Health committee  Yes. It is through the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance that all public drug plans coordinate their purchasing—their price negotiation to subsequently purchase.

Health committee  Yes, it is true that they jointly negotiate.

Health committee  There are two parts there. First, this does not create a new role for Canada's drug agency in the realm of price negotiations. I want to be very clear about that. The bill sets up a future conversation about the future of pharmacare. Now, as part of that, the bill sets out that the minister may request advice from Canada's drug agency on two elements to develop expert advice to support that conversation.

Health committee  The pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance acts on behalf of all of its members, all provinces and territories in Canada, and, in doing, so coordinates the purchase for their public drug plans, and, indeed, some federal drug plans are a part of that as well. It has the ability to conduct those price negotiations.

Health committee  It is the coordinated price negotiation upon which the letters of intent that are signed at that process are used by public drug plans to—

Health committee  Not at all. What the national bulk purchasing section of Bill C-64 refers to is—I'm just seeking a term here—more improvements in the existing price negotiation steps that are taken in the pharmaceutical management system in Canada today: Where might improvements be sought? How might that be affected?

Health committee  The activities of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance are ongoing now and continuing, and what the bill references is the development of advice that would support a conversation among provinces, territories, indigenous peoples and other partners and stakeholders about where to go next and what might happen in the future development of national pharmacare.

Health committee  That was generally part of their mandate as a health technology association; you're correct. This is about the minister's being able to seek a specific piece of advice about where in Canada, as part of future pharmacare, coordinated price negotiation or improvements might be made, because it is an important element of pharmacare as a total package.

Health committee  No, that's not at all what I was implying.

Health committee  I apologize for that.

Health committee  That sounds better. No, that is not at all what I was suggesting. I was simply stating two parts of the response to the question. The first is the existing coordination of price negotiation that provinces and territories have set up through the existing pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, and I was simply distinguishing that from the advice the minister, under Bill C-64, would be seeking from Canada's drug agency to suggest a future development or a move forward.

Health committee  With respect to what Bill C-64 commits to, which is the generation of advice, upon request, to the minister, that would not be being continued, because it doesn't exist yet.

Health committee  I think the essence of the response given last time when we gave witness testimony was referencing the fact that the nature of policy development is not necessarily linear and continuous, such that it has a defined start and end. That is all a way of saying that the process of developing something, all of the options that got assessed and the advice that was provided to the minister during the course of it—this was actually prior to my joining the unit itself—has been going for more than two years.

Health committee  Drafting of legislation and all the work that goes into that tends to occur concurrently with the policy development, because the two go hand in hand.

Health committee  There was nothing anomalous about this process. When you're developing legislation or you're developing the policy advice that will lead to the instrument, the legislation, you do work with all the elements of the public service that support legislative drafting through that process.