44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 15, 2023 02:00PM
Madam Speaker, virtually all medical health experts contend that mental illness is not irremediable. Why the delay for a year? What is going to change in this next year that should not be dealt with right now?
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the question is whether we can get it right in a year. I have to ask this back: Can we ever get something like this right? It is incalculable that we have come so far. We have not gone down a slippery slope; we have jumped off a ledge.
51 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we have seen how slippery this slope has become with what I would call a botched expansion of MAID by the Liberal government.
A few short years ago, MAID was seen as a procedure that would be used in exceptional circumstances and that would require very strict criteria to be placed around it. Now MAID is being administered under increasingly questionable and concerning circumstances. The criteria has become looser and is wildly subjective, and many of the safeguards that once existed seem to have evaporated.
The recent scandal at Veterans Affairs around medical assistance in dying has revealed how bad the Liberals rushed and mismanaged it, and, I would say, how careless the expansion of MAID has become. Since Canada's inception, our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have fought and sacrificed to defend freedoms here at home and all around the world. Whether that be on the ground, in the air or at sea, they have done so with valour and distinction. In doing so, many of them endure physical, psychological or other injuries during their service.
There is nothing that we as Canadians can do to fully repay them for what they have done for Canada, but at the very least, it is incumbent upon us to remember and honour their sacrifices and ensure that when they transition out of service, they are fully supported and cared for as veterans. Sadly, under the Liberal government, Veterans Affairs Canada has fallen into disrepair. I have heard from many veterans that Veterans Affairs Canada feels more like an insurance company focused on reducing its financial liability and placing an unfair onus on veterans to have to prove their disabilities or illnesses over and over again.
I can think of a lot of examples, but one of the worst examples I can think of is a veteran I met who is in a wheelchair. He is missing both of his legs from his time serving our country, and every single year, he has to prove to Veterans Affairs that he is still missing his legs. Can anyone imagine what it must feel like for that veteran to prove every single year to Veterans Affairs that he is still missing his legs and is required to have a wheelchair because he served this country? That should never be the case.
I can think of another veteran who has been fighting Veterans Affairs Canada for years to have a wheelchair lift installed in her home. She is in a wheelchair because of her service, and she simply wants a wheelchair lift installed in her home. She has faced repeated delays and denials, and she still does not have the wheelchair lift she needs in order to access her home. She is forced to crawl across her driveway and up and down her stairs because of that. Is that what a veteran deserves after a life of service?
When I thought about the context there, I was that much more alarmed and disturbed when Global News broke a story last summer about an anonymous veteran who had been pressured to consider medical assistance in dying by Veterans Affairs Canada. We learned that the veteran had gone to Veterans Affairs Canada seeking help and support for injuries that he sustained while he was serving in our armed forces.
Initially, he was experiencing positive improvements in his mental and physical health. To him and his family, that must have been very promising. Then he got a call from a Veterans Affairs service agent who suggested that he consider medical assistance in dying.
The service agent brought the suggestion up repeatedly, even after the veteran asked her to stop. The service agent further asserted that she had helped another veteran successfully access medical assistance in dying and that the veteran had gone through with the procedure and was now deceased. In describing how she helped this veteran access medical assistance in dying, she concluded that it was preferable to traditional forms of suicide, like, as she said, “blowing [your] brains out all over the wall or driving [your] car into something.”
After learning about those accusations, the Conservatives demanded that the Minister of Veterans Affairs and his officials come before the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs and answer for those appalling accusations. The minister came to the committee about this disturbing incident and indicated that it was, in his claim, isolated to one employee and was not indicative of a pattern of behaviour or a systemic issue. In fact, between the minister and his officials, they described the incident as isolated six different times. However, later in that very same meeting, they admitted that there was a second case involving the same employee.
That did not quite seem right either, so we asked the minister and his officials to come back to the committee, and the very night before the minister came back to testify that second time, another anonymous veteran came forward. He told the Operation Tango Romeo Trauma Recovery podcast that he too had been offered medical assistance in dying by Veterans Affairs Canada and that he too had felt pressured. This employee told the veteran, in the veteran's recollection, that they could help end his suffering because they had helped someone else end their suffering.
The next day at the veterans affairs committee, the minister confirmed that he was now aware of four cases involving one employee, but those did not include the allegations that were made the evening before on the Operation Tango Romeo podcast. Now we are talking about a situation where, after being told it was an isolated incident, we are aware of five different instances of this happening with two different Veterans Affairs employees at minimum. When we called on the Minister of Veterans Affairs to fire the employee who was involved in this, he refused to answer the questions, only saying instead that this employee was no longer in direct contact with veterans.
However, it got worse from there. Another veteran, Christine Gauthier, came to testify before the veterans affairs committee on something completely unrelated, but she revealed that she too had been offered medical assistance in dying. She was simply trying to get some help for her home to have a lift installed. Then, unprompted, a suggestion was made by another Veterans Affairs employee that if her pain was so unbearable, MAID was something she could consider as an option. In private conversations since then, I have learned of at least a couple of other veterans who have been offered MAID, so that makes about eight veterans and about four different employees, at minimum, whom we are aware of.
This whole thing has gone down a very bizarre trail, and we get repeated denials. The minister came out at one point and said, after he had admitted there were four cases, that Veterans Affairs has never offered this. Then, the very next day, he told us they fired the employee who was involved in the four cases. It is a story that no one on that side of the House can seem to get straight, and it is really concerning. Those are the kinds of inconsistencies that we are seeing.
When veterans go to Veterans Affairs Canada looking for help, support and assistance, whether with physical injuries or mental injuries, they should feel comfortable and safe when they are dealing with Veterans Affairs. There should be a level of trust there. However, instead of being offered help with things they need to help them live their lives, they are being told that maybe it would be better if they just went off and died. That is a pretty sad situation. Veterans are being betrayed by the very people and institutions they are supposed to be able to trust, and that creates further damage. That creates what is called sanctuary trauma, and that can further isolate veterans and further prevent them from wanting to get the help they need.
I hope a long, hard look at this is taken in the next year. If the Liberal government cannot even stop its own employees from pushing MAID on veterans, how can it assure Canadians that the necessary safeguards can be put in place to protect vulnerable people from being pressured into accessing medical assistance in dying?
1394 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, perhaps my intervention will be more of a comment than a question, but I am happy to hear the member's thoughts on it.
Let us be absolutely clear on what happened with this one particular individual. There was a case worker in Veterans Affairs who should never have been giving any kind of advice regarding MAID. They were certainly not qualified to do that, and that individual no longer works for Veterans Affairs. That is the reality of the situation. Pertaining to medical advice, that should only ever come from an individual's physician and the medical experts who are qualified to do that.
Let us be clear that this was an isolated incident. The individual no longer works for Veterans Affairs. It is very clear what has happened with this individual and the fact is that they are no longer employed by Veterans Affairs.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am glad the member raised this because it is really important to understand we are talking about this kind of slippery slope we are leading down when we talk about expanding this into mental health.
I mean, there are many veterans in this country who struggle because of the service they have given this country. They struggle with psychological injuries, mental injuries, and PTSD. They may feel that, if they go to Veterans Affairs, which is where they need to go to get the help they need, there is a chance that, instead, they might be counselled on how they could end their life.
This has happened. We know of at least six cases where it has happened, and who knows how many others there might be. However, if a veteran has to feel that way about going to Veterans Affairs, might that mean they will not get the help they need? We should never be in a situation where a veteran feels they cannot get the help they need from the government.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I invite my colleague to read the expert report, which clearly states that, when treatment exists, people are not automatically eligible for medical assistance in dying just because the treatment is hard to get.
That is the shortcut the Conservatives have been taking since the start of this debate. Just because a person with depression asks for MAID does not necessarily mean they will get it. Just because someone somewhere is considering MAID because they are depressed does not mean they will have access to it. That is what they do not understand. There are assessors, providers, professionals whose job is to provide care for people whose condition is reversible. Is anyone here going to suggest that depression is irreversible?
Our colleagues talked about the experiences of people who attempted suicide. In every case, the condition was reversible. In fact, some Conservative members even talked about their own experience. They are here to tell the tale. We have to see things clearly. There are 16 key recommendations that are worth reading. I invite them to read the report.
180 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/23 6:09:00 p.m.
- Watch
We have to move on to Private Members' Business.
The hon. member for Banff—Airdrie will have about two minutes after Private Members' Business to continue with questions and comments.
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/23 6:09:52 p.m.
- Watch
There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved that the bill be concurred in.
7 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/23 6:11:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
During the debate on Bill C-39, I had finished giving a speech and was in the middle of the question and answer period. The normal practice is that someone asks a question, and usually, before moving on to the next item of business, there would be an opportunity for the person being asked a question to at least reply to the question. I was not afforded that opportunity. I wanted to raise that because it seemed odd to me. I wonder if it breaks with the usual practice we have.
Madam Speaker, I will ask for your ruling on this, but I think I should have been afforded the opportunity to at least respond briefly to the question I was asked.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/23 6:12:38 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member has a good point, but it was a question of timing. We had gone over the time when we should have started Private Members' Business. Since the hon. member for Montcalm did not ask a question but made more of a comment, I thought it would be appropriate to leave the other two minutes until later.
I agree that it is not the normal practice. Had it been a question, yes, I would have asked the hon. member to answer.
An hon. member: He asked if he had read the report.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès): He asked him to read a report. That was my judgment. The comment the hon. member made was not necessarily a question but more of a comment. However, the hon. member does have two minutes left for questions and comments right after Private Members' Business.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.
She said: Madam Speaker, before I begin, I want to take a moment to thank the member for Cloverdale—Langley City for agreeing to switch places with me on the order of precedence so my private member's bill, Bill C-224, an act to establish a national framework for the prevention and treatment of cancers linked to firefighting, could come back to the House for report stage earlier than scheduled.
I thank him because, if we have learned anything since my bill was first introduced in the House in January 2022, it is that, when it comes to protecting our Canadian firefighters from the risk of developing a duty-related cancer, time is of the essence. Every day can mean more dangerous exposure, more new cancer diagnoses and, heaven forbid, more preventable deaths.
Like many of my colleagues, I am sure, I have heard a lot of firefighters over the past year say how very necessary and essential this bill is.
Men and women from every province and territory have contacted me to tell me about their cancer battle or that of a dear colleague whose life was cut short by the dangers firefighters face every day at work.
Right here in the House, we have heard the heartfelt words of members on both sides of the aisle, some of them former firefighters themselves, who stood up to share their own experiences and to pay tribute to the co-workers and dear friends they have lost to cancer along the way in the service of Canadians.
Last June, the Standing Committee on Health heard testimony from representatives of the International Association of Fire Fighters and the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs on the prevalence of cancer among firefighters.
They told us about the risks that these first responders face every day and about the importance of this bill in raising public awareness and promoting information sharing on firefighter cancer prevention and treatment and ultimately, in saving lives.
I have also heard it, as I am certain many members here have, from family members or loved ones of firefighters who are currently battling an occupational cancer or have sadly succumbed to one.
Recently, Donna from Alberta wrote to me to voice her support for Bill C-224 and to tell me how she only wished it had come earlier. In 2021, Donna lost her husband, a retired Edmonton district chief with 36 years of service, to pancreatic cancer. He had been feeling unwell for some time and had undergone countless tests, but pancreatic cancer, which is not on Alberta's list of presumptive cancers, was simply not on his doctor's radar. By the time her husband received the diagnosis, his cancer had reached stage four.
As the daughter and wife of former firefighters, my heart immediately went out to Donna. I remember well the fear that would grip me each time they went out on a fire call and the huge sense of relief I would feel every time they walked back through the door when it was over, thinking they were out of harm's way and safe, but we now know the danger is never really gone.
The facts are there. Last summer, following an in-depth review of scientific literature on the link between the occupational exposure of firefighters and their risk of cancer, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer reclassified firefighting as a Group 1 profession, the classification with the highest cancer hazards.
I made a pledge to Donna that I would not rest until lasting and positive change comes from the sacrifice she, her husband and firefighters and their families across the country have made to keep Canadians and our communities safe, so what I want to say today is, although there are a lot more stories like this out there, I think we can all say that we have heard enough. We have heard enough to now do right by the brave firefighters of our country and the loved ones who stand by them in support of the critical job they do.
I, therefore, humbly ask all members to help me get this bill through the House as quickly as possible by agreeing to collapse debate tonight so we can get it to a vote. Let us make sure that, by the time the International Association of Firefighters gathers in Ottawa next month for its legislative conference, Bill C-224 will have moved on to the Senate and will be one step closer to becoming law. We owe it to Donna. We owe it to them.
780 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague and seatmate for the bill she has brought forward. I know I am not allowed to reference members who are in the gallery when we are sitting, but I can say that, when we first voted on this at second reading, to see the number of firefighters who were sitting in the gallery to witness that vote was truly astounding considering the implications of this bill for the firefighting community throughout our country.
I wonder if my colleague could further explain why we should allow this to get through now, what the impact will be if we can get it through the Senate as expeditiously as possible, and what the significance of that is to the firefighters who were here when we voted on it the first time and all firefighters in Canada.
141 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and seatmate for seconding the bill at report stage and third reading.
Firefighters have been saying for years that the exposure they are subjected to in the day-to-day work they do is causing cancer, and people did not want to listen. Slowly, research has come out to show that there is a link, and they want to be recognized. They want people to recognize the work they do, not only with respect to the dangers at a fire scene, but after the fact. Therefore, for them to have this win, the recognition that we get it, that we understand, that we are working together for them, is important.
It is important to get this bill through, and through the Senate, because part of this bill is about increasing awareness regarding cancers linked to firefighting and designating January as firefighter cancer awareness month. Although we just went through the month of January, I would like to make sure this becomes law for next January so we can start putting in place that public awareness campaign.
185 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will be brief. I just want to point out that sometimes, when we show a bit of openness in the House, when we introduce a bill that at first may get a lukewarm reception for reasons that have nothing to do with the value or intention of the bill, we see that things can evolve and move forward.
I want to congratulate my colleague from Longueuil—Charles‑LeMoyne for her work, and especially for the heart she put into this bill. As we know, this bill is incredibly important to her.
I simply want to congratulate her. I do not even want her to rise in response because I want her to spare her voice. I just wanted to make that comment to say that sometimes, when we work together on sensitive issues like this, we end up with good results. Everyone wins.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Drummond. We have proven that we can work together, and that is what the firefighters wanted. They wanted to see all political parties rise above partisanship and work together for the same goal.
40 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for her dedication to firefighters. This bill is incredibly important, and I have definitely heard that from my riding.
My riding is large, with a lot of very small rural and remote communities. This means that the majority of the firefighters are volunteers. They do this out of the love for their community; they do not get paid for it, and they just work incredibly hard.
One of the things the NDP has proposed, through the member for Courtenay—Alberni, is the idea that we would see the tax credit increase so they could claim a bit more for the hard work they do. Would the member consider looking this over and seeing if it something the Liberals could support?
129 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, yes, in fact, 85% of firefighters across Canada are what we would consider volunteer part-time firefighters working in rural communities. I am fully aware of the request for increasing the tax credit for firefighters; I would welcome an opportunity to sit down with the member opposite and look at it. I think it is something we should look at.
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this important debate on Bill C-224, the national framework on cancers linked to firefighting act. The bill would have a couple of really important pieces. It would establish January as firefighter cancer awareness month, and when we draw more attention to an issue, we are more likely to catch something early.
The bill would also create a national framework to increase the overall public awareness of cancers related to firefighting. This would enable better access to cancer prevention and treatment for firefighters.
As a kid, I actually grew up down the street from fire hall 3 in Fort McMurray. I had many opportunities to get to know firefighters on a personal basis. Whether they were our neighbours or my friends' dads, I got to know them as people, and they were everyday heroes to us. When Fort McMurray was overtaken by a massive forest fire about seven years ago, it was very difficult because when everyone else evacuated and left with little more than the shirts on their backs, our brave Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo firefighters stayed behind to protect our community. They did an amazing job.
They risk their lives every single day to protect our communities and our homes, and they always have our backs. Therefore, it is time we had their backs; this is a group of people who are truly heroes.
The best parade I have ever been to in my life was the Canada Day parade after the fire in Fort McMurray. There were fire trucks from all around the region, all the first nations and indigenous fire teams from the different communities, and all the fire teams from the oil companies. It was so amazing to see everyone in the community.
We had only just gotten back at the beginning of June. It was so special to have a major parade less than a month after getting back into those homes after a massive forest fire that the firefighters were still fighting. It is a memory I will have until the day I die. We celebrated them as heroes then, and in my community, we still celebrate them as heroes today.
The dangers to firefighters who race to save communities are very well known. In my community, they effectively experienced a lifetime amount of exposure to carcinogens and toxins in a month, which is virtually unheard of in that field. This is one of the big reasons I have become passionate about this. Statistical data has shown that the risk of developing cancers among firefighters is higher than it is in the rest of the population. Unfortunately, the chances of survival are often lower because they are slightly rarer cancers that are not detected as quickly.
This is something that is near and dear to my heart as someone who lost both parents to cancer at a very young age, although neither of my parents were firefighters. I know this is so important for our society. If we can keep families and friends together, it impacts far more than the firefighter; it impacts their entire family, their entire structure and the entire community. As the saying goes, it is very clear that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
The only reticence I have with the bill is that in its original text, Bill C-224 was to “provide for firefighters across Canada to be regularly screened for cancers linked to firefighting”.
I supported that. I thought it was a very important piece. Unfortunately, the Liberal members of the health committee, supported by the Bloc, actually decided to water it down. It now says “to...make recommendations respecting regular screenings for cancers linked to firefighting”.
Instead of making it so the government was required to do it, it became a recommendation.
As someone who is a fierce defender of provincial jurisdiction, I can understand some of the challenge on these pieces. However, I think that it is not as strong as it could have been and that it was in the original iteration. I just want to highlight the fact that I think it was better.
I am very proud to support this bill. However, I think it was interesting because all the expert witnesses who came before the health committee highlighted that the earlier we screen for cancers, the better the outcomes.
My mom died of breast cancer when I was 21 years old. She was diagnosed when I was 20. I have had routine screenings for breast cancer since I was in my early 20s. I know that that is how I am going to save myself from that same fate of dying at 49. I know that the original intent of this bill was to do things like that so kids would get to have their parents.
I am hopeful that at some point we will get to a space where there is more robust screening for firefighters from coast to coast to coast. It is absolutely an important piece of legislation, not only for the firefighters but also, as I said, for their families, friends and entire communities. This is something to define that link between firefighting and occupational cancers or occupational diseases. This is so important because they are often people who are quick to save our homes. They are not necessarily looking out for themselves. Having more awareness about these cancers and more conversation is really how we are going to be there for them. That is our way of showing them that we care, they are important to us, they matter and their lives are meaningful.
I want to thank all members of Parliament in the debate today and all the ones who have come before me. I especially want to thank my good colleague from Barrie—Innisfil, a retired firefighter, and the member for Essex. They are two people I have come to know in this place who are former firefighters. I want to thank all Canadian firefighters for their service. I mentioned the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, but we had firefighters who came to save my community from all across the province, the country, and in fact, the world. That is something we do not get to see often, and I hope to never see it again. I hope no other community has to see it again.
Profoundly, from the very bottom of my heart, I want to thank every firefighter who serves in our communities and our nation, as well as all retired firefighters and firefighter families. I thank them. They make a difference in our lives, and we are going to do our best to support them.
1123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to once again express my appreciation for the hon. member for Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, the sponsor of Bill C-224. I want to acknowledge the work that was done with the co-operation of all parties. That happens every once in a while, and when it does, we see just how well it works. I want to point that out so we do not forget. When we work together, it can lead to great results.
There was no consensus on Bill C-224 at first. Members will recall that, when we received the first version of this bill, the Bloc Québécois had concerns about it. Those concerns were related to strong beliefs that we hold and that are integral to our political involvement. We felt that the original bill interfered in the jurisdictions of the provinces and Quebec.
It was therefore difficult for us to readily support this bill, which is otherwise good. We cannot be against trying to improve our firefighters' living and working conditions, as well as their health and safety. I think that everyone agreed on that, but we had that one concern.
It did not take long for us to sense an opening for discussion. We appreciated it. That opening, evident from the start, meant that we were much more favourable to the bill moving forward.
By chance, I had the opportunity to replace my colleague from Mirabel on the Standing Committee on Health the day that the member for Longueuil—Saint‑Hubert came to speak in support of his bill. There were firefighters in the room. There were also members who had been firefighters in a past life, which resulted in testimony that was actually quite moving. Those who were there will remember.
Several firefighters from my region, Drummond, later contacted me to say how much that meeting meant to them. I am not talking about the fact that I spoke, but rather about all of the testimony given that day.
I know that my colleague from Longueuil—Charles‑LeMoyne has already heard this, but I am going to talk about when I was a firefighter. People might think it is Capitaine Bonhomme speaking, but it is not.
Many boys dream of being a police officer or a firefighter when they grow up. My dreams were different. My dream was to be a radio host, which I ended up doing eventually. On the way there, I also worked on boats. I worked as a sailor. As part of our training, we had to learn how to respond to incidents, such as fires on board and whatnot. I had only a vague, abstract notion of what firefighters did, but they shipped me off for a weekend at a firefighters' training centre. They dressed me up in the gear, which weighs a ton. Then they put me in a container they were about to set on fire and told me to figure it out.
That is not exactly how it happened. I did get some safety instructions, which I did not really listen to, unfortunately. The point is, that day was a revelation, a shock. I realized that there was more to the job than what boys of my generation thought. It was more than driving around in trucks blasting sirens and getting cats out of trees. There were huge responsibilities. These people face major risks every day on the job.
That changed how I viewed the profession. Since that day, even though I did not have to carry out those duties as part of my job at the time, I nevertheless did retain a deep admiration for firefighting, which is a vocation rather than a profession, in my opinion.
It was therefore an honour to attend the committee meeting where we discussed Bill C‑244. As a result, I remained interested in this bill. I followed it at a distance because, as I stated earlier, the member for Mirabel was more involved in this file.
I was also pleased to see the Bloc Québécois caucus change its position to support this bill and to realize that our concerns about the bill were being addressed. It is still not perfect, but I believe that what was most important to us was to ensure we were putting in place something that would better protect those who are called on to protect us. I believe that the outcome is pretty good.
As I was saying, I think there may still be other things that could be done. I think the bill is a very good starting point and a very good demonstration of the House of Commons' willingness to ensure that firefighters across Quebec and Canada feel supported and know that we are concerned about their safety.
I think the federal government could do more without encroaching on Quebec and provincial jurisdictions. For example, it could better fund research on the treatment, diagnosis and prevention of cancers, as well as on carcinogenic materials. Perhaps the federal government could make its own list of recognized cancers for its memorial grant program for first responders. It could also increase funding for municipal emergency preparedness infrastructure.
After I attended that committee meeting, I was approached by a firefighter from Drummondville, Marco Héroux. I asked him for permission to speak a little bit about the meeting we had recently at my constituency office. Mr. Héroux is a career firefighter. He has been working in Drummondville for several years and has had a number of work-related health challenges. Some of these challenges relate to certain traumas associated with firefighting work. These people witness trauma on a daily basis. It is hard for us to imagine the extent of what these individuals have to deal with in their line of work.
Mr. Héroux also had concerns about safety in fire stations. We talked about that at length as Bill C-224 was being developed. We talked about things like materials, clothing and fumes inside the fire stations themselves. We talked about how some municipalities are unable to renovate stations and install ventilation systems and protections to ensure that firefighters, who spend so much time at the fire stations, are not in contact with contaminants. This requires huge investments by municipalities, and it can be hard for them to respond to this emergency situation. It is an emergency for the health of firefighters.
The federal government could invest more in municipal infrastructure to ensure that fire stations are equipped with cutting edge ventilation systems that are beyond reproach to keep our firefighters safe and limit their exposure to cancer risks that are just as significant inside the fire station when they are not even doing responding work.
Obviously, some of the concerns I am raising may be outside the scope of the bill, but these are steps the federal government could certainly take to further improve the situation for firefighters and address their concerns over their health and safety.
I cannot help but come back to the issue of health transfers because it is such a topical issue. I think the Bloc has been tirelessly calling on the federal government to increase health transfers for many months, even years. An agreement between the federal government and the provinces seems to be coming together.
We are saying that that is not enough, that more was needed. Imagine what could have been done in terms of prevention and the implementation of mechanisms and research tools for cancer and cancer treatment. Health transfers could be used for all those things too. Those are the types of things that are missing because of the lack of funding for health care. We also need to invest to respond to these types of requests. Funding is not just needed to reduce overcrowding in emergency rooms. It is needed for many things, and I think this is a good example of why the government needs to increase health transfers.
I want to reiterate that I am pleased to see that this bill is going to be passed. I think that it is an important bill that has been long awaited by firefighters in Quebec and Canada. We can do more work on it as needs arise. I am pleased that the bill will be passed as a result of the co-operative efforts among the parties. The Bloc Québécois will enthusiastically support this bill.
1426 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
