Thank you very much, Chairperson, and thank you to all of the witnesses for being here today. You're clearly experts in the field and it's much appreciated that you've been so specific today.
I think that there's strong support for this bill from all parties. It's very unfortunate, though, that it's being jammed through at the last minute. We've had something like 45 witnesses who have been asked to appear. Last Thursday, we heard from the government officials. Today, we're hearing from the five of you. We'll hear from some more witnesses on Thursday and then we're into clause-by-clause on Monday. I think what is important is that we get this bill right. We take a good proposition and we try to make it the best that we can make it. You've given us some very specific suggestions. I think it's very unfortunate that we won't get to hear most of the witnesses who want to be heard on this bill.
The bill sat around for six months because the government didn't call it. Now, at the eleventh hour, there's a crisis and it has to be rushed through. I want to get that on the public record because I think it's very disturbing.
In terms of the testimony that you've given I want to clarify a couple of things.
Janice, you made a number of points and you mentioned that the independent appraisal of all clinical trial data was important and that it should be independent.
Joel, you also suggested that the pharmaceutical companies should pay for the independent trials so as to separate the money from whoever does the trial. I want to understand whether the two of you are talking about the same thing or whether you're actually talking about separate things. Could you address that?
Matthew, you made some specific recommendations that were very helpful. One that hasn't received a lot of attention is the issue of deleting—I forget the clause number—the clause that deals with the trade agreements overriding this bill. I'd like you to spell that out a bit more. As I understand it, from what you're saying, if we have transparency in this bill and if it came down to a trade agreement that had privacy over the intellectual property rights with some of these drugs, then the trade agreement would overtake this bill and the transparency wouldn't exist. I want you to clarify what you're saying.
Would any of you care to address whether or not you think this bill should be broadened to include natural health products? We've received a whack of emails from people who think that should be the case. We did talk to the Minister about it and she said that natural health products are considered to be a much lower risk. In terms of what we're dealing with in this bill I think that seems to be a reasonable assumption. I would like to get your take on it because you are experts on drug safety. Do you think, at this point, we should contemplate whether or not natural health products should be included?
I know there are a lot of points. I'd appreciate it if Joel, Matthew, and Elaine would comment.