It's hard for me to chime in after I've missed the majority of the debate and discussion on this bill, but let's call it for what it is. It is being billed as pharmacare, but it really is not pharmacare.
A national pharmacare program implies that Canadians will be able to receive any drugs they are looking for. Further to what Dr. Ellis said, this piece of legislation really deals with just two main areas of concern: contraception and diabetes. They are two very important topics and issues that Canadians face and are dealing with.
If you've read the common-sense amendments that have been put forth by our Conservative colleagues, they say we call it what it is. Let's not mislead Canadians. I think it's important that we, here at this committee.... I've said this all along: We do some of our best work in Parliament at committees, but it calls for common sense from all of us. The work we do here will be reported to the House, and then at that point, Canadians will know what Bill C-64 entails.
I don't think there's any requirement for us to bill this as anything other than what it does: It's a funding framework for certain prescription drugs and related products intended for contraception, for the treatment of diabetes, and to support....
It's not just this bill, but others. We struggle in this House at times to get common sense to come into play. This is just a common-sense amendment that our colleague Dr. Ellis has put forth.
I support CPC-7.