Mr. Speaker, I would first point out that I am sharing my time with the member for Mississauga South. I am happy to contribute to the debate this evening.
Having worked for over 25 years as a surgeon in a rural community in New Brunswick, having worked in a hospital setting and with community health services for all those years, having had the privilege of sitting on the Standing Committee on Health with government and opposition colleagues, whom I got to know and appreciate, I must say I have the health of all Canadians at heart.
This is why I am opposed to Motion No. 1, which questions Health Canada's Vote 5 on the department's subsidies and contributions.
Is this opposition to the motion a way of saying that the approach to achieving the government's objective regarding health is not laudable? Nothing could be further from the truth.
Some members in this House like to claim that the Government of Canada is out of touch with the public that it serves. They like to suggest that the government is disconnected from the real needs of Canadians. This is far from the reality, and in more ways than one.
One of the most appropriate ways to demonstrate that we care about the health of Canadians is to look at the subsidies and contributions that Health Canada gives to community organizations and to its partners, the provincial and territorial governments. These funds meet real needs in the health sector and they allow us to explore new avenues to strengthen our health system. Currently, subsidies and contributions are given to partners that do productive work in this country.
The basic principle is that our government is taking measures regarding a large number of priorities in health, priorities that Canadians feel are important.
Our government is taking measures to provide to first nations and Inuit communities sustainable programs and health services that take into account the disparities and the threat of disease, so they can enjoy a level of health that is comparable to that of other Canadians.
Our government is taking measures to improve prenatal health and ensure that young children have the best possible start in life.
Our government is taking measures to help older children and teenagers who are pressured by their peers to smoke or to use drugs or alcohol.
Our government is taking measures regarding a number of priorities in community health that impact on people of all ages.
Our government is working to meet the needs of seniors.
However, our government knows that all these concerns need not be tackled strictly within government. The fact is that there are many groups already working in these areas. There are ways that we can work with the provincial and territorial governments. There are many organizations which are very familiar with their communities and which have the necessary expertise to deliver effective programs and services.
Our grants and contributions are investments in partnerships and success. I will, if I may, give a few examples of what I am saying.
First, there is the alcohol and drug treatment and rehabilitation program, or ADTR. This is a longstanding program designed to reduce the harm caused, as we all know, by alcohol and other drug abuse to individuals, to families and to communities.
Through this program, Health Canada provides funding to the provinces and territories in order to help them improve accessibility to effective alcohol and drug treatment and rehab programs. These governments use these funds to support direct treatment and rehab programs for persons with substance abuse problems, and to provide training to health professionals, as well as services in schools, rapid screening, and counselling.
Naturally, if we accept this opposition to the motion, the provinces and territories will no longer receive support for ADTR. The funding will no longer be there.
Then there are the programs in support of science, which is essential to an understanding of health risks. It is crucial to policy choices that will enhance Canadians' health. All of these are supported by research funding.
Let us take, for instance, research into atmospheric pollution in our cities. All of us realize that poor quality air is bad for people, but we need to know which components in air pollution are the most harmful.
We need to know whether this situation presents more risks for certain members of society such as children or seniors. With that information, governments, communities and businesses can make informed choices.
Health Canada funds research activities at the University of Ottawa in these fields. This budget category is what funds that research. These are areas of research which ought to make it possible to improve the rules and policies that impact on atmospheric pollution and to provide healthier air to the population of our cities.
In many other cases, we are pursuing broad initiatives in which our subsidies and contributions are combined to fulfil major commitments made to Canadians. Allow me to give an example.
Just last week, the government announced new support for eight health initiatives in rural British Columbia. This was a global announcement on subsidies and contributions. For example, some local and regional projects will benefit from funds provided through the HIV/AIDS strategy to target problems such as the care and treatment for people infected with the HIV/AIDS virus, or to prevent the spreading of the HIV/AIDS virus in these communities.
Some projects will benefit from the support provided under the community action program for children. We co-manage this program with the provincial and territorial governments. This is another example of federal-provincial co-operation through subsidies and contributions. And this co-operation will provide support for community programs and services that help children up to six years of age get a good start in life, be ready for school and improve their chances of having a healthy adult life.
There are already close to 450 projects across Canada under the community action program for children. Together, these projects are valued at more than $50 million. If the House accepts the motion, this will all come to an end.
I will conclude by pointing out that a large number of subsidies and contributions help shape Canada's future health system. The funding provided under that vote will be used for a number of telehealth initiatives across Canada, including in Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, western Canada and the north.
These projects serve as testing grounds for ideas on such matters as how health care organizations can exchange records on patients securely and effectively and on how to give people in remote regions access to the expertise available in the health care centres of our major cities.
We are even trying ways to link people receiving home care with organizations providing community services to enable them to use these technologies at home.
Allow me to give an example of the outreach project in Ontario. This project, which is being run in London, involves exploring a way to meet the need for psychiatric services in poorly served regions in southwest and northern Ontario. It will be achieved by linking four psychiatric centres to as many as 100 locations in the cities and communities of the first nations, by way of a video conferencing system. Examples of this sort are popping up all over Canada.
The fact is that subsidies and contributions are an essential part of the government's strategy to improve the health of Canadians. They enable us to support local organizations that share our commitment to a healthy childhood. They enable us to support major research efforts. They enable us to keep up with the new millennium.
This funding deserves the support of the House.
