Bill C-64 · 44th Parliament · Justin Trudeau
Pharmacare Act
An Act respecting pharmacare
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedFeb. 29, 2024
- Debated in principleMay 7, 2024
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 3, 2024
- Passed the second chamberOct. 10, 2024
- Became lawOct. 10, 2024
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Justin TrudeauPrime Minister
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
What it set out to do
On 29 February 2024, the Minister of Health introduced Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare (Pharmacare Act), and it was given first reading. Bill C-64 sets out the principles that the Minister of Health is to consider when working towards the implementation of national universal pharmacare and provides the Minister with the power to make payments, in certain circumstances, in relation to the coverage of certain prescription drugs and related products. It also sets out certain powers and obligations of the Minister — including in relation to the preparation of a list to inform the development of a national formulary and in relation to the development of a national bulk purchasing strategy — and requires the Minister to publish a pan-Canadian strategy regarding the appropriate use of prescription drugs and related products. Finally, it provides for the establishment of a committee of experts to make certain recommendations.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
13% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,577 words introduced, 1,617 passed). A committee amended it.
moderate changeintent mostly kept
The bill kept its core purpose of advancing national pharmacare but changed permissive language to mandatory obligations on the Minister. A new requirement was added to table expert reports in Parliament.
- Changed permissive payments to mandatory payments to provinces and territories.
Before: “The Minister may, if the Minister has entered into an agreement with a province or territory to do so, make payments”
After: “The Minister must, if the Minister has entered into an agreement with a province or territory to do so, make payments”
- Changed permissive request for advice to mandatory request for advice from the Canadian Drug Agency.
Before: “The Minister may seek advice from the Canadian Drug Agency”
After: “The Minister must seek advice from the Canadian Drug Agency”
- Added obligation to table the expert committee report in Parliament.
After: “The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of Parliament on any of the first 20 days on which that House is sitting after the day on which the Minister receives the report.”
How precisely it is written
vagueChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act sets firm deadlines for the Minister to publish strategies and seek lists but leaves the substance of those documents and the meaning of key goals undefined. Broad principles and phrases such as 'appropriate use' and 'improve accessibility' dominate the operative sections.
Open to argument
“support the appropriate use of pharmaceutical products — namely, in a manner that prioritizes patient safety, optimizes health outcomes and reinforces health system sustainability”
The three-part standard is subjective and invites argument over what counts as optimization or sustainability.“improve the accessibility and affordability of prescription drugs and related products”
No numeric targets, benchmarks or objective tests are supplied to decide when improvement has occurred.“on any terms, that the Minister considers appropriate”
Payment conditions are left entirely to ministerial opinion rather than fixed statutory criteria.“a pan-Canadian strategy regarding the appropriate use of prescription drugs and related products”
The required content of the strategy is not enumerated, allowing wide discretion in scope and detail.
Clear-cut
“no later than the first anniversary of the day on which this Act receives royal assent”
A fixed calendar trigger removes doubt about when the obligation must be met.“no later than 30 days after the day on which this Act receives royal assent”
Exact time limit for establishing the committee of experts.“Indigenous peoples has the meaning assigned by the definition aboriginal peoples of Canada in subsection 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982”
Cross-reference supplies an external, objective definition.
Discretion. The Minister decides the content of strategies and lists, the terms of funding agreements, the timing and manner of payments from the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and the membership of the expert committee.
Challenging the law itself. The Act imposes duties on the Minister rather than prohibiting conduct, so doctrines of vagueness or overbreadth under s. 7 of the Charter would be difficult to invoke.
Disputing a charge under it. No offences or prohibitions are created for private persons, leaving little for an accused to contest.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
not effective
By October 2026, the Pharmacare Act has resulted in only four bilateral agreements covering contraceptives and diabetes medications in BC, Manitoba, PEI, and Yukon, falling far short of national universal pharmacare. Official expert review and analyses confirm stalled implementation, lack of new funding, and failure to achieve broader formulary or single-payer goals.
- Final Report of the National Pharmacare Committee of ExpertsreviewOnly four of 13 jurisdictions signed agreements for two drug classes, with bilateral negotiations proving challenging and time-consuming, and no comprehensive national system established.
- Legislative Summary of Bill C-64 (Library of Parliament)reviewPBO estimated first-phase costs at $1.9 billion over five years assuming no disruption to existing plans, but post-assent progress reports note limited rollout without broader evaluation of outcomes.
- Canada’s Pharmacare Act: Still a Work in Progress (Medscape, citing Health Canada)newsEarly feedback from two provinces shows positive patient impact on cost barriers, but rollout remains limited to 18% of Canadians with no expansion plans detailed.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.