Evidence of meeting #53 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was health.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
We don't have much time, so could you very quickly answer that?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Office of Patented Medicines and Liaison, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health
There was at least an initial attempt on the part of Apotex to seek voluntary licences. It's a triple-fixed dose so they tried to seek licences from the relative patentees. At that time, there wasn't a country of mention, so there was some discussion on whether that was a bona fide attempt to seek a licence. There was some correspondence sent into us, but we deferred it to the Commissioner of Patents, where it belongs. It's really, as I said, an issue that has to go between the generic company and the patentees. We've only had an opportunity to watch it from a distance.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay. I appreciate that.
Members, we have about eight minutes left, so I'm going to give two minutes to each party. I'll start with the Bloc. I'll start with Madame Brunelle.
5:20 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Clark, are companies really interested in selling pharmaceuticals? I note that costs are minimal. You mentioned fairly complex regulatory processes. Wouldn't it be simpler to award tax credits to companies that supply pharmaceuticals? What difference would that mean in terms of cost, given that putting the required structure in place along with a renewable mandatory licensing scheme are costly propositions?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Patent Policy, Department of Industry
Your question concerning the interest expressed by Canada's generic drug industry is excellent. Only two of the 30 submissions received in response to our consultation paper were from generic drug companies. I think that speaks volumes about the situation.
As for other incentives, that's really not my area of expertise. I know that some measures are already in place. The government recently announced similar measures, but I'm not familiar with the details. A number of innovative companies do take advantage of this type of tax credit to supply various pharmaceutical products to developing countries.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Mr. Clark, you mentioned that one of the biggest barriers or obstacles to would-be importing countries accessing this program is money. I take it that as a least developed country you have decisions to make, and sometimes you may find that you don't have the capital to invest in medicines purchased from overseas. CIDA does have the cash, and Foreign Affairs has a role to play as well. We do have a $250 million two-year commitment to the global fund. I'd like to hear from each player at the table on this. Does the concept of CIDA embarking upon pilot projects in the variety I've described--consistent with CIDA's normal delivery mechanisms--make sense to provide Canada a baseline of data and a track record as to whether or not this enabling legislation works or whether this is a systemic process problem we are engaged in?
Mr. Lee, would you be able to kick off the answers as to whether or not you would find it helpful to have a pilot project to study?
5:25 p.m.
Director, Office of Patented Medicines and Liaison, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health
It would be very helpful to have a pilot. CIDA is not my area. I do drug regulations.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
What I'm looking for is whether or not it would be helpful, in terms of completing the regulatory environment, from Health Canada's point of view, from the patent office point of view, from CIDA's point of view, and from Industry Canada's point of view.
5:25 p.m.
Director, Office of Patented Medicines and Liaison, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health
It's well observed that when we get companies in or countries in and we are having discussions, we play our regulatory role. We talk about what we do with the generics from a Health Canada point of view, and then CIDA will have to come in. The funding always comes up as an issue.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Director, Patent Policy, Department of Industry
I think I've made it pretty clear so far that in the absence of funding, there's not going to be uptake now. I also take Mr. Armstrong's point about not wanting to be paternalistic. If you provide funding to these countries, you should enable them to determine where best to source their drugs. If the generic versions of these patented drugs are much cheaper in India, why on earth would you insist on their spending the money that you give them in Canada?
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Well, that's what we did. That's our whole modus operandi for development assistance.
5:25 p.m.
Team Leader, HIV-AIDS, Canadian International Development Agency
I think I've answered this question a few times.
I'm not going to deny that absolutely some of our funding is “tied”, for lack of a better word, to Canadian products; in this particular sector, we don't do a whole lot of it, and we haven't considered it under CAMR. As I said, we'd be willing to consider it and to look at it from all of the perspectives, including the one Mr. Clark mentioned.
On the specific issue of the global fund, the understanding is that when we provide funding to those types of mechanisms, we're not in a position to be able to tie our funding--in this case, to the global fund--even if we wanted to.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
We're way over time here, but just quickly, Foreign Affairs--yes, no?
5:25 p.m.
Robert Fry Senior Departmental Coordinator, Pandemic Preparedness, Human Security and Human Rights Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
I don't have much to add, other than the fact that, as Mr. Clark said, in terms of our foreign policy objectives, we support this regime but also support finding the best mechanism for doing it without being paternalistic, without wanting to impose things.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Clark hit it right on the head when he talked about this legislation being a facilitating legislation. That's because the previous government and this current one decided not to actually put the funds into foreign aid, be it the 0.7% GDP or actually having a strategy to do so. That's why their outreach was there to the generics and the brand name companies, to actually see if they wanted to play a role.
I agree that nobody's hands are clean on this. The fact of the matter is that if a brand name company wanted to take a 0.2% profit--or 1%, or 2%, or 3%, or 4%--on their drugs being shipped out somewhere else, they could do so. We wouldn't even need the legislation.
I guess one thing I am concerned about, Mr. Clark, is somewhat of a legitimate sticking point, I think. Isn't the two-year time limit a little bit restrictive in terms of going through the process and getting an actual application through? What do you do about the fact that people will be living with HIV and AIDS, on some of the drugs we can provide, much longer than the two years on the prescriptions they have? Isn't that kind of a problem with the whole issue? Or do you see it as not a problem? I think it really is, from a health and human aspect--there are many Canadians who take HIV and AIDS medication longer than two years and benefit from it very strongly--and also a production aspect.
5:25 p.m.
Director, Patent Policy, Department of Industry
Just as a point of clarification, it's two years and renewable for an additional two years.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Renewable, yes, but you only get it for two years. Then you have to go back, and that renewal may not happen.
5:25 p.m.
Director, Patent Policy, Department of Industry
It may not happen, but if you haven't shipped out the quantity that you were originally authorized to ship, it is pretty much automatic on application.
I will say that this issue was debated extensively, as I certainly recall, back when Bill C-9 was under development and was being examined by this committee. Several members of the committee suggested a longer term or a term set at the discretion of the commissioner. One issue that was raised was that you don't want to lock countries into a specific price and contract for an extended period of time while prices have been spiralling downwards, as they have been these past few years.
So that's one answer to your question. The other answer is that some other countries that have implemented it have left it to the discretion of their patent authority. They all prescribe a finite term, but set at the discretion of the patent authority hasn't made a difference in terms of exports.
I take your point about—
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
We could have a simple clause to lower it. I mean, if those prices can go down, we could have a simple clause in our own legislation saying it may be lowered.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative