Liberal MP wants to regulate sex toys

[Barrister]

"Liberal" is a very accurate descriptor to someone who is a member of the Liberal Party caucus.   

Is someone doubting the accuracy of the descriptor used in the story? 

Fine.  You got me.  You used the word "odd", not "accurate".

My statement should be corrected to read:

"Liberal" is not an odd descriptor of someone who is a member of the Liberal Party caucus.

[Admiral Yi]

Fine.  You got me.

PRAWNED

[grumbler]

Fine.  You got me.  You used the word "odd", not "accurate".

My statement should be corrected to read:

"Liberal" is not an odd descriptor of someone who is a member of the Liberal Party caucus.

And even better response on your part would have been

[Barrister]

Fine.  You got me.

PRAWNED

[dps]

Do we really need to have the debate over the meaning of the word liberal again?

Do we really need to have the debate over the meaning of the word liberal again?

Do we really need to have the debate over the meaning of the word liberal again?

Actually, I'd rather hear more about the differences in Canadian and American consumer product safetly laws, but appantly, I'm the only one.

[Ed Anger]

I'd rather hear about the sextoys.

[Malthus]

The regulation of products in this country is not handled well, and this is a good example of how it works.

Rather than having some sort of overall approach to regulation of consumer products, it is handled purely in a piecemeal manner - that is, when a product causes some sort of controversy, it is added to that limited list of products which is regulated pursuant to the federal Hazardous Products Act or the various bits and bobs of provincial regulation.

The result is a system that is both complex and not comprehensive.

The current item is a case in point. some politician gets exited about sex toys. Perhaps some sex toy - specific legislation comes out of it; perhaps not. In either event, the issue only arises, not because of any sort of systematic review of risky products, but because some politician chooses to be interested in it. Meanwhile there could be equally risky (or more risky) products that are ignored, because they are not, so to speak, as "sexy".

The result is a sort of legislative lottery, where some manufacturers are subject to stringent regulations and others are subject to no regulations at all. 

That's interesting.  I was going to post that, presumably, sex toys would be covered by the regular consumer product safety laws, and there would seem to be little evidence that they required additional regulation, but if Canada doesn't have general product safety laws, that wouldn't apply.

It doesn't. A fact which surprises many people who assume, quite wrongly, that it does.

Certain products are highly regulated: foods, drugs, medical devices, "natural health products" & cosmetics are all regulated under the Food and Drugs Act & regulations.

Other products are regulated, piecemeal manner, under the federal Hazardous Products Act.

Yet other products are regulated at the provincial level - such as stuffed articles and, in Ontario, electrical products (legislation requires certification by agencies like UL, that sort of thing).

[HisMajestyBOB]

I'd like to read another asinine debate on the meaning of words. 

[sbr]

How about the liberal use of sex toys?

[katmai]

I'd like to read another asinine debate on the meaning of words. 

Then you are at the right forum.

[Martinus]

The regulation of products in this country is not handled well, and this is a good example of how it works.

Rather than having some sort of overall approach to regulation of consumer products, it is handled purely in a piecemeal manner - that is, when a product causes some sort of controversy, it is added to that limited list of products which is regulated pursuant to the federal Hazardous Products Act or the various bits and bobs of provincial regulation.

The result is a system that is both complex and not comprehensive.

The current item is a case in point. some politician gets exited about sex toys. Perhaps some sex toy - specific legislation comes out of it; perhaps not. In either event, the issue only arises, not because of any sort of systematic review of risky products, but because some politician chooses to be interested in it. Meanwhile there could be equally risky (or more risky) products that are ignored, because they are not, so to speak, as "sexy".

The result is a sort of legislative lottery, where some manufacturers are subject to stringent regulations and others are subject to no regulations at all.

I don't necessarily agree - sex toys are pretty unique in some of their applications, which may call for a specific regulation. Most of the other consumer stuff that is regulated comes in two varieties - stuff you eat and stuff you put on your body. I don't think there are extensive studies of substances and items that are harmful if you put them into your anus or your vagina, though.

[Martinus]

I'd like to read another asinine debate on the meaning of words. 

Then you are at the right forum.

[Syt]

At the very least they should introduce warnings to operate toys only at prescribed voltages.

[Zanza]

The regulation of products in this country is not handled well, and this is a good example of how it works.

Rather than having some sort of overall approach to regulation of consumer products, it is handled purely in a piecemeal manner - that is, when a product causes some sort of controversy, it is added to that limited list of products which is regulated pursuant to the federal Hazardous Products Act or the various bits and bobs of provincial regulation.

The result is a system that is both complex and not comprehensive.

The current item is a case in point. some politician gets exited about sex toys. Perhaps some sex toy - specific legislation comes out of it; perhaps not. In either event, the issue only arises, not because of any sort of systematic review of risky products, but because some politician chooses to be interested in it. Meanwhile there could be equally risky (or more risky) products that are ignored, because they are not, so to speak, as "sexy".

The result is a sort of legislative lottery, where some manufacturers are subject to stringent regulations and others are subject to no regulations at all.

You guys should join the EU. That way you would have comprehensive product quality and safety standards for just about everything.

[The Brain]

Canada = Third World.