House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
Health November 15th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I am actually not surprised that the question comes from that member. He is criticizing me for defending and standing up for the Canada Health Act and public health care in Canada. That party has a policy that it endorsed at its last national convention to privatize health care. Conservatives should stand up and say it is not so.
Question No. 187 November 14th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, on November 22, 2004, the Minister of Health announced the government’s intention to enter into discussions about options to provide compensation to those infected pre-1986 and post-1990. The government entered into discussions because it was the right and responsible thing to do.
The government voted in favour of the motion before the House of Commons concerning hepatitis C compensation for those infected pre-1986/post-1990, because the principle of the motion supported the actions we have taken and allowed us to reaffirm our commitment of November 22, 2004.
Discussions with legal counsel representing those infected began immediately after the Minister of Health’s November announcement, and are ongoing. The parties have held a number of discussions in the months before the motion was adopted by the House of Commons and since.
It must be understood that compensation can only be made once the necessary medical information about those infected is available and the discussions between all parties have concluded.
As part of gathering this necessary medical information, we anticipate that class counsel for the pre-1986/post-1990 class will send a letter before year’s end to the pre-1986/post-1990 class. The letter seeks consent to obtain medical information from the pre-1986/post-1990 class in an effort to gather information needed to move discussions forward. The letter demonstrates that all parties involved are committed to dealing with this issue as quickly as possible.
We are working as quickly as possible to reach a successful conclusion that takes into account the actual and legal circumstances of the claimants. The negotiations are addressing these issues and all parties continue to work together in good faith to provide the necessary information upon which to base a compensation framework.
Health November 14th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, that is certainly not the policy of the government. The fact is that it is the policy of the opposition, on the other hand, and its members have been saying for years that they want to end the role of the Canada Health Act in health care. They want to end the federal role in health care. They actually want to have nothing to do with public health care and privatize it all.
Health November 14th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that we stand for strengthened public health care. We want to make sure that we end double-dipping by doctors. We want to make sure that we actually put a stop to privatization. In fact, it is ironic that this is coming from the privatizers on the other side, whose current leader has always wanted to gut the Canada Health Act and end the role of Health Canada in health care in Canada.
Question No. 211 November 4th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, PMPRB, is an independent, quasi-judicial, administrative agency, created in 1987 under the Patent Act.
The PMPRB is responsible for regulating the prices that patentees charge, known as the “factory-gate” price, for prescription and non-prescription patented drugs sold in Canada to wholesalers, hospitals, pharmacies and others, for human and veterinary use, to ensure that they are not excessive. The PMPRB regulates the price of each patented drug product sold in Canada including each strength of dosage form.
The PMPRB regulates the first sale of a patented drug in Canada from the manufacturer. While a manufacturer’s sale of a patented drug product to any pharmacy in Canada falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the PMPRB, the subsequent sale of the product from the pharmacy to a consumer does not. Thus the circumstances of such pharmaceutical sales (i.e. whether to a resident of Canada or a person outside Canada) as in the case of cross border drug sales is outside the PMPRB’s mandate.
Cross-Border Drug Sales November 1st, 2005
Madam Chair, I am somewhat confused as to the position of the opposition benches. We have the opposition critic saying that we should not be moving at this point and that we should be sending this issue to the committee and the committee should be spending time talking about it. On the other hand, we have the member who just asked the question asking why are we not moving quickly.
I believe the opposition members need to sort out what their position is. I guess the kind of confusion that has reigned in the ranks of the opposition on this issue still reigns unchanged.
I want to tell hon. members that we are consulting very quickly. We want to make sure that the legislation on bulk exports is introduced by the end of November.
Cross-Border Drug Sales November 1st, 2005
Madam Chair, the implant issue is being dealt with by the committee. I also understand that a panel has been dealing with it. The health regulator, which is independent of the minister, would make that decision based on the evidence before that regulator, and the panel's recommendations would be taken into account.
I understand from the way the process works that the regulator, Health Canada, which is independent in the process of either approving or not approving breast implants, can take into account the opinion of the panel but is not bound by that opinion. Let me respond in that fashion.
On the other issue, I know we in Health Canada are eager to share as much information as we can with the committee under the circumstances on those issues. I always take my critic's questions, advice and suggestions very seriously.
Cross-Border Drug Sales November 1st, 2005
Madam Chair, I welcome the intervention by the hon. parliamentary secretary. Our intent is to ensure that we are able to have a continuing secure and affordable supply of drugs for Canadians. One way to deal with that is to deal with the issue of bulk exports and to create a supply network to monitor the drugs available at any particular time or the quantity available in the market so we are able to act expeditiously to deal with these issues.
On the issue of prescriptions on the Internet, there are issues around Telehealth. We know that within Canada nurse practitioners are engaged in their practice under the supervision of a doctor. That is an appropriate connection to have for these kinds of processes.
The hon. member knows well that the medical practice in Canada is intensely supervised and monitored by the regulating bodies in the country. They deal with unethical practices. One of the reasons they have not been able to deal with the practices of pharmacists or doctors who supply drugs on the Internet to U.S. residents is because it is cost prohibitive to even begin to gather the evidence to deal with those issues.
Cross-Border Drug Sales November 1st, 2005
I know the hon. member is trying to heckle me. I welcome the heckling, but I would be happy to respond to all the concerns he has raised.
Let me deal with one issue at a time. He raised the issue of the sales levelling off. The fact is that sales in the last three or four years have multiplied many times. The last figures I checked several month ago, sales were about $1 billion a year through the Internet. I am concerned at this time about that issue, but more important, I am concerned about the issue of bulk exports.
There are several bills currently before the United States Congress and there is a very good likelihood of one of those bills being passed. When I visited Washington D.C. several months ago, Senator Vitter from Louisiana told us very clearly that it was their intent to ensure that our pricing regime, which provides affordable drugs to Canadians, was targeted. They want to dismantle and demolish that pricing regime.
Therefore, it is important for us to act. We have consulted on these issues. I understand from the hon. members present here that the committee has been engaged in some other adventures in terms of determining other issues while it could have been utilizing its time more appropriately, perhaps dealing with this issue on its own.
Cross-Border Drug Sales November 1st, 2005
Madam Chair, I must confess I find it very difficult to discern the hon. member's position from time to time on this issue. He has changed his position innumerable times. It would be very difficult for me to document that now, but I would be happy to go through Hansard and provide examples to the hon. member.
I believe it is incumbent upon us as government to act in as speedy a fashion as possible to ensure that the issue of bulk exports is dealt with right away.