The future of the NDP’s supply-and-confidence deal with the Liberals could hinge on competing proposals for pharmacare legislation the parties exchanged over the weekend, NDP health critic Don Davies said Tuesday.
Davies said that one of the last issues still outstanding in the bipartisan negotiations on pharmacare has to do with who pays for the medication — private and public insurers or the federal government as the sole price negotiator and buyer.
The New Democrats are pressing for a single-payer pharmacare system, which they argue would get better results because as sole purchaser, the federal government could use bulk-buying to push down drug prices.
New Democrats say the Liberals have balked at adopting the single-payer model because of the cost, which could amount to billions of dollars.
“Up to now, they’ve not wanted to commit to single-payer,” Davies said. “Of course, we’ve drawn a red line in the sand that we have to build on that system.”
The introduction of pharmacare legislation was a condition the NDP set when it joined the federal Liberals in the supply-and-confidence agreement. The agreement sees New Democrats support the minority government on key votes in the House of Commons to stave off an early election, in exchange for movement on NDP policy priorities.
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh told reporters Tuesday that if the Liberals “break the agreement” over pharmacare, New Democrats will be negotiating key votes individually with the government going forward.
“If they break the agreement, they walk away from the agreement, there is nothing that they can expect from us then,” he said. “We will negotiate every vote at a time.”
The federal government has agreed to table pharmacare legislation by March 1.
Davies said he has been communicating daily with Health Minister Mark Holland through email and text messages.
“We exchanged proposals on the weekend, and you know we’re getting close to seeing if we have an agreement or not,” Davies told reporters. “I would say we’re pretty close to finding out if we have an agreement or not.”
According to the original terms of the supply-and-confidence agreement, the government was supposed have legislation drafted by now outlining the principles of pharmacare and a plan to start covering some drugs by 2025. The parties agreed recently to extend the deadline to March 1 and Holland has said he has “every confidence” his government can deliver on time.
According to the wording of the supply-and-confidence agreement, the government would not need “to develop a national formulary of essential medicines and bulk purchasing plan by the end of the agreement.”
.JPG?crop=1.777xh:h;*,*&downsize=510px:*510w)
NDP health critic Don Davies says Canadians should learn soon whether his party and the Liberals can come to terms on pharmacare.
Davies said New Democrats are not calling for national drug coverage for all medicines all at once. He said the party is content to start with certain drugs and then slowly ramp up coverage.
“We’re prepared to start incrementally. You know, one of the proposals was to start with essential medicines,” he said.
Davies spoke after attending a rally of health care advocates Wednesday. Frontline health-care workers, patients, labour leaders and advocates gathered on Parliament Hill to push against the privatization of health care and call for universal pharmacare.
Canada is the only developed nation in the world with a publicly funded universal system that does not cover prescription drugs.
Singh also attended the rally. At a news conference, he dismissed claims that New Democrats are calling on the government to begin funding a pharmacare program in March.
“This is absolutely Liberal spin,” Singh said. “They know what we are asking for is a legal framework … We would never ask for the entire budget to be in place.”
Although Singh downplayed the need for a budget commitment in March, an NDP source who was not authorized to speak publicly told CBC in January that the NDP had asked the Liberals to begin covering several life-saving drugs for conditions like diabetes.
In 2019, a federal advisory council led by former Ontario health minister Eric Hoskins estimated that universal, single-payer public pharmacare would cost the federal government $3.5 billion annually if it started by covering essential medicines, and $15.3 billion once it was fully implemented.
Holland was in Yellowknife Tuesday signing two health-care agreements with the government of the Northwest Territories. He declined to comment on the talks with New Democrats, saying he prefers not to negotiate in public.
“Once we table legislation, we will be able to talk about all of the various machinations,” he said. “I am at a bit of a disadvantage when the NDP is in a position to share all of their internal thoughts, and I am not able to do the same.”
Holland did say the pending legislation will not have everything some are calling for and the government is not in a position to take on massive costs. Holland said that at the conclusion of the negotiations, he’ll be able to explain his party’s position.