Evidence of meeting #13 for Health in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pmprb.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Most Canadians, though, you're saying here, are very satisfied with the insurance coverage they have.
2:50 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association
There's no question. They're either very satisfied or satisfied. It's up in the 85% range.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you.
We go now to Monsieur Thériault.
It's your turn, Mr. Thériault.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I'm sorry; that was my mistake. Next is Mr. Fisher.
I'm getting ahead of myself on the list. I apologize to everyone.
December 11th, 2020 / 2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My apologies to Mr. Thériault, I didn't mean to stop him in midstream there.
I want to take a second to thank all the witnesses here today. Thank you for your expertise. It's an interesting panel because we have diverging opinions.
I want to go to Ms. Fuller, if I may.
Ms. Fuller, these aren't really questions. I'm going to throw a couple of things at you and ask you, if you want, to touch on some of these things.
You made a comment with regard to supply and said that government has the tools and that it's unethical to hold back drugs from Canada because of regulations. Separate to that, you said that PMPRB needs the backing of Parliament. Then there was another comment by a witness earlier in the testimony who said that drug prices in Canada are comparable to those in comparable countries. Would you touch on three of those topics at your leisure?
2:50 p.m.
Representative, Independent Voices for Safe and Effective Drugs
First of all, I think that although the industry feels its overarching responsibility is to supply a return on investment to shareholders, from my perspective, the overarching responsibility should be to ensure that Canadians have access to safe and effective medicines. That obviously is not at the top of the list. Canada is not the only country that has confronted threats and warnings from the industry about interrupting access by patients to medicines.
As mentioned in our brief, Global Insight pointed out, “the human-interest angle of patients denied access to potentially life-saving therapies has generated an unusual level of support for a pharmaceutical industry often regarded with deep suspicion.”
I think that what is happening in Canada right now and what has happened in other countries is horribly manipulative on the part of the industry. People are afraid, if they don't get access to medicine. I am a victim of two companies that withdrew all of the only type of insulin I can use, which is animal insulin. Of course it's a threatening and frightening thing when that happens, but I also believe that governments have an obligation and a duty to counter those types of warnings and threats from the industry.
That's why we are arguing that tools that either are there or should be there.... The government should develop those tools if they don't exist. One of them is public manufacturing. We absolutely believe that should be the case. Compulsory licensing is another one. Also, quite frankly, so is national pharmacare.
All of those things are interconnected in one way or another, and the prices review board plays a very positive role in the discussion about access and affordability—and justice, quite frankly.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you.
Are drug prices in Canada comparable to drug prices in comparable countries?
2:55 p.m.
Representative, Independent Voices for Safe and Effective Drugs
I think that the prices review board has.... The countries that have been selected will enable us to ascertain where we fall within that range of comparable countries. In the past, it seems the prices review board has fallen midway between that group of comparative countries.
I don't think there's a huge difference in price between Canada and a lot of the comparator countries, which is probably not great. If we had lower prices in countries, we would be able to bring our prices down as well.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
We're now going to Mr. Thériault, for real this time.
I'm sorry about earlier.
You have two minutes.
2:55 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Adams, could you comment on the great uncertainty and lack of transparency associated with the authority of the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board staff questionnaire in the application of the regulations and guidelines?
2:55 p.m.
Board Chair, Best Medicines Coalition
To me, the central problem is that they have to.... This is about the Patent Act. All of the arguments in favour of what PMPRB and the government are doing are around what I will call consumer protection. The Patent Act is actually about regulating the use of intellectual property and avoiding abuses [Technical Difficulty—Editor]. That is not the same as consumer protection. My quarrel—and I think the courts are going to deal with this—is that it's a bit of a stretch to push intellectual property into consumer protection.
If the Government of Canada and the Parliament of Canada see fit to say there's a need for consumer protection around drug prices, I think that would require its own legislation separate and distinct from—
2:55 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, but there are problems with the interpretation.
Excuse me, Mr. Adams, but we have to be able to hear and understand you.
We should start again, Mr. Chair, because there's no interpretation.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Yes. Mr. Adams, can you back up a little bit? We'll check with translation to see if it's working.
3 p.m.
Board Chair, Best Medicines Coalition
Okay. For me, the key point and cause of uncertainty is the desire of some to stretch the Patent Act into a consumer protection act. The Patent Act, in my view, is about regulating intellectual property and avoiding abuses of intellectual property. Its central purpose is not consumer protection. If the government and Parliament see fit that there is a need for consumer protection on drug prices, then, with respect, it would be up to the government and Parliament to pass a law on consumer protection on drug prices.
We're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole here. I fear it's going to make things worse and I fear we're heading towards substantial litigation.
3 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, sir.
We go now to Mr. Davies.
Mr. Davies, please go ahead. You have two minutes.