Pharmacare Act

An Act respecting pharmacare

Sponsor

Mark Holland  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment sets out the principles that the Minister of Health is to consider when working towards the implementation of national universal pharmacare and obliges the Minister to make payments, in certain circumstances, in relation to the coverage of certain prescription drugs and related products. It also sets out certain powers and obligations of the Minister — including in relation to the preparation of a list to inform the development of a national formulary and in relation to the development of a national bulk purchasing strategy — and requires the Minister to publish a pan-Canadian strategy regarding the appropriate use of prescription drugs and related products. Finally, it provides for the establishment of a committee of experts to make certain recommendations.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 3, 2024 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare
May 30, 2024 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare
May 30, 2024 Failed Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare (report stage amendment)
May 7, 2024 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare
May 7, 2024 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare (reasoned amendment)
May 6, 2024 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:10 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I know it is not on the list. At the end of the day, some provinces, from what I understand, provide coverage for shingles vaccination for those 55 and over, or maybe 60 and over, whereas some provinces do not. However, I was suggesting, by bringing it up, that this is the type of discussion I would like to hear more about, but not in terms of how we keep Ottawa away from the issue of pharmacare or developing a national program. I do not think that is what our constituents want to hear. I believe they want to see consistency, where they can, in the different regions of our country.

I have presented many petitions in the House on the issue of pharmacare. I have consulted and talked about pharmacare at the door for years. I understand who has what kind of responsibility in health. As I said, I was a health care critic in the province of Manitoba.

However, I do not understand denying the opportunity for a federal government to participate in providing contraceptives or diabetes medications. I do not understand how opposition parties could oppose that, no matter what province they are from. Tell me a province, and I say that to all members, that provides any form of support for contraceptives today. I am not aware of any, but I could be wrong on that.

How could anyone say that the legislation would not be of benefit for all Canadians? It is a major part of the legislation. When we think of diabetes, we are not talking about a few hundred or a few thousand Canadians; we are talking about hundreds of thousands of Canadians who would be affected by Bill C-64.

What are opposition members afraid of? If they were truly listening to what people are saying in their communities, I would suggest that they should talk more about the issue of health care. I talk a great deal about health care in my riding. I understand why it is so important.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:15 p.m.


See context

An hon. member

It's provincial.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:15 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, a Conservative heckles across the way, and she is consistent with other Conservative members who say it is a provincial responsibility. That is the attitude. We can remember, at the beginning, I said that the Bloc does not surprise me. I understand why Bloc members do not support it. It is a separatist party. It would just as soon Ottawa hand over the money, then Quebec would take the money and develop the programming.

In contrast, the Conservative Party thinks it is a provincial responsibility. People need to be aware, because it is the same as the member's off-the-cuff heckle. I would suggest that it is not just a provincial responsibility. If the member truly understood the Canada Health Act and, more importantly, her constituents, she would quickly realize that it is not just a provincial responsibility.

Even when I was in the Manitoba legislature, I argued and articulated that health care is not solely the responsibility of the Province of Manitoba. I like to think that, at the end of the day, all provinces have a responsibility to follow the Canada Health Act. When I talk to people about the pharmacare program and Bill C-64, it is a positive discussion. I have yet to hear anyone, outside the Conservative Party, tell me that Ottawa moving forward with respect to a national pharmacare program is a bad thing. I cannot recall anyone saying that we should not be doing this.

That might precipitate a few emails to me, but at the end of the day, I believe it is because people truly appreciate and understand the value.

That is why I said before the interruptions that one has to take a holistic approach to health care. Let us look at what has happened since 2015, when a new Prime Minister was elected and the agenda of health care started to change in a very positive way. It was not that long ago, and I referred to this earlier, that we actually had the Prime Minister in Winnipeg at a press conference at the Grace Hospital. My colleague would be very familiar with the Grace Hospital. At the end of the day, we had the premier of the province, the provincial minister of health, the Prime Minister and the federal Minister of Health. We talked about the future of health care and how the $198 billion over 10 years would have a positive impact not only for today but for tomorrow, thinking of generations ahead. We talked about how it would impact the province of Manitoba.

Let us think about the number of agreements that have been achieved by the government with the different provinces and territories and indigenous community leaders, all dealing directly or indirectly with the well-being and health of people. Something that was missing previously was the type of financial commitment, along with the sense of co-operation. Then we look at the type of national programs that we would bring in, which would make a difference.

People talk about the dental program as an example. Having a dental program ultimately helped literally thousands of children over the last year, including children who would not have been able to see a dentist or get some of the dental work that they received as a direct result of a national program. There are actually children in the province of Manitoba who end up going to emergency departments because their dental work has been neglected. Moving forward with a dental program is a good thing.

We just came out with the national food program, where we are delivering more nutritious food for children throughout the country. Hundreds of thousands of children will actually benefit from the program.

That is why I said that health care is a lot more than just a hospital facility. People need to look at everything from independent living and community living to what takes place in our schools. They need to think in terms of the medications; the bill is about getting people talking about medications and the important role they play in health care. Along with that, I would suggest that there is a general attitude that says we are committed to the Canada Health Act and to making sure that we continue to provide the type of progressive programs that would complement the health and well-being of Canadians. That is the way I see Bill C-64. It complements the Canada Health Act, and people should not fear it. They should accept it and look at ways in which we can improve upon it.

We often hear about the issue of bulk buying, as an example, and the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been saved in that area. I would suggest that we could do even more. I look forward to seeing the ongoing debate on this very important issue. I would hope that my Conservative friends, in particular, would revisit their positioning with the idea of getting behind the legislation and voting in favour of it.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, not too long ago, at the beginning of this year, there was a shortage of Ozempic, which is a medication diabetics take. For some diabetics, this was the only type of medication that would help them with their particular condition. There was a shortage and there was not enough to go around. With the government in charge of deciding who will get this life-saving medication in the event of another shortage, because there will be one, how will the government decide who lives and who dies?

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, look at the options of the Conservative Party and what the Conservatives would be saying. They would be saying not to go to them because they do not care. They would tell people to go to the provinces or anywhere else but not to Ottawa, because the Conservative Party does not believe that Ottawa plays a role when it comes to the health and well-being of Canadians. If this debate we are having today was on the Canada Health Act, the Conservative members of Parliament would be instructed by their leader to vote against it. They do not believe in—

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

An hon. member

That is not right.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Yes, it is true. That is what we are—

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. It is not about having debate back and forth unless someone is recognized. I would ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to ignore the comments that are being made on the other side.

I would also ask members on the other side to wait until they are recognized to make comments as opposed to heckling or trying to ask other questions.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, think about it. Many Conservatives have stood in the chamber and said that health care is a provincial responsibility. I for one believe what they are saying is what they believe. If that is what they believe, Canadians need to be concerned that the Conservative Party of Canada today has dropped the issue of being progressive and will cut health care. That is the bottom line coming from the Conservative Party.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:25 p.m.


See context

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Madam Speaker, let us take things down a notch by asking a fundamental question. I have a two-pronged question for the parliamentary secretary.

First, does my colleague think that the child care program is a good program? Does he think that it works well across Canada?

Second, does he not think that the pharmacare program could work just as well, if the federal government would respect Quebec and its jurisdictions for once and give the Government of Quebec the money that belongs to Quebeckers? That would not cost the rest of Canada anything. This is just a matter of respecting the systems that are already in place and those who blazed the trail.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:30 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I think the Province of Saskatchewan led the way, which encouraged Ottawa to ultimately come up with the Canada Health Act, and today Canadians have a fantastic health care system. Sure, there are some imperfections there, but at least we have a quality national health care program.

The Province of Quebec had a wonderful child care program. Ottawa was able to look at the Quebec example and establish a national child care program that all provinces have signed on board with, thereby ensuring that we have a strong, healthy national health care program. I think Ottawa is in a good position to be able to deliver for Canadians in all regions of the country and I would hope we would get participation. I would encourage the provinces to look at ways we can continue to work together in certain areas to ensure that we have healthier communities.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:30 p.m.


See context

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, I know that it was the NDP who pushed for the beginning stages of this pharmacare plan. I am very proud that the NDP government in Manitoba already has free contraception in place. I am glad that the Liberals are finally coming on board, after a lot of coaxing.

However, despite the Liberals saying they support the right to choose, they have not done their due diligence in ensuring access to safe, trauma-informed abortion care, including out east where women cannot even access abortion. Does my hon. colleague agree that the government is responsible to ensure that women can access safe, trauma-informed abortion out east and that the government needs to do more to uphold that right?

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:30 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, whether it be the Prime Minister, members of cabinet or members of Parliament within the Liberal ranks, I think that we all have been very strong advocates on that particular point. I would suggest to the member that there is potential. As I cited, Saskatchewan played a very important role in regard to health care. Quebec played a very important role in regard to child care. I would love to see Manitoba play an important role on the further development of a pharmacare program that would be something that we could share with different provinces. I believe the best way we can deliver the best type of pharmacare program would be to have different levels of government working together for the betterment of Canadians.

I am an optimist. I am going to hold out and believe that the Province of Manitoba and others will seriously look at ways to make the program more successful.

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:30 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON

Mr. Speaker, it has been quite a fruitful debate today. It has been interesting to hear the diversity of perspectives and experiences as to what different provinces are doing.

I know that here, in the province of Ontario, it has been really challenging to have the provincial government step up at the level that it should, so the federal government has been doing more than its fair share. To have a partner, as the member referred to, would be quite interesting. To hear what other provinces are doing, it really does make me think that, if other provinces can do it, would it not be great to see my province able to do that? Perhaps there is something that Ontario is doing that other provinces could do.

What I would like to hear from the member is really on the matter of pharmacare. I know he has stood up in the House numerous times in regard to petitions and his constituents. Within the riding of Waterloo, constituents who have access to pharmacare have been saying, great. Constituents who do not have access say they want to have that access to pharmacare and they want access to medication.

Is the advancement of this legislation something we can take for granted? I know today there have been comments hoping everyone is unanimously supporting it. Can the member just reiterate and share what he has been hearing within this chamber as to the voices of all parties? Are all parties in support of this to ensure that every Canadian has access to pharmacare?

Second readingPharmacare ActGovernment Orders

May 6th, 2024 / 7:30 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, what has become very clear is that Canadians should be concerned if they support the concept of a national pharmacare program. They need to know that the Conservative Party of Canada will not support pharmacare and a national pharmacare program. Member after member has stood up who will clearly be voting against this legislation. There is no doubt that it will be on the axing block if the Conservative leader ever forms government. People should not take this for granted.

I think that Conservatives need to be clear with Canadians on this very important issue. Pharmacare would complement our health care system, and this is something that we should all be voting in favour of. I am very much concerned that the Conservative Party appears to be voting against this legislation.