We have only 15 minutes, so please, everybody, be as brief as you can. If somebody says something, don't repeat it. Just say, “what he said” or “What she said,” and move on—because we have to finish this.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0)
After the motions, we will decide on the priority.
The second motion is by Monsieur Thériault. It reads:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study on antimicrobial resistance, which, according to the World Health Organization, is one of the 10 greatest threats to global public health facing humanity. That the committee hold a minimum of four meetings; that additional meetings be added to the committee's schedule if the committee deems it necessary; that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House; and that pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request a comprehensive response to the report by the government.
That's Mr. Thériault's motion. You have it in English and French in front of you.
Is there any discussion on Mr. Thériault's motion? Seeing none, we will take a vote on the motion.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0)
Now we will move on to the third motion, which is by Ms. Chi. It reads:
That, whereas it is in Canada’s best interests to have a strong domestic pharmaceutical industry that ensures Canadians have access to essential medicines and medical supplies, the committee undertake a study pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) of no less than eight hours examining Canada’s pharmaceutical sovereignty; that the committee hear from representatives of industry, academic, and patient groups; that the study develop recommendations for how Canada can best promote pharmaceutical sovereignty; that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House; and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Government table a comprehensive response to the report.
That's the third motion on the table. Is there any discussion?
Mr. Powlowski.