Thank you, Chair.
Conservatives have put forward a motion to allow us, and through us to allow the public, to see this contract signed by this NDP-Liberal government with big pharmaceutical companies that are involved in supplying hard drugs that are used as part of the government's so-called safe supply program.
These programs are a failure. We oppose them. In any event, we believe that the public has a right to see the contracts, the deals made by this government and big pharmaceutical companies. In at least one case, that of Purdue Pharma, we know that a company that is heavily involved in supplying hard drugs now as part of this government program was also substantially responsible for causing the opioid crisis in the first place through their over-marketing and over-promotion of another opioid.
We have put forward this motion to get the contracts, and we've accepted and negotiated reasonable amendments to the point where I think we now have a majority of support from this committee for this common-sense motion to release the contracts. However, unfortunately what we've seen over successive meetings is a filibuster undertaken by Liberal members using more and more absurd and desperate arguments to try to justify their attempt to protect big pharma from the release of these contracts. Now, let's be very clear. The member who spoke just now said that there are no such signed contracts, because the federal government doesn't deal directly with these companies. They simply fund these programs, which are then where these external entities are doing the contracting.
First of all, let me say that even if that were true, there is no harm in passing this motion. This motion asks for all of the contracts signed between the federal government and these drug companies. If there are no such contracts in existence, then why are Mr. Jowhari and his colleagues filibustering to prevent this motion from passing? If there really are no such contracts, then they should have no problem letting the motion pass. It's highly suspicious that despite saying that no such contracts exist, they are persistent in filibustering this common-sense Conservative motion, although the member opposite admitted that he wasn't entirely sure that no such contracts exist.
Further, one thing we do know is that the federal government has directly funded these so-called safe supply programs, and that there have been meetings between pharmaceutical companies that are involved or want to be involved in these programs and the government. There's a company called Fair Price Pharma that's in the business of making heroin that they want to include in these safe supply so-called programs. Fair Price Pharma is run by, among others, Perry Kendall, a former public health officer in B.C. Representatives from Fair Price Pharma have met multiple times with government officials, including on more than one occasion with the previous minister. We do know there is direct engagement. We know this according to the lobbying registry. There is direct engagement between the minister and government officials and pharmaceutical companies that are involved or want to be involved in the production and sale of dangerous hard drugs as part of these programs.
I am very suspicious of the claims that no such contracts exist. However, even if it were true, let's get the contracts and find out. What do you have to be afraid of? What is justifying this filibuster if these contracts don't exist?
Finally, some Liberals have tried to get off this issue by saying, well, this could be at the health committee instead. Mr. Chair, it's very simple. We passed an amendment that said that once these contracts are received we will share them with the health committee. We are acquiring these contracts from the government and these companies for use both by this committee and by the health committee. Let's pass this motion that will support our work and the work of the health committee. There's no contradiction. Rather than having a big debate about which committee it should go to, let's pass the motion so both committees can use it. I suspect that the only reason the Liberals are saying that it should go to health committee is because if this same motion were brought at health committee they would filibuster it there as well.
The fact is it's clear now that Liberals do not want these contracts to be released, and we'll see in the remaining time of this meeting whether Liberals allow this motion to come to a vote, or persist in their filibuster to protect big pharma and their own government from accountability. These contracts should be released. Big pharma and this NDP-Liberal government should be accountable. That's why Conservatives put forward this common-sense motion that contracts signed for the production of these dangerous drugs be released so that we know exactly what the terms of the deals were, exactly who got rich and how, and who is profiting from this very dangerous and extreme policy.
I'll leave it there. I hope other members allow this to go to a vote, Mr. Chair.