Madam Speaker, the motion is fairly broad and the mover actually took some pains to narrow the focus of her motion. I am going to do the same. I have respect for the mover. The member for Yukon has a significant and specific interest in this subject.
The hon. member did take the time to focus on silicone breast implants and went on to say that this motion would be a voluntary motion where physicians and patients would voluntarily comply, that it would help with notification and the tracking of those individuals who had medical device problems.
If we look carefully at the issue of silicone breast implants we could say that a registry of these devices would have been a help in tracking those women who had them implanted. As it turned out it was consumer groups that took up the slack, women who had advocacy groups set up to take that information. Today that is still the case. Whether a government registry would have been the most cost efficient and best mechanism for this, I am not convinced. I leave that as a question I cannot answer.
As the member spoke about silicone breast implants, she suggested that it was the FDA in the U.S. that was really the instigator of our regulatory process here in Canada. Because this is a subject of great personal interest to me, I went back and researched very carefully the genesis of this problem. I am not sure I agree with the member on this specific issue. Let me tell this House what I found on silicone breast implants.
One of the very first individuals in the world who expressed concern about silicone breast implants was a scientist of our Canadian HPB. This scientist went to the manufacturer of the Meme implant and found manufacturing techniques that he said were completely unacceptable for a device to be implanted in the human body. He came home to Canada and made that public
over a fair portion of time. I have copies of his original memo saying that he had grave reservations and he advised the HPB to discontinue the certificate of compliance for the Meme implant.
What happened to that scientist? He was fired. The HPB, through pressures that went beyond the scientific data, fired him. That scientist, a Canadian, was not at all convinced that he was wrong and he went to the FDA in the United States and asked if it had any concerns. He was personally instrumental in getting the FDA to move toward the moratorium that subsequently was established.
If members who were not part of the debate in this House on the breast implant issue want to go back and look at a fascinating series of documents, I invite them to do that. It sounds like a spy story with manufacturers making claims, the health minister making promises, the regulators involved in the middle and finally, a big moratorium established. Most people know the subsequent events of the manufacturers having been accused of some inappropriate behaviour and lawsuits are now on the table.
I go back to the regulatory process. A scientist in a very good department said there was a problem and he was fired. What has happened to him since? Has he been honoured in Canada? Has he been elevated on a pedestal as a hero of the regulatory process? Not a chance. Today that scientist is still vilified by his record from HPB.
I think that someday Dr. Pierre Blais will stand in this Chamber to be recognized for his contribution to the health of women in this country. Someday he will be recognized for the visionary scientist that he was, the man who put his reputation on the line, who put his avocation on the line, who said that it is more important to tell the truth than it is to go through a process of saying that it is okay.
I direct all my comments to: Is our regulatory process in Canada effective and efficient? Is it the best regulatory process? Politicians, and I include myself in this group, should only be certain the regulators are doing their job.
I have watched with great interest BST. What is happening to BST? It has become a political hot potato. Forces from three different directions are coming at us on BST.
I simply say that when members of Parliament start to think they are scientists, that they are regulators, they are stepping beyond their purview. We, as politicians, should be making sure the regulatory process is perfect, as best as it can be. When the scientists make their decision to make certain that new data, new information is readily available to them, then politicians should get out of the regulatory process.
I considered this motion carefully. I have not decided fixed in my own mind that all the things this motion asks for would be suitable for Canada. I do believe that a registry of medical devices makes good sense and I will limit my support to that.