Evidence of meeting #7 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amr.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Thank you.
Just going back to the veterinary medicine piece, I believe that in December 2018, certain important antimicrobials for veterinary use in Canada could be used only by prescription, and claims about animal growth—or, in other words, a better quantity of meat—would not be a reason to use antimicrobials. Could you talk a bit about the success of that initiative and how that is working?
October 6th, 2025 / 11:30 a.m.
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
It really depends on where we're looking.
Quebec has taken the lead on this recently, four years ago, by not letting agricultural producers use class I antimicrobials anymore—the antimicrobials that need to be reserved for human infections—and that is working very well. The agricultural sector has adapted well to this, and we really see results of that.
I think we need to look at that, and there is a role for provincial governments in that.
We know that the use of antimicrobials in animals has an effect on antimicrobial resistance in animals and in people; however, we don't know how that actually goes from animals to people. Farmers need to be convinced that this really is the case. It's not in animal products. We know that in milk and in meat, that doesn't play a role. We think that water and the air will play a role there, but if we want to convince the agricultural commodities to really play a big role....
I must say that the poultry industry and also to a bit of a lesser extent, the swine industry, have already done that, but we need more data and knowledge to convince them.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Perhaps the example of Quebec can be used in terms of surveillance and so on, going forward, to convince other provinces to adopt the similar strategy.
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Can I add one thing?
In Alberta, we now also have a “one health” approach. We also have antimicrobial stewardship. Alberta is also taking a leading role there. It focuses a lot on communication—how doctors communicate with patients and how veterinarians communicate with owners of animals. That's also a good example.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Dr. Bogoch, as a clinician as well as a researcher, are you aware, perhaps...? Is CIHR looking specifically at AMR issues as a priority, or do you have any opportunity to try to convince it that they should be a priority?
Infectious Diseases Specialist, Toronto General Hospital and Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, As an Individual
That's a great question.
Once in a while, it has priority areas that focus on antimicrobial resistance. However, given the scale of the problem, I think that there's room for a greater proportion of funding dedicated toward this. With regard to the points that were made by my colleagues up here, an intersectoral approach is needed—in health, for sure, but also in environmental health and in animal health. This is truly an intersectoral issue.
I would even wager that the funding available from CIHR might not be sufficient, and alternative sources of funding—including tapping into security-related funding—would likely be ideal because this is truly a security issue, as well.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
We will now proceed to MP Blanchette-Joncas.
Please go ahead. You have six minutes.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good morning to the witnesses with us today.
Professor Castonguay, Canada is the only G7 country that has not developed its own COVID‑19 vaccines. Isn’t this failure a direct result of chronic underinvestment in research and innovation, which has undermined our scientific sovereignty and has now made Quebec and Canada dependent on foreign multinationals for their health security?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Thank you for your question, Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas. It’s an excellent question, but I don’t necessarily have the answer.
Generally speaking, when it comes to antimicrobial resistance, we need to think about how we can prepare for the future. Researching and developing new antimicrobials is not necessarily the only option for tackling this problem. We need to really look at all available solutions and try to find the best one. I think that’s really the way forward.
Regarding your question specifically, I can’t comment because I don’t have enough information to answer it properly.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Noted. Thank you.
In 2018, one in four bacterial infections in Canada was already resistant to first-line treatment. Each resistant infection is more expensive to treat.
From an economic standpoint, does federal underfunding for research and health take away our ability to come up with proactive solutions, including an integrated approach that interconnects human, animal and environmental health?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Yes, absolutely. Earlier, I gave the example of whole genome sequencing. It’s a fairly expensive practice to adopt, but it has the potential to generate enormous benefits. Indeed, it provides a better understanding of the evolution of resistant pathogens, how they emerged and how they spread from one place to another.
As I mentioned, according to a rough estimate I made ahead of today’s meeting, implementing such a policy could generate as much as $70 million in savings for provincial and federal governments. This is one of the many measures that could be implemented. There are others. Many of these measures should not be seen as investments, because in reality, they will save us money. They are actually policies that will result in cost savings. We need to bring forward such policies.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Antimicrobial resistance has so far cost billions of dollars in health care and lost productivity. Ottawa provides funding for barely 22% of health spending, which is way below the 50% originally promised.
Doesn’t this disengagement create a major fiscal imbalance that weakens the capacity of Quebec and the provinces to meet their own public health priorities?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
My earlier proposal to combine a “One Health” approach with economic tools would really help to maintain and strengthen the resilience of provincial health systems using an integrated “Economic One Health” approach. That's what we need to move forward and to address this issue.
Co-operation can be intergovernmental and intersectoral. Both aspects are incredibly important. I appreciate that there are jurisdictional challenges at the provincial and federal levels. It's important to understand that we need to find solutions to these issues, because as my colleagues pointed out, microbes don’t respect borders.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
We can agree on that.
Ottawa has capped the health transfer escalator at 3%, even though costs are doubling annually. Isn't it ironic that the federal government is withdrawing from funding while increasing the number of conditional programs? In your opinion, what place do Quebec and the provinces have in developing their own programs?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Again, this is a matter of jurisdiction and respective rights. These are political issues, and I don’t really want to get into that.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
I understand.
Let's go back to the economic aspect.
As I said, Ottawa has capped the health transfer escalator at 3%, even though costs are doubling annually. From a purely economic point of view, if the money coming in is less than the costs in question, what can be done to tackle the problem of antimicrobial resistance, for example?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
I think it’s important to introduce efficient policies. That means finding ways to implement public policies that are good for health and good for the economy. In other words, this means reflecting on what we can do to save lives and keep people healthy while introducing economically efficient policies.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
If Canada wants to reduce its dependence on the big foreign pharmaceutical companies, shouldn't we review our own model of innovation to ensure that it provides more support to universities, research centres, and Quebec and Canadian businesses to develop antimicrobials and vaccines?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
As I was saying earlier, development is just one of the five pillars proposed in the Pan-Canadian Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance. As such, we don't necessarily need to move towards developing new antimicrobials. There are other options. It's important to understand which of these pillars or levers should be promoted in order to optimize investment and get the best return when implementing public policies.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
I'm sorry. Your time is up.
We will now proceed to MP DeRidder.
You have five minutes for your round of questioning. Please go ahead.
Conservative
Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
My question is for you, Herman, but I'll open up the floor to anyone who might be able to support the data part of what I'm going to ask.
Herman, you mentioned that there's an environmental factor to infectious disease, that we need to monitor our waste water and that it will lead to food insecurity as well. We do know that the homeless population is more at risk for infectious disease. That includes those who are struggling with addiction.
In my riding in Kitchener, I was driving by one of our encampments over the summer. Someone had passed in the encampment. I was deeply saddened by their passing, but I was even more saddened by the fact that those cleaning up his area were dressed in full haz-mat. In another story from my riding, a lady lost her son because he injected with water from our Grand River. He got an infectious disease straight from our river when he injected with that water.
We've lost 53,000 people to this opioid crisis that we're facing right now. That's more people than we lost in World War II. It just seems that these failed social experiment policies are leading to more deaths in our country. I have two questions: How is this drug crisis today contributing to the infectious disease increase in Canada, and do you have any data on the actual AMR deaths contributing to what we're facing in Canada today?
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
I will have to get back to you on the exact numbers. Maybe my colleagues have them at hand, maybe my friend and colleague Dr. John Conly.
In humans it is way higher in people who are addicted.
We should also not forget the first nations, because infectious diseases like TB, which are multi-drug resistant, are particularly present in first nations. There are other diseases where this also is the case. We have 26 first nations that still cannot use the water on their reserve. They have to fly it in. That's another group of people we really need to look after.
We know that people using drugs or getting chemotherapy also are more vulnerable to this. I don't have the exact numbers in my head.
Conservative
Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you for that. I agree that we need to have clean water for indigenous people.
Let's go into some spending here. I'm going to go to you, Isaac.
A recent report by the Auditor General of Canada found that $4.6 billion in ineligible CERB payments and other benefits was paid to individuals. The report recommended that the government investigate the nature of another $27.4 billion in COVID-related spending. Overpayment recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 deceased and 434 children too young to be eligible. In addition, the report identified 51,409 employers that received $9.9 billion in CEWS payments that did not demonstrate a sufficient revenue drop to be eligible for the subsidy.
How could these billions of dollars be better spent for AMR research to help the Canadian population?
Infectious Diseases Specialist, Toronto General Hospital and Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the data that you just mentioned. I can say that we know that AMR is a huge issue in Canada. It's a global issue as well.
As everyone here has discussed, it's extremely important to have a Canadian focus, but we can't ignore the global impact. I often think of it like a swimming pool. Pardon the analogy, but if someone else pees in the swimming pool, we're still in the same swimming pool, so we have to think globally as well. Funding that you discussed can be focused locally, but we also need to use our leverage globally to help curb this issue.