Evidence of meeting #51 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Philippe Méla  Legislative Clerk
Steve Verheul  Chief Trade Negotiator, Canada-European Union, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Mark Schaan  Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry
Denis Martel  Director, Patent Policy Directorate, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry

4:20 p.m.

Chief Trade Negotiator, Canada-European Union, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Steve Verheul

If we look back to all of the previous free trade agreements we've done, we have never had any kind of legislative requirement to do any kind of economic study like this. There have been many studies done, and the majority of those studies, including by outside firms, have been indicating that there would be a positive benefit.

Now, the scope of the benefit varies between the studies. I'll acknowledge that some studies have suggested that there would be a negative impact, but the majority of the studies have found a positive impact. We are quite confident that a positive impact will be there and will be significant. To have a legislative requirement to do this before ratification and implementation will slow down the process considerably and will prevent us from getting the agreement into force as we'd like—as soon as possible—so that we can start to enjoy the benefit.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Is there any more comment on this amendment?

If not, all in favour of amendment NDP-9?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The next amendment is NDP-10.

Ms. Ramsey, you're good to go.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

On this one, I feel that the cost of pharmaceutical drugs and the changes to the Patent Act, the scope of it inside the implementing legislation.... It's very serious. I cannot get a response from the minister or the government on this, any acknowledgement, I believe, of the fact that it will cost Canadians more money. I know we've heard that eight to 10 years is when we'll start to see the effects of that, but that's certainly not a long period of time before Canadians will start to pay more for their pharmaceutical drugs.

I think it is really incumbent on us to have a report containing an analysis of the potential impact of the agreement on the cost of pharmaceutical drugs in Canada. I don't believe it would be difficult to get, because the PBO received one from Health Canada. They put out to several departments around CETA a request for these reports, and Health Canada returned one. It's confidential, so we're unable to see that publicly, but data does exist on what the cost impact will be to Canadians. I think it's fair to ask that this data be revealed to Canadians so that they understand what we're facing in the patent changes that exist in CETA.

Is that possible? Do you have the Health Canada study that the PBO requested?

4:25 p.m.

Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry

Mark Schaan

A wide range of estimates has been provided on the potential costs of pharmaceutical changes under the intellectual property provisions of the act. There has been a number of those sets of analyses. It's extremely difficult work. In fact, we don't believe the estimates we would be able to provide would meaningfully advance the issues, because we have no foresight as to the nature of the drugs that will potentially be on the market, post the coming into force, for those that would actually benefit from a certificate of supplementary protection, for instance. It's impossible to know which patent will be selected and on which drugs, so to our end it would be nearly impossible to predict what the specifics of the impacts would be.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

So Health Canada has that study. Can we get that study released to us? Can we get the information around that released? The deputy minister appeared at the health committee and stated that the PBO had requested these and that there was a report from Health Canada on the costs.

4:25 p.m.

Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry

Mark Schaan

It's not a study. It's data. I can't speak to what the PBO has in their possession. I can say, from our perspective as the department responsible for the intellectual property statutes, that in our assessment, based on what we see as the changes to the intellectual property statutes, it would be very difficult to predict what the potential impacts would be, given the forward nature of the changes being proposed.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

I think it's widely accepted that there will be an increase in costs. I don't think that's being debated on any level.

I will move to you, Mr. Verheul, and ask if you have access to the data from Health Canada and if you're able to share it with us, either at the committee level or publicly in any way.

4:25 p.m.

Chief Trade Negotiator, Canada-European Union, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Steve Verheul

I have not seen any data from Health Canada on that.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Okay.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Are there more comments on this amendment?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Okay. That amendment has not passed, and as everybody knows, those other two amendments we don't need to do because they flow with the other ones. I'm talking about NDP-11 and NDP-12. We'll go right to the main clause. Shall clause 138 carry?

(Clause 138 agreed to)

I don't see any more clauses. Now we'll go to the schedules. Shall schedules 1 to 6 carry?

(Schedules 1 to 6 inclusive agreed to)

Shall clause 1, the short title, carry?

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Shall the title carry? If I don't hear anything, I'm assuming it is.

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Shall the bill as amended carry?

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Shall I report the bill as amended?

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill?

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Folks, it was a long, long road to get to here, and I really appreciate all the work that the negotiators, the staff, and the MPs and their staff, of course, did on this one.

There are a couple of little things that I have to tidy up here. I don't need to go in camera.

As everybody knows, the House is closing today, so I don't know if they'll let me throw this in the door on the way through.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC

It's not closing; it's rising.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

You have 10 minutes to make it there, Mr. Chair.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

There's one more thing that was brought to my attention, and since we have the officials here, I will say that there's another important negotiation on Bill C-31, as our clerk has informed us. It's my sense that we have fairly good agreement on Bill C-31 with CETA, but it has to come here for clause-by-clause consideration. We went through our schedule, and I think it would be good if we hit the Canada-Ukraine deal as soon we come back and do the clause-by-clause consideration. Is everybody agreed on that for our first day back?

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Definitely.

4:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.