SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 315 - May/22/24

May/22/24 5:14:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the choice of government is for Canadians. It is not for the member, nor me. First of all, as the member is a medical professional, I found some of his interventions quite astounding. The notion that investing in the health care system is somehow inappropriate is not what his province advocated for, nor did any of the other 10 provinces and three territories when we struck an almost $200-billion deal. What I would also say is that it is really fundamental to get straight what we are talking about here. We are talking about delivering health care for Canadians by investing in their medication. As the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands rightfully pointed out, we are alone in the OECD in being a state that provides medical care coverage without providing medication coverage. That is an anomaly that we are curing with this important step. Why is it important? Because it deals with reproductive rights for women and medication for diabetes, which affects 3.7 million Canadians. Those are two cohorts that desperately need our support. That is what we are providing through this legislation and that is why we are moving with pace to implement it.

201 words

Advocated

Mr. Richard Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay, NDP)

May/22/24 5:15:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister about concerns that we share with him about all the blockages the Conservatives have been putting up on bills like dental care that would help Canadians across the country. They seem to think that they deserve dental care here as MPs, yet needy families in the rest of Canada should not have dental care. They believe that we should not have single-payer pharmacare that would save us billions of dollars a year. Canadians seem to think the Conservatives are good on the economy, but the Conservatives have no concept that this measure to create a single-payer pharmacare plan that would include coverage for contraceptives, as well as the dental care plan and all the other things that we talked about, would save us money. I am just wondering if the minister could comment on that.

146 words

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:16:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think the fiscal case for proceeding in this manner is quite remarkably already laid out in studies, such as the one at UBC that I cited, and studies that we have seen in other areas with respect to diabetes. If there was no need for these kinds of services, I would query the Conservatives why 1.9 million seniors in this country registered for the Canada dental benefit, if no actual need existed. I would put to the Conservatives, also, that if there was no need for extending that coverage on dental care, why we have already had 100,000 appointments set up, in literally the first three weeks of the program. It expresses to me, on a simplistic analysis, that the need is acute. We are addressing the need with the program. Does it cost money? It absolutely costs money. However, that is an investment on the front end that cures costs to the system on the back end, which is something that a traditional red Tory would normally get behind.

175 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

May/22/24 5:17:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there is a fairly simple dictum in politics that everyone knows, and it is that adding is better than subtracting. We try to add to the number of people who are willing to support our positions. By the same token, when a bill as momentous as this government bill is introduced, the aim is to get all the provinces to buy in and consent. This is not the case for pharmacare, however. The government never negotiated with the provinces and Quebec to secure their buy-in. It decided to implement a one-size-fits-all pharmacare program throughout Quebec, without having the necessary jurisdiction. That is why, today, it has to impose closure. The Quebec government wants nothing to do with this version of pharmacare that the Liberal government is putting in place. The only ones who are happy with it are the members of the Liberal government, who are trying to spin it to their advantage with the electorate and preserve their alliance with the NDP. This is not the case for mere mortals. People who just want quality services can see that this bill has been botched. If the government truly cared about health care, it would fund it at the level that the provinces are asking for, rather than cutting transfers year after year and starving our health system of the resources it needs. That is the question my colleague should weigh in on.

239 words

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:19:22 p.m.
Watch

I do not agree at all with the remarks of my colleague opposite. First, when we created a national program for all of Canada's provinces and territories by investing about $200 billion, we launched a process to sign bilateral agreements with each province, Quebec included. Second, I would ask my colleague to talk to diabetics and women in his riding about the cost of their medication these days. The oral contraception pill costs about $25 a month, or $300 a year. Diabetes medication can cost between $900 and $1,700 a year. I think my colleague should support this bill so that his constituents can save money while receiving care from the health system and getting their medication.

120 words

Mr. Marc Dalton (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, CPC)

May/22/24 5:20:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I find the Liberal-NDP support of health care to be somewhat confusing. On one hand, they say they are providing all of these supports and building a whole new bureaucracy, but on the other hand, they are making things much more difficult and restricting choices for health care. I am thinking specifically of natural health products, which most Canadians take in one form or another. The policies and legislation they are bringing in would restrict and reduce the number of choices that Canadians could make. I wonder if the minister can put it together. On one hand, Liberals say, yes, they want to help. On the other hand, they are not helping. They are making it harder for Canadians.

122 words

Health

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:21:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk about the medication that would be covered under this proposal, which is diabetic medication and contraception. I am struggling to find any shred of a basis or rationale for the Conservatives' opposition to this. What I can only conclude is that the very issue of contraception is somehow some sort of sacred cow for the Conservative Party because it touches upon the very important notion, which we believe in firmly on this side of the House, in alliance with some of our progressive allies in this chamber, that women, and only women, have the right to have control over their own bodies and their own reproductive processes. What impact would this have on women? It would have a significant impact. Not having affordable access to effective contraception can increase the risk of unintended pregnancies and impact life plans, such as going to school or advancing in one's career. By giving women this control, we would be not only helping their health care outcomes, but also helping their economic and education outcomes. Certainly, that is not something the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge would oppose for his female constituents.

198 words

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC)

May/22/24 5:22:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to this legislation, I believe there should be more debate on it because it is a wider bill. Right now, it takes about seven years for an oncology drug to be approved in Canada. That is partly because of the many processes it has to go through at Health Canada and through a provincial group that discusses drugs, etc. This would add to that, so we need to have more conversation about it. Outside of that, I would like to correct the minister. It is within the purview of the government, through the regular supply process, to basically fund initiatives, and it can come to agreements with provinces to fund particular things under its fiscal power. It does not need to have legislation such as this. Would the minister please acknowledge that the government does not need to have this legislation in place to make payments to individual provinces? British Columbia has already approved contraception through its own budget process. That is something that was debated in its legislature and passed. He does not need to do that here and now. I am concerned with other measures within the bill. The government does not need this bill to pass to make those payments to provinces, whether it be for diabetes or for contraception.

218 words

Fiscal

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:24:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for offering a substantive question and comment to this debate. We have an agreement that there are health care needs that relate to medication. That is useful progress. I would say that there is a need for proceeding in this context with this very particular piece of legislation because the program is not meant to be a checkerboard where it is done on a bilateral basis, province by province. It is meant to be national, covering all 10 provinces and all three territories. That is the first very important point. The second very important point is that the very pressing issue the member raised about oncological medications for cancer treatment is something that deserves to be discussed and debated. By starting incrementally, we are finally opening the door towards pharmacare in this country as an important expansion of our medical care system. Through the Canada drug agency, the new formulary and the expert recommendations that would follow, we would learn more about whether oncological drugs should be the next salvo in expanding this envelope.

180 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

May/22/24 5:25:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives want absolutely nothing to do with a measure that will help tens of thousands of people in their ridings. In each Conservative riding, approximately 18,000 people could benefit from diabetes medication and 25,000 people could have access to contraception. What I do not understand is why the Bloc Québécois is opposed to it. The Bloc Québécois wants to block this bill, even though all the major labour groups in Quebec have clearly stated that the bill is very useful and should be passed. Now, the number of Quebeckers involved with the unions affiliated with these major labour groups is far greater than the number who voted for the Bloc Québécois in the last federal election. The big question is, why is the Bloc Québécois planning to oppose measures that will help millions of Quebeckers?

159 words

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:26:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is another very good question. I have been wondering the same thing, given the tradition in the Bloc Québécois and Quebec of promoting gender equality, promoting women's rights, promoting women's freedom, empowerment and access to health care. It is a bit sad and dangerous when a woman in Quebec has to choose between paying the bills and paying for medication. With this bill, we will eliminate the need to make that choice. We will respond women's needs. This is a very serious situation that affects not just Quebec women, but approximately nine million women across Canada. It is a significant problem. We must pick up the pace in order to meet their needs.

123 words

Mr. Mario Simard

May/22/24 5:27:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I can tell my NDP colleague that the Bloc Québécois never opposes progressive policies. It defends the political independence of Quebec. That is what the Bloc Québécois does. I would also like to point out to my colleague that many unions are members of OUI Québec. OUI Québec is a pro-independence umbrella group. Does this mean the NDP does not support Quebec unions, since it opposes independence? We cannot be allies in every battle, but we are definitely closer to most Quebec unions than the NDP is, because Quebec has already proven how progressive it is. Still, I am astounded that the Minister of Justice is drawing a link between women's rights and the fact the Bloc Québécois opposes pharmacare. No society is more progressive on women's rights than Quebec. If the Minister of Justice wants to improve gender equality, one of the best ways to do that would be to pass a secularism law, since certain religions make distinctions between men and women. I do not know if he is in favour of passing a secularism law. I would like it if he could tell us.

208 words

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:28:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we just heard some interesting comments. I want to note that when we talk about women, there are impacts on women as a whole, but there is also a disproportionate impact on certain women. I am talking about first nations women, Métis women, women of African heritage, as well as East Asian and South Asian women. These women are disproportionately affected by diabetes. I hope that those who come from a progressive people and party will understand that these women are disproportionately affected by the policies currently in place regarding diabetes.

95 words

Mr. Arnold Viersen (Peace River—Westlock, CPC)

May/22/24 5:29:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was elected at the same time the minister was, and I remember the sunny ways and accusations that the Liberals made against the Conservatives about our use of closure and our use of ending debate here. The Liberals promised, in the 2015 election, that they would no longer do that. Is the minister proud of himself today?

60 words

Hon. Arif Virani

May/22/24 5:29:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud, as I am advancing the rights of women and the rights of diabetics in Canada. I am a bit concerned about the member for Peace River—Westlock. About two short days after the member's leader cavalierly indicated that he would be invoking the notwithstanding clause to trample Canadians' charter rights, the member for Peace River—Westlock stood up and called for ending abortions, protecting the preborn and overturning the Morgentaler decision. That demonstrates quite clearly who is on the side of protecting women's rights and women's reproductive rights in this chamber.

102 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/22/24 5:30:20 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time. Members may wish to refer to the Speaker's ruling from June 7, 2021, at page 8001 of the Debates where the Speaker addressed the situation and indicated to the House that “the question and comment period on a time allocation motion or closure motion will be interrupted only if there is an opportunity to conclude the proceedings in the same sitting.” Accordingly, I will remind members that there are four minutes remaining for questions and comments on the motion after Private Members' Business.

97 words

Ms. Sylvie Bérubé

May/22/24 5:30:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for me to introduce the bill that I planned to introduce today.

33 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/22/24 5:31:10 p.m.
Watch

Is it agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Ms. Sylvie Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ)

May/22/24 5:31:48 p.m.
Watch

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-390, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (provincial medical assistance in dying framework). She said: Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise today to introduce this important bill entitled an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding a provincial medical assistance in dying framework. The purpose of my bill is to enable persons who have an incapacitating illness to make an advance request for medical assistance in dying, in accordance with the unanimous will of the Quebec National Assembly. The recognition of advance requests for MAID in the context of a serious, incurable, incapacitating illness would constitute an important step forward for patients' peace of mind. The text of this bill amends the Criminal Code so that MAID can be provided under a provincial framework that stipulates that a person with an illness that could deprive them of the capacity to consent to care can make an advance request for MAID.

160 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/22/24 5:33:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I have done in the past to have the questions on the Order Paper on the record, I would ask for unanimous consent to do so. I believe there was consultation done prior.

36 words

Record
Prior