Evidence of meeting #25 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was care.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Pharmacists Association
Absolutely. I would be pleased to talk to my colleagues in the licensing body in British Columbia and get you that information.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
All right. And if they did make such a resolution, could you also ask them on what basis they thought they could do so and advise us of that?
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Pharmacists Association
Absolutely we'll do that.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Thank you.
I have one question, I guess, for the Canadian Medical Association.
On page 3, your second-last sentence of the first paragraph, referring to work product information, says the following:
The perceived and indeed actual loss of control by physicians over information created in the patient encounter, such as prescribing data, could undermine the confidence and faith of our patients that we are able to safeguard their health information.
The way I read this, you're saying that your patients wouldn't trust you even though there was no legal impediment to use that information. In other words, the law doesn't prevent it, so why would the patient blame you?
4:55 p.m.
Chair, Committee on Ethics, Canadian Medical Association
We're not so concerned about being blamed by the patients—
4:55 p.m.
Chair, Committee on Ethics, Canadian Medical Association
What we're concerned about is the effect on our ability to give them good health care. If they don't trust us or have confidence that their personal information will be kept confidential, then they may not be fully comfortable disclosing it to us.
So we're not worried about being in court, even; we're worried that patients won't trust us, won't give us the information, and we won't be able to give good care.
5 p.m.
Liberal
December 13th, 2006 / 5 p.m.
Assistant Director, Legal Services and Chief Privacy Officer, Canadian Medical Association
If I may, I think it has to do with the relationship that's generated. If you make the analogy to work product, it's not the general work product, in the federal Privacy Commissioner's decision, of how much tarragon a chef uses or how many shingles a roofer uses. It's actually, instead, what kind of medication am I receiving? If the patient perceives that third parties are commercially benefiting from that exchange, is that patient going to be more reluctant or more inhibited to share that information?
There actually have been data studies—CMA itself has done polling, which we'd be happy to share with you--showing that patients have indicated that they will be less likely to confide in their physicians as they perceive more third parties intruding into that encounter. Because that's the lynchpin of the whole thing: the secondary users of it.
If I might, CMA—
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Before you continue, yes, we would like that information and that polling data, if you wouldn't mind.
I'm sorry to interrupt. Please go ahead.
5 p.m.
Assistant Director, Legal Services and Chief Privacy Officer, Canadian Medical Association
Sure.
We can also share with the committee peer-reviewed articles that were published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal about physician prescribing practices and data, and what happens at the pharmacy level.
Dr. Zoutman of Kingston has written many articles on this. He actually did a survey—it's not current, being from 2004, but it is very relevant—on what happened at the pharmacy level. We'd be happy to share that with the committee.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Okay. Thank you.
Committee members, are there any other questions?
All right. I want to thank our witnesses very, very much for coming and giving their testimony today and giving us their best advice as to how we could improve PIPEDA.
We wish you all the best. Happy holidays, Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year, on behalf of all committee members.
Now, Madame Lavallée, you in fact have an amazing 26 minutes, if you want, to proceed with your motion.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
We already know what the motion is. You don't have to restate it. You've already spoken to it.
Is there any other member who wishes to speak?
5 p.m.
The Clerk
You need seven.
5 p.m.
Bloc
5 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
I’ll be very pleased to speak about my motion at our meeting on Tuesday, January 29. Don’t think I’ll forget about it. Otherwise, it will turn into a motion to blame the Minister.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Okay.
Whether there's quorum or not, I wish everybody happy holidays, Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year.
The meeting is adjourned.