Health Committee on May 9th, 2017

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for your efforts on this important issue. I want to thank the committee for finally undertaking this study of the thalidomide survivors contribution program, and thank the witnesses for coming today.

As you all know, I brought this issue forward on behalf of a constituent of mine, Mr. Terry Bolton, who will appearing on Thursday here at the committee. When I brought that forward, you all know we discussed the history of this issue. We don't need to go over that tragedy that happened about 55 years ago. What we want, and what I have asked for a number of times and pushed the minister on, is to give those forgotten thalidomide survivor victims an in-person interview.

My first question is to Mr. Mooney from Crawford. About how many people were rejected from the program who had made applications under the thalidomide survivors contribution program? How many people received rejection letters who had applied to be compensated?

[Michael Mooney]

I thank you for the question. I'm going to defer you to my colleague Brenda Weiss, who is the senior project manager and who's actually dealing with the day-to-day operation of the project.

[Brenda Weiss, Project Manager, Thalidomide Survivor Compensation Program, Crawford]

There were 167 individuals who received decisions that they did not meet the eligibility criteria. Those were for individuals who submitted applications prior to May 31, 2016, which was the deadline to submit the application.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I understand that your team—and we've already heard this—is following the guidelines set by Health Canada. Quickly, because I don't want to use up all of my time, I have a number of questions, could you please explain the scope and the extent of the medical assessment that had been done on those rejected claims?

[Brenda Weiss]

With the criteria we were provided, each individual claim went through three different tiers of analysis. We had someone at our level at Crawford review the person's presentation to see whether or not they presented proof to meet any of the three eligible criteria. If they presented medical documentation, we then forwarded their claim to a medical professional, and they also reviewed the claim to see whether or not the individual provided proof of one of the three criteria. They would provide that report back to Crawford, the administrator. Then I would make the final review, along with my colleagues, and verify whether or not the proof was provided. Then the ultimate decision was delivered to the claimant.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Part of that criteria included producing documentation, a prescription for thalidomide at that time, or a doctor testifying to that effect. I know in the case of Mr. Bolton, because it's so many years ago, he does not have the ability to get a prescription because the doctor has long passed away. There were fires at the various pharmacies in Gananoque, his hometown, so there is no record of these.

What we've been asking for is an in-person interview. I do not believe that an in-person interview was part of that process because we've already heard today from Mr. Johnson that there is a high degree of confidence that if a person was born in that period of time, and thalidomide was available, and if they have phocomelia, their mothers were in fact likely to have taken thalidomide, whether it be a sample drug or other case where there's an inability to produce those prescriptions.

Why has there not been an in-person interview to see if those people who have been denied compensation could have met that criteria if they were able to produce those documents? Obviously, it's going to be impossible. These people have lived a lifetime, really, of discrimination, of pain and suffering, yet because they can't produce a prescription they're not going to be compensated.

Why has there not been an in-person interview of those people?

[Cindy Moriarty]

I don't know if that's a fair question for Crawford as they're administering the existing criteria. All I can say is that decisions were made by the government to establish the program with the criteria that we have, which doesn't include in-person interviews. It just includes the three criteria that I outlined.

All we can talk about today is how that program is implemented. We're not in a position to talk about what it could have been or might have been, and Crawford is just implementing our direction.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

If the minister were to direct Crawford to do an in-person interview, then could that happen? My question is to Ms. Moriarty.

[Cindy Moriarty]

That would be possible through a policy process. It might require a cabinet decision. I don't want to commit the minister to anything, but—

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Obviously, you can't commit the minister to that, but the minister could do that. The minister could direct Crawford, through Health Canada, to give these forgotten thalidomide survivors an in-person interview, because that's what they've been asking for.

We've heard from Mr. Johnson that there's a very real likelihood, and he puts it at a high number, a high probability, that the mothers of these people who have phocomelia ingested thalidomide, and if they fit the period of time....

It is really up to the minister. That's my question to Ms. Moriarty.

[Cindy Moriarty]

I can't answer on behalf of the minister.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

But the minister could direct Health Canada to—

[Cindy Moriarty]

You're asking a hypothetical....

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

The minister could direct Health Canada to make that decision.

[Cindy Moriarty]

Not that linearly, but it's possible, yes.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Nantel.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm replacing my colleague Don Davies here. I'm very pleased to do so, because I narrowly avoided the illness, in the sense that I'm exactly the same age as the people affected. I was quite well acquainted with two people affected. You should have seen the emotion expressed by these people when, after my colleague Libby Davies tabled the motion, the House acknowledged them. The NDP has been working on this case for a long time. We must acknowledge the work of Libby Davies, who was a health critic for this topic in particular, and of Don Davies, who took over. Coincidentally, they have the same last name.

I'm not an expert in the field, so I'm pleased to see English experts among us. When a problem seems unsolvable, we usually look at what has happened and at the expertise acquired elsewhere.

How do the developments in the thalidomide victims' cases in Canada compare with the developments in other countries? My question is for the two British experts, who are speaking today by videoconference.

Ms. Moriarty, since you are the one asking the people from Crawford to administer the program, I'll also ask you the question. What are the best practices?

As my colleague Mr. Brown said, the people affected by this drug face unspeakable difficulties in life that any normal person wouldn't have to endure. The compensation for these people doesn't involve huge amounts for a government, especially since, in this case, everyone clearly failed at their job. This includes the pharmaceutical company and the various governments that approved the drug.

Ms. Moriarty, what expertise has been acquired worldwide on how to manage this situation and compensate victims over the long term? A few years ago, when we tabled our motion, we argued that, although the people affected had been compensated and had received support, their disabilities or defects had resulted in wear and tear and premature aging. This was specific to each case.

From this perspective, what are the best practices worldwide?

[Cindy Moriarty]

Thank you for your question.

I want to respond to the best of my ability. However, you'll understand that I'm limited in what I can say or hypothesize regarding the existing program and its management.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I want to congratulate the committee for inviting witnesses from both sides of the fence.

[Cindy Moriarty]

Exactly.

I can assure you that, before establishing the program, we tried to find out how other countries handled this matter. The experiences are quite varied. We looked closely at the United Kingdom's model. Finally, we decided that we needed to meet the same criteria implemented by Canada in 1991.

There's no ideal solution. Even with the scientific advances, there's no diagnosis or definitive test. Even though we can deduce certain things and identify some possibilities, we can't be 100% certain that thalidomide caused the condition of the people affected. In the establishment of objective evidence, all international experiences are a mix of objective criteria and probabilities.

Dr. Johnson has just explained—

I feel bad for speaking in French. I don't know whether you're following me, when I'm talking about you.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Actually, I thought they had translation. If they don't, please speak in English.

[Cindy Moriarty]

Okay. I want to respect you, since you asked the question—

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

That's very nice, but we—

[Cindy Moriarty]

In terms of the U.K. model, I was just going to say that it's a mix of probabilities and objective evidence, so there are a number of tiers that they go through. It's not a pure probability model. I think you'll find across the world that there are variations in that regard.

In Canada, we have the model that we do and it's managed the way that it is.