John Manley

[Patent Drugs, April 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition seems to be very nervous about this. At least he is now acknowledging that he supported a review of the legislation. It is indeed as he says scheduled to take effect no later than the fourth anniversary of the passage of the bill which would be the spring of 1997 as he indicates.

I think it would be fair to say that it is appropriate for the government to monitor the results in the areas I have mentioned in the course of performing this review. Perhaps we will have a look at the results of that monitoring and will be able to give a precise answer to his question later on.

Let me say this as well. If anyone wants to talk about what is causing instability in the investment climate in this country, one does not need to look beyond the Leader of the Opposition.

[Patent Drugs, April 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, we are very aware of our commitments under GATT and NAFTA. That is the basis of our position.

I want to make perfectly clear to the House and to Canadians that this government is not going to be blackmailed by threats. We made one simple commitment during the election campaign on Bill C-91 and that was that we would review it.

As I explained yesterday both here and to the media, that review consists of looking at the impact on prices of prescription medications and on looking, second, at the fulfilment of obligations made to the previous government with respect to investment and research and development.

If the Leader of the Opposition considers it to be inappropriate for governments to monitor performance resulting from the passage of important pieces of legislation like that, why does he not get up and say that companies no matter what kind of companies they are can do whatever they want? We believe that the best interests of Canadians need to count first. That is what the government is endeavouring to do.

[Patent Drugs, April 28th, 1994]

Certainly, Mr. Speaker. I withdraw that word.

[Patent Drugs, April 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I think it would be rather difficult to understand if I did not use that word. I would never want to give the impression that the Hon. Leader of the Opposition is a hypocrite.

[Patent Drugs, April 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that the government has already announced its intention to keep our international commitments, as we signed the new GATT agreement and NAFTA.

Moreover, I want to remind the Leader of the Opposition of the provisions of C-91 which he supported. These provisions include a clause to review this legislation. It is already in C-91. The Bloquistes supported this bill. It is more than a little hypocritical for the Leader of the Opposition to say now that the bill is being reviewed.

[Defence Industry Productivity Program, April 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to assure the member that as was announced in the budget, the broadening of the terms of the DIPP is being worked on at the present time.

The member is aware of the financial limitations the government has. That is why we are also looking not only at making the DIPP contributions repayable in their entirety, but creating a revolving fund. Therefore not only do we aid projects that are directed at defence conversion presently, but we build a fund based on commercial viability that will sustain such projects and those companies that are involved in those sectors of our industry into the future.

[Defence Industry Productivity Program, April 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to hear the hon. member refer to that project, because the rules regulating DIPP will be expanded so as to include conversion projects for the defence industry.

[Pharmaceutical Industry, April 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this is the same kind of exaggerated hyperbole that we have heard on both sides of this debate for too long.

We are trying to deal with the facts and we are going to determine what the facts are. The facts will indicate what policy direction the government should take in the future.

I want the hon. member to understand, because he was not here when Bill C-91 was passed, that law contains within it a statutory review that would occur within four years of its enactment in 1993. That is already in the bill. There is nothing new about saying that we will review legislation passed by the previous government.

[Pharmaceutical Industry, April 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that I have no interest in lobbyists' efforts. What I care about the most is Canadians' interests.

We promised during the election campaign that we would review Bill C-91, and that is what we explained again yesterday. We are interested in drug prices and in the investment and R and D track record here in Canada.

[Electronic Highway, April 25th, 1994]

As I just said, Mr. Speaker, we have representatives from all regions and also from all provinces of Canada. This committee has members who deal with cultural issues every day.