On the recordJune 23, 2003
What I said in several speeches is as follows: Where there is competition, there are like classes of drugs. They use the exclusion, they use a formulary to exclude or drive down prices. If you have 10 arthritis drugs, they pick two or three, which is what a formulary is all about, and they will pick those based on the cheapest price available and patent medicines. And they will exclude others so they do not have access to the market. I have never said in those cases the Canadian Government would use their authority to steal a patent. In fact, I have been very clear. I have said in the cases they would use it is where this is a unique drug. And if this is a unique drug, a breakthrough drug, or something that has no other competition, if you do not go along--we used the example of, I think, Cipro they were using as an example that is relevant to the case I made in the past--where there is a drug that does not have competition, that is, in fact, what they do. Leverage. In the other cases where there is competition, they have other leverage and they will not use the licensing of a patent or the stealing of a patent as a recourse. There are two different competitive or anticompetitive maneuvers by the Government of Canada: One having to do with drugs of which there are a variety in that class and a separate, the patent issue having to do where there is a drug with no real competitor. This is the case I have made repeatedly, not just last week but in years past.
Source
govinfo.gov




