Ontario Hansard

February 21, 2005

ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE


Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Premier. Mr. Rick Sgroi of Richmond Hill will die without enzyme replacement therapy. His wife, Mara, wrote you a letter, and I want to quote from that letter: "It has now been a month since my last letter to you and ... I have not had a personal reply from you." She goes on to say, "I have stopped asking for your compassion -- you have none.... I say, for shame to you all when costs and discrimination dictate who lives or who dies. I charge you with pulling the plug on the life support system of Fabry patients and that is a premeditated criminal act!"

This is from Mara, whose husband, Rick, will die without enzyme replacement therapy. I'm going to ask you -- because they're watching this afternoon and they know that I'm asking this question -- to stand in your place, look at them, and tell them why you aren't prepared to instruct the Minister of Health to do what has to be done to ensure that Rick has the medical attention that he needs to live.


Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think obviously we all express concern around patients who are feeling in these circumstances. We also have some responsibilities that are very challenging from time to time. This is one of those.

We're operating under a regime, frankly, with respect to the honourable member, that his party helped bring in in our country, and that is utilizing a common drug review so that all provinces and territories could have the benefit of working together with a view toward determining the clinical efficacy of any product before it's listed on our formulary. This is the process that was established. The company didn't like the way it worked the first time around, and upon application and at their instigation, a further review is ongoing.

I think the thing that has shocked us is that the company has decided to treat different Canadians in different fashions. There has been an unequal view on their part. They began offering this product on a compassionate basis. I believe that if they believe as fervently in their product as they claim to, they should continue to support it while this process is ongoing.


The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I want to put the supplementary back to the Premier. I know you to be a decent man, someone who cares deeply about your hometown -- about our hometown. I want to put a face on this problem, the face of Carolyn Auger of Ottawa. She has worked hard. She has played by the rules. Her illness is debilitating. Her illness is life-threatening. At this tragic time in her life, she needs the help of her community, she needs the help of her provincial government.

I want to make a direct appeal to you. It's never too late to do the right thing. Premier, would you step in and solve this problem for Carolyn Auger and the very, very small number of citizens who are dealing with this tragic illness? Would you do that, Premier?


The Speaker: The Minister of Health.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The honourable member knows from his time in government that every single day in the province of Ontario pharmaceutical companies put product on offer to patients. But obviously, before we make decisions that say we're able to support it through our government's formulary, those products are to go through a process that is science-based, that helps to determine the clinical efficacy of any product. This is an essential step in an environment where there is absolutely no alternative to science.

1530

The reality is that the honourable member suggests that politics and emotion are what should make up decisions around this, but obviously, given the number of products that are available on any given day, it's absolutely essential that we work in the process that that party helped to bring in while in government. That's the common drug review. In the meantime, we say to that company one more time: If you believe as fervently in your product as you claim to, you should continue to offer it on a compassionate basis.


Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I cannot believe that the Premier refused to answer my question.

Interjections.


The Speaker: I presume your point of order is asking for a late show on this.

Mr. Klees: Point of order --

The Chair: You're asking for a late show, and I understand, but you did not ask the question yourself. So I'll have to proceed in asking for a new question. Could this point of order -- we are encroaching on question period time.