Debates of April 16th, 2024

Pharmacare Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member withdrew it. He does not need to elaborate. I just asked him to withdraw.

The hon. member for Cariboo—Prince George has the floor.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, most of that member's minute-and-a-half-long rant was incomprehensible. I could not understand what he was saying. However, on one comment that he did mention is that they like to point fingers at other groups and lobbyists. I will remind the member that his leader's brother is a lobbyist for a big grocer. They may not like the answer. They obviously do not like the answer, so they are shouting over top—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order.

I want to remind members that they have an opportunity to ask questions, but unless they are being recognized again, they should not be yelling out or trying to ask other questions.

The hon. member for Cariboo—Prince George has the floor.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is unfortunate that when we speak the truth here, those members take offence to it, because all they want on the record is their misinformation. They can say everything they want about the Conservatives, but when we fire back at them, they take offence to it.

I hope I did not hurt the member's feelings by not answering, but I am sure we will speak off-line and hug it out afterward. I will end there.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We have seen a lot in the House, but since the member could not answer the question, he does not need to attack the emotion of my colleague. He does not need to hug him; he needs to tell the truth. It is a simple thing.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

This is a point of debate, not a point of order.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Durham.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise in the chamber today as Canada's newest member of Parliament elected to represent the riding of Durham. I have a very clear message to deliver on behalf of my community in Durham. We are tired of the Prime Minister's broken promises. We are tired of the Prime Minister promising to fix this and that and, in return, what we receive is a life that is harder and more expensive.

The Conservatives believe that Canadians deserve better and that the topic of debate today, pharmacare, is just the latest example of the Prime Minister promising big things, only to disappoint the people of Canada. I put my name on a ballot and wanted this job as a member of Parliament because, despite the Prime Minister's best efforts, I am optimistic and hopeful about the future of our country. I believe that once we have a new leader in this great land, we will see brighter days ahead.

My optimism does not come from these big deficits or big budget announcements. My optimism comes from my knowledge of the people of Canada and the people of Durham. My optimism comes from people like Kirk Kemp, who runs one of the biggest and most important agricultural businesses in Canada, Algoma Orchards. As he becomes more successful in his business, he only gives back more to our community, supporting initiatives like the Bowmanville Hospital redevelopment.

My optimism comes from people like Dr. Kan Chandra, a dentist in Courtice, Ontario, who has built a tremendous business, provides for his family and gives back to our community as a connector for Durham's growing Tamil community.

My optimism comes from Kim and Leon Morrow over on Taunton Road East in Oshawa, who scrape together every spare dollar they can find and every spare moment to provide guidance and mentorship to young men and women who may otherwise fall into the pitfalls that await struggling youth. However, Kim and Leon have their backs. That is why I am hopeful about the future of the country.

I am very honoured to stand in this beautiful building and I appreciate the chance to dress up in a suit and tie, but my heart was not shaped in places like this. My heart was shaped by people like my grandfather, Robert McFarlane, may he rest in peace. My grandfather worked as a school custodian for decades in the Toronto District School Board, a man who swept and mopped the floors, who kept the classrooms tidy and locked up at the end of the night so that children had a place to learn and teachers had a place to work. I carry his story with me.

I come into this job very much a servant, like my grandpa. I am here to protect what makes the country special, to protect the rights and freedoms of Canadians, to ensure our country continues to be a place where people from all over the world can come and find a better life, people like my grandpa who came here from Scotland, my grandmother who came here from Ireland and my father who came here from Kenya.

I am aware that there is a Liberal playbook that gets used against people who disagree with the Prime Minister, a playbook that likes to marginalize and vilify anyone who has the audacity to stand up and say that what is happening in our country right now is not right. That playbook the Prime Minister likes to use that casts people who disagree with him as racists. I would welcome the Prime Minister to try that with me. Based on our history, I do not think that will go so well for him.

The Prime Minister is completely out of touch with the needs and desires, hopes and dreams of our very diverse country and diverse communities like the one I represent in Durham. He is welcome to take his claims that people who disagree with him are racist to my African father and see how that goes for him.

The Prime Minister also uses the Liberal playbook to marginalize and vilify Canadians who disagree with him by calling those of us who believe in traditional family values bigots. I ask him to come to my diverse riding in Durham and try that on us, where we have Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus and Jews living together, all people who believe that mothers and fathers matter. He is welcome to try that with us.

I know his Liberal playbook also likes to say that people who disagree with him do not care about the working class or do not care about vulnerable people. That is not going to work on me either. I am not a trust fund baby. Like most people in the country, I have clawed, scraped and worked hard for everything I have. I do not think the Prime Minister can say the same thing.

The reality is this. He is welcome to try that message on people like my mom. She would love to have a conversation with him. She is a woman who raised three children by herself. She is 68 years old and continues to work hard every day, because she cannot afford to retire in the NDP-Liberal economy. The Liberal playbook is not going to work. The Liberals can try their greatest hits. Tune up the guitar, tune up the banjo, the greatest hits are not hitting anymore.

I am here to deliver that message very clearly on behalf of my community in Durham and people everywhere else in our great country who are unhappy with what is happening, who are feeling frustrated because they are unable to say what is happening in their hearts and their minds, do not feel validated and affirmed by the reality they experience not being echoed by many of the institutions across the country that have bought into a narrative that simply does not reflect reality.

With the remainder of my time, I would also like to deliver a message to any young men and women across the country who might hear my words. My presence in this chamber is a glitch in the system. I am not supposed to be here. When I was 15 years old, I failed the Ontario literacy test. I was labelled illiterate by the Ontario education system, but I am here.

At the age of 30, I was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. I sat in a recliner with an IV in my arm, pumping my body with chemotherapy drugs. I laid on a hospital bed as radiation lasers ran along my spine for months, but I am here. I took on woke censorship from corporate Canada, looked it dead in the eye and I am here. I have been the subject of hit piece after hit piece from Liberal news media. Guess what, I am here.

The reality is that many young men and women are facing a variety of challenges across the country right now, some of whom are facing things I cannot even fathom. As long as I stand in the House of Commons, as long as I am honoured to call myself a member of Parliament, I hope I can be a walking, talking reminder that people should never give up. They should not give up on themselves, their families, their communities and our country. As long as I am here, I will not give up on them either.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for sharing his personal stories and congratulate him on his first speech in the chamber.

Could the member give his personal perspective on the principles of a national pharmacare program?

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, my concern in being asked about pharmacare is that I have been drawn into a debate that assumes the Liberal-NDP government will do what it says it will do. Over the course of the last eight years, we have seen that is simply not going to happen.

We have a country full of people, tens of millions of people, who have been led to believe over and over again that the Liberal-NDP government and the Prime Minister are going to deliver for the hard-working people of our country, yet that has never happened.

Before I discuss anything like the principles of pharmacare, I would like to be convinced that something substantive actually will happen for the people of Canada. I would love to go back to my riding and say that the Liberals have a plan for us. Unfortunately, everything I have seen since I got here last Monday has indicated otherwise.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating my colleague on his election and his first speech.

I recall a great quote by Scott Brison, who sat on both the Liberal and Conservative benches. When he sat in the House, he said that although he did not share a lot of the policies of the Conservative Party, regardless of where we sat in the House, we could have a huge impact and difference for Canadians. I hope my colleague will take that to heart and work collectively with members to try to find solutions to support Canadians as we walk forward together.

With respect to the question on insulin, my colleague cited the delays by the Liberal government, and I agree, but does he believe that if insulin were free of charge, it would be of benefit to his constituents and would he be willing to work with us to find a pathway to expedite that?

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, when I was a cancer patient at North York General Hospital and Sunnybrook hospital, I saw many people in very dire health circumstances, people facing all sorts of challenges, some of with whom I shared a cancer ward. What was very clear to me was that we needed programs that could help people who did not have the money to purchase the drugs they needed. The cancer ward at North York General Hospital has a provincial program to help people with drugs.

What I continue to be confused about, as I hear this debate on pharmacare, is why there is not a greater recognition of the need to work with the provinces to solve some of these problems. I saw people right beside me, hooked up to the same IVs as I was, getting their body pumped with chemotherapy drugs. They depended on those provincial programs to get the health care they needed. What I worry about, and I think what my fellow cancer patients at North York General Hospital would worry as well, including cancer patients all across the country, is whether this is a matter of creating more bureaucracy in Ottawa or whether we are actually concerned about providing people with what they need at an affordable price.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, my colleague, the member for Durham, has had the opportunity to knock on doors very recently. I wonder if you can enlighten the House on the issues that you—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would remind the hon. member to address his questions and comments through the Chair and not directly to the member.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I apologize, Madam Speaker. I was caught up in the moment.

Could the member elaborate on the issues he heard, when he was knocking on doors in his most recent election, so all Canadians can understand what the issues are out there?

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, the short answer to my colleague's question is affordability. People from all ages, whether they are seniors who are concerned about their pensions and not being able to afford a good quality of life, or people my own age who are living in their parents' basement, hoping to move out and start a family one day, across generations, across cultures, across languages, are concerned about affordability and whether the NDP-Liberal government can make life easier so we can move forward with our lives. What is uniting Canadians right now is their concern about affordability.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is a real pleasure to rise today to speak to a very important piece of legislation, Bill C-64. I will be sharing my time today with the hon. member for Humber River—Black Creek.

This is important legislation because, for decades, we have been talking about the need to bring in pharmacare. I look at this as the first step in bringing in pharmacare, which could cover a whole host of drugs and medicines that are very important for people. I would agree with the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, who was speaking earlier, that this is about preventative health care. This is about helping people before they get to the point when they would need to go to an emergency room. This is about getting people their very important medication.

When we have an issue like this that further builds on our health care system, which is a health care system that has developed over generations through, at times, very difficult partnerships and relationships with provinces, I am disheartened to see that, in the very first speech on this issue, when Conservatives stood, they brought in a motion to amend the bill. The amendment would basically substitute everything after the word “That” with “The House decline to give second reading”. That is all the Conservatives did.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, now they are clapping. Conservatives are clapping as a result of this non-motion. They could have just voted against the bill to say they were not interested. Instead, they introduced a second vote. It will take 10 minutes to vote down their amendment before we vote in favour and pass this very important piece of legislation. I imagine that, much like there was with the piece of legislation on sustainable jobs, which we finally voted on yesterday, there will be obstruction after obstruction with Conservatives playing with the bill at committee and through the various stages of the House.

I ask myself why Conservatives would be so dead set against legislation like this. In my opinion, this is about helping people, particularly the people who really need help. The vast majority of Conservative donors, and the people they look to for fundraising, are individuals who, quite frankly, could probably afford to have private insurance or work in a job that provides insurance. The individuals I see who would really benefit from this legislation are those vulnerable individuals in our society who are not covered by health care or pharmacare plans or who do not have insurance in one way or another.

One of the criticisms we hear from Conservatives is that this is about provincial jurisdiction. The Conservatives have said that this is provincial jurisdiction and ask why we are getting in the way of it. I will then ask them why they voted in favour of the national child care plan. They got up to talk down the plan for hours on end, but ultimately, they ended up voting in favour of it. That was something we needed to work together with the provinces on to make it a reality. The Conservatives saw a benefit in voting in favour of that, so they did. However, they cannot seem to see the same way forward with this particular issue.

This bill would introduce pharmacare by first setting up the system to provide for two drugs: insulin, for individuals with diabetes, and contraceptives. This is extremely important. There are nine million women and gender-diverse Canadians all across the country who would get access to the contraception and reproductive autonomy they deserve. This is really important in the context we are in, and I will explain why.

Right now, when we look south of the border, we are literally watching state legislatures and the Supreme Court of the United States make rulings that are further confining the ability of a woman's right to choose. We are seeing legislation being adopted that is something that we thought would have been dreamt up, that we would have assumed the United States had moved away from decades ago. Canada will stand up to a very aggressive position to say that we will not go down the same road as the United States. Despite the fact that many Conservatives, I am sure, would love to do that, we will not. We will ensure that a woman would have not only the right to choose, but also free access to the necessary medication specifically for contraceptive purposes.

I will certainly be voting in favour of this. I look forward to this bill coming to the House so we can have that vote, if the Conservatives ever let us get there.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, in my province of British Columbia, we are sending cancer patients for therapy to the United States. Does the member have concerns about provinces sending people to the American system?

The Minister of Health has said that we do not want to go to the United States' system, yet our public health care system in British Columbia is sending patients to the United States. Here we are, talking about expanding more bureaucracy, when we have provinces such as mine that are sending patients there. What does the member have to say about that sad state of affairs?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, if I understand the member correctly, what he is saying is that his province has to send people to the U.S. for treatment. I do not know about that, but I will take his word for it that he believes it. He is saying his province has to send people to the United States, so we should not try to do anything else to help Canadians.

This legislation is about developing a national framework. I am sorry that there are issues in his province with health care. He should come to Ontario. I would love to have a chat with him about the issues that Doug Ford has created in Ontario.

However, that is beside the point. What we are talking about is developing a national strategy as it relates to pharmacare. This member can find all the excuses in the book that he wants to vote against this. At the end of the day, what he is going to do is vote against helping vulnerable Canadians, in particular, getting access to the medications they need.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the speech of my colleague with great interest, and I know he is a great advocate for health care for Canadians.

I would like to ask him about the situation in Quebec. Maybe he is not that familiar with it, but we did hear how many unions are in favour of our health care plan, even if their members have employer drug insurance.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question because we have different levels of coverage throughout our country. Those levels of coverage, directly or indirectly, are going to correlate to whether individuals are more wealthy or not. Therefore, somebody who works in a corporation, for example an executive high up in the corporation, probably has really good coverage. As well, within the unions, there are going to be different levels of coverage.

This is about accepting, realizing and coming to the conclusion that we all deserve the exact same level of coverage, regardless of who we are, where we work or what our income is.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Madam Speaker, in responding to the member from Quebec's question, the member just proved that he knows absolutely nothing about Quebec's pharmacare program. Everyone gets the same coverage and has access to the same molecules. The example he gave makes it absolutely clear that this government does not know what it is talking about when it talks about pharmacare. They are sorcerers' apprentices.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member is referring to the question that was previously asked and not to my answer. I would say that maybe the member did not hear what the question was.

The question the member asked me was specifically about union support for this bill and unions in Quebec that support it. I would encourage my Bloc colleague, who stands up quite often for the workers of Quebec, to consider what the union folks in Quebec are saying about this legislation. From what I hear, they are saying that they are supportive of it, so maybe the Bloc members should really give some consideration to that when it comes time to vote for this.