the cybercoma is quite taken aback by your purposeful disregard for the Canadian Health Act and just how federalism works!
The NDP proposed a universal framework for pharmacare coverage and not a mish-mash of different policies in each province with the power of centralized taxation....you know, the exact same thing that exists for healthcare funding across the country that guarantees no matter where you are in the country you receive the same standard of care.
How partisan of you to pretend like you don't realize that.
partisan? Says you, a long-standing supporter of the NDP! In any case, this is, of course, simply re-cycled tripe that was left on the perogy table last fall. It's laughable how you dance between the labeling 'Universal Pharmacare' &, as you weaselWord, "a universal framework"!

My party is not misleading Canadians by suggesting the bill’s passage would have ushered in pharmacare. It would have been a key step in that direction.
by the by, what's the verdict on backbencher bills and their ability to (as in no ability to) actually spend money, hey?
and... the NDP is being called out on their outright hypocrisy in arguing that their bill C-213 would act on the 2019 report from the government’s advisory panel on pharmacare - as chaired by former Ontario Liberal health minister Eric Hoskins. It was this panel's final report that recommended:
Ottawa work with provinces and territories on a pharmacare system reflecting the five principles of: public, portable, comprehensive, universal, and accessible. The report also recommended the federal government “enshrine the principles and national standards of pharmacare in federal legislation, separate and distinct from the Canada Health Act, to demonstrate its ongoing commitment to partnership on national pharmacare and provide for a dedicated funding arrangement.”
so which is it, as you say within/a part of the Canada Health Act... or per the Hoskin's panel recommendation, separate and distinct from the Canada Health Act? Which is it, hey?