SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 309

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 6, 2024 11:00AM
  • May/6/24 2:29:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, let me state clearly and unequivocally that every woman, in every part of the country, must have access to the oral contraceptives she needs to have control over her reproductive future. Any party that stands in the way of that is standing in the way of the basic freedom for women in our country to have autonomy over their body. I would ask the Conservative Party of Canada to stop blocking this so that women can get the reproductive aids they need to have control over their reproductive future.
91 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 3:41:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think it really is reprehensible to see the backward movement we are seeing over women's reproductive health and rights, where their autonomy over their own bodies is being called into question. Let me make it very clear, as Minister of Health, that we will do everything in our power to make sure that women have full power and autonomy over their bodies. That is a fundamental freedom. That includes their reproductive futures. In many of these instances is an inability to have real conversations about sex and about whether a woman should have the autonomy to make a choice about the way in which she makes decisions with her body. It is absolutely unacceptable in this country. When we take something like contraceptives, such as a condom, that have a failure rate of about 9%, and an IUD, which has a failure rate of 0.2%, how could people, first of all, have the position that they are going to tell a woman what she does with her body and then, secondly, try to block her ability to get reproductive technologies so that she does not wind up with an unwanted pregnancy? Those things, to me, seem to be diametrically opposed. If one was opposed to abortion, if one was opposed to a woman being able to make that choice over her body, it would seem to me that one would at least stand up and support her ability to get reproductive medicine. For me, it is extremely disturbing that this is any kind of debate in this country. Everywhere in this country, every woman should be told that she has autonomy over her body and that she has access to the medication she needs. That is fundamentally what this bill is about, in part. I am sure we will get an opportunity to talk about diabetes as well.
313 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 3:44:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is a concrete proposal to move pharmacare forward in this country. The drugs are two classes of drugs. They represent more than 80 different medical drugs that deal specifically with diabetes and contraceptives. It is part of a broader suite of actions that we are taking, such as, for example, drugs for rare diseases. I am currently having conversations with every province and territory about how we can take action on drugs for rare diseases so that folks with rare diseases can get access to the medications they need. It is part of what we have done on bulk purchasing to realize $300 million in savings for Canadians across the country. It also builds on the work that we are doing with a pilot in P.E.I., where we have been able to get copays down to five dollars there, saving seniors hundreds and hundreds of dollars in P.E.I. Action is taken one step at a time by demonstrating in evidence exactly what is going to be saved and exactly how this should function. As an example, in British Columbia, when it comes to contraceptives, it already shows that the province is saving more than it costs to run the program. I suspect we will also see that in diabetes. Canadians, rightfully, want to see this in evidence. They want to see these things live out there, demonstrate how they work in each example and then build on that successively. Our health care system was based on an iterative process by making sure that the steps we take are prudent, smart and fiscally responsible, and that is the way that we need to proceed with pharmacare as well.
284 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 3:47:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the answer, of course, is no, and that point is not grounded in any kind of reality. There is no plan. I used to be the head of Heart and Stroke, and we would negotiate benefit agreements. They cannot say, “Oh, there are two drugs and now people are going to cancel the rest of their medical coverage.” That is a preposterous notion that is not rooted in anything resembling reality. What really would happen is that people would have choice. What does that mean? Let me be very clear, and put the question back to the member. For somebody in the member's riding who does not have the money for contraception, why should they be limited to the choice they can afford, which has a 9% failure rate, when there is something available to them that has a 0.2% failure rate? Why should somebody who has less money not have access to the contraceptive medicine they need to have choice and autonomy over their own body? I can tell the member that I have had direct conversations with Minister Asagwara. We are ready to work together to deliver this in the same way that we are working together to create dental care. It is fine if the Conservatives want to vote against it. If they do not think those people should have access to contraceptive drugs, then that is fair. They are allowed to have that position and to go and defend it. However, they should not try, with misinformation and blocking in the House, to sabotage the ability of somebody to get dental care or contraceptives. Let us have a debate rooted in reality. The reality is that there is an enormous need. This bill would make sure that everybody would get exactly what they need and would not be left in a position without the critical medication that they require.
319 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 5:17:30 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked a lot about the cost savings in terms of this program. Of course, this goes right back into medicare and our health system. The direct cost associated with unintended pregnancies here in Canada is an estimated $320 million, so the benefits of universal contraception do not just end unwanted pregnancies with prevention and cost savings, but can actually help in terms of prescription contraceptives for other health conditions like abnormal uterine bleeding and endometriosis, precancer of the uterus, polycystic ovary syndrome and the prevention of ovarian and uterine cancer. Can the member talk about the importance of seeing those benefits and the cost savings to our system as well, in addition to the health of people who need that support?
126 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 5:33:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it would be surprising to most Canadians to learn that there is a huge under-insurance problem in this country. Many people, we could say, slip through the cracks. As I mentioned in my speech, for those who are part-time workers, who end up getting phased out of their parents' health insurance plans and for those who are taking social assistance, there is always a gap between the two insurances. We need to make sure that everybody is covered and that every Canadian is treated equally. It is all about equality and equity. This is how those gaps can be prevented. As my hon. colleague from London—Fanshawementioned, it is important for women to be able to take care of themselves. It should not matter what one's income bracket is. One should be able to access contraceptives and these services in order to create a more equal society.
153 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 6:21:00 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-64 
Madam Speaker, I really appreciated the speech by my colleague from Skeena—Bulkley Valley. He shared such amazing points today about the importance of looking after Canadians. I am standing today, as a woman in Parliament, discussing one of the most important aspects of women's health and daily life: access to contraceptives. This health care measure is currently restricted by whether one can afford to access it or not. It should not be that way. Every time I enter this place, I am aware of how different my experiences are from the men who have not had to deal with regular menstrual cycles, painful periods, ovarian cysts, PMS and PMDD, endometriosis, menstrual migraines and unintended pregnancy. These are part of daily life when one has ovaries, starting in one's teens. Having ovaries requires management and affects everyday choices for school, work, recreation and more. With that in mind, I am going to take a moment to read a poem by my daughter Coral. She is a writer and a poet. I wanted to share it because it shows how periods affect women, girls and non-binary people, from their very early teens. It is called Late Bloomer. In the seventh grade, all my friends started menstruating, but not me. We would travel in a gossiping group to the school washroom and I would listen as my friends ripped tape inside stalls. In high school, we had swimming in gym. I had a hard time with a box of “easy applicators”. I cried, one foot propped up on the toilet. I lied on the ground, tried to raise my hips and contort my body to be comfortable. The garbage filled with failure. I surrendered to pads. Diapers, my friends called them. I would hide panic as girls exchanged tampons in cute pink wrappers. Once a pad fell out of my bag, I snatched it up, cheeks shame red. I concealed pads far up sleeves and deep down in pockets. On days I forgot a pad I settled for folded tissues and tied my jacket around my waist. Today, I borrowed a pad from a stranger. Her cheeks weren't red and neither were mine. bloom, bloom, bloom “Bloom, bloom, bloom” is how I see this bill. It is time to blossom. It is a bill that sets in place a framework to consider the needs of women, girls and transgender people who menstruate. My message to the men in power across the globe, including in Canada, who have spent their legislative time trying to control women and their bodies, while ignoring the enhancements that are there in basic health care, is to stop it, and let this bill bloom. At a time when the possibility of gender equity remains elusive, what gives me hope is that in this bill, and currently in the tabled budget, the needs of women are starting to make their way onto the main stage, after 150 years. Affordable child care, free contraceptives, the red dress alert from my colleague, the member for Winnipeg Centre, a caregiving strategy and a sectoral table on care economy are all women's issues that the Conservatives and the Liberals have ignored for decades. With that in mind, that is what causes me worry. The Conservatives in the House are rejecting these important advancements for women and, at the same time, are working against us by espousing that they would override women's charter rights on a whim. Conservatives are dangerous to women. If they ever had the power, they would immediately go after a woman's right to choose, just like what has happened in the United States. I never want to see that happen. Not only would Bill C-64 help women as a framework for historic expansion of health care to single-payer pharmacare, but also the first rollout would give access to life-saving medication and devices for diabetics. Linda, a resident in my riding, recently told me she estimates that, since she was diagnosed with diabetes over 40 years ago, she has spent over $120,000 on medication and devices to manage it. This is unfair. She has had to spend thousands of dollars a month just to stay alive. While I am on the topic of gender equity, Linda shared that she was 26 when she was diagnosed. She went to the doctor. She was single at the time, and the doctor said to just go find herself a husband, and she would be fine. This is what happens when someone cannot afford their medication or when society decides that women should not have economic empowerment and that they would not be able to afford their medication on their own. Even with the loss of the life of a diabetic, if they do not get their medication, the Conservatives have decided to block the pharmacare bill. While they enjoy their MP taxpayer-funded health care and dental benefits, they deny them to others who need them. With the new pharmacare bill, New Democrats know that Canadians would have the access to medication that they need, not with a credit card, but with a health care card. This would mean that close to 10 million Canadians would not have to suffer in pain and discomfort, would not have to put their health at risk and would not have to let their conditions get worse. This would no longer have to happen. The reason the Conservatives and the Liberals have let it happen in the past is profits from big pharma, as my colleague from Skeena—Bulkley Valley mentioned. It is about trying to keep big pharma happy, not about trying to keep Canadians healthy. We need to do the work to keep Canadians healthy, to make sure we do preventative medicine and to release the burden of the expenses of contraceptives, diabetic medication and other medications as they come out. This is why we must pass the bill as quickly as possible. People are waiting on us, and the provinces are ready to come together and make life better for people. The NDP has gotten this victory for Linda, for all women, and for people who use contraceptives and have not been able to get access to contraceptives. All those people will be able to get access very soon, and it would roll out to be even more. They would be able to keep the money in their pockets rather than in the pocket of some rich CEO. I want to close and to double down on the fact that this is not the time to let our guard down as Canadians and as the NDP. This is not the time to let our guard down. Ideologies south of the border are coming up into Canada. There is a conversation in the House, and the Conservatives are trying to open a conversation about removing a woman's right to choose. They are using bills like this pharmacare bill around contraceptives to have that conversation. We cannot let it happen. Also, for all Canadians, who are paying some of the highest drug prices in the world, this is not fair, and this is legislation. This is because of the Conservatives and the Liberals before, who have let big pharma take advantage of Canadians, gouge Canadians and made Canadians sicker because of their lack of compassion and their desire to control a woman's body.
1245 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 6:29:48 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for sharing the poem by her daughter. I think it is very special. We have come a long way, because there was a time, I can certainly remember, when talking about menstruation cycles and so on was very taboo. Here we are in the House of Commons, and we can talk about it. We need to talk about it because contraceptives are a very important priority for the pharmacare act that we are discussing tonight. I would like to hear from my colleague because she alluded to this. For people who are not insured or who may be working but are under-insured and still cannot afford the care they need, could she tell us about the stigma that can surround vulnerable groups when they are seeking proper medical care?
136 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 7:01:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am looking for clarification from the Bloc members. They seem to give the impression that prescription drugs are free in the province of Quebec. I would ask the member if he could, for clarity purposes, give an indication of whether people are charged any sort of deductible or fees. Different provinces have different mechanisms. Some have private and some have public. I am wondering if he could expand on exactly what type of plan there is in the province of Quebec and how it applies, in particular for contraceptives.
92 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 7:02:10 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is true that contraceptives are not yet covered. That is why we need money. We are going to improve our system. Since my colleague is asking questions about how it works, I will quickly explain. We have a mixed system in Quebec. People who are not covered by private group insurance pay, if I remember correctly, between $0 and $731 in premiums per year, depending on their income. That is how it works for people in the public system. For everyone else, the employer deducts an insurance premium from the employee's earnings. I should also point out that ours is the most progressive taxation system in North America. The tax rate is income-based. There is no better place in North America for that. The Quebec system is certainly not perfect, as I said in my speech. However, we are going to improve it. All we have to say to the government is let us manage it on our own.
164 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:21:01 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-64 
Mr. Speaker, since 2015, when I was first elected to this most honourable House, my focus has been on helping and ensuring the success of the residents of my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge and of all Canadians, and that is what we continue to do. We continue to implement policies that strengthen our social system, including what is contained in Bill C-64, specifically for folks with diabetes and individuals in need of contraceptives. Obviously, the rare disease strategy is something near and dear to my heart as I have a nephew who suffers from a rare genetic disease. I understand the issues that my brother and sister-in-law go through in taking care of my nephew. The issue of expanding pharmacare, expanding our national system and strengthening our social safety net is very near and dear to my heart.
142 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:24:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague's speech. I would like to ask the member about how something as simple as monitoring diabetes and testing sugar levels, which can prevent hospitalization and the additional costs that can occur due to hospitalization when people do not have this equipment to be able to take care of themselves at home. I would also like to ask, if he has a few moments, if he could talk about oral contraceptives for women.
83 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:24:40 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-64 
Mr. Speaker, we know that almost four million Canadians have a form of diabetes, and we want to prevent their condition from deteriorating and their ending up in the hospital, which costs our hospital system even more. We want to prevent that, which is a big piece in Bill C-64. Obviously, with contraceptives, we know that there are women out there who may not be able to afford the cost. We would be there to assist those individuals, especially the most vulnerable, in our country.
86 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:25:28 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-64 
Mr. Speaker, reproductive and sexual rights are human rights. Our government recognizes that, and we stand by it as a matter of principle. Members of the Conservative Party caucus can stand in the House and say they are not interested in pursuing anti-abortion legislation that would infringe upon women's reproductive rights; however, sadly, that conviction is far from a universally held one in the caucus. In fact, the entire caucus has been designated as anti-choice by the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada. I am proud to say that, on this side, we are walking the walk. We are leading by example and putting forward Bill C-64, an act representing pharmacare, which would provide universal access to prescribed contraceptives to Canadians. In collaboration with provinces and territories, we will support universal coverage of contraceptive medications and devices so that nine million Canadians of reproductive age will have access to the contraception that they need and deserve. This will ensure that Canadian women can choose whether they are going to have children. It will give them greater control over their bodies and their futures. Currently, Canada is one of the only countries in the world where access to health care is universal but access to contraceptives is not. Women therefore have a more limited range of options, and are more likely to experience unwanted pregnancies, which can impact their lives. Access to safe, reliable birth control is essential. It gives women the freedom to plan their families and pursue their long-term goals and dreams. Unintended pregnancies, on the other hand, can cause a great number of negative health and economic impacts on families. At present, coverage for contraceptives varies across the country. Most Canadians rely on private drug insurance through their employer for their medication needs, and some populations are disproportionately affected by the lack of coverage. Women, people with low incomes and young people, all of whom are more likely to work in part-time or contract positions, often lack access to private coverage, and only a fraction of Canadians are eligible for prescription birth control at low or no cost through a public drug plan. When a person pays out-of-pocket for their contraceptive needs, regardless of whether they have coverage, cost has been identified as the single most important barrier to accessing contraceptive medications or devices that they require. One study showed that women from low-income households are more likely to use less effective contraceptives, or no contraceptives at all. Cost is a significant obstacle to gaining access to more effective forms of contraception. For example, oral contraceptives cost approximately $25 per unit, or $300 per year. In comparison, intrauterine devices, or IUDs, are often more effective and last up to five years, but they have an upfront cost of approximately $500 per unit. IUDs are a much more effective method of contraception, since they have a low failure rate of 0.2%, compared with that of oral contraceptive pills, which is 9%. Furthermore, they do not require daily doses to remain effective, which is a long-standing challenge with the pill. At this time, I would also point out that women can have the choice, but sometimes, it is not so much a matter of choice; it is a matter of how a woman's body reacts to these various interventions. It really should be a matter of choosing not based on cost, but based on what works best for them. If someone is a young woman in their twenties, working at a part-time job that does not offer private coverage, accessing an IUD or other contraceptive method can be a big cost when trying to manage other basic life expenses, such as rent or grocery bills. As colleagues can see, this is the reality that many Canadians are currently facing and trying to manage. We have decided to intervene and help. Bill C-64 would address the lack of access by working with provinces and territories to provide universal coverage of contraceptive medications and devices, so Canadians can access the contraceptives they need. Furthermore, some provinces are already paving the way; this is similar to how Saskatchewan led the way by implementing universal health care in the 1960s. Last year, British Columbia became the first province to provide universal access to contraceptives to their residents. Recently, Manitoba also announced a commitment to implementing universal contraceptive coverage in their province. I would join my colleague in clapping. There is a certain trend I see, with certain provinces offering these services to Canadians. What is that common trend? I think we can leave it to our imagination, but it tends to be parties that are left of centre, that are more progressive and that are willing to step in and help where people need it most. Studies from the United Kingdom show that universal access to contraceptives provided a return on investment in health and social services of nine to one for every investment in universal contraceptive access. In the Canadian context, evidence from the University of British Columbia estimated that no-cost contraception has the potential to save the B.C. health care system approximately $27 million per year. We commit to working with those provinces and the others in Canada to ensure that everyone in Canada has universal access to contraceptives. This new coverage, to be delivered by provinces and territories that enter into a bilateral agreement with the Government of Canada, means that Canadians would be able to receive the contraceptives they choose, no matter where they live or how much they earn. In turn, Canadians will be healthier; they will be empowered to make important life decisions, and they will not have to opt for less-effective or less-desirable methods of contraception because of the cost of this essential medicine. We will work with provinces and territories to provide Canadians with universal coverage for contraception. This is just the first phase of a national pharmacare plan, which can show how much of an impact universal coverage for contraception and, indeed, more than just contraception, will have on the lives of Canadians and further enshrine reproductive choice in Canada. In closing, we look forward to working with all parliamentarians to pass the pharmacare act so that all Canadians can have reproductive choice and rights and get the contraception they need and deserve.
1065 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:33:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives can find all the excuses that they want to deny women access to free contraceptives, whether it has— An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, I continue to be heckled by a caucus that has a perfect score with the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada as being completely anti-choice. They can deal with that on their own time. We will stand with Canadians. We will stand with women, and we will stand for women's rights and reproductive rights.
89 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/6/24 8:48:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I, of course, come from the province of British Columbia, where contraceptives are already provided by the provincial government. To ensure equality for women, how much money would the Province of British Columbia receive from this NDP bill because we already have contraceptives? For equality's sake, what is the number B.C. would get?
57 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border