QUESTION PERIOD — Health
National Pharmacare
October 2, 2024
Senator Gold, Bill C-64 contains a critical drafting error where the government does not have the legal authority to spend money on emergency contraceptives and insulin. Under the principles of statutory interpretation, by using the term “prescription drug” rather than “drug,” the bill is excluding non-prescription drugs, which, by definition, do not require a prescription. These drugs cannot be classified as a related product, as that has a specific technical meaning of a device or supply. Will the government support a simple amendment to provide the legal spending authority on emergency contraceptives and insulin to remove any legal risks regarding the integrity of the program?
First of all, thank you for your question.
Let me be clear: The government does not share your interpretation, Senator Quinn. The government’s position on this historic piece of legislation, which is currently being studied in committee and will proceed to clause-by-clause consideration — it will be of no surprise to hear this from me, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to speak to all senators on this matter — is that this bill, this important, historic framework bill, should be passed with dispatch and without amendment. It is a framework within which bilateral agreements will be negotiated and concluded, and Canadians will benefit from this historic step toward a pharmacare system. With the greatest of respect, the government will not support an amendment.
Senator Gold, you may want to check with the departmental officials on what I have said.
I have a second question: Non-insured health benefits include coverage for diabetes related to medication for First Nations people and Inuit under the age of 64, but not for Métis and other Canadians. Why, going into the pharmacare, would the federal government not raise the floor as the starting point so that all Canadians regardless of status start from the same basis with regard to access and availability of diabetes medication?
This issue has been raised. You have raised it, and it has been raised before committee. It will apparently continue to be raised. It is the government’s position that the bill’s framework, which was carefully considered, carefully negotiated and carefully drafted, is the right step, and this is the right time to take that step without amendment.
