Health Committee on March 10th, 2026

[Michel Bouvier]

Those centres have definitely had to cut back on their activities. In our case, for example, while IRIC and IRICoR continue to operate and generate successes, our ability to invest in new projects has been significantly reduced. As a result, these innovations won't see the light of day quickly, due to a lack of investment.

Other CECRs have also had to cut back a great deal. I'm thinking, for example, of adMare in Montreal, formerly NÉOMED, which had to significantly reduce its activities, particularly in terms of developing a new company and research programs. It had to limit itself to certain sectors, only for investments, and stop almost all development.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

I understand.

From your perspective, is national drug discovery and development capacity an essential condition for ensuring true pharmaceutical sovereignty?

[Michel Bouvier]

I think it's essential. The ability to innovate makes it possible to use those innovations. When a country or an organization stops innovating, it also hinders its ability to adopt innovations, even if it imports them from elsewhere.

In addition, if we are forced to import innovations from elsewhere, we can't contribute to them ourselves. We leave ourselves vulnerable to crises such as the one we experienced in public health or those linked to major geopolitical changes currently taking place.

It is essential to have a strong and vibrant biopharmaceutical sector here in Canada to continue collaborations with other foreign organizations. Collaborations with large pharmaceutical companies have been very important for us. It speeds up drug discovery, as long as we have the right structures in place to capture the value of what has been generated here and maintain this virtuous cycle.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

To your knowledge, if a new global health crisis were to occur tomorrow, which we obviously don't want, would Canada have the necessary capacity to develop and produce new treatments quickly, or would we still remain largely dependent on foreign countries?

[Michel Bouvier]

Unfortunately, I think we would still be largely dependent on other countries. There have been improvements, but the difficulty, in my opinion, is in targeting certain very specific sectors.

Human beings are pretty bad at predicting the next problems they're going to encounter. Of course, viruses and bacteria are real problems, but they aren't the only problems that we may have to deal with. Providing a broad base of innovation and knowledge would increase our response capabilities.

It also takes infrastructure that enables us to pivot quickly and with the necessary agility. That's what I was describing in my opening remarks. We must be able to reorient existing, efficient infrastructure based on needs. If we lose this infrastructure, and if we don't have a broad base, we'll once again find ourselves in serious trouble when faced with the challenges ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

I understand.

To recap, Mr. Bouvier, if you had essential recommendations for the government to strengthen its pharmaceutical sovereignty, what structuring measures would you prioritize?

[Michel Bouvier]

I would say that we need to invest in existing innovation and research infrastructure that is already working well, in order to strengthen it and encourage the local development—and this is key—of structures necessary for value creation.

There is often a perception that this can be done globally by superstructures. Unfortunately, research and innovation are contact sports. There really needs to be proximity between the people who make the discoveries and the people who will turn them into value. The goal is to build trust and ensure that things are done in a very efficient and agile way. Those two things are absolutely critical.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Thank you.

Mr. Strauss, you have five minutes.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, everyone, for coming to committee today. Your testimony is really interesting.

Mr. Watson, I hope you understand that the Conservatives' line of questioning is in good faith, and I hope you've been reassured prior to coming that you benefit from parliamentary privilege while you're here. Nothing you say at this table can be held against you or your company in a court or any other proceeding. Have you been briefed that way?

[Jeff Watson]

No, but I appreciate your comment.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.

Could the clerk confirm to the witnesses here that they benefit from parliamentary privilege, and could future witnesses at the committee be briefed about the benefits thereof?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

What did you...? I'm sorry.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

It's just notable to me that the witnesses here today haven't been briefed about parliamentary privilege and that they're able to speak with immunity here. I'm wondering if the clerk could confirm to them now that they benefit from that immunity and if future witnesses to the committee could be reminded of that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Do they have parliamentary immunity while they're testifying to the committee?

[A voice]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

That is confirmation of yes.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you. I just wanted the witness to be reassured by that.

Part of what intrigues me, Mr. Watson, about pharmaceutical sovereignty is the opportunity for a higher level of trust and safety of Canadian drugs made for Canadians by Canadian manufacturers. Would you agree with me?

I see a lot of heads on the panel nodding. That would be an important part of pharmaceutical sovereignty, the opportunity for higher trust and safety standards. Thank you.

This question is still for you, Mr. Watson.

Dr. Somers claimed that in Canada—though it might be different in other countries—drug manufacturers don't have to disclose the amount of opioids or other potentially addictive drugs that are given to any particular provider or in any particular situation. Is that your understanding of the regulations? If a safe supply provider is asking for a bunch of your meds, do you take an interest in that? Does it have to be reported anywhere?

[Jeff Watson]

I'm not in a position to talk about a safe provider, but I can tell you once again that on the generic side of the business, we would ship either to pharmacies or to wholesalers. If it were a wholesaler, we would have to track the amount. We would be able to track the units sold to a unit pharmacy.

We're not involved in any way with the promotion of the products.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Got it, but you do track the amounts. Do you have to report the amounts to any government agency?

[Jeff Watson]

We have other.... I'm not aware of reporting.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

Would you say in general that as a Canadian manufacturer, you take an interest in how your drugs are used? If you became aware....

What's interesting here is we have Dr. Somers saying that there is not good evidence for using hydromorphone in safe supply and not good evidence for using it in general as a treatment for opioid use disorder.

Is that of interest to your company? If providers are using your drugs in a way for which there is not good evidence, is there any way by which that is fed back to either your company or the government?

[Jeff Watson]

Once again, we're not in a position to have a relationship with the providers. We do not have a relationship with prescribers or with providers.

Are we interested in the general category of pain management and the fact that we participate in that to ensure that there's a safe supply of product in the marketplace? Yes. Do we have an awareness of the product? Yes. Do we have ongoing frontline knowledge of emerging information on the product? We might not have that, as other parts of industry might be exposed to that information.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Would you be interested in taking an interest in that? I'm asking you in good faith, with parliamentary privilege, could your company, as part of a pharmaceutical sovereignty strategy, take an interest in making sure these drugs are not misused in Canada?

[Jeff Watson]

Of course.