BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 8 Why did the Liberals vote in favour of Bill C-368 at second reading — only to now support changes that risk undermining its purpose? In this clip from the HESA Committee proceedings, Bloc Québécois MP Marie-Hélène Gaudreau questions Conservative MP Blaine Calkins about why recall provisions were not included in the original bill, despite existing safeguards and the debate over additional powers for Health Canada. Calkins explains that Bill C-368 was supported by the Conservatives, Bloc Québécois, and NDP in the previous Parliament, while the Liberal government opposed it. He highlights the apparent change in the Liberals’ position, noting that they voted in favour of Bill C-224 at second reading, yet are now pursuing changes that raise concerns about the bill’s original intent. Calkins emphasizes that the natural health products industry is not seeking to avoid accountability — it is concerned about being swept into Vanessa’s Law, legislation designed for pharmaceutical drugs rather than natural health products. We’re continuing to share clips from the proceedings so Canadians can see how the debate unfolded and understand the decisions that shaped Bill C-224’s outcome. Watch Part 8 and follow the series: Bill C-224 — How Did We Get Here?

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 7 If Health Canada already has extensive enforcement powers, why are Liberals pushing for additional regulatory authority over natural health products? In this clip from the HESA Committee proceedings, Conservative MP Blaine Calkins challenges Liberal MP Sawatzky on the need for expanded powers. He points out that Health Canada already has the authority to stop sales, seize products, revoke licences and Natural Product Numbers, mandate label changes, and conduct inspections. Calkins questions whether the proposed changes will meaningfully improve safety or simply introduce more onerous regulations and costly bureaucratic steps. He also raises concerns about the evidence used to justify the changes and emphasizes that the industry is not opposed to regulation — the issue is whether the additional burden is justified. The exchange highlights a critical concern surrounding Bill C-224: after initially supporting the bill, Liberals are now seeking changes that threaten to undermine its purpose of protecting Canadians’ access to natural health products. We’re continuing to share clips from the proceedings so Canadians can see how the debate unfolded and understand the decisions shaping Bill C-224’s future. Watch Part 7 and follow the series: Bill C-224 — How Did We Get Here? @Shawnbuckleylaw @BlaineFCalkins

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 6 Are natural health products being regulated as if they were pharmaceuticals? And what does that mean for Canadian businesses and consumers? In this clip from the October 7 HESA Committee proceedings, Conservative MP Blaine Calkins responds to concerns raised by MP Konar about the impact of regulatory costs on Canadian natural health product businesses, particularly smaller companies competing with U.S. suppliers and online retailers. Calkins explains that the fees and approval requirements introduced through Bill C-47 risk placing an unsustainable burden on small businesses. He also challenges the logic of treating natural health products like pharmaceutical drugs, pointing out that ordinary foods such as grapefruit can interact with medications, yet that does not make every food a pharmaceutical product. He emphasizes that Health Canada already has significant powers to require label changes and warnings, inspect manufacturing sites, test products, stop sales, and withdraw Natural Product Numbers (NPNs). If these safeguards already exist, why impose additional burdens that could make Canadian products harder to produce and access? Watch Part 6 as we continue examining the committee proceedings and the debate surrounding Bill C-224. @BlaineFCalkins @Shawnbuckleylaw

BILL C-224 GUTTED AT COMMITTEE — THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER On October 7, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health voted down every clause of Bill C-224, despite the bill having received unanimous support at second reading. Liberal committee members voted to remove its provisions, leaving the bill stripped of its substance and to be reported back to the House as an empty shell. Bill C-224 was intended to reverse changes introduced through Bill C-47 that brought natural health products under the Food and Drugs Act definition of “therapeutic product.” Millions of Canadians rely on natural health products. The NHPPA believes these products should not be subjected to a pharmaceutical-style regulatory framework that threatens access and places additional costs and burdens on Canadian businesses. Natural health products are not pharmaceuticals. The NHPPA will continue fighting for appropriate regulation, Canadians’ access to natural health products, and accountability for decisions that affect their freedom of choice. The fight is not over. Stay tuned...

LIVE NOW! here on X or at nhppa.org/live

Homeopathy In Danger! | Oct 2026 xitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1nxeLMArQ…

Watch live in an hour! The NHPPA Homeopathic Network is on at at 4:30 PT / 7:30 ET Homeopathic Remedies and treatments for vaccine injury.

Tonight! The NHPPA Homeopathic Network is back at 4:30 PM PT / 7:30 PM ET. Homeopathic remedies and treatments for vaccine injury Shawn Buckley is joined by Anke Zimmermann, BSc, FCAH, a homeopathic consultant and educator with more than 30 years of clinical practise, practising homeopath and clinical herbalist Victor Cirone, and Basil Ziv of the College of Homeopaths of Ontario. This session focuses on homeopathic remedies and treatments for vaccine injury. The panel will discuss what practitioners are seeing, how homeopathy approaches these cases, and the practical and regulatory realities facing both homeopaths and the people who seek their care. Watch live, Thursday, October 22, at 4:30 PM PT / 7:30 PM ET. nhppa.org/live

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 5 What amendments could have strengthened Bill C-224 — and why was getting the wording right so important? In this clip from the HESA Committee proceedings, Bloc Québécois MP Marie-Hélène Gaudreau questions Bill C-224 sponsor Blaine Calkins about differences between the current bill and its predecessor, Bill C-368, including recall powers and proposed amendments. Calkins explains that he left the question of recall provisions for the committee to debate, while emphasizing that any amendments must ensure natural health products are not classified as therapeutic products. He warns that even well-intentioned wording can create confusion and inadvertently imply that natural health products fall under that definition. The discussion highlights the importance of precise legislative language — and the committee’s responsibility to get it right. We’re continuing to share clips from the proceedings so Canadians can see how the debate unfolded and understand the decisions that shaped Bill C-224’s outcome. Watch Part 5 and follow the series: Bill C-224 — How Did We Get Here? @Shawnbuckleylaw @BlaineFCalkins

Homeopathy in Danger! Returns Tomorrow Night! The NHPPA Homeopathic Network is back tomorrow night, Thursday, October 22, at 4:30 PM PT / 7:30 PM ET. Shawn Buckley is joined by Anke Zimmermann, BSc, FCAH, a homeopathic consultant and educator with more than 30 years of clinical practise, practising homeopath and clinical herbalist Victor Cirone, and Basil Ziv of the College of Homeopaths of Ontario. This session focuses on homeopathic remedies and treatments for vaccine injury. The panel will discuss what practitioners are seeing, how homeopathy approaches these cases, and the practical and regulatory realities facing both homeopaths and the people who seek their care. Watch live tomorrow night, Thursday, October 22, at 4:30 PM PT / 7:30 PM ET. On X, Facebook, YouTube and at nhppa.org/live

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 4 In Part 3, Conservative MP Blaine Calkins explained that Health Canada already has mechanisms to protect Canadians from potential problems with natural health products. Now, we continue examining the committee proceedings that led to Bill C-224 being stripped of its substance. In this clip, Conservative MP Raquel Dancho questions Calkins about the origins of his bill and the changes introduced through Bill C-47 in 2023. Calkins explains that the changes were buried in a massive budget implementation bill, without consultation with the natural health product industry, and prompted an outcry from consumers, practitioners and businesses. The discussion also highlights a critical point: natural health products in Canada are already regulated and require pre-market approval from Health Canada. Calkins argues that treating vitamins and other natural health products like pharmaceutical drugs creates unnecessary regulatory burdens and costs, despite the fundamental differences between them. If natural health products already have a regulatory framework, why impose pharmaceutical-style requirements? Watch Part 4 and follow our series as we examine what happened to Bill C-224 at committee. @Shawnbuckleylaw @BlaineFCalkins

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 3 In Part 1, we shared Conservative MP Matt Strauss’s closing remarks. In Part 2, we went back to the beginning with Bill C-224 sponsor Blaine Calkins’s opening speech. Now, we continue examining the committee proceedings that led to the bill being stripped of its substance. In this clip, Blaine Calkins challenges Liberal MP Doug Eyolfson on the need for Bill C-224, explaining that Health Canada already has mechanisms in place to protect Canadians from potential problems with natural health products. If those safeguards already exist, why maintain the regulatory changes that Bill C-224 sought to reverse? We’ll continue sharing clips to show Canadians the debate that unfolded — and how the committee arrived at its outcome. Watch Part 3 and follow along as we examine what happened to Bill C-224.

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 2 Yesterday, we began at the end — with Conservative MP Matt Strauss’s closing remarks on the October 7 HESA Committee proceedings and his assessment of how Bill C-224 was dismantled, despite Liberal members having agreed to the bill in principle. Today, we’re going back to the beginning. This clip features Blaine Calkins, the Conservative MP who sponsored Bill C-224, delivering the first speech of the day. His bill was intended to reverse changes introduced by the Liberals through Bill C-47, which brought natural health products under the Food and Drugs Act definition of “therapeutic product,” subjecting them to a more pharmaceutical-style regulatory framework. How did a bill intended to protect access to natural health products reach the outcome we saw at committee? We’ll continue sharing clips from the proceedings to show Canadians the debate that unfolded and why it appeared the end goal was to defeat Bill C-224 in committee. Watch Blaine Calkins’s opening remarks below. Follow the series as we piece together what happened. @Shawnbuckleylaw @BlaineFCalkins

BILL C-224: HOW DID WE GET HERE? PART 1 The NHPPA will be sharing clips from the October 7 HESA Committee proceedings to help Canadians understand how the clause-by-clause review of Bill C-224 unfolded. We’re not starting at the beginning. Instead, we’re leading with the final clip of the day, featuring Conservative MP Matt Strauss, who describes the proceedings as a farce. He explains how Liberal members appeared to agree with Bill C-224 in principle, yet proceeded to reject its provisions, leaving the bill to return to Parliament stripped of its substance — an empty piece of paper. In the coming days, we’ll share more clips showing the debate that led to this outcome — the theatre of debating the bill, and why the proceedings appeared to be heading toward one result: defeating Bill C-224 in committee. Watch Matt Strauss’s closing remarks below. Then follow along as we show you how it unfolded.

“AT THE VERY LEAST, CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE” — SHAWN BUCKLEY TESTIFIES ON BILL C-224 On October 5, NHPPA President Shawn Buckley testified before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA) regarding Bill C-224 and the consequences of placing natural health products under the Food and Drugs Act definition of “therapeutic product.” Buckley raised serious concerns about the regulatory changes introduced through Bill C-47 and the implications for Canadians’ access to natural health products. Just two days after his testimony, on October 7, Liberal members of the committee voted down Bill C-224, which would have reversed key changes and removed most natural health products from that definition. The fight to protect Canadians’ access to natural health products continues. Learn more about Bill C-224: nhppa.org/bill224/ @Shawnbuckleylaw @BlaineFCalkins

1 NHPPA Show | October 2026 | Updates and Bill C-224 xitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1yJAPwVnZ…

The NHPPA Show Goes Live Tonight! Join Us Live Tonight, Wednesday, October 14 at 4 PM PT / 7 PM ET. On October 7, Liberal members of the Standing Committee on Health voted down every clause. The bill was gutted at committee. It would have taken most natural health products out of the Food and Drugs Act definition of "therapeutic product" and rolled back the changes made through Bill C-47. Shawn Buckley testified to the committee on October 5. Tonight he will walk through what the committee did, what it means for access, and where the effort to push back Health Canada's over-regulation goes from here. This vote does not end the fight. It shows how determined Ottawa is to keep natural health products inside a drug-style regime they do not belong in. Regular segments are on as well: ➡️ Campaign Update with Jason Dahl ➡️ The Feed with Eric Clegg ➡️ Your Questions from the live chat. Bring your questions for the team. Tune in live tonight at 4 PM PT / 7 PM ET.

The NHPPA Show Returns tomorrow night! Join Us Live on Wednesday, October 14 at 4 PM PT / 7 PM ET. On October 7, Liberal members of the Standing Committee on Health voted down Bill C-224. It would have taken most natural health products out of the Food and Drugs Act definition of "therapeutic product" and rolled back the changes made through Bill C-47. Shawn Buckley testified to the committee on October 5. On this week's NHPPA Show, Shawn will talk about what happened and what comes next. Plus... 👉️ Campaign Updates with Jason Dahl 👉️ The Feed with Eric Clegg 👉️ Your Questions from the live chat. Bring your questions for the team. Tune in live tonight at nhppa.org/live

BILL C-224 BLOCKED AT COMMITTEE: WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? On October 7, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health considered Bill C-224, legislation intended to reverse changes to the Food and Drugs Act affecting natural health products. During the meeting, Liberal committee members voted against every clause of the bill, and Bill C-224 was not passed by the committee. What does this mean for Canadians who rely on vitamins, supplements, and other natural health products? What happens next for the businesses that manufacture and supply them? Join us Wednesday evening on The NHPPA Show, where NHPPA President Shawn Buckley will break down what happened at committee, explain the implications, and discuss the next steps in the effort to protect access to natural health products in Canada. The conversation is not over. Watch live at NHPPA.org/live.