Ontario Report (Continues)

observations from the

"Interested people who wish to be considered to make an oral presentation on Bill 102 should contact the Committee Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 23, 2006."

I am working on a written submission on this bill, which I will pass by you in the next several days.

I must say I am not encouraged by the fact the government's schedule of finishing public input on June 6 and then calling the bill on June 7. This may be an exercise in futility, but I think it would be necessary to go on record. My fear is that this bill is in actuality a cost-cutting bill which will impair patient access to prescription drugs.

Joseph Witalis

I sat in the Ontario Legislature on Tuesday night, expecting to observe the beginning of debate on Bill 102, An Act to amend the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act and the Ontario Drug Benefit Act.

I was extremely surprised to hear Jim Bradley, Liberal House Leader, introduce Government Motion 144 - a time allocation bill. The entire evening session consisted of debate on closing off debate on Bill 102; and, of course, the government side won the vote on the motion that took place at 9:30 at night. So were a number of MPPs, who all expected Second Reading debate on the bill.

Where it stands right now is:

Bill 102 is referred to the Standing Committee on Social Policy with public hearings planned for May 29 and 30, and June 3,4, and 5. I understand from Mr. Bradley's motion that the bill will be called on June 7, at which time debate will be limited and the question called. Very troubling was his call for third reading to be called on the same day, without further debate.

I may be in error about the vote being planned for June 7: I am a little bit unclear about the procedure. It may take a day to complete the time-allocated second / third reading process.

A number of opposition MPPs stood to oppose this choking off of debate, and questioned why the government would not take the winter session to get this bill right since it is so important to Ontarians. Some pointed out the lack of accountability of the Executive Officer, several read statements from pharmacists who see themselves as losing much in this legislation.  Some pointed to the lack of definition of some of the terms in the bill.

John Tory, Leader of the Official Opposition, did ask Minister Smitherman to take the term ''similar'' out of the interchangeability section of the bill, but Mr. Smitherman responded that the word ''similar'' only referred to cases where, for example, a funded medication becomes available in another form (he used the example of a capsule becoming availabble in tablet form). But much of the language remains vague, which was commented on by several Opposition members.

Anyone who is going to make a submission to the Standing Committee on Social Policy should go to http://www.ontl.on.ca and follow links to committee schedules and to the identity of the clerk who will receive written submissions or schedule in-person submisssions.

Joseph Witalis

<BACK to CHARGE Syndrome Canada newslettter; ontario report spring 2006