Health Committee on May 7th, 2026

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

As I have one minute left, I'm going to ask if you would table any documents with the clerk about Health Canada complaints that you indicated in response to that other question. Then we can review them as a committee.

In your testimony, you stated that there were an estimated $2.3 billion in avoided health care costs. What would be some examples of these cost savings? Could the health care cost savings be even larger when considering the wider benefits to the economy, strain on the system and other factors?

Unfortunately, we have about 20 seconds, so it will have to be quick.

[Sonia Parmar]

I'll say it was a complicated study. I will submit that if it's of interest.

It's a lot of event-based costing for avoided events like fractures, complications, infections, hospital care and long-term care. It was a very onerous study that was done by an AI regtech company. We couldn't even hire a big company, because it's such an onerous study.

I'd be very happy to table that as well, so you can see the complexity.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you. That's perfect timing.

We'll go to Mrs. Sidhu for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being with us.

My question is for Ms. Steele from the Best Medicines Coalition.

Ms. Steele, you highlighted the leadership of the provinces and the bilateral agreement, but where is the biggest barrier in Canada's drug review and health technology assessment processes, and what reforms would you recommend to make these processes more timely?

[Kim Steele]

I will be honest. I think there are a lot of great things going on in terms of drug review and reimbursement.

Our greatest challenge is that we are still murky in some areas. I mentioned rare diseases and the drugs for rare diseases. It's partially about how these drugs are assessed and recommended for reimbursement through the health technology assessment, but it's also about having predictability of funding and being able to access those medicines.

One of the biggest challenges we face is that of the recommended price reductions that a body like Canada's Drug Agency might recommend for some of these innovative therapies. Some of these therapies can be assessed, and it's recommended that there be a 90% price reduction. It's very difficult to get innovative therapies through to reimbursement if that is the price recommendation.

If we look at the pCPA, we see that they've done some great initiatives in collaboration with the CDA. We are starting to see things move through the system. I would say that there's a lot of work being done to look at patient engagement at those levels, and we're starting to see some really positive change, to the point that we are writing submissions because there are so many consultations going on. We are able to sit back and look and say, “Wow, some good things are actually happening here in Canada at all levels.”

Our challenges were not cohesive. These are all different parts of a system that isn't necessarily a system. We break down not just at the health technology assessment bodies when it comes to some of these innovative therapies and how they are assessed. We also break down because we have programs in individual jurisdictions that may reassess. Those are non-binding recommendations, so the provinces and territories and the public drug plans in general don't necessarily have to take those recommendations. Sometimes that's a good thing. Sometimes that's a bad thing.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Steele.

Mr. Chair, six months ago, I placed on notice a motion calling for this committee to study the growing role and potential of artificial intelligence in health care. It has since been circulated again through the clerk for members' review. I now move the following motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), given the growth of artificial intelligence in health care, the Standing Committee on Health undertake a study of no fewer than six meetings on the adoption of artificial intelligence in health care, especially in research and innovation, data collection, health service, and patient-centred care; that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House; and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the government table a comprehensive response.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

The motion is in order.

How do we want to proceed? Do we want to have debate on this?

I have Madam Jaczek.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Mr. Chair, how about unanimous consent for the motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Is there unanimous consent?

I have Mr. Bailey.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I'd like to ask, through the chair, why we are not discussing PrescribeIT, Mr. Green and some of the motions we have. I realize that the Liberals want to talk about the study, but this ongoing debacle with Mr. Green and our asking to have the health minister here has not been addressed. I believe we should go back to that motion and talk about it before we start talking about other studies. Let's clean this up, and then we will work together as a health committee.

I'm quite simply asking that we address what has gone on with Mr. Green and the health minister, so that we get Mr. Green to come back here, because he has not answered questions on this whole debacle with Canada Health Infoway.

I really feel that this is incompetence. It's a failed IT pilot. We have a bill coming from the Senate. I just received something in my mailbox today that I found very alarming. It actually says Canada Health Infoway is going to be part of getting all of this right across Canada with Bill S-5.

If we don't address this IT problem right now, how are we supposed to convey to constituents and the general public and instill some sense of understanding that it's okay that Canada Health Infoway is involved in another big project? We're going to start to connect all the provinces and territories together. I have been speaking with my province about its concerns already, and I believe we need to find out more from Mr. Green before we start talking about anything else.

When you all get to your mailboxes, I invite you to look at this piece of material that we all received today, because, as I said, it's very concerning to me that Canada Health Infoway is involved in that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Bailey, I have given you enough time. If we can come back to the motion, I will entertain that. Otherwise, I will go to Mr. Strauss.

If anyone has anything to say about the motion that's on the floor, that's what I would like you to focus on. I have given you enough time for the preamble, so let's come back to the motion. Otherwise, I'll go to Dr. Strauss.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

This motion that has been distributed to us.... I'd like to know what it is again, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

This motion was distributed before.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

She's distributing it now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

No. This motion was distributed on September 9.

I'll suspend for a few seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I call the meeting back to order.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Chair, I have the motion that the honourable member brought, and we have an amendment that we'd like to make to that motion. Would you like me to read it from the start, or should I just indicate where our amendment comes in? It was sent to the clerk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You may proceed in whichever way you feel comfortable.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Has everyone received our amended motion from the clerk?

Basically, it states that this study does not begin until Michael Green, former CEO of Canada Health Infoway, has appeared for two hours on PrescribeIT.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

We have the amendment on the floor, and I have speakers on the list. I have Dr. Strauss, Mr. Mazier and Madam Konanz.

Before we go to the members, on behalf of the committee members, I would like to thank the panel members, Ms. Parmar, Mr. Lévesque and Ms. Steele, for coming to this committee.

The witnesses are released.

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

I have a point of order.

I wonder whether you would just extend to those witnesses the apologies of the committee for the Liberal obstruction of PrescribeIT. It is getting rid of their testimony, which I was very excited to hear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

It's okay. I already released them. We don't need to go there. This is not a point of order. Let's focus on—

Just a minute. Is it a point of order?

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

I believe so. If this motion is passed with these amendments, then they won't need to go home. Why don't we see...? Maybe everyone will agree, and there won't be any more obstruction. Maybe everyone at this table will agree to support this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I talked to the members earlier. It was my understanding that, as long as the one hour was over, I could release the witnesses. I'm not going to make them sit here for hours. There are already four speakers on the list.

Madam Konanz, you are on the list. Dr. Strauss is on the list. Mr. Mazier is on the list, and I'm sure there will be other members. It's my decision. Of course, Mr. Blanchette-Joncas is on the list.

I'm not going to make the honourable witnesses stay here. Witnesses, you are welcome to go. Thank you for your contributions.

Okay, now we'll go—