SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 321

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 30, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24
Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)
  • May/30/24 7:44:45 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-64 
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!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24
Mr. Warren Steinley
  • May/30/24 10:21:00 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, in Saskatchewan, in 2011, the Saskatchewan Party made a commitment to campaign on providing coverage for diabetics up to the age 18. Then, in 2016, we campaigned to move that to age 25. That is exactly what we did: we provided coverage for diabetics until the age of 25. The theory behind that was, after the age of 25, a lot of people had their own coverage when they were gainfully employed and had private insurance. There are still other programs to cover people who are less insured. The problem I have with this is that we do not know what the coverage is going to be. Not all diabetics take the same medicine either, so we do not know which medicines would be covered in this program, as it is not going to be all of them, which goes to my point that consultations should be done before bringing in legislation so we know what works and what does not.
163 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24
Mr. Marcus Powlowski
  • May/30/24 10:35:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the very perceptive question by the member from Ottawa. This is a very important point. We heard from a lot of people, and there was a lot of concern about having a basic system. What if we needed more expensive medications for certain things? Would we be getting rid of private drug plans? That is not necessarily the case. There will be a public plan, but I think there would still be the option, if people wanted, to pay additional money for a private plan that would cover all the things that are not currently insured, as there is for other kinds of health care at the moment.
112 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24
Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)
  • May/30/24 11:17:48 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will talk about someone who is insured. Sheila wrote to me and said that with two type 1s in the family, with one suffering from multiple complications from 50 years with the disease, their out-of-pocket medical expenses are about $18,000 a year, and that is with extended medical. Otherwise, it would be about $30,000. That is one paycheque just to keep everyone alive and well. Maybe my colleague can say a few words to Sheila on why he is blocking getting her the help she deserves and needs.
95 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border