Industry Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

Bonjour à tous. Welcome to meeting number 41 of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

We are going to be doing a clause-by-clause review of Bill C-393 today.

Before I begin, I'd like to introduce our experts from the public service who are with us today. We have with us Colette Downie, director general, marketplace framework policy branch, Department of Industry; Rob Sutherland-Brown, senior counsel, legal services, Justice Canada; and Mona Frendo, director, patent and trade-mark policy directorate, Department of Industry. From the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, we have with us Edith St-Hilaire, director, intellectual property, information and technology trade policy division. Finally, from the Department of Health, we have Lisa Lange, associate director, bureau of policy, science and international programs, therapeutic products directorate.

Thank you very much for joining us today and giving us your expertise as we proceed to this bill.

Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Are we proceeding or do you have more announcements to make?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

No, sir. You can go ahead, Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I just got six amendments put on the table here by our Liberal colleagues. I think that makes a difference to me. Can we deal with the amendments first as we do those clauses first and see how that goes and then go from there?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

One moment please, Mr. Masse.

In fact, Mr. Wallace, the legal clerk who is assisting me today mentioned that because of the amendments and the fact that they impact on so many other areas, if we want to proceed through this bill, we really have to move to clause 15 for Liberal amendment 5, or Lib-5, because it has impacts on three other amendments.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

So can we do that, then?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

We can do that, yes.

Mr. Malo, do you have a point?

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Chairman, before we proceed with clause by clause consideration, if you don't mind, I would like to start by thanking Committee members.

As you know, I am not a regular member of this Committee. I want to extend my deepest thanks to all of you for the work we have been able to accomplish. I also want to thank the analysts and the clerk for their cooperation throughout this study.

I would just like to remind you, Mr. Chairman, that when we heard from officials at the Committee's first meeting, I pointed out that in examining Bill C-393, it would be important to look at the issue as a whole. I suggested considering an approach based on the model in Bill C-393, of course, in order to take advantage of APOTEX's experience with Rwanda. I suggested we take a look at our approach to be sure we could really help people, specifically in Africa, where they have a greater need for medications to treat HIV/AIDS.

At the time, I gave you a fairly extensive witness list. I want to thank you for trying to accommodate as many witnesses as possible so that, in a way, both perspectives could be heard.

However, now that we have heard from these witnesses, we are going to be moving to the next steps in this process, which means carefully considering the testimony we heard in order to find appropriate solutions. On the very first day of testimony, when we heard from officials, it was clear that, in their opinion, Bill C-393 was not the ideal solution, because a number of parameters had been defined in the bill with respect to our international commitments. That is something that should be preserved.

However, considering how the system has been used, we clearly have a 100% success rate. It was used there once and it worked well. It is clear that the goal of many of the witnesses we heard from, including those representing the National Action Committee of the Grandmothers-to-Grandmothers Campaign, who were here at our last meeting, was for more medications to be made available. So, I think there is good reason to review the system, all the commitments that have been made and the resources available to Canada to do more and do better.

Mr. Chairman, I know that the mandate of this Committee, both today and throughout this study, was to examine Bill C-393. I also know that the Committee has a full schedule, and that its work plan includes several bills and committee studies that have yet to be addressed. At the same time, however, I think we need to take the time to report the testimony we heard to the House and put down in writing some of the representations made as part of that testimony. That way, it would be possible to look for ways to improve the system while still keeping the current framework, and draft a list of irritants. We could also include in that report what is currently being done, as well as what we are suggesting in order for Canada to do better and do more.

I would like to repeat what representatives of the National Action Committee for the Grandmothers-to-Grandmothers Campaign said to us at the last meeting. They said that they had been to Africa, that they had seen a certain number of things, that they had made commitments to the grandmothers of Africa and would report back on what the House of Commons and the Committee decided to do for them. So, I think it would be sad if, upon completing our examination of Bill C-393, we simply closed our books and moved on to something else, without trying to go a little further.

Given the comments we've made and what we can do in relation to Canada's international obligations as a signatory, I think it would be rather sad if we didn't make the effort being asked of us, which is to refer this issue back to the House.

Thank you very much for your attention, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Malo.

Certainly the committee might want to comment on what would be an additional report on the evidence we heard, on top of the issue we're seized with right now, which is the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-393.

But I have acknowledged that Mr. Masse wanted the floor, so go ahead, please, Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

We can provide.... We can go through clause-by-clause.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Okay. That's great.

We'll have to move directly to clause 15, then, because amendment Lib-5 would apply to amendments Lib-4 and Lib-6, and to the first amendment as well.

The only way we can propose those other amendments, Mr. Garneau, is if this passes first. This amendment creates several inconsistencies in the bill where references are made to the schedule, which would have to be changed to refer to schedule 2.

(On clause 15)

Are there any comments on the amendment?

Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm glad Mr. Malo led off with a discussion about compromise and willingness to work and make this bill better, because we still have an opportunity to do so.

So towards that common good, I have several suggestions today in support of this Liberal amendment. Although I don't believe it is necessary under WTO and TRIPS in the agreement, it has caused some concern for some members, and I certainly value their input and suggestion on that. This also, then, provides for CAMR to reach its current footprint, although restricted to some degree. At the same time, it would still be of benefit if we passed further amendments to the bill.

I'll suggest as well that I'll be dropping issues, such as the changes to the food and drugs safety act, as a compromise to make sure that we can actually get a bill passed in this chamber to report back to the House of Commons that will improve CAMR.

I'm hoping that the Bloc and the Liberals will be open to those amendments that are certainly going to strengthen the bill but also will serve the purpose at the end of the day. There are certain ones that will create some difficulty ,but there are other ones like this one, where I'm certainly willing to live with the consequences. Unfortunately, the drugs won't reach as many people in different nations, but at the same time, with all due respect, it still creates the environment we currently have.... There are other things we can do in Bill C-393 that will actually improve the bill. So in that spirit I will support this amendment and its consequential amendments.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Just one second, Mr. Wallace. You're on the speakers list.

I just wanted to advise Mr. Garneau that, by his nod, I assumed that he moved the amendment. I should say that verbally for the record.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I did. Yes, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Okay. I'll come back to you, Mr. Garneau, if you want to make any comments after the other members comment on your amendment.

Mr. Wallace and then Mr. Lake.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I have a question. Based on the submission by Mr. Masse, are there other amendments? I have the six amendments from the Liberals in front of me. Were any amendments submitted by other parties? Can amendments be moved from the floor without any previous notice?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

They can if they are germane to the business at hand, Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you very much. I just wanted to clarify.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I'd like just a quick clarification on this amendment. It refers to schedules 2 to 4 of the act, but my understanding is that there's only one schedule in the bill right now. Even with amendments, there's no schedule 3 or schedule 4 anyway. Is that correct? I'm trying to look at the amendments overall.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

In fact, I'll let Mr. Garneau explain that, because there have been a number of changes.

Mr. Garneau.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you know, Bill C-393 deals with a part of the Patent Act that deals with the use of patents for international humanitarian purposes to address public health problems. In it there are four schedules. One of them is a list of drugs that are approved under CAMR. The other three are lists of countries that have a slightly different status.

As you know, Bill C-393 in clause 15 sort of eliminated those, so we're left with one schedule at the back, which is a schedule of countries only. My aim, with a couple of these amendments, is to reintroduce the schedule 1 that is in the Patent Act and that lists eligible drugs under CAMR as approved by the Minister of Health.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Mr. Chair, could I ask the officials to comment on the impact of this amendment at this point and perhaps maybe to comment on how clause 15 would impact the act in question?

[Mona Frendo, Director, Patent and Trade-mark Policy Directorate, Department of Industry]

My understanding is that, as Mr. Garneau mentioned, it would reinsert schedule 1 into Canada's access to medicines regime, along with potentially another amendment, which I suppose we'll discuss later. But it's not clear to me how the other schedules, the country schedules, would be reflected.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Chair, what I'm suggesting, essentially, is that we take schedule 1 that exists in the Patent Act and make it schedule 1 in Bill C-393. The existing schedule that's in there right now would become schedule 2, so we'd have schedules 1 and 2.