SoVote

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

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

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/22/24 5:33:29 p.m.
Watch

Is it agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/22/24 5:33:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 2487, 2490, 2491 and 2497 to 2500.

17 words

May/22/24 5:35:52 p.m.
Watch

Question No. 2487—

Questioner: Marc Dalton

With regard to Health Canada's (HC) authorization of COVID-19 vaccines: (a) has HC received studies about theoretical risk of Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED), also referred to as Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE), from the manufacturers of the COVID-19 vaccines; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, (i) what were the outcome of the studies, (ii) which manufacturers and independent researchers are conducting these studies, (iii) what were the timelines to completion; (c) if the answer to (a) is negative, did HC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, or the National Advisory Committee identify a need for long-term studies to examine VAED, and, if not, why not; (d) has any federal health agency, department or other government entity been monitoring for VAED ADE post-COVID-19 injections; (e) if the answer to (d) is affirmative, (i) what is the data, (ii) what are the timelines, (iii) was this active or passive monitoring; (f) if the answer to (d) is negative, why not; and (g) has any federal health agency, department or other government entity been monitoring for the potential of vaccine-enhanced infectivity?

Question No. 2490—

Questioner: Terry Dowdall

With regard to Canada Post: (a) what was the total amount spent on fuel in the last year; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by gasoline versus diesel; (c) what is the estimated number of litres of (i) gasoline, (ii) diesel fuel, purchased in the last year; (d) how many vehicles does Canada Post currently own; (e) what is the breakdown of vehicles owned by (i) diesel fueled, (ii) gasoline fueled, (iii) hybrid, (iv) electric; (f) what is the estimated number of kilometers driven by Canada Post vehicles last year; and (g) what is the breakdown of (a) through (f) by province or territory?

Question No. 2491—

Questioner: Richard Cannings

With regard to the Housing Accelerator Fund, since September 1, 2023: (a) how many applications for federal funding were rejected or unsuccessful, broken down by (i) province or territory, (ii) municipality; and (b) what is the projected number of residences that could have been constructed if funding was provided?

Question No. 2497—

Questioner: Ryan Williams

With regard to Environment and Climate Change Canada’s funding of the barn swallow nesting structure project in Prince Edward Point: (a) what was the cost of the project, in total, and broken down by item and type of expense; and (b) what are the details of all contracts related to the project, including, for each, the (i) amount, (ii) vendor, (iii) date and duration, (iv) description of the goods or services provided, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (i.e. sole-sourced or competitive bid)?

Question No. 2498—

Questioner: Dave Epp

With regard to the completion date on the Gordie Howe International Bridge project being delayed until September 2025: (a) was the delay related to disputes with Valard Construction; (b) to which of the four major associated construction projects are the additional $700 million assigned, and which of these projects is expected to result in more claims; (c) will the $700 million cover the overrun costs to the subcontractors until the end of 2022; (d) what additional funds will be allocated for work order charges from 2023, 2024 and 2025 until the end of the project; and (e) if there will be no additional funds allocated, will the government confirm there will be no more contractors' claims for the remainder of the project?

Question No. 2499—

Questioner: Dave Epp

With regard to the Gordie Howe International Bridge project: (a) what are the estimated costs to taxpayers associated with the new completion date; and (b) will the cost overruns, those identified and the others yet to be determined, lengthen the time it takes for Canadian taxpayers to be reimbursed through the collection of tolls, will the toll charges be increased to cover the additional costs, or both?

Question No. 2500—

Questioner: Claude DeBellefeuille

With regard to the Canada Post building located at 180 Victoria Street, Salaberry-de-Valleyfield: (a) what are the annual expenses related to the operation of the post office and the sorting facility; (b) what investments are planned between now and 2030 at this building and for the operations that take place there; and (c) what is the estimated market value of the building and the land?

2395 words