SoVote

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

May/6/24 8:21:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we heard several times this evening from Conservatives talking about child care. If we look at how that legislation came about, which is something the NDP pushed for for years, it was eventually written into legislation and passed in a very similar format to pharmacare, and it required the participation of provinces. We heard all sorts of opposition from the Conservatives, but what we saw is that provinces, one by one, came on board. Now, we see the same thing with pharmacare. I am just wondering if the member can project on whether we are going to see, over the coming months and the coming year, as agreements are signed with British Columbia and Manitoba, that other provinces are going to have a hard time explaining to their people why they do not get free contraception and free diabetes medication, and slowly they are all going to sign on to a national universal pharmacare plan. Is that how it is going to roll out?

166 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/6/24 8:23:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, leadership is about having the confidence to invest in Canadians and invest in Canada. We continue to work with all the provinces. We have signed all the agreements for the national early learning and child care agreements across the country with all the provinces, Conservative, New Democrats or Liberal. We have done the same on health care. As I said in my speech, I was there with the Prime Minister and the Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, the morning we signed the bilateral health care agreement of injecting $3.1 billion as part of the agreement with the Province of Ontario. That is real leadership. That is not hot air. That is real leadership, which is providing real solutions to individuals in the province of Ontario and across this country that we call home. We will continue to introduce measures that I know make a real difference in the lives of everyday Canadians, including the ones who live in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge.

167 words

Leadership

Ms. Anju Dhillon (Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, Lib.)

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

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

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

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

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

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC)

May/6/24 8:31:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite opened his speech by talking about the morning-after pill. Does he know that, in his province of Ontario, that is already covered? With respect to all the money that is going into protecting women from going full term in pregnancy, would the government instead, or in addition, at some point choose to direct the funding towards in vitro fertilization? Our birth rate in Canada is lamentably low. Rather than focusing on wiping out or tapering off the population, would they consider helping women to have babies?

92 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

May/6/24 8:32:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is a shameful display of the type of anti-choice rhetoric that happens in the House far too often with Conservatives. The facts remain: Women want the right to choose. They want the right to choose how to have their bodies, and— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, as I am being heckled by a Conservative—

66 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/6/24 8:32:58 p.m.
Watch

Order. Ask questions, get answers and comments. The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.

14 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

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

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

May/6/24 8:33:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us bring a little bit of cheer to all this by asking questions about the content. I would like the member to tell me whether he thinks that the child care program is working well in Quebec and the rest of Canada. We know that the federal government recognized Quebec's jurisdiction and its right to opt out of that program with full compensation. Does my colleague not believe that the pharmacare program could also work just as well if the federal government were to respect Quebec's expertise and jurisdiction by simply transferring the money?

99 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

May/6/24 8:34:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It is true that Quebec is a leader in Canada in many areas, including women's rights and reproduction. It is important to recognize when a province or territory is a leader or ahead of its time when it comes to important, progressive issues. The federal government must consider all of its options to create a level playing field. To level the playing field, it is important that we find ways to ensure that great ideas in provinces such as Quebec, Manitoba or British Columbia are shared by all Canadians.

99 words

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

May/6/24 8:35:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as I have heard in the House tonight, I know the Conservatives think providing free contraception is communist, but I would like to say this to the hon. member across the way: They talk about reproductive rights, but in New Brunswick, one cannot even access a trauma-informed abortion at care. We have a Canada Health Act that they have to uphold, and I am glad that the member supports that, but his government actually does not support action. It is one thing to say that we support the right to a safe, trauma-informed abortion, but it is another thing to provide access to that right.

109 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

May/6/24 8:35:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the member opposite for her intervention tonight, because it underscores the importance of electing good provincial government and the necessity to look at provinces' leadership, read their platforms very carefully and consider who they are. They demonstrate exactly who they are, whether it is their approach in New Brunswick or, frankly, in Alberta, to how they support LGBTQS+ kids. The position on abortion in New Brunswick has been demonstrated very clearly. Canadians know what they get when they elect Conservative governments in Canada: a questioning of the enshrined rights of women. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, as I continue to be heckled by members of a caucus that has a perfect score with the Abortion Rights Coalition for being anti-choice, I think they are demonstrating exactly who they are.

143 words

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

May/6/24 8:36:53 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-311

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to support what the NDP has fought for. It is the beginning of a pharmacare plan that will start with one of the things the NDP has championed for years: the reproductive rights of women and people who menstruate. It is a significant step forward to promote reproductive rights for women and gender-diverse people in Canada; we know, for far too long, leaders have neglected calls to improve reproductive health services. In this room today, I have heard Conservatives saying such things as that we already pay for abortion; they know very well that even the Liberal government still does not provide access to safe, trauma-informed abortion care. We are talking about the gamut of reproductive rights; that includes the ability, if one so chooses, to access contraception. I used to be a high school sex ed teacher. One thing we would talk to the kids about was choice and how to protect themselves and their reproductive rights should they want to avoid pregnancy. I know there are Conservatives smiling because the discussion around sex, abortion and contraception is a difficult one, but these are important open discussions that we have to have, especially as we change into a society that is becoming much more inclusive in our gender diversity. I support that. The bill would allow nine million people of reproductive age in Canada to access contraception, providing them with reproductive autonomy and reducing the risk of unintended pregnancies. However, we know that bodily autonomy is currently under attack. We have heard in the House, in fact, petitions that have been put on the floor by the Conservative Party that attack the trans community. The March for Life is happening on Thursday, and I wonder which Conservative faces we will see again this year at the campaign. Just as the colleague across the way said, the Campaign Life Coalition has labelled the Conservatives anti-choice. This is not surprising, because in this very session of Parliament, Bill C-311 was named a backdoor anti-abortion legislation in the name of so-called violence, even though it was not supported by any women's groups working with women and gender-diverse people who are experiencing violence. The bill is also a major win for promoting the rights of economic empowerment for women and gender-diverse people in Canada. We have a right to choose what we want to do with our own bodies. I find it disturbing that, in 2024, most of the people opposing the bill in the House on the Conservative side are not even impacted by it. I do not know many men in the House who have to run to the drugstore to get birth control pills or have to use diaphragms or IUDs. This is a gender-specific issue for women and gender-diverse people. It is really appalling, because the very Conservative opposition that is talking about freedom, with a leader who talks about freedom, does not believe in freedom when it comes to bodily autonomy. The member for Carleton does not believe in freedom of religion, with the kind of Islamophobic, visceral garbage I have to hear on that side. Now they are directly attacking women's right to choose.

547 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/6/24 8:41:47 p.m.
Watch

We have a point of order. The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

13 words

Ms. Marilyn Gladu

May/6/24 8:41:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, you certainly have given lots of advice on people not impugning other members with motives. I think the member has gone quite far enough, and I would ask if you could return her to the theme of today.

40 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

May/6/24 8:42:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, the member has not impugned anything. The member is just simply stating what she knows to be true. I do not think there is any motive being impugned here. I just think the Conservatives are slightly offended by what they are hearing.

50 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

May/6/24 8:42:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I was eating my dinner in the lobby and was horrified to hear the member throw out these accusations of Islamophobia, which are very serious accusations against members, with no basis. I think that is unparliamentary. The member is providing no support because she is talking utter nonsense. If I were to casually say that a member is anti-Semitic, Islamophobic or anti-Christian, I think you would find that unparliamentary. I hope you will call that member to order.

90 words

Mr. Mike Morrice

May/6/24 8:43:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, these are obviously not points of order. I think the member should continue her speech.

23 words

Mr. Peter Julian

May/6/24 8:43:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, I completely agree with my colleague from Kitchener Centre. Let the member for Winnipeg Centre speak, and hopefully the Conservatives will not provoke any more interruptions.

34 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 309