Health Committee on April 23rd, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I now call the meeting to order.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to meeting number 30 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health.

We meet on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Today's meeting is taking place in a non-hybrid format for a change.

I want remind participants of the following points.

Wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating, please mute your mic so we don't have interference. On the console in front of you, you will see that there is English and French, so you know what to do there.

All comments should be addressed through the chair. For members in the room, you know the drill: If you want to speak, put up your hand. The clerk and I will try to figure out whose hand was up first, and we will go ahead with it in that order.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, September 23, 2025, the committee will commence its study of Canada's pharmaceutical sovereignty.

I want to welcome the witnesses who are here to speak to that. From Diabetes Canada, we have Glenn Thibeault, executive director, government affairs, advocacy and policy. From HealthPRO Canada, we have Christine Donaldson, president and chief executive officer. From VaxSynergy, we have Denis Leclerc, director and full professor at CHU de Québec, Université Laval.

Each of you will have five minutes. I will shout out “a minute” when you have a minute left, and then “30 seconds” to give you a chance to wrap up. If you cannot finish what you've said, you will be able to expand on it during the question and answer session, so do not panic.

We will begin with Monsieur Thibeault for five minutes.

[Glenn Thibeault, Executive Director, Government Affairs, Advocacy and Policy, Diabetes Canada]

Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, for the time to speak to you today.

Millions of people in Canada wake up every morning dependent on diabetes medications, which include insulin, a life-saving medication discovered here in Canada. Sir Frederick Banting, alongside fellow Canadian scientists Charles Best and James Collip, changed the world from a lab in Toronto.

Banting House in London, Ontario—I extend an open invitation to all of you to come for a visit—stands as a national historic site marking the place where Banting first thought of taking insulin from a pancreas to treat diabetes. Sir Banting is a Canadian hero, yet today, we do not manufacture a single vial of insulin domestically. That is not a failure of science; that is a failure of will. Despite insulin having been discovered here, Canada remains entirely dependent on foreign manufacturers, and when shortages occur, we have no enforceable mechanism to prioritize Canadians.

In 2024, for example, Canada faced a critical shortage of injectable glucagon, a life-saving emergency treatment for severe hypoglycemia. Emergency importation from the United States was required, and still is. That is a short-term workaround, not a resilient strategy. That shortage was a warning—a stress test we failed.

I have another example. As recently as last month, a small group of Canadians living with type 1 diabetes was about to lose access to animal insulin—the only kind their bodies can tolerate—as the foreign company that manufactures and distributes it in Canada was about to discontinue it altogether. It took those families going public with their story in the media for a solution, albeit still a temporary one, to be reached.

A federal government program, one we all know, is pharmacare. It has helped improve access and affordability, and that matters, but affordability policy is not the same as availability policy. Pharmacare does not secure upstream supply, it does not manufacture medicines and it does not guarantee availability in global distribution.

Pharmacare is a pillar program of the federal government, and its success depends on a stable domestic supply of the medicine it covers. A national pharmacare program cannot function effectively if we remain entirely dependent on foreign manufacturers for its most fundamental input. Supply disruptions or allocation decisions made abroad could undermine the entire program's credibility and leave vulnerable populations without access to covered medications. The bottom line is that, in matters of health security, availability must come first.

Let me be clear that pharmaceutical sovereignty is not about isolation. It is about resilience, it is about preparedness and it is about the duty of a nation to protect its people. Without domestic manufacturing capacity, Canada has no mechanism to prioritize its own population's needs over international demand. We have no control, we have no leverage and we have no guarantee that when the next crisis hits, our patients will have access to the medications they need.

With President Trump’s threats of tariffs on pharmaceuticals, his most favoured nation policy and the U.S. state importation programs, the U.S. is actively competing for Canadian medications. As U.S. states seek lower-cost drugs from Canada, they can create competing demand for products manufactured through Canadian channels, diverting supply away from our patients and creating unpredictable shortages. Global supply chain fragility means that decisions made in foreign boardrooms during crises we do not control directly impact the health of Canadians.

However, here is what gives me hope: We are not starting from scratch. For example, Canada's new defence industrial strategy explicitly recognizes life sciences as a critical sector. The Canadian defence industrial strategy can be a policy instrument in helping us with domestic pharmaceutical manufacturing.

The irony is that insulin was discovered by Canadian scientists in 1920, profoundly changing the lives of every person living with diabetes globally thereafter. We have an opportunity here to really work together to protect our own sovereignty, protect our own supply and make sure that the diabetes community continues to work with Parliament to solve this issue.

Thank you very much, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Monsieur Thibeault.

Now I'll go to HealthPRO Canada and Christine Donaldson for five minutes, please.

[Christine Donaldson, President and Chief Executive Officer, HealthPRO Canada]

Madam Chair, vice-chairs and honourable members of the committee, I thank you for this opportunity to appear today.

My name is Christine Donaldson, and I am the president and CEO of HealthPRO Canada. We are a national, member-owned, group-purchasing organization that serves more than 2,100 hospitals and health care organizations across the country. We help procure approximately $1 billion in pharmaceuticals each year, partnering with 50 pharmaceutical suppliers across the globe on behalf of the Canadian health care system. In addition, I am a hospital pharmacist, so I have a very strong investment in what we're talking about today and have experienced many medication shortages first-hand.

The recommendations I am bringing to you today are informed by my experience, by my role at HealthPRO Canada and by the over 20 pharmacy leaders from across the country who gave their input for our recommendations.

I am sure we would all agree that any conversation about pharmaceutical needs should be grounded in uninterrupted patient access to essential medicines. It is our position that today Canada is not currently well positioned to pursue full pharmaceutical self-sufficiency.

Thus, a sustainable and realistic pharmaceutical strategy must prioritize pursuing domestic manufacturing—but it has to be strategic—for critical medications; updating public procurement to prioritize both reliability and redundancy; creating more regulatory agility to incentivize pharmaceutical manufacturing here in Canada; enhancing coordinated data sharing on a national level; and aligning policy across manufacturing and innovation.

In recent years, Canada has experienced repeated shortages of many medications, including those that are hospital-based. These are not theoretical risks. When supply becomes unpredictable, hospitals are forced into buying alternative products and rationing them, which obviously brings increased risk and can compromise continuity of care. Think back to the shortage of pediatric Tylenol that caused risks to our most vulnerable patients—children—and undue stress for parents across the country.

HealthPRO's experience shows that Canada currently relies heavily on global supply and has limited redundancy. Pharmaceutical manufacturing is capital-intensive and depends on sufficient scale across multiple product classes. Replicating end-to-end capacity across all medicines would require substantial investment and volumes that Canada simply does not have with our relatively small population.

Thus, domestic manufacturing must be strategic and must focus on medicines that pose the greatest clinical and system risk. They include sterile injectables, antimicrobials, emergency and critical care medicines and high-volume hospital products.

Health Canada's recently published critical and vulnerable drug list provides an important evidence-based foundation for this prioritization. This targeted approach both strengthens and builds resilience where it matters most, without introducing inefficiencies or escalating costs.

Traditional procurement models have often emphasized immediate savings, but the price alone does not reflect the true costs across the whole system. Procurement can and should incorporate risk-adjusted criteria such as reliability, redundancy, sustainability and domestic capability. These criteria can remain fully trade-compliant, while encouraging manufacturers to invest in more resilient production to strengthen our supply chain overall.

Manufacturers consistently cite that regulatory uncertainty and long approval timelines are barriers to investing in Canada or bringing alternatives to market. Priority review of clinical, critical and shortage-prone medications would align with our trusted international regulators and help bring forward expedited pathways for alternative suppliers during these disruptions.

We know that data is fragmented across jurisdictions and many supply chain actors, limiting our ability to anticipate shortages before they escalate. We believe that improved standardized data sharing across all stakeholders, including organizations such as HealthPRO Canada, would enable earlier intervention, better forecasting and more proactive mitigation.

Finally, pharmaceutical sovereignty requires alignment among manufacturing, health policy and innovation. We see that investment in domestic capability is far more effective when it's paired with predictable procurement signals, regulatory agility and a clear understanding of those clinical priorities.

In closing, pharmaceutical sovereignty is not about choosing domestic production over global sourcing. The most resilient and cost-effective path is a balanced one, combining both strategic domestic capacity and diversified global supply supported by a coordinated national policy.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Ms. Donaldson.

We'll now go to VaxSynergy.

Monsieur Leclerc, you have five minutes.

[Denis Leclerc, Director and Full Professor, CHU de Québec, Université Laval, VaxSynergy]

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for inviting me here today.

What is VaxSynergy? It is a network of researchers funded by Médicament Québec and the Canada Foundation for Innovation. It spans three sites—in Montreal, Shawinigan, and here in Quebec City—and possesses cutting-edge expertise in vaccine development.

Our mission is to meet the preclinical development needs for vaccines and therapeutic proteins. Our clientele consists primarily of small and medium-sized enterprises or researcher-entrepreneurs in the academic sector. All our services undergo rigorous quality control in accordance with the good laboratory practices necessary to meet industry needs and regulatory requirements. This is, in fact, one of the aspects that sets us apart from most other academic laboratories and brings us closer to the industry’s way of doing things. I won’t go into further detail on this subject.

To help you understand what VaxSynergy does within the ecosystem, I will present four concrete examples of our work and explain how they are useful.

The first example is that of Dr. Sauvageau, a clinician interested in the human papillomavirus, or HPV, who used to rely on the services of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, based in the United States, to perform serological testing on patients vaccinated in Canada. Recently, the CDC discontinued its collaboration with Canadians. The problem is that Dr. Sauvageau can no longer access these services, yet there is no recognized HPV serology centre in Canada. So we have a problem.

We then worked in collaboration with Dr. Sauvageau and took steps to ensure that VaxSynergy becomes the reference centre for HPV serology in Canada. We hope that good news will be announced shortly regarding the funding of this program. Our intention is to offer these services internationally as well, and even to Americans, since the CDC is completely overwhelmed. So, here is a concrete example of a VaxSynergy initiative that helps improve Canada’s self-sufficiency in the field of serological monitoring of vaccinated patients.

The second example involves an SME, Glycovax Pharma, which consulted VaxSynergy to resolve a purification process issue with its vaccine platform. Joint funding from Glycovax Pharma and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada enabled the financing of VaxSynergy’s research activities and the simplification of the purification process. The benefit for Glycovax Pharma is affordable access to experts without having to hire additional staff. Furthermore, VaxSynergy’s involvement led to a reduction in production costs for Glycovax Pharma’s vaccine platform.

The third example involves another SME, but in a different context. Recently, an expression of interest was submitted for Canadian government funding under a program linked to the Biomedical Countermeasures Initiative. Under this program, VaxSynergy is expected to be responsible for elucidating the mechanisms of action of an adjuvant and evaluating its potential for preventing viral and bacterial respiratory diseases. This project lies at the heart of VaxSynergy’s expertise and will enable the SME to find new applications for its adjuvant, including for combatting respiratory diseases in a pandemic context. Thus, in this case, if the program is funded, VaxSynergy’s involvement will help a Canadian SME develop new products.

Finally, the fourth example involves a researcher-entrepreneur from Laval University, Dr. Tessier. He discovered a protein with promising anti-cancer properties. However, Dr. Tessier faces a major problem: production of the protein is far too low to consider commercialization. He therefore consulted VaxSynergy. Together, we developed a new production process that increases output by a factor of 1,000 compared to the initial process. Consequently, a new patent application was filed, a new biotechnology was created, and a licensing agreement was negotiated with Laval University to commercially exploit this invention. Here, VaxSynergy’s involvement facilitated the transition of a new drug from the academic sector to the private sector.

That’s not all. VaxSynergy also contributes to the training of highly qualified personnel, as we train—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You have 30 seconds.

[Denis Leclerc]

Very well.

I was saying that we train students, and that is one of the reasons why companies working in the field of vaccination, such as GlaxoSmithKline or Aramis Biotechnologies, are able to remain in Quebec City.

So, this is just the beginning. VaxSynergy was created just a few months ago, and we anticipate that it will play an important role in facilitating the development of new vaccines and therapeutic proteins in Canada. Our survival will depend on government funding and the revenue generated by our activities. We hope to become financially self-sufficient within four or five years.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Monsieur Leclerc.

I'll now go to the question and answer session. Just as an explanation, you have a six-minute question and answer to start off, and then there are five-minute question and answers. The six minutes and the five minutes include the question and answer, so please be as succinct as you can.

I'll begin with the six-minute round, starting with Ms. Konanz from the Conservatives.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

My first questions are for Ms. Donaldson. Thank you so much for being here today.

You were quoted last week in a BNN Bloomberg article entitled “Why Canada's health care system is eyeing the global helium shortage closely”. Helium is vital for its use in MRI scans, and there's no hospital in the country that can go without medical imaging.

Shipping constraints through the Strait of Hormuz and damage to helium production facilities in Qatar have essentially cut off one-third of the world's helium supply. You told Bloomberg, “There is no system-wide shortage”, yet you said that there seem to be “targeted pressures”. This is now the fifth worldwide helium shortage in two decades.

My question is twofold. What are those “targeted pressures” you mentioned, and, if the conflict in the Middle East persists, how long will it take for Canada to see shortages of helium?

[Christine Donaldson]

HealthPRO Canada has certain helium contracts for hospitals. Some of them are used for medical gases, and as you said, there is a product used in MRI machines.

At this point, one of the producers has put out a notice that says there is a 50% allocation for a certain type of liquid helium. We have been working with that producer very carefully to ensure that the medical usage of helium is being prioritized. In other words, there are many uses of helium, and all recipients or users of helium receive the same notice.

Secondly, we have a diversification strategy with helium. At HealthPRO Canada, we often try to do a very unique strategy with contracts called the multi-supplier strategy. That allows us to award a contract to more than one producer, which keeps them healthy in the Canadian market. In this case, we have two producers. One is based out of Qatar, as you mentioned, and one in North America. That is one of our strategies, and we've been working to diversify and prioritize medical gases here in the country.

I do not have a strict answer for you about the timing. It is still something we're working very carefully on with suppliers to determine.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

What you are saying is that at this point there hasn't been a noticeable change in the availability of helium for medical imaging, but this could change in the near future.

[Christine Donaldson]

I do not have any line of sight as to when that could change.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Canada has the world's fifth-largest helium resources, estimated at seven billion cubic feet. However, we have no liquidation facilities in Canada, so we are completely reliant on shipping helium to the United States. Provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan want to change this, but federal taxes and red tape are limiting companies' willingness to invest in liquidation plants.

Would having helium liquidation plants help to end our reliance on Qatar and the United States for medical helium? Also, do you support federal tax changes to make that happen?

[Christine Donaldson]

Unfortunately, I do not have much interaction with the domestically based suppliers. I think your question is a thoughtful one, and I believe that the Minister of Energy and Resources in the province of Saskatchewan is actively looking into those strategies.

We have an open market opportunity within all of our contracts that encourages, wherever we can, domestic production by allowing suppliers to enter into a formal contract with HealthPRO Canada.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

My next question is for Glenn Thibeault.

Mr. Thibeault, Canada's Drug Agency recently recommended that public health plans should cover Mounjaro for type 2 diabetes. Mounjaro is like Ozempic in that it's being used as a weight-loss drug in other countries. We know that generic forms of Ozempic are currently under review as well.

What challenges should we be aware of, on behalf of the diabetic community's access to the supply of Mounjaro and Ozempic, if these drugs inevitably become used more for weight loss than diabetes?

[Glenn Thibeault]

There are quite a few concerns that we should be flagging when it comes to even generic GLP-1s, from Ozempic to Mounjaro.

The important thing to recognize here is that I'm very concerned about online pharmaceutical sales and the cost of Canada having a lower cost for these medicines. We've seen before that prescriptions happening in British Columbia are being filled in Nova Scotia, and 17,000 of them are going to the States. When we have this at a lower level, we could see a shortage of those products for Canadians.

If you talk to the pharmaceutical companies involved in this and look at the patient voice.... We're all really concerned and raising the flag here at a committee, asking that we find ways to protect Canadian supply to make sure that the lower cost is then applied to Canadians and not shared globally.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Would you say that you're more worried about them being sent to other countries, as opposed to being used as weight loss drugs?

[Glenn Thibeault]

Yes. Off-label usage is something for the person and their health care provider. The loss of them, I think, is more important.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

I now go to the Liberals, with six minutes for Ms. Sidhu.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for coming here.

My first question is for Mr. Thibeault.

I was proud to help advance Canada's national diabetes framework. Thank you, Diabetes Canada, for supporting this bill. Now it's law.

You raised the question of the life-saving insulin shortage, drug shortage, continuing to affect patients across the country. What are the main factors behind shortages, from your perspective? What should the federal government be doing differently to help prevent them? Can you give any advice on that?

[Glenn Thibeault]

First off, it's important to say that diabetes is a non-partisan chronic condition. With that, I want to thank you for your leadership in organizing the diabetes caucus and bringing MPs from all different parties to talk about the issue. Thank you for your leadership on that.

When it comes to shortages, we've seen shortages with Ozempic, which came about in relation to plastics—not necessarily the manufacturing of the medicine but that process. Making sure that there is an opportunity for supply to be created from beginning to end in Canada—because we are reliant on having products shipped in from the U.S. or from other places—and looking into having our own domestic supply will be key.

In my opening statement, I talked a bit about Canada's new defence industrial strategy. Everyone is asking me, “Why is a health charity looking at the defence industrial strategy?” It's because there's a life sciences fund in there, and that life sciences fund can do a few things. It can provide capital investment for domestic insulin manufacturing facilities, procurement guarantees and long-term supply contracts that can create predictable demand. Those are the things that we would like to see to ensure that insulin can get to everybody in this country.

We have over four million people in this country who are already diagnosed with diabetes. The number for prediabetes makes that number jump from anywhere between 10 million and 12 million people. There are a lot of things we can do, and I think the government has the tools necessary to act right now.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Canada has strong research capabilities and a highly skilled workforce, and it is known for having a well-respected regulatory system, yet stakeholders continue to tell us there's room to improve. We are heavily relying on foreign imports for innovative medicines. Can you give us recommendations about which sectors we can improve so that we do not have to rely on others and can be self-sufficient in our own country?

[Glenn Thibeault]

There's an opportunity for us to align pharmaceutical sovereignty with this industrial strategy to create high-skilled jobs, strengthen domestic capacity and advance Canadian innovation.

It's very important for us to honour the legacy of the scientists who gifted insulin to the world. I'm very focused on diabetes medications, but this can apply to all medications. What we're looking for now is the political will to implement the types of frameworks we've all talked about, let alone the diabetes framework—from the Canadian defence industrial strategy to other kinds of opportunities.

Coming from Sudbury.... We always talk about critical minerals. We really could look at critical minerals and compare them to medicines, and then make sure that the medicines Canadians depend on every single day are actually produced and manufactured here so we can control what happens if and when the next crisis or shortage happens.

There are plenty of opportunities. I think there are frameworks currently in place that we should be looking at and utilizing to make sure that we don't have to go through another shortage here in Canada.