OTTAWA – The House of Commons passed a bill Wednesday its supporters say will help get inexpensive and badly needed medication to underdeveloped countries.
Two Liberal MPs voted against the NDP bill, and several others abstained. But with the help of some Conservative MPs, Bill C-393 passed with 172 votes for, and 111 against.
The bill would amend Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime, which, despite being on the books for more than half a decade, has only been used by one company to send one HIV/AIDS shipment to another country.
Critics say that paltry statistic is a testament to a system overwhelmed by red tape.
As it stands, the regime allows for a generic pharmaceutical company to apply for a permit to produce a patented medicine only after it has received an order. The key change in C-393 is a "one-licence agreement" which allows a generic pharmaceutical company to produce and distribute as much of a given drug as it pleases without having to re-apply and sift through piles of red tape each time a developing country expresses interest.
Earlier Wednesday, the bill drew hip-hop artist K’naan from a California recording studio to Parliament Hill to lend his support to the initiative.
"This is a very good moment for Canada," said the Somalia-born singer and Juno Award winner. "We’re asking for Canada to step up and to do something – not just anything. This is the right thing."
NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis introduced Bill C-393, but it became an orphan last year when she left federal politics for an unsuccessful bid to become mayor of Winnipeg. Her colleague, Brian Masse, shepherded the bill through committee but parliamentary regulations wouldn’t allow for him to officially sponsor the bill.
But in a rare demonstration of co-operation in the House of Commons, the parties offered unanimous support for NDP MP Paul Dewar to sponsor the bill.
Still, there was opposition.
Liberal MP Marc Garneau was briefly successful in removing the one-licence clause from the bill – a decision advocates said undermined and "gutted" the bill. The decision was later overturned with votes on NDP amendments during final debate on the bill last week.
Garneau’s reasoning, supported by Conservative MPs also studying the bill, was that a single licence ultimately would give generic drug companies too much freedom and infringe on intellectual property rights.
Another argument against the bill focuses on the cost of Canadian generics, which are among the world’s most expensive.
But that’s no reason to derail the bill, said Richard Elliott, executive director of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.
Rather, Canadian companies should be given the opportunity to compete.
"The point is, what will generic manufacturers operating under the improved Access to Medicines regime be able to offer by way of affordable prices in developing-country markets?" he said. "In fact, the one instance when the regime was used . . . (the company) matched the price that two Indian generic manufacturers were offering."
Approximately 15 million people worldwide need antiretroviral drugs to control their HIV infections; only about 5.2 million are getting them now.
Most of those drugs come from Indian generic drug manufacturers producing medicines dating mostly from before 2005, which are now beginning to lose their effectiveness as the virus mutates and develops resistance.
The flow of generic drugs from India has slashed the cost of treatment for HIV from $10,000 per patient per year to $100 or less, enabling millions of HIV patients in Africa to get treatment, Elliott said.
Worldwide, 32 nations have adopted laws similar to Canada’s access regime. To date, however, none of them have used its law to export a single pill to a developing nation.
Comments