encouraging proposals from Aboriginal communities. A communications strategy was launched with key national organizations: Assembly of First Nations, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Pauktuutit, Métis National
Council and Native Women's Association of Canada, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples and the National Association of Friendship Centres.
Table 17 : Horizontal Initiative
1. Building Public Confidence in Pesticide Regulation and Improving Access to Pest Management Products | ||||||
2. Name of Lead Department: Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) - Health Canada (HC) | ||||||
3. Start Date: 2002–2003 | 4. End Date: 2008–2009 | |||||
6. Description of the Horizontal Initiative The initiative is a part of the federal government’s commitments as outlined in the Treasury Board submission Building Public Confidence in Pesticide Regulation and Improving Access to Pest Management Products. The submission and its associated Results-based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) describe the integrated approach by which initiatives will be measured, managed and reported throughout their life cycle. An important element of the commitments made is that stakeholders and the public will be kept informed through a transparent management system. Participating departments will work together for shared outcomes; measure performance on delivery; and review progress achieved. This initiative incorporates six federal government partners to increase public and stakeholder confidence in the pesticide regulatory system, to protect health and environment, and to increase the competitiveness of the agri-food and forestry sectors. Research and monitoring in the area of pesticides is being coordinated with their regulation. The presence and effects of pesticides in the environment, in marine and freshwater ecosystems, and in the forest environment are being monitored. The initiative enhances monitoring and enforcement of pesticide residue limits in foods, in feed, of pesticide residues in fertilizers, and pesticide guarantee verification for fertilizer-pesticide combinations. Reduced-risk pesticides and biological pesticides for forestry are being developed and their use facilitated. Commodity-based risk reduction strategies for the agriculture and agri-food sector are being developed and implemented. Programs improving access to agricultural minor-use pesticides and reduced-risk pesticides for agricultural use are being established. Research to support introduction of minor-use pesticides that pose a reduced risk to the environment is being conducted. A reporting system to track adverse effects of pesticides has been developed, and information will be collected and recorded. Collectively, this work is being conducted to achieve public confidence in increased conservation and protection of human health and the environment while contributing to the competitiveness of Canada ’s agricultural sector. The information in this table has been organized along three main themes: 1. Research and Monitoring, carried out by Agriculture and Agri-food Canada (AAFC), the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), the Department of Fisheries and Ocean (DFO), Environment Canada (EC), Health Canada’s PMRA, and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) 2. Developing and Implementing Commodity Specific Risk Reduction Strategies, carried out by AAFC and HC’s PMRA 3. Generation of Data to Support Registration of Reduced-Risk and Minor-Use Pesticides for the Agricultural and Agri-food Sector and Reduced-Risk Pesticides and Biopesticides for Forestry, carried out by AAFC, HC’s PMRA and NRCan |
||||||
7. Shared Outcomes: Immediate Outcomes:
Intermediate Outcomes:
Final Outcome: Increased public and stakeholder confidence in pesticide regulation, protected health and environment as well as increased competitiveness of the agri-food and forestry sectors |
||||||
8. Governance Structures:
|
||||||
9. Federal Partners |
10. Names of Programs |
11. Total Allocation |
12. Planned Spending for 2006–2007 |
13. Actual Spending for 2006–2007 |
14. Expected Results for 2006–2007 |
15. Actual Results for 2006–2007 |
AAFC, CFIA, DFO, EC, HC (PMRA), NRCan | I. RESEARCH AND MONITORING | |||||
1. AAFC |
(a) Conducting research to support introduction of minor-use pesticides that pose a reduced risk to the environment.
|
$8.0 M
|
$2.0 M |
$ .04 M AL .01 M EBP 1.50 M NPO
|
Following evaluation of research projects, continued funding for some as appropriate. Final reports and next steps for implementation of research results under way for projects completed in March 2006. Initiation (in April,2006) of approximately 20 projects in Minor-Use Research and Biopesticide Initiatives as a result of November 2005 Project Call. Results of one year of research work on these projects to be reported upon (April 2007). Research planning, coordination continued with MOU Research Working Group. |
Continued funding approved for 10 of 12 projects evaluated during February 2006 Evaluation Workshop for fourth (final) year. Two projects completed as of April 2006 resulted in: 1) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan for management of leek moth, including submissions for registration of reduced-risk products Btk and spinosad and, 2) Identification of RR herbicide options for use in special crops, and data to support registration of sulfentrazone and carfentrazone-ethyl. Final reports for 10 ongoing projects due Q1 2007-2008. As a result of the November 2005 Project Call for Proposals, new projects were selected in 2006 for funding (under Minor-Use Research, Biopesticides, and Screening Trials Initiatives). A total of 30 projects were funded (20 new, 10 ongoing; the remaining project was selected in March 2006 and begins April 2007); 97% (29 of 30 projects) have met milestones to the end of March 2007. Research priorities and results were shared at two meetings of AAFC/PMRA Minor-Use Research Working Group (July, November) and one meeting of 5NR Pesticide Working Group (October) and the 5NR Environmental Assessment Workshop (February 2007). Extra activity 1: Biopesticides work with registrants. Submission of data package to support Category A registration of BlightBan A506 to PMRA. Submission of a bio-fungicide package to the registrant anticipated before end of May 2007. Submission of data package to registrant to support label expansion of Surround. Assistance provided to registrant for preparation of data package to support Category A submission of Met 52. Also as a result of promotional activities with U.S. and Canadian biopesticide companies, there is new interest in Canadian registrations. Several companies have made new submissions directly to PMRA. Extra Activity 2: Selection of projects where pest solutions don’t appear to exist. Developed and piloted a proposal with Minor- Use Program personnel, resulting in funding of two projects to screen for reduced-risk solutions (green mould in mushrooms and weeds in ginseng). |
2. CFIA |
(b) Enhanced monitoring and enforcement of pesticide residue limits in food and feed. |
$2.95 M |
$0.25 M |
$0.25 M |
Identify food commodities consumed by targeted subgroup (children). Lab testing of approximately 1,500 samples per year. Follow-up inspections for non-compliant test sample results. Publish annual report of findings of National Chemical Residues Monitoring Program (NCRMP). Food recalls, as required, for risk mitigation and removal of hazardous foods from marketplace. |
Program targeted traditional and organically labelled baby foods. Method used in analysis of samples was perfected by CFIA as a result of funding received in this initiative. Increased sensitivity was achieved in these analyses. |
2. CFIA cont’d |
(c) Enhanced monitoring and enforcement of pesticide residues in fertilizers and pesticide guarantee verification in fertilizer-pesticide combinations. |
$2.15 M |
$0.25 M |
$156 K lapsed funding to be used in next fiscal year |
Develop monitoring and surveillance policies and processes to guide and advise operational staff on fertilizer-pesticide combinations and pesticide contaminated fertilizers. Increase interaction with PMRA to obtain the most up-to-date pesticide safety and labelling information. Update the Compendium of Fertilizer-Use Pesticides, which contains information regarding registration, guarantees and proper labelling. Work to develop regulatory changes to facilitate updating of the Compendium, and, if successful, provide updates more regularly to producers of mixtures and to CFIA’s inspection staff. Advise CFIA Operations on appropriate follow-up procedures and recommendations regarding the significance of sample analytical results. Sample fertilizer-pesticide combinations to verify guarantees. Sample fertilizers suspected to be contaminated with pesticides. Verify fertilizer-pesticide labels. Conduct investigation and compliance activities (anticipated based on sampling and inspection frequencies). Analyze samples submitted by inspectors. |
Inspection Memorandum I-4-93, a document identifying inspection activities and sample quotas for the year, was provided to inspection staff. To facilitate label verification in the field and maintain consistency, a list of all registered fertilizer-pesticides and labels was updated and distributed to inspectors. Inspectors were guided on appropriate non-compliance follow-up when needed. The pesticide guarantee verification program has been redesigned, with the help of stakeholders, to improve compliance rate. CFIA’s tolerance for pesticide residues in fertilizers was reviewed and amended. Enforcement procedures in response to non-compliance were developed through a National Training Initiative to promote consistency in enforcement actions across Canada. CFIA and PMRA are jointly working to develop sub-agreements to an existing Memorandum of Understanding on regulation and/or registration of products under the Fertilizers Act and Pest Control Products Act, as well as a process to increase communication between the two agencies. CFIA is participating in the Building Public Confidence TB Initiative Evaluation Working Group. CFIA is participating in the 6NR Pesticides and Pest Management Working Group. The 3rd edition of the CFUP is pending in Canada Gazette, Part II. CFIA is looking into regulatory changes and expedited mechanisms to allow for more frequent updates. A new format is being created to facilitate public availability, and updates were distributed. Inspectors took 140 samples of fertilizer-pesticides for pesticide guarantee verification, and 80 samples of fertilizer products for the presence of pesticide residues. This is more than a three-fold increase for both programs over the average number of samples taken from 2000-01 to 2002-03. Follow-up actions on 49 non-compliant samples included warning letters, product detentions and investigations. Inspectors reviewed 137 fertilizer-pesticide labels for compliance with the Fertilizers Act and Regulations. Number of samples analyzed was 131 for pesticide guarantee verification and 63 for pesticide contamination audit. Analytical methodologies for the guarantee verification of 32 pesticides were reviewed to ensure that they are current and properly executed. Work is being done with the Calgary Lab on a method development for testing pesticide residues in organic fertilizers, like compost.Number of samples analyzed was 131 for pesticide guarantee verification and 63 for pesticide contamination audit. |
3. DFO
|
(d) Monitor and research presence and effects of pesticides in marine and freshwater ecosystems. |
$7.9 M |
$1.0 M |
$1.0 M |
Provide PMRA with final reports on four regional National Fund projects: 1) Impacts of forest spray programs on trout/salmon, Newfoundland-Labrador; 2) Effects of pesticides on fish reproduction, Quebec; 3) Impacts of pesticides on salmon habitat and on neurological development, Pacific; 4) Potential for biological effects from episodic release of pesticides into the aquatic environment, Gulf and Maritimes. Provide PMRA with a status report from DFO’s Centre for Environmental Research on Pesticides (CERP). CERP will conduct studies to quantify impacts of exposure to pesticide residues in two model systems in Canada: one representative of prairie land use and another indicative of southern Ontario land use pattern. Impacts will be quantified in terms of reproductive success of native fish populations as well as overall population numbers. After consultation with PMRA, DFO will design and initiate new research projects related to the theme -“Population Level Impacts of Pesticides on Fisheries Resources”. Contribute to Formative Evaluation of the Building Public Confidence in Pesticide Regulation and Improving Access to Pest Management Products Horizontal Initiative. |
DFO presented reports to PMRA at 5NR Workshop In Ottawa February 25-27, 2007. Summary written reports being assembled for submission to PMRA as a single document Comprises a portion of the summary report above. CERP conducted studies in Ontario and initiated collaboration with Dr. Annemieke Fairenhorst (University of Manitoba) to examine impacts in prairie wetlands. Four projects under this theme have been funded for 2007-2008. DFO contributed to development of a Memorandum of Understanding under which pesticide research results will be shared among the 5NR departments. Furthermore, DFO contributed to development of an integrated workplan for the 5NR departments. |
4. EC |
(e) Monitor and research presence and effects of pesticides in the environment. |
$7.0 M |
$1.0 M |
$1.0 M |
EC leads in specific research and monitoring themes have provided EC’s Pesticide Program Coordinating Committee with a document highlighting each theme’s results for the first three-year cycle of work. Themes include air and water surveillance; fish, amphibian and multitrophic aquatic effects; and plant, mammal and bird terrestrial effects. Following three years of research we will obtain answers to questions regarding knowledge generation with highlights of findings, contribution to the initial Pesticide |
Under Environment Canada's new management structure, the Pesticide Program falls under the Clean Water Result and is coordinated by the EC Pesticide Program Coordinating Committee. We have maintained and are continuing activities addressing the following:
|
4. EC cont’d |
|
|
|
|
Science Fund (PSF) objectives (e.g. national in scope and linked to regulatory decision-making priority, advanced knowledge of pesticide fate and effects), contribution to future departmental priorities, links within EC and to interdepartmental research/monitoring activities, leverage of complementary work and building of partnerships, scientific (or other) publications and finally, the theme’s top five priorities for PSF (including research, monitoring, methods development, risk assessment and modelling). These documents were used by the Committee to prioritize research and monitoring activities for a second cycle of work beginning in 2006-2007. Environmental priorities will be set according to the fundamentals of detecting change, understanding why it is occuring, better understanding what we can do about it, and using this information to inform decision makers and Canadians. Collected knowledge will be used in the context of EC’s Competitiveness and Environmental Sustainability Framework (CESF) and applied to pesticides. This will support decisions related to national competitiveness, protection of the health and safety of Canadians as well as to conservation of ecosystem functions. |
Continue to provide science advice to PMRA to meet regulatory data gaps, reduce knowledge deficiencies, and improve risk assessment methods. EC provided significant input into PMRA’s
Showcased PSF achievements at national and international venues to facilitate the exchange of information that will allow achievement of PSF objectives and use of this information to inform decision makers and Canadians.
Co-hosted 5NR Pesticide Research and Monitoring Workshop - EC presented on 11 topics. Hosted pesticide water monitoring workshops to present current data and better link with PMRA needs. Proceedings were produced. |
4. EC cont’d |
|
|
|
|
To better integrate and coordinate research with regulation, EC will continue to work with PMRA in implementation of the EC/PMRA MOU. The MOU has four components: Science Policy, Knowledge Generation, Issue Management and Compliance Promotion and Enforcement. EC will continue providing leadership in development and implementation of a coordinated federal pesticides science strategy for research and monitoring. As well, EC will continue to contribute to PMRA’s pesticide assessments where appropriate and will continue to provide science/policy advice on key Government of Canada policies as they relate to pesticide management and use. |
Met with industry to promote development of Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines on pesticides. Establishing Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) sub-committee to focus solely on pesticide-related issues. Drafting 6NR MOU and workplans to establish mechanisms that facilitate exchange of scientific information and advice and promote strong working relationships among six federal partners. |
5. HC (PMRA) |
(f) Linking pesticide regulation and research. |
$4.2 M |
$0.8 M |
$0.8 M |
Identify PMRA’s research and monitoring priorities annually and communicate to 5NR partners through regular meetings and other avenues as needed. Facilitate discussion among the 5NR on identifying actions to address specific priorities, including collaborative research. Discuss with the 5NR how the results of their research and monitoring are used in regulatory decisions to build better linkages between research and regulation. Facilitate two-way communication and coordination between governments within Canada (through PMRA’s FPT Committee) and internationally as well as with the private and academic sectors, through presentations linking research and regulation at regional, national and international meetings e.g. through SETAC, CSA, IUPAC. To strengthen the framework in linking pesticide research and monitoring, develop a MOU amongst the 5NR. Improve risk assessment procedures particularly in environmental fate prediction e.g. water modelling and exposure assessment. Continue to improve and expand the use of probabilistic risk assessments. |
PMRA hosted a 6NR workshop that included provincial and industry representatives. The workshop provided a forum where pesticide regulators and researchers from the 5NR departments could exchange information on pesticide research and monitoring and how these fit into the regulatory framework; PMRA assessment and mitigation of pesticide risk to the environment and results of recent 5NR pesticide research in environmental toxicology and environmental fate, and environmental monitoring. There was discussion on future research and monitoring priorities, and linkages to the current PMRA re- evaluation schedule. Subsequently, a draft 6NR integrated workplan was completed and circulated to the 6NR departments for comments (to be finalized in spring 2007). A 6NR DG level committee was formed, an MOU was produced and circulated amongst the members for approval (spring 2007). A new NAFTA project on degradation kinetics was initiated. This will provide tools and guidance for both assessment and modelling purposes. A tiered approach to aquatic exposure assessment has been fully implemented. The Directorate is improving its capacity for using and assessing probabilistic risk assessment methods on several fronts. First, an introductory course on probabilistic risk assessment was delivered to the entire directorate in February 2007. In addition, four scientists within the Directorate have been chosen to form a probabilistic technical working group. This group will receive advanced training on probabilistic methods this fiscal year and will provide expert advice and/or analytical support on issues related to probabilistic risk assessments. A probabilistic approach has been used in two recent assessments. |
5. HC (PMRA) |
(g) Conducting research to support introduction of minor-use pesticides that pose a reduced risk to the environment. |
$3.5 M |
$0.9 M |
$0.9 M |
Advance risk assessment methodologies through: 1 - Further refinement and application of environmental protection goals; 2 - Publication of draft guidance on environmental risk assessment methods; 3 - Research to support harmonization of risk assessment methodology with international partners e.g. occupational exposure assessment, ground water modelling, pesticide degradation kinetics. Facilitate access to reduced-risk products, specifically low risk products, through developing, and publishing for external comment, guidance on registration of low risk products. Continue to develop a database on environmental toxicology and fate to guide decisions, internally and externally, on comparative risk and reduced-risk products. Finalize and publish a Best Management Practices guide to reduce spray drift by applicators. Publish for public comment a document identifying various options to better communicate buffer zones on labels to applicators. |
A 6NR integrated workplan is under development. A draft guidance on environmental risk assessment methods within the Directorate is being revised. To facilitate residue chemistry assessments, crop group schemes to incorporate additional Minor Use crops (NAFTA/CODEX) were developed or expanded. Also crop profiles were developed with AAFC for ornamentals. Additionally, Dietary Risk Assessments (DRA) were facilitated for Minor Use crops. Agricultural statistics were updated based on most recent consumption data for DRA and Maximum Residue Limits (MRL) setting that is undergoing validation. (HED) A new NAFTA project with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on degradation kinetics was initiated. A NAFTA project with the U.S. EPA on ground water model selection, scenario and guidance development continues. Guidance document on low risk pesticides has been drafted and discussed with PMAC, FPT and numerous industry associations. Guidance document is in editing/translation. Development and transfer of database from Microsoft Access to the Agency Pesticide database (Oracle) was initiated. An MOU with AAFC for providing data for their National Agr-Environmental Health Analysis and Reporting Program (NAHARP) indicator project was developed and approved. Finalization and publication of the documents has been delayed due to submission workload |
6. NRCan |
(h) Research and monitor pesticides in the forest environment. |
$3.5 M |
$0.4 M
|
$0.4 M |
Third and final year of research work for four projects will be completed. Provide results to clients/stakeholders and PMRA in reports and publications. Research projects are: 1) Environmental fate and ecological effects of a systemic insecticide for control of exotic wood boring insect pests. Completion of second year field research program (GLP study comparing fate of imidacloprid following soil and stem injections); 2) Development of a biological treatment for control of root rot pathogen and impact on microbial biodiversity; 3) Advanced methods for monitoring impacts of pest control products on key microbial communities of forest soils. Publish guidelines that demonstrate the use of cutting edge molecular methods to study environmental fate of microbes; 4) Monitoring status of spruce budworm population to improve forest protection programs, integration of information on mortality agents in infestation forecasting and spray decision making for spruce budworm. Refine research priorities and plan for request for new proposals, January 2007. |
Final Reports and publications were completed and data submitted for the four projects, in support of product registration. Research presentations were made at a session entitled Enhanced Pest Management Perspective, Forest Pest Management Forum (December 2006). Participated in the 6NR Environmental Information Exchange on Pest Management Research and Monitoring in Canada 2007 (February 2007) hosted by PMRA. The main objective was to provide a forum for sharing of information and data. The following papers presented were by NRCan-CFS:
A new cycle of proposals is to be initiated in 2007-2008. |
AAFC HC (PMRA) |
II. DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING COMMODITY SPECIFIC RISK REDUCTION STRATEGIES | |||||
1. AAFC |
(a) Commodity-based risk reduction strategies. |
$19.3 M |
$2.5 M |
$0.40 M SAL 0.07 M EBP 1.53 M NPO .45 M PWG --------- $2.45 M Total |
Process to engage stakeholders in crop prioritization based on risk and needs assessments developed. Next wave of about 10 crop profiles to be finalized and published. Develop up to five risk reduction strategies and support implementation of priority projects as established with Technical Working Group/stakeholders. Fund research and implementation projects from November 2005 Call for Proposals. Follow-up from workshop on barriers to grower adoption of IPM practices. Analyze data from pilot pesticide use survey. Continued implementation of AAFC/PMRA joint communication plan. |
More than 30 meetings held with stakeholders of priority commodities to determine key pest management issues for risk reduction and to develop strategies to deal with these issues. Twelve crop profiles published on website (4 new crop profiles and 8 updates completed). This brings to 26 the total number of crop profiles web published as of March 31, 2007. Strategy consultations undertaken for 19 crops. More than 30 pest management issues for risk reduction identified and 20 strategies developed. Strategy development commenced for 16 others. Oversight and funding provided for 34 ongoing projects. Five projects completed and final reports submitted in April 2006. An action plan for communication and technology transfer of the results is in progress. Call for Proposals launched in fall 2006 requiring establishment of new process with PWGSC was open to AAFC and external research/contractor community. Peer review of proposals completed, resulting in selection of 35 new projects for funding which address key pest management issues identified in pesticide risk reduction strategy consultations. Announcement regarding new projects planned for Q2, 2007-2008. The IPM Working Group wrapped up its activities at the end of March 2007. The group held four meetings to develop a national approach to support grower adoption of IPM practices and to develop guidelines for pilot projects. Recommendations of the group were presented to the PRR Program and its Technical Working Group and are being taken into consideration in the context of future directions of the Program. Delays due to the complexity of the data collected have slowed analysis of the crop protection survey. A draft publication has been prepared and will be completed early in 2007-2008. A new approach is being developed for analysis of IPM data in the questionnaire. Various communications products were released (fact sheets, reports, CDs, etc.). |
2. HC (PMRA) |
(a) Commodity-based risk reduction strategies (RR) |
$25.7 M |
$4.0 M (2.0 M for commodity strategies / 2.0 M for RR product review) |
$4.0 M |
Planned staffing actions of indeterminate positions. Ongoing consultations with stakeholders; work share with other government departments and 5NRs. Work on pesticide risk indicator: consult, build and validate database. Refine, together with AAFC, prioritization criteria for determining priority crops for the program. Work share with AAFC on crop profiles. Risk reduction strategies have been developed for pulse crops and canola. A long-term fireblight management strategy has been developed for apples. Steering committee and working groups have been meeting to develop solutions to identified priorities and implement steps to resolve these issues. Substantial progress has been made in developing strategies and forming steering committees to lead the strategies for a number of other crops: greenhouse vegetables, grape, peach, potato, strawberry and apple. Pursue risk reduction program for honey, Richardson ground squirrel and develop a work plan for forestry uses and needs. Consolidate and integrate all information collected with this program into the registration stream of PMRA. Continue review of reduced-risk pesticides submitted for registration. |
Two NAFTA microbial Joint Reviews completed. Pesticide Risk Indicator (CaPRI): 1- FPT consultation completed. 2- First report circulated within FPT and comments addressed. 3- Two documents being written are to be published in 2007. 4- Improvement of model under way for publication of second report which is expected to be made public , followed by consultations in 2008. 5- Three databases needed (human health data, environmental data, and pesticide use/sale data) are being completed to assess the pesticide risk trend of all provinces (as opposed to only Quebec and Ontario. (VSAD) Registered two new microbial products for control of fireblight disease on apples. Ongoing: six microbial, two pheromone and five low risk (biochemical) products. |
AAFC HC (PMRA) NRCan |
III. GENERATION OF DATA TO SUPPORT REGISTRATION OF REDUCED-RISK AND MINOR-USE PESTICIDES FOR THE AGRICULTURAL AND AGRI-FOOD SECTOR AND REDUCED-RISK PESTICIDES AND BIOPESTICIDES FOR FORESTRY | |||||
1. AAFC
|
(a) Improving access to agricultural minor-use pesticides, and reduced-risk pesticides for agricultural use. |
$33.7 M $12.0 M A-base |
$6.5 M $2.0 M A-base |
$1.94 M SAL 0.39 M EBP 3.04 M NPO 0.85 M PWG $6.25 M Total $2.0 M A-base |
Thirty-six pest-crop combinations will be identified at annual national stakeholder meeting hosted by AAFC. Manufacturer (registrant) written support will be obtained by July 2006 for each pest-crop pair, then sent to PMRA for review by October with the majority by August (PSCR 3.1). Subsequently, data requirements (DACO) for each pest-crop pair will be issued by PMRA to AAFC according to PMRA-established timeline (97 days from receipt). AAFC will convert DACOs to study plans by January 2007 and assign trials that complete the study plans, to contractors and collaborating AAFC personnel across Canada. Good laboratory practice (GLP) trials require quality assurance oversight that is provided by contractors and AAFC headquarters staff. |
[PMRA/HED] Participated in National Priority Setting meeting In addition to 38 priorities established during AAFC’s MU Priority Setting Workshop (March 26-28, 2007), we selected 25 joint AAFC/U.S. minor-use projects during IR-4's planning meeting (November 1-3, 2006). D3.1s (AAFC) 26 presubmissions and 11 sets of trial requirements were issued. (HED) Registrant written support was obtained and Pre-Submission Consultation Requests (PSCR) were submitted to PMRA for each priority by October 2006. DACO’s were not all received by January 2007. As a result this activity continued to year-end. It was determined that since AAFC is working with both registered and unregistered compounds, PMRA does not want AAFC to submit PSCRs for unregistered compounds. Study plans are being written and data collection is being initiated for 354 field trials. All residue trials respected GLP requirements without any significant observations. Also, in January 2007 a Standard Council of Canada GLP audit was conducted on our facility. There were no major observations, only minor clarifications. A response was provided to SCC by the required deadline. PMC accreditation to OECD GLP standards will continue. |
1 AAFC cont’d |
|
|
|
|
Data generation from field trials in 2006 and laboratory analysis of residues proceeds to final report stage in spring–summer 2007 and are submitted to PMRA. PMRA provides a decision on use 247 days later. Total process takes about 36 months. |
D3.2s (AAFC) 7 submissions (HED) More than 400 field trials from 2006 were completed and final reports are being written and assessed in order to be submitted to PMRA. Completed and submitted 41 AAFC projects or registrants for submission to PMRA. |
2. HC (PMRA) |
(a) Improving access to agricultural minor-use pesticides, and reduced-risk pesticides for agricultural use. |
$20.8 M |
$4.0 M |
$4.0 M |
Product evaluation work—review presubmission proposals from AAFC and provincial coordinators and issue data requirements. Register new minor crop uses, including minor-use and reduced-risk products and uses. Harmonization work and regulatory projects—Joint Reviews in collaboration with U.S. EPA, AAFC and U.S. Department of Agriculture IR-4 Program, further work on crop groupings and on Maximum Residue Levels (MRL) promulgation. Increase communication and provide feedback to AAFC, to improve quality and use of scientific rationales. |
Minor-Use Submissions: D3.1 - 92 presubmissions D3.2 - 28 submissions JR’s - 2 Minor-Use Registrations/MRLs: 28 label expansions 13 registrations resulted in MRL recommendations Meetings with AAFC regarding study report format, rationale preparations - ongoing Technical Gap Submissions - approximately two+ conventional chemicals, five microbial and six low risk (biochemical) new products registered. (HED) |
3. NRCan
|
(b) Develop and facilitate use of reduced-risk pesticides and biological pesticides for forestry. |
$4.1 M |
$0.3 M |
$0.3 M |
Review final reports of nine projects funded for three years and plan strategy and priorities for future funding. NRCan will continue work to integrate and coordinate activities with 5NR partners and stakeholders. The NRCan-CFS Minor-Use Advisor hired under this fund will continue to work in collaboration with AAFC to facilitate registration of reduced-risk/minor-use pest control products against pests on outdoor woody ornamentals and forests. Coordinate and report on six projects for minor-use pesticides in Canada. Support 2006 National Forest Pest Management Forum. Support forest projects on reduced-risk pest control products. |
Completed NRCan-CFS Enhanced Pest Management Methods Science & Technology Program Review 2002-2006 (March 2007). NRCan exchanged and shared information and data at 6NR departments’ Pesticides Committee meetings. Contributed to BPC Formative Evaluation Report (2006). NRCan-CFS Minor-Use Advisor housed at AAFC Pest Management Centre obtained support for minor-use products on two Christmas tree projects and a reforestation nursery that were useful for both forestry and agriculture. A group of three borers including emerald ash borer and Asian long-horned beetle were selected for screening of potential control products. A Data Package and Application for Registration for use of the insect growth regulator MIMIC against gypsy moth, were submitted to PMRA. A balsam fir sawfly nucleopolyhedrovirus, Abietiv™, received conditional registration from PMRA in April 2006, and was used operationally for control of the sawfly in Newfoundland. Provided financial and research support for 2006 National Forest Pest Management Forum which consists of pest managers, researchers, industry, regulators, and others interested in pest management. PMRA registered one new microbial pesticide and one new pheromone. |
TOTAL |
|
$154.96 M |
|
|
|
|
17. Results Achieved by Non-federal Partners: n/a |
||||||
18. Contact Information: |
19. Approved by:
|
20. Date Approved: |
Table 17: Horizontal Initiative
1. Name of Horizontal Initiative: Federal Tobacco Control Strategy |
2. Name of Lead Department: Health Canada |
|||||
3. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2001-02 |
4. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2006-07 and ongoing |
5. Total Federal Funding Allocation: $560 M (See note about Health Canada total funding in #11.) |
||||
6. Description of the Horizontal Initiative: The Federal Tobacco Control Strategy (FTCS) establishes a framework for a comprehensive, integrated, and multi-faceted approach to tobacco control. The FTCS is the federal contribution to the national tobacco control plan endorsed in 1999 by all Ministers of Health. It focuses on four mutually reinforcing components: protection, prevention, cessation and harm reduction, supplemented by effective use of public education campaigns to reach all Canadians. |
||||||
7. Shared Outcome: The FTCS has five 10-year objectives (2001-11):
|
||||||
8. Governance Structure: Resources for implementation were allocated to a number of departments and agencies. Health Canada (HC) is the lead department and is responsible for regulating the manufacture, sale, labelling and promotion of tobacco products as well as developing, implementing and promoting initiatives that reduce or prevent the negative health impacts associated with smoking. The partner departments and agencies are:
|
||||||
9. Federal Partners Involved in each Program |
10. Names of Programs |
11. Total Allocation 2001-02 to 2006-07 |
12. Forecasted Spending for 2006-07 |
13. Actual Spending in 2006-07 |
14. Planned Results for 2006-07 |
15. Achieved Results in 2006-07 |
1. HC |
FTCS |
$482.5 M (Note: this original allocation has been affected by several cuts since the FTCS began. |
$80.8 M (Tobacco Control Program: $67.8 M) |
$75.6 M (TCP - $66.6 M) |
See text below. |
See text below. |
2. PS |
FTCS |
$3.2 M |
$0.6 M |
$0.6 M |
See text below. |
See text below. |
3. ODPP |
FTCS |
$10 M |
$1.3 M |
$1.3 M |
See text below. |
See text below. |
4. RCMP |
FTCS |
$10.5 M (To offset seven analytical FTEs and five technical support FTEs) |
$1.5 M |
$1.5 M |
See text below. |
See text below. |
5. CRA |
FTCS |
$43.1 M (Total allotment to CRA, includes Customs/CBSA $30.7 M and Assessment and Benefit Services $1.7 M and Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch $10.7 M) |
$10.4 M (Allocated between Customs/ CBSA and two CRA areas) |
$10.4 M (Allocated between Customs/ CBSA and two CRA areas) |
See text below. |
See text below. |
Assessment and Client Services (previously Assessment and Collections) | See above. | See above. | $.2 M (Included in above) | See text below. | See text below | |
Excise and GST/HST Rulings Directorate/ Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch | See above. | $.5 M (Included in above) | See text below. | See text below. | ||
6. CBSA Intelligence Directorate and Travellers Division |
FTCS |
$21.1 M |
$5.1 M for activities plus $4.3 M for loss of duty-free licensing |
$5.1 M for activities plus $4.3 M for loss of duty-free licensing |
See text below. |
See text below. |
|
|
Total $560 M |
Total $104.0 M |
Total $98.8 M |
|
|
16. Comments on Variances: The Health Canada variance is mainly the result of a budget reduction sustained as part of the 2004 government-wide Expenditure Review exercise and a reallocation of FTCS resources to Health Canada's responsibilities with respect to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. This reduction is permanent. As part of the September 2006 Expenditure Review, the FNIHB portion of the FTCS funding was eliminated. This reduced Health Canada's overall budget by $10.8 M over the next two years (reduction of $2.5 M in 2006-07; $8.3 M in 2007-08; $10.8 M in 2008-09 and ongoing). |
||||||
17. Results Achieved by Non-federal Partners: Through funding provided by the FTCS, the Akwesasne Mohawk Police (AMP) have been able to increase their surveillance and monitoring of tobacco smuggling. The AMP has reported participating in joint forces operations that have led to charges and seizures, including tobacco. All tobacco seizures made by the AMP are turned over to the RCMP for prosecutions and reported through the RCMP Cornwall Detachment. The AMP have enhanced their capacity in intelligence development and specialized criminal investigation techniques through their work with Canadian and U.S. law enforcement partners in the context of the Integrated Border Enforcement Team in the Cornwall area. In addition, they have had an opportunity to lead and participate in Joint Forces Operations related to cross-border criminal activities and organized crime. An evaluation is being conducted by Consulting and Audit Canada under contract to PS. The final evaluation report is anticipated by July 30, 2007. |
||||||
18. Contact Information: Dave Semel (613) 952-3367 |
19: Approved By: | 20. Date Approved: | ||||
14. Planned Results for 2006-07 | 15. Results Achieved in 2006-07 | |||||
1. Health Canada (HC) | Complete an evaluation to assess the impacts of the first five years of the FTCS. | A summative (impact-based) evaluation was conducted of the FTCS (2001-06) including all Tobacco Control Program components i.e. contribution-funded projects, regulatory interventions, research and policy development; First Nations and Inuit Health Branch (FNIHB); International Affairs Directorate (IAD); and federal partners. | ||||
Work with eight regional offices and partner with several National Aboriginal Organizations across Canada for program delivery and development. | HC supported over 100 First Nations and Inuit projects at the national, regional and community level aimed at cessation and tobacco awareness with a particular emphasis on youth, young adults and pregnant women. | |||||
2. PS | Enhanced partnership arrangement with Akwesasne Mohawk Police. | See Results Achieved by Non-federal Partners above. | ||||
3. ODPP | 1) Prioritize fine recovery for fines ordered under cigarette contraband and tobacco sales to youth convictions. | 1) The number of cigarette contraband and other tobacco-related fines has gone from 1,920 files in 2002 to 892 files as of March 31, 2007, a reduction of over 53.5 percent. There were 826 files in the inventory in 2005-06. This year's figure is mostly due to the increase in convictions for selling tobacco to minors and an increase in cigarette contraband which has resulted in more convictions. | ||||
2) Increase the number of fines satisfied by a minimum of 15 percent. | 2) The number of fines that were satisfied as of March 2007 was 423 as compared to 491 in March 2006, a reduction of 14 percent. This may be due to the fact that additional emphasis is being given to attempting to recover long-standing fines which by nature are more difficult to recover. | |||||
3) Analyze trends and prioritize the most effective and least costly recovery methods. | 3) Priority is given to the most cost-effective methods of recovery, in particular, demand letters, telephone calls and negotiating payment agreements. To date, approximately 27,000 interventions have been made, resulting in the recovery of over $32 M in past-due fines as of March 2007. | |||||
4) Prioritize payment of fines over incarceration, but enhance enforcement measures when appropriate. | 4) Incarcerations for non-payment of fines totalled 66 in 2007 as compared to 60 in 2006. Of these 66 offenders, 15 subsequently opted to pay their fine rather than remain in incarceration. | |||||
5) Reduce costs to client departments in regards to fees incurred for Crown counsel attending motions for extensions in the delay to pay a fine. | 5) Crown counsel assigned to Fine Recovery Units oppose all motions for payment extensions heard at court, resulting in a decrease in counsel fees to client departments for these hearings. | |||||
4. RCMP | 1) Provide the Department of Finance, Health Canada and other partners with current updates on illicit tobacco trade activities. | 1) Regular reports on the illicit tobacco situation were provided to Finance and Health Canada. Side bar reports provided to other partners and key Ministerial entities upon request. Tobacco analysts attend regular meetings to brief the Department of Finance. | ||||
2) The RCMP monitors illegal activities at and along the Canada/U.S. border through the use of strategic detection and surveillance equipment. | 2) Improved border security through the use of sophisticated technology which permits detection and monitoring of illegal border intrusions, resulting in vital intelligence. | |||||
3) Expand cooperation with international and national law enforcement partners. | 3) Co-hosted the 2006 Joint U.S./Canada Tobacco Diversion Workshop with American and Canadian agencies. The RCMP holds biannual Joint Smuggling Initiative conferences across the country to address current trends and ongoing investigations into the illegal tobacco trade. Partners are invited to share information and to build key partnerships to enhance investigations. | |||||
5. CRA | 1) Systems adjustments and maintenance to reflect the legislative changes that affect rates, reporting and refunds as well as program changes to include duty-free shops and ships stores. | 1) Systems maintained as required. Reporting capabilities were reviewed and enhanced to meet program requirements. | ||||
Assessment and Benefit Services (previously Assessment and Collections) | 2) Verify export activity. | 2) The Tobacco Enforcement Verification Program (field) effectively monitored the movement of exported tobacco products. | ||||
Excise and GST/HST Rulings Directorate/ Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch | 3) Ensure legislative compliance with remittance requirements as well as stamping and marking. | 3) Excise duty officers increased the number of compliance and audit visits to licensed manufacturers to ensure compliance with remittance requirements as well as stamping and marking. | ||||
4) Work with stakeholders to monitor and assess the effectiveness of measures used to reduce contraband tobacco. | 4) Participated on a number of committees dealing with the monitoring and control of tobacco products, including those dealing with interprovincial issues. Co-hosted the 2006 Tobacco Diversion Workshop with Canadian and U.S. participation. | |||||
5) Provide the Department of Finance with advice to assist in the determination of the magnitude and timing of future tax increases. | 5) Met with the Department of Finance as required. Provided industry and product information. | |||||
6) Support RCMP enforcement activity. | 6) Supported RCMP enforcement activity by providing information about specific tobacco transactions as well as expert testimony and affidavits. | |||||
6. CBSA Intelligence Directorate |
1) Provide advice to Department of Finance on matters that will impact the future tax structure on tobacco. | 1) Attended monthly meetings with Department of Finance and partners to discuss and serve as a reference for questions on tobacco issues. | ||||
2) Monitor and report on the contraband tobacco situation in Canada. | 2) Provided monthly analysis of the national contraband situation by compiling reports received from the Regions. Partnered with RCMP in annual risk assessment of the nature and extent of tobacco contraband activity. Coordinated development of tobacco intelligence in the Regions. The capabilities of our officers/analysts to infiltrate the marketplace, gather intelligence, liaise with other agencies and process their files has resulted in: an increase in targets for examination, both companies and individuals; identification of possible risk elements not previously perceived; awareness of emerging trends and threats. | |||||
3) Expand cooperation with international and national law enforcement partners. | 3) Participated in Joint Force Operations with law enforcement partners across the Regions. Co-hosted the 2006 Tobacco Diversion Workshop with American and Canadian agencies. Developed and maintained contact with international tobacco enforcement personnel. | |||||
Travellers Division | Collection of the tobacco duties imposed on personal importations of returning Canadians. | CBSA front-line officers collected duties and taxes from previously exempted personal importations of tobacco. |