SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 30

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 14, 2022 11:00AM
  • Feb/14/22 5:01:31 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order. There are two parts to this bill, and it is a very small bill. One part speaks to spending money to purchase rapid tests and the other paragraph speaks to distributing those tests to provinces and territories. This member has not spoken to this bill at all during the five minutes that he has already spoken.
64 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:07:27 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Mr. Speaker, throughout the pandemic, we have been able to provide the provinces and territories with the necessary rapid tests, PPE and vaccines. What the provinces are asking for are additional rapid tests. This is based on the demand from provinces and territories. I myself stood in line during the holidays in the cold to get a rapid test because my family did catch COVID over the holidays, and I know that parents want to make sure they have a rapid test at home in case their child is exposed. What we are asking for is support for the provinces based on what they need. Would the member agree that it is really important to give parents and those of us who want to visit loved ones in long-term care facilities that tool so that we can make sure not to infect someone if we become exposed?
148 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:33:29 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I am enjoying this trip down memory lane. In fact, the member is correct that we did call for rapid tests two years ago, but I do not see the relevance here.
39 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:34:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, if you review Hansard, I am sure you will find that I am one of the few people who is talking about rapid tests during today's debate. I do appreciate the points of order though, because it gives me an opportunity to collect my thoughts. On January 5, the member for Thornhill, the Conservative Party transport critic, sent a letter to the Minister of Transport asking that he consider rapid tests as an alternative to the new requirement for cross-border truckers to be vaccinated. Here we have time after time Conservatives calling on the government to get more rapid tests and to do it as quickly as possible, yet today they seem to be in a position where they want to push back against that, delay it and slow it down as much as they can. The member for Calgary Nose Hill is quoted as saying, “We need immediate action to deploy widespread rapid testing for all Canadians”. Conservative after Conservative, at some point in the last month or two, have been calling on this government to do this and to do it as expeditiously as possible. However, now we get to the point where we have a piece of legislation before us to authorize the government to make those purchases and in turn supply the rapid tests to provinces and territories, yet there is opposition from the Conservatives about doing this. I cannot help but wonder why. We have heard so many times about not politicizing things and not politicizing the debate on this. The Conservatives have said that repeatedly today, but they seem to be doing exactly that, which I find very confusing. I want to address a point that has been brought up by a couple of Conservatives. The member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon brought this up. He asked why there are two bills and why this was not put into the budget implementation act. I find it ironic, I must admit, that the Conservatives are now asking why we did not create an omnibus bill when they usually complain that we are doing that and we should not be doing that. There is actually a really simple answer for that. The answer is that the first allocation of funding in the budget implementation act was a result of the fall economic statement. In the fall economic statement, it was determined x number of dollars was required for rapid tests. When the statement was delivered and when the bill was introduced and tabled, we had not yet become aware of the omicron variant and what that was going to expose the world to in terms of a new higher demand for rapid tests. Once that comes along and we discover we need more tests and the demand will increase, the default is that we need a new piece of legislation to get more rapid tests into the hands of the Canadian government so they can be deployed to the provinces and territories. There is a very simple explanation for why this has been done in two different bills. The Conservatives want to paint it as some kind of sinister attempt to fool somebody or to try to trick people by putting this into two bills for some reason. This bill is very straightforward and it is very simple. There are two clauses. It does not even consist of more than three sentences in total. There is one sentence in the introduction, one sentence in the first clause and one sentence in the second clause. The first clause authorizes the Minister of Health to make the payments necessary to secure rapid tests. The second clause allows the minister to deploy those rapid tests to provinces and territories throughout Canada so that provinces can work to make sure that the supplies are available in terms of rapid testing. I cannot help but wonder why there is this cry from across the way about division and political opportunity when we are literally talking about the simplest bill I have ever seen before the House in the six years I have been here. It is very straightforward. It could easily pass quickly and could be moved along so we can get those resources into the hands of provinces and territories. However, we are still hearing the rhetoric from across the way that we have not delivered. This government has delivered millions of rapid tests and put them in the hands of the provinces and the authorities that distribute them. Wherever we can, we have made sure that there were opportunities for those who needed rapid tests to have them, paid for by federal dollars, essentially being paid for by all Canadians, which is what is so critically important when it comes to anything related to our health care. This is a bill that specifically asks for that and we are being accused of trying to somehow sow division and a create political opportunity when this is the simplest bill and the easiest piece of legislation to understand. It really comes down, in my opinion, to whether or not Conservatives want them, yes or no. I have heard mixed messages from across the way all day long. The leader in the House for the Conservatives said, “Throughout the pandemic, the Conservative Party has consistently and persistently called for greater access to rapid tests for all Canadians.” He even went as far as to say that he supports rapid tests and this bill. However, then I heard the member for Cumberland—Colchester question whether or not rapid tests are even effective and scientifically proven. He said, “I find it very unusual that it has now become an absolute urgency...without any consideration at all”. Let us not forget that this is from the same party that days and weeks ago called on the government to have these rapid tests yesterday. He then went on to say that this is without any consideration for “the changes in science we have seen in this dynamic situation.” He even said that there is a need “to have a look at the science”. The member for Cumberland—Colchester actually said that. One of the Conservative Party's senior representatives on the health committee said that. He is questioning the science of rapid tests. This leaves me to wonder where the Conservatives are on this. Do they believe in rapid tests and think they effectively work or do they question the science, demanding that we look at the science of it, as though somehow the health committee of Parliament is going to better understand the science than the people who have authorized the use of these tests in Canada? I find it absolutely remarkable. The member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon said in his speech today, “in my province”, which is British Columbia, “the public health officer is telling us that, for the majority of the population, they are not needed anymore”. We have the Conservative House leader saying we need them, want them and support them, but Conservatives just do not like the way the government is doing it. We have the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan saying the exact same thing, but he never brought up in his speech the need for them or questioned this bill whatsoever. We have the member for Cumberland—Colchester questioning the science and validity of rapid tests, and then we have the member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon saying they are not even needed anymore. I am sorry if I am a little confused as to where the Conservative Party is coming from on this and if my default reaction, as usual, unfortunately, is to assume that its members are trying to play games, but their actions and words in the House only lead one to conclude this. I have been watching. I have been here for the entire debate and there is no absolutely no consistency. It is as though Conservatives are trying filibuster this and make it last as long as it can. That is not going to benefit Canadians, it is not going to benefit the people who need these rapid tests and it is not going to be a good partner with the provinces and territories that deliver these supplies across the country. At the end of the day, all it is going to do is slow this government down so that the opposition can say that we did not get them quick enough. I am sorry I end up at this place where I assume this, but it is based on everything that I have heard here today. I appreciate the time to contribute to this debate today. I think these tests are absolutely critical to making sure we have the supplies in the hands of the provinces and territories, the health agencies they work with, and the various partners that will help distribute them. As members will recall, a short six to eight weeks ago we did not know we would need this many tests. Suddenly we do, and we do not know what we are going to need six, seven or eight weeks from now. We need to make sure that we have these rapid tests in hand so if there is another variant like omicron, or something similar, we are prepared to make sure we can deploy rapid tests to the various organizations that will help us distribute them throughout the country. I am very supportive of moving forward with the motion before us right now, which is to program the bill so that it properly gets to a vote later on this evening and so that we can pass it here, allow it to take its course and be passed by the Senate. Then we can get to a point where we can purchase these rapid tests and make sure they get into the hands of Canadians throughout the country.
1679 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:46:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent. I have certainly always enjoyed our discussions. I just spoke for 15 minutes on this bill. The first question I got was not even about the bill, but about what another member of Parliament said, who is completely entitled to his opinion. It differs from mine, but it is what it is. The point is that this bill today is about rapid tests, and whether or not we should expend the money in order to buy rapid tests so we can use them throughout the country. Just as with every speech before this, it is regrettable that the first question to come from the Conservatives to me is again about an issue that has nothing to do with the bill.
130 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:47:59 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I am going to make my colleague happy and speak about the bill. I am going to tell him that we want these rapid tests and that we support this bill. Madam Speaker, a member's mic is on.
41 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:53:30 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, we have a long and inexplicable wait in getting access to rapid tests in this country. I am as sympathetic as anyone to the fact that there could be bureaucratic delays, but I do not understand why this bill is only coming to us now. Does the hon. member have any light to cast on this?
58 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:55:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I am going to indulge my hon. colleague from the other side to keep this on point. Probably the most baffling thing to me is why we even have a programming motion on this particular bill. We raised the issue of rapid testing and having rapid tests nearly two years ago, in April of 2020. Today we are bringing this up, and there suddenly seems to be a mad panic for rapid tests. We have been calling for rapid tests for nearly two years. Something has not significantly changed, in my mind, that suddenly today, of all days, rapid tests should be the thing we talk about in this place. There are a host of other things going on in this place that we perhaps should be talking about, but here we are talking about a programming motion on a bill to approve rapid tests. Could the member please explain to me what the issue is with the rapid tests that makes this so important today?
168 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 5:56:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate, although I would have preferred to speak about other matters that are impacting Canadians, such as the runaway inflation that is affecting all Canadian families. However, as a result of this government's complacency, today we have to discuss a motion seeking to muzzle MPs on a matter that concerns us all. Let us look at the elements one by one, starting with rapid tests, since that is what we are debating. The government wants to purchase rapid tests, which it will distribute to the provinces, and they in turn will distribute them to Canadians. On this side of the House, we have been asking the government to obtain an adequate supply of rapid tests for almost two years. If I could make a joke, I recollect very well my colleague for Kingston and the Islands, who quotes a lot of members on this side, talking about rapid tests a few weeks ago. It is sad to me that he has not quoted me, because I have talked about rapid tests for the last 18 months. I would have welcomed a quote from 18 months ago talking about rapid tests, because everybody on this side supports rapid tests. We were the first to ask the government to procure rapid tests. We must have these rapid tests because they are one of the tools that give Canadians a little more freedom and hope for a return to a more normal life, living with the effects of COVID-19 every day. Dr. Tam recently said that it may be time to start re-evaluating the health guidelines imposed on us, 75% to 80% of which fall within provincial rather than federal jurisdiction. I will come back to that later. Rapid tests, along with vaccines, mask wearing, regular handwashing and physical distancing when in contact with someone for more than 15 minutes, are some of the measures that will help us get through the pandemic. For months now, almost two years, in fact, we on this side of the House have been in favour of the government purchasing rapid tests for Canadians. We are talking here about buying 450 million rapid tests at a cost of $2.5 billion, which is a tad more than the parliamentary paper budget. This government has been in power since 2015, for six and a half years, and it promised to run just three small deficits before balancing the budget in 2019. It ultimately scrapped that plan for sound management of public funds. We will not sign a blank cheque for this government to buy tests. We will not stand by as though all is well and we trust the government to spend $2.5 billion. We have a duty as parliamentarians to be thorough. We have a duty to ensure that the money that Canadian taxpayers send to the federal government is spent appropriately and correctly for the common good. Over the past six and a half years that this government has been in power, it has proven itself to have no regard for controlling spending. We are in favour of buying rapid tests and supplying them to the provinces so that they can get to Canadians. We do, however, have a job to do. That is why, although we agree with buying rapid tests and getting them to Canadians, we have some serious concerns that need to be considered. We cannot abide a gag order on a $2.5‑billion purchase. I remind members that the proposed measures apply to purchases dating back to January 1, yet the government is claiming that these measures need to be adopted urgently. Let us also remember that this is our third week since the House came back. Why wait until week three to invoke closure when they could have done it some other time? As the House leader of the official opposition said, he spoke with his counterparts from the governing party and the other opposition parties in hopes of finding a way to debate this bill properly in the House, send it to committee to give experts their say, and then come back to the House and wrap it up by Friday, all by the book. If Bill C‑10 is debated today, if the closure motion is adopted and we go through the usual steps, we will end up voting on the bill at third reading around 2 a.m., which will demonstrate the urgency of the situation. However, nothing will actually happen at two in the morning because, for this bill to become law, it has to be debated and passed in the Senate. Now, the Senate is not going to be sitting at 3 a.m. on Tuesday, nor is it sitting on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday. It is not sitting until next Monday. That being the case, why the big rush? They say we have to pass this bill immediately, today, in the middle of the night because it is urgent and necessary, but nothing will actually change for another six days because the Senate will not be able to go ahead right away. That is proof, should anyone need proof, of the government's incompetence. It is once again turning a situation that could have been handled by the book with a proper debate into a crisis. Speaking of going by the book, I forgot to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the member for Peterborough—Kawartha, which I am sure will be fascinating. In short, yes to rapid tests, and no to closure. Unfortunately, the government has a history of being perpetually late, as we are currently seeing with the procurement of rapid tests. Almost two years ago, in March 2020, when COVID-19 hit the entire world, with everyone aghast, wondering what was going to happen, and the entire planet in turmoil, our globalist Prime Minister was debating whether to close the borders and wondering how dangerous the virus was. It took the government 10 days to do what it should have done long before, which was to close the borders. It is not that we do not like foreign countries—we actually love them. All immigrants are welcome; I am living proof, being the son of immigrants. However, in a global health emergency, it is important to make the right decisions. Do I need to remind the House that the mayor of Montreal took it upon herself to send her own city’s police officers to Dorval’s Pierre Elliott Trudeau airport to do the job that the RCMP could not because this government did not want them to do it? That was totally irresponsible. In addition to the delays at the border, there were also delays in vaccine procurement. Let us not forget the time when the government put all its eggs in the CanSino basket. Unfortunately, CanSino announced in July 2020 that it would not do business with Canada. It was too bad, because we ended up being four months late securing contracts with the Pfizers and Modernas of the world. Just before Christmas, the Prime Minister put on a big dog-and-pony show when he wanted to suggest that everything was A-okay, even though the government had only a few tens of thousands of vaccine doses. Once again, in typical Liberal fashion, where everything is done for optics rather than substance, another problem arose. There was a 10-day gap in January and February 2021, when there were no vaccines available in Canada. We have seen one delay after another, the most recent one involving rapid tests. We are disappointed, but should we be surprised that the government has unfortunately decided to put its own partisan political interests ahead of public health interests? Let us not fool ourselves. I like political debate and good old partisan bickering, but not on matters of public health. The Prime Minister's primary, sacred duty is to unite Canadians on an issue as dangerous, perilous and fragile as this one. He did not do that. Motivated by partisan politics, this Prime Minister decided to call an election on the public service mandate, which he did against the advice of the top public servant, who was responsible for hiring. It is not for nothing that we saw the member for Louis-Hébert, who was elected for saying certain things, now saying exactly the opposite, namely that he is sad to see his government engaging in polarization, demonization and partisan political attacks on an issue that should in fact unite us all. That is why we want to say yes to accessing to rapid tests, but no to closure, which prevents us from holding a full debate on this issue.
1479 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:35:41 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, my colleagues across the floor are such great proponents of these rapid tests, and it is interesting because they are important for the country. If the Liberals really feel comfortable with the science, I wonder if the member opposite could clearly communicate the sensitivity and specificity in asymptomatic individuals who get a rapid test. What is that and what does it mean to people?
66 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:35:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, these rapid tests are incredibly important, and as I mentioned in my speech, they are to be used to curb the spread, the transmission, of COVID. When someone is asymptomatic, it does not mean they are incapable of spreading the disease to others who are vulnerable, such as children, seniors and people with underlying health conditions. These are things we must take into account. Just because someone is asymptomatic does not mean they cannot infect someone and bring some real harm to their lives. People have ended up on ventilators and very sick, with long-term COVID symptoms that are ongoing, and it is up to us to be responsible and make sure we protect not only ourselves, but our loved ones and others around us to protect society, to make sure Canadians are safe and to be a community.
142 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:40:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Bill C-10. COVID-19 continues to be part of our lives, which we all know, and testing and screening remain important tools. They allow us to rapidly detect and isolate new cases. They support contact tracing and they help prevent community outbreaks by breaking the chain of transmission. As we have been, we continue to be committed to supporting the provinces and territories' testing strategies. These are different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but our job is to support. A critical part of finishing the fight against COVID-19 is making sure that we continue to prevent outbreaks at schools and workplaces. The $2.5-billion investment to purchase and distribute rapid tests across the country that is contained in this bill would ensure the delivery of millions of rapid tests to provinces and territories and indigenous communities free of charge and continue to support screening programs through our various distribution channels. Rapid tests are safe, they are effective and they are easy to administer. They provide quick results and they will empower Canadians to make more-informed decisions to protect their health and the health of their loved ones. As all members know, rapid tests represent only one element in the tool kit to fight this pandemic. This bill therefore represents a continuation of the kinds of measures that we have implemented and will continue to implement, measures that are based on the best public health advice and scientific evidence. Since the start of this pandemic, Health Canada has put in place rapid, innovative and agile measures to ensure prompt access to medical devices to respond to the needs of Canadians. The department has worked closely with public health partners to ensure that applications for COVID-19 testing devices are prioritized to meet urgent public health needs. These measures have allowed Health Canada to authorize over 100 testing devices, including 10 self-tests and 27 tests that can be used in a point-of-care setting. Health Canada is also expediting the review of all treatments for COVID-19. The department has rapidly authorized several clinical trials in Canada, including for some vaccines being developed right here in Canada, without compromising on strict standards for the safety of clinical trial participants. Clinical trial regulations allow the investigation of new drugs or new uses of drugs while affording protection to participants and requiring the proper collection and retention of outcomes. As of February 9, 115 clinical trials for COVID-19 drugs and vaccines have been authorized in Canada. Health Canada has authorized five drugs to treat COVID-19, including Remdesivir for hospitalized people, as well Paxlovid and three biologic treatments for non-hospitalized folks who have mild or moderate COVID symptoms and are at risk of developing severe disease. The Government of Canada has procured many of these treatments and continues to engage proactively with domestic and international companies to negotiate advance purchase agreements and ensure timely access in the procurement of treatments. As we know, vaccination is one of the most effective tools that we have to combat the pandemic, and along with the availability of rapid testing, it will play an important role in protecting our supply chains and helping us to get to a point where the pandemic is behind us. Governments have an important responsibility to protect the health and safety of their citizens. That is what we have done since day one. This responsibility becomes especially critical in the face of a public health emergency such as the one we are in right now. Since the beginning of this pandemic, the government has committed to making decisions that are based on science and based on the advice of public health officials. The government has implemented many critical measures to protect the health and safety of Canadians, including federal public servants. As the employer of the federal public service, it is the government's role to set the conditions for those employees to be safe when they are called upon to provide those services. Last October, we implemented a policy requiring that all employees of the core public service, including the RCMP, be vaccinated. This requirement applies to all employees, whether they are working remotely or working on site. It also applies to contractors who require access to federal government work sites. Having a fully vaccinated workforce means that not only are work sites safer, but so are the communities in which these public servants live and work. It also means better protection for Canadians who are accessing government services in person, including, in particular, the more vulnerable members of our communities. The vaccination requirements within the transportation sector have helped to protect our transport system from the impacts of omicron by reducing the frequency and severity of the COVID-19 illness among transportation workers. As we have done throughout the pandemic, we have worked closely with our partners in the transportation sector, including industry, to implement the vaccine requirements and to ensure the overall safety of the transportation system. These partners have played an invaluable, critical role in ensuring that people, goods and services continue to move in a safe and secure manner. Transportation workers have done their part by getting vaccinated and helping us all get through this pandemic. I want to reiterate that the Government of Canada's top priority is the health and safety of all Canadians. To protect Canadians, the government has taken every measure at its disposal to protect citizens. I know that it has not been easy. The pandemic has had an undeniable impact on Canadian businesses, large and small. Canadians have been patient. They rolled up their sleeves. They did their part to protect themselves, to protect others, and they got vaccinated. We recognize that this pandemic has created anxiety and additional stress for many Canadians. While we are all fatigued, we are also hopeful for what is to come. We are not where we were at the beginning and we can look forward to a brighter future. The measures that we have put in place, opportunities to be able to access rapid tests like the ones we are making available through this bill, will make it possible for us to look toward a bright future.
1050 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:47:07 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle seem to think tests are of great import. They talk a lot about the science. My question is this: What is the danger with a rapid test that has a very, very poor sensitivity rate?
42 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:47:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, my colleague notes a very important point here. I think it is important for us to recognize that this is one tool in the arsenal and it is not a silver bullet, but rapid tests make it possible for us to have a baseline of information that we may not have had otherwise. It gives us an additional piece of information from which to make informed decisions. They add a layer of information that then makes it possible for individuals to make decisions for themselves.
87 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:50:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to elaborate a little bit in terms of the need in his home province for these rapid tests. I myself know that in the province of Quebec it was pretty tough to get them during the Christmas holidays when the peak of omicron was hitting the province. Why is it so important to support the provinces and territories with respect to the need for these rapid tests and for them to be able to deploy them?
83 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:50:40 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, access to rapid tests in British Columbia has been virtually impossible over the course of the last little while. I can say from personal experience that over the course of the Christmas holidays it was a source of anxiety for many of my constituents who wanted to know, at the very least, whether they were going to be able to take some kind of test for their small and limited Christmas holiday gatherings to be safer and to give them even a limited sense of confidence regarding the decisions they make. We know these tests are not perfect, but giving folks the ability to know if in fact they have tested positive, to go for secondary testing and to access the supports they need is critical. In our province of British Columbia, being able to have access to rapid tests is going to make a world of difference for schools, community organizations and so many others who will be able to benefit as a direct result. I am very hopeful that we will be able to move the bill forward and get rapid tests into the hands of the folks who need them in British Columbia, and Vancouver Granville in particular.
203 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:02:14 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, the question around rapid tests has been a significant one. In the province of Alberta, it actually took the provincial government taking their own initiative and requiring, I believe and I could be corrected, an exception from Health Canada in order for them to even procure these rapid tests. I find it interesting that we are debating this. It is an important tool to fight COVID, yet it seems like it is maybe a little late when these have been called for, for a very long time. I wonder if the member would have further comments on that.
100 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:16:50 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Actually, I think the parliamentary secretary and I do not have the same concept of what urgent means. It is not urgent to fund rapid tests. What is really urgent is—
32 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:17:39 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I would like to say again to my colleague, the parliamentary secretary, that we do not have the same concept of what urgent means. Of course it is urgent to support the purchase of rapid tests, since public health authorities have assured us that they are necessary and effective and that we must use them. However, what is urgent for us in the Bloc Québécois are health transfers and the need for a robust health care system. It is urgent because our health care system is broken. We cannot wait any longer. This is even more urgent than funding the purchase of rapid tests to buy time, which is what the government is doing on a regular basis these days.
126 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:21:13 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her constructive question. This is about democracy. We need to take the time it takes. We cannot shut down debate on a whim. We in the Bloc Québécois are in favour of debate. We are in favour of these tests, but it is important to go through the parliamentary process.
61 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border