44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 30, 2024 10:00AM
- May/30/24 7:27:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things that amazes me is the degree to which the Conservatives are so insensitive to their own constituents. One of the biggest beneficiaries of passing this legislation would be people with diabetes. Every member of Parliament has literally hundreds, if not thousands, of constituents with diabetes, and this bill is long overdue. I would like to to see it passed, and the Conservatives do not seem to want to recognize the important impact this is going to have on Canadians with diabetes.
Could the member provide his thoughts on that aspect, please?
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 7:31:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member was starting to hit the nail on the head here, when he made reference to the fact that there might be some benefit in terms of late-night sitting tonight, if somehow we can get the Conservatives to flip-flop on this particular issue.
It is encouraging, and the first step is to recognize not only people with diabetes, but also the millions of Canadians who would directly benefit because of contraceptive coverage. I believe it is somewhere around nine million women who would, potentially, directly benefit from this aspect of the program.
Can the member comment?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will actually ask the member a question about the legislation. In Bill C-64, clause 6, “Payments”, it says very specifically that it is supposed “to provide universal, single-payer, first-dollar coverage”.
First-dollar coverage means that if a private insurance company today covers diabetic medication, it will not be able to do so if this legislation comes into force. In fact, it would be a crime. It would be illegal to do that, which means that there is a great potential for Canadians who are currently insured for their diabetes medication with a private insurer to lose it. They are actually the majority in this country.
How many Canadians would lose the coverage that they currently have because of this first-dollar coverage found in clause 6 of Bill C-64?
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 7:47:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I can tell the constituents whom he represents that what he just said is not accurate. He tried to give the impression that the people of Ontario do not have to pay anything for diabetes medications.
There are things such as deductions and a whole spectrum of ways in which there are direct and indirect charges for people who need insulin. I think the member does a disservice in trying to discredit the legislation, when I am sure he knows better, as the Conservative leader ought to know, that millions of Canadians would in fact benefit by the passage of this legislation. The Conservatives really need to ask themselves, collectively, in front of a mirror, “Why are we trying to deny Canadians these benefits?”
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 7:58:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am well aware that the member has had a long career and that he lived through the Harper regime, the most expensive regime in Canadian history. Some $116 billion was given to the big banks to increase their profits. According to the Parliamentary Budget Office, $30 billion a year went to tax havens thanks to Mr. Harper and his team. Of course, there was also all the money given to CEOs in the oil patch.
The costly Conservatives spent a lot of money on the rich and affluent. However, now we are talking about pharmacare, which will help people in his riding. It will help 18,000 people with diabetes who are struggling every month to pay sometimes up to $1,000 for their medication.
The question I want to ask my friend is very simple. Why are the Conservatives so keen on spending money on billionaires, CEOs and banks, but do not want to give a penny to people struggling to pay for their medication, such as diabetes medication?
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 8:12:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague across the way for a very impassioned speech, based on real lived experiences, that was not intentionally partisan. It was actually about reality. The class of by-elections of 2023, I think, includes some of the best around this place.
I will respond in kind with a bit of a personal reality. My beautiful wife, Cailey, was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at age one, which I think was the earliest in the country at that point. Prior to meeting her, I did not know a lot about diabetes, so I personally had to learn a lot of the challenges of living with diabetes and what it entails, and I certainly can recognize the costs.
I am going to do a quick shout-out, while I have the opportunity, to wish Cailey a happy birthday tomorrow. I look forward to spending the day with her.
Cailey is on an insurance plan, as are many other Canadians, and a real concern is that the options available for specific products and insulin are adequately covered for the majority of people right now. Why the need to aim for universality when we could be more targeted and use taxpayer dollars more efficiently to still try to seek the same results? Obviously the expectation is to expand this to other products. We need to be smart with taxpayers' money while still trying to seek the results the member wants to achieve.
244 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 8:15:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, early in my career as a politician, I was in a meeting with two young people who had type 1 diabetes. They came from two different provinces, so it was very interesting to hear the story of those young people and their parents. What stuck with me was that one young person lived in one province and had an important, often life-saving device, and the other young person from a different province did not have it. The reason they did not have it is that it was costing them a significant amount of money every month. The dad had been hurt on the job; he was now living on very minimal income, and they had to take the device away from their child. Could the member talk about how this would really create that important factor of universality so that all young people who have type 1 diabetes get exactly the same appropriate care across Canada?
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 8:16:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the point. When we use the word “universal”, it is to ensure we do not have this kind of hodgepodge patchwork health care system across provinces, but that any Canadian, wherever they live in the country, is able to access these medicines when they need it.
I mentioned in my remarks that I worked with a lot of first nations kids in northern Manitoba in particular. Because there is so much migration within the province through to the city of Winnipeg, as a result of historical harms and all the reasons we know indigenous people are disadvantaged in this country, they are disproportionately susceptible to many of the challenges that come along with diabetes and other poor health outcomes. For first nations kids, in particular, and indigenous kids as a whole, as well as people such as the constituents she was talking about, the legislation would allow for us to fill some of the gaps that exist and make sure they get the type of health services that they need in this country. I am proud to work alongside her and other members across the way who support this legislation.
197 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 8:27:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is not true. That is not the reason why the members of the Conservative Party have difficulty with this bill. The reality is that when it comes to diabetes and contraceptives, millions of Canadians will actually have benefits that many of them would never have had without the passage of this legislation. The member might be sympathetic as an individual member, but let there be no doubt that the Conservative Party of Canada, under the current far-right leadership of the leader today, does not support national pharmacare in any fashion whatsoever.
The member should not be trying to confuse the debate on this issue, to try to imply that it is some bogus reason as to why they are not supporting it. He might support it individually, but the party, the official opposition, does not.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 9:00:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives, in a bizarre way, seem obsessed with the size of the bill. It is just a few pages, they say.
There is another bill that Canadians hold dear, and it is called the Canada Health Act. It is just a few pages, but it puts in place our universal health care that, in poll after poll, 80% of Canadians see as our most cherished institution.
The dental care plan the NDP pushed out, which Conservatives refused to support and in fact tried to block at every turn, has now helped hundreds of seniors in the member's riding.
Now we have pharmacare, which would help about 18,000 people in this riding with diabetes and 25,000 who are looking for contraception. The reality is that the next election will be a health care election. Conservatives are very badly placed because all they have done is obstruct and block rather than offering anything at all.
Why is my colleague blocking legislation that would help 18,000 of his constituents who have diabetes, and who are sometimes paying up to $1,000 a month, and 25,000 people who are looking for support for contraception?
197 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 9:17:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I worked for many years in a community outreach centre where we saw a disproportionate number of indigenous people who were outside of the supports they needed. Health care and pharmaceuticals for chronic disease management were very much part of that.
I think the agreements between the provinces and the territories, which are clearly laid out in this bill, are going to be important to ensure that every Canadian has access to diabetes medications and contraceptives.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 9:45:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened to the hon. member's comments around the young lady and the child who did not have diabetes coverage. That is actually the reason I got into politics and fought with the Saskatchewan Party in 2011 to increase coverage for diabetes, and then again in 2016 to yet again increase the coverage for everyone in Saskatchewan who has diabetes.
Could the hon. member please tell me this: Does she know what age complete coverage for diabetes goes up to in Saskatchewan? Will the member's plan, this fake health pharmacare plan, cover it as well as it is covered in Saskatchewan? Just give the age number, please.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 10:33:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have worked with the member very closely on a number of files, and I know him to be a very honourable member of this place.
He referenced the Hoskins report many times, and of course this is the report that was commissioned by the government to look at this. It found that $5 billion of savings would be available if we were to put in a national pharmacare program. Like the member, I recognize that this is not a full pharmacare program. This is a framework on which we could build a pharmacare program.
Could the member comment on the medications or drugs that he thinks should be next in the pharmacare program now that we have dedicated this particular step to diabetes medication and devices and to contraceptives?
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 10:48:12 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, Jordan's principle is such an important story to always remember because the implementation of it allows payments to be made up front and for the jurisdictions to discuss who ends up paying for it in the end. We have an opportunity with the pharmacare act for women and gender-diverse people to get their contraceptives immediately, without having to worry about whether it is going to be the provinces or the federal government who pays for it, as well as for people to get their diabetes medication.
I know this kind of system can work because we see it in Jordan's principle, especially when we have discovered, through that program, the atrocities indigenous children are forced to experience and that treatment will happen immediately. We need that same kind of foundation through this pharmacare program.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 11:03:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his commitment and passion to the national pharmacare program.
In my riding of Davenport, having a national pharmacare program is very popular. Constituents are very excited about phase one with the introduction of diabetes medication being covered, as well as contraceptives. I know that they are looking for an expansion of this program, which is something I am very interested in as well.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 11:18:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, to the member for Courtenay—Alberni, who I have worked with on health care many times over the last nine years, I applaud him for his passion and care for his constituents and for his desire to do the best that he believes he can to help. I do believe he is doing what he can to help. Ultimately, though, this piece of legislation is about diabetes coverage. It is not about rare diseases. It is about diabetes coverage, and that diabetes coverage would actually be less than what is available in other programs.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
