Rick Norlock

[Lloyd Clemett, February 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, during the first world war almost 650,000 Canadians, nearly one-tenth of our population, gave up the safety and comfort of their homes and their loved ones to defend our freedom. Nearly 69,000 of these brave Canadians also gave their lives to protect our way of life and to restore peace and defend democracy.

Today it is my sad duty to confirm the passing of Lloyd Clemett, one of Canada's last known first world war veterans. Mr. Clemett was a remarkable man who remained as proud to be Canadian as when he first wore the uniform.

It is the Lloyd Clemetts of our country who unite members of Parliament as few things can. Our love and respect for our veterans crosses party lines and brings our regions together as one proud and great nation.

As we gather in this House today, together and in our own individual solitude, we are reminded yet again that we serve here only because our veterans have served Canada so bravely and so courageously.

We must never forget that. We must never forget Mr. Clemett and the many brave men and women who contributed so much to making our country what it is. We are forever grateful.

[Warkworth Maple Syrup Festival, February 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, March 10 and 11 are special days in my community of Warkworth, Ontario. On this special weekend, thousands of people will be enjoying the sights, sounds and smells of the Warkworth Maple Syrup Festival.

Each year the community marks the coming of spring with a fun-filled family weekend of events to enjoy both in the village of Warkworth and the Sandy Flats Sugar Bush.

Sugar bush highlights include horse-drawn sleigh rides, free taffy on the snow, log sawing contests, snowshoe and plank races, nature trail walks, clog and old-time square dancing, music and much, much more.

Of course, a trip to the sugar bush would not be complete without the taste of fresh, hot off the grill pancakes and sausages smothered in local award winning maple syrup expertly cooked by the Warkworth Community Service Club.

I send a special thanks to all the volunteers who make this weekend a yearly success. I urge all to come and enjoy a fun-filled, old-time country weekend in the beautiful hills of Northumberland—Quinte West.

[Anti-terrorism Act, February 13th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are being quoted in the media claiming that they are going to vote down key elements of their anti-terrorism legislation because the government's motion does not reflect the changes recommended by the subcommittee.

As a member of the subcommittee, I am amazed by the lack of factual procedural integrity of the Liberals' arguments. A motion cannot amend the law. Only a bill duly passed can amend the law.

The sunset provisions as passed by a Liberal controlled Parliament demand that a non-amendable motion be laid before Parliament.

The government will address this issue in its response to the final reports of the House and Senate committees reviewing the Anti-terrorism Act. These reports have yet to be tabled in Parliament and their timelines exceed the deadline for the sunset clauses.

What the government has proposed is that these special powers be extended for three years. During such time, potential amendments can be considered and Canadians can continue to enjoy the protection of these balanced measures.

[Anti-terrorism Act, February 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my friend's comments with regard to the Anti-terrorism Act and I wonder if she would comment on two aspects of the act.

First, there was an inference by the hon. member and another before her that this act was somehow in response to the influence of certain great powers on the face of the earth who may be close to Canada. I am wondering if she would like to comment on the fact that it was as a result of the United Nations passing resolution 1373 just after September 11. It was not one or two powerful countries, it was all of the civilized world that actually requested in the strongest possible way that countries address terrorism through legislation and other means.

I wonder if she would also comment on the Supreme Court's finding, which stated that the provisions of investigative hearings were totally within the jurisdiction or according to the charter. It said:

Consequently, the challenge for a democratic state’s answer to terrorism calls for a balancing of what is required for an effective response to terrorism in a way that appropriately recognizes the fundamental values of the rule of law. In a democracy, not every response is available to meet the challenge of terrorism. At first blush, this may appear to be a disadvantage, but in reality, it is not. A response to terrorism within the rule of law preserves and enhances the cherished liberties that are essential to democracy.

I wonder if the hon. member would like to respond.

[Brain Tumour Surveillance, February 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the creation of uniform national standards and guidelines for the surveillance of all malignant and benign brain tumours has the potential to improve the quality and completeness of brain tumour registration across Canada. Complete and accurate data on preliminary brain tumours would facilitate research into the causes of this disease, which may lead to improved diagnosis and treatment of patients.

Currently published statistics usually include malignant tumours. Benign tumours are slower growing and do not invade important structures, while malignant tumours are fast growing and may invade and damage important structures. Nevertheless, for improved cancer surveillance, it is worthwhile for cancer registries to collect and report standardized information on benign brain tumours since they result in similar systems and outcomes as malignant tumours. Ideally, data collected by cancer registries should include all tumours of the central nervous system.

Cancer registries have been created in each of the provinces and territories, but the sources of data and relevant legislation varies. In addition to provincial, territorial registries, there is a central Canadian cancer registry maintained at Statistics Canada, which includes selected data from each of the provincial and territorial registries.

Cancer registries serve several purposes by linking available sources of administrative data to obtain information on the number of new cases and corresponding patient follow-up information. This information allows basic surveillance and establishes a platform to provide the additional information needed to develop an evaluate cancer control programs.

Current uses for cancer registries include linkages to other administrative databases such as vital statistics and further assesses potential causes of cancer such as behavioural risk factors as well as occupational and environmental exposures.

A total of 2,500 cases and 1,650 deaths in Canada from malignant brain and nervous system cancers were expected in 2006 The number of brain and nervous system cases registered would be increased by around 40% to 70% if benign cases were included. Based on underlying causes reported on death certificates, the number of deaths would be increased by about 30% when benign and uncertain brain tumours were included.

Benign cases contribute a substantial proportion of the total burden of brain cancer. The inclusion of benign brain tumours in standard data collection and the adoption of standard site and historical definitions for tabulating benign brain tumours is needed to incorporate these tumours fully into the Canadian cancer registry and allow comparability of information across registries and internationally.

Including non-malignant brain tumours in the Canadian cancer registry is also needed to allow these tumours to be studied fully, including an evaluation of the trends in the rates of newly diagnosed cases for this type of cancer.

It will be necessary to report and analyze data for non-malignant central nervous system tumours separately from malignant tumours. By including data on these two tumour types in the registries, it will be available for use in analytic epidemiological research studies that will help identify factors that influence the risk for developing malignant and non-malignant tumours.

Another reason why it is important to include benign brain tumours in registration is that there is a large number of sub-types of brain and nervous system cancers. The chance of recovering or prognosis and the choice of treatment depend on the type, grade and location of the tumour and whether the cancer cells remain after surgery and/or have spread to other parts of the brain. For example, survival rates are generally higher for benign meningiomas than for malignant meningiomas, but the treatment of benign tumours may be limited by their location. Favourably situated lesions are usually amenable to complete removal by surgery, while other types are more difficult to fully and safely excise.

Reporting of benign brain cancer is expected to increase the total overall number of reported cancer cases by about 1%. There would be some implications for the registry to this added reporting, including some modest costs, the need for training and database upgrades and possibly revisions in legislation.

Registries may also need access to additional sources of administrative data to ensure that cases not included in the current source are captured. For example, where cases are not hospitalized shortly after diagnosis, access to other data sources, such as pathology records or physician claims data, becomes more important.

Completeness of reporting is critical for cancer registries. Accurate case counts are necessary to assess the burden of cancer, to guide cancer control program planning, to prioritize the allocation of health resources and to facilitate epidemiologic research. This is a particular challenge for registries with access to limited sources of administrative data.

Cancer registry information is continually being enhanced with data relevant to these programs. For example, stage data, the extent of the disease at the time of diagnosis, was not collected when cancer registration was initiated.

However, currently there are collaborative initiatives among the cancer registries, Statistics Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada to collect cancer stage data at the time of diagnosis. Stage information is necessary to better describe and evaluate cancer survival and cancer control programs. Other data enhancements are being considered to fill the information gap between diagnosis and death.

In addition to adding cancer stage data to the cancer registries, current priorities for enhanced cancer surveillance under exploration with provinces, territories and cancer stakeholders are the collection of radiation and other treatment data, treatment access, treatment outcome, improved record linkages and consideration of privacy legislation.

These ongoing enhancements of the cancer registries will also benefit the study of both benign and malignant brain tumours.

Knowing more about the risks for brain cancer and its evaluation and impact across a lifetime is particularly important because brain cancer is a significant cancer among young adults. In 2003, 388 cases were diagnosed within the 20 to 44 age group, or close to 20% of brain cancer cases among Canadians aged 20 and older. I can attest to those age groups because my brother died of an astrocytoma, which is a malignant brain cancer.

The Brain Tumour Foundation of Canada has developed a patient resource handbook, directed to patients, family members, caregivers and other individuals who have been affected by brain tumours.

It is clear that for Canadian cancer registries to provide the most complete information for brain tumours, data on both benign and malignant tumours needs to be collected. I ask members to join with me in commending the member for introducing the motion and giving it the support of the House.

[Prebudget Consultations, December 13th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently while the hon. member was discussing budgetary issues and issues surrounding what he perceives to be an imbalance in the way Canada treats the provinces and in particular the province of Quebec. I would like to bring to the member's attention that the last budget reduced taxes for all Canadians. It is one of the greatest tax reducing budgets that ever occurred in this country, at least out of the past five or six budgets that were introduced by the previous government.

Further, he mentioned there were still no breaks. I bring to the hon. member's attention that just in the last few days, probably the last few hours, the Minister of Industry announced more than $350 million going to Pratt & Whitney, which is primarily concentrated in the member's province, with regard to modernization and replacing gas turbine engines. We know we need to become more efficient and be on the leading edge of that industry. When he speaks to his constituency, I think he owes it to them to provide the facts and not distort them.

In addition, not that very long ago, at the beginning of this month, the government introduced tariffs for Canadian apparel manufacturers. Canada's new government understands the importance of the apparel industry and knows much of it is concentrated in the hon. member's province. It is sensitive to that and that is why it introduced an additional $4.5 million in tariff relief to help the Canadian apparel manufacturers be more competitive internationally. It consulted with the industry and that is the difference between the current government and the previous one. I wonder if the hon. member was cognizant of those recent developments in our relationship with his province and his constituency.

[Afghanistan, December 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the new Leader of the Opposition has recently been talking about a Marshall plan for Afghanistan.

Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs please tell the House what type of reconstruction plan is in place in Afghanistan?

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the hon. member to know that the wait times guarantee is a collaborative effort. We know that the federal government and the provinces form a partnership in the management of our health care system. We are committed to working with the provinces toward that goal.

What is more important is we are not just looking at Canada, we are looking at the rest of the world. As I mentioned in my speech, we are also looking at other countries that have recognized the need for patient wait times guarantee benchmarks for the delivery of those health services.

I am happy and proud that the health minister is going to use that information plus the results of some experiences in Canada, in particular, as I mentioned in my speech, Alberta's hip and knee replacement pilot project that resulted in a reduction from 47 weeks to 4.7 weeks.

These are the kinds of results that Canadians are looking for and these are the kinds of results that they are going to see delivered by the government in cooperation with the provinces.

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, over the past several months our health minister has had discussions with health ministers from every province and territory to obtain their views on the opportunities and challenges they see in reducing wait times. Already some provinces have tackled complex issues and they are achieving improved results and making progress toward being ready for a guarantee, which is the next logical step in our health care step.

Ontario reports reducing wait times in eight of nine services it tracks, and that is since 2005. Over the last three years Ontario has decreased wait times for angiography by 25 days and for MRI scans by 29 days. In the last year cataract surgery wait times in Ontario have decreased by 61 days.

Quebec is leading the way in guaranteeing timely access and recourse in two priority areas. Further its service corridor model allows cancer patients' waiting times for more than eight weeks to be transferred between the radiation oncology centres.

Manitoba and Quebec have indicated that they are providing de facto guarantees to some cardiac services and cancer treatments.

Manitoba's wait time for cancer radiotherapy is down one week from over six weeks in 1999.

Alberta's hip and knee replacement pilot project has shown success in reducing wait times from 47 weeks to 4.7 weeks. That is a tenfold decrease.

In British Columbia the median wait time for cataract surgery fell from 9.7 weeks in 2005 to 7.4 weeks in 2006.

These examples, and there are many more, clearly show that when we work with focus and determination, when we have a common goal and, most important, when governments work together, we can deliver to Canadians the kind of health care they deserve.

Last summer our Minister of Health met with health ministers from Denmark, Sweden, Mexico and France to see how other nations had been able to reduce wait times. For example, Sweden introduced its national maximum wait times guarantee in 2005. Its plan includes patients to be treated elsewhere if waits become excessive.

Denmark's extended choice of hospitals initiative was launched in 2002. If its health care system is unable to provide treatment within two months, patients have the option of being treated in a private facility or another country.

The United Kingdom has a choice at six months policy, which means patients who wait more than six months for elective surgery will be offered the choice of moving to another provider for faster treatment. The U.K. program is a good example of system triggered recourse. The patient is not required to file a complaint at six months. The choice is automatically offered.

These international examples show the kinds of guarantees that are possible for governments to offer their citizens. Sweden, Denmark and the United Kingdom did not deliver patient wait times guarantee overnight. It was a process founded on improving the management of their health care systems to use tax dollars more efficiently and effectively to provide their citizens with better health outcomes.

The message from international experience is simple. The effectiveness of a nation's health care system depends on two things, its medicine and its management. To provide the very best, countries must do both equally well.

Canada is a world leader in many scientific medical based endeavours. Our scientists and our scientific community are among the most valued in the world, often in terms of scientific citations being at the forefront of their disciplines.

This is something, as a country, we need to be proud of. Recent successes in the provincial management of wait times are indicators that we are making progress on the management of our system and this includes the financial management of that system.

Let us address the money issue head on. There is a lot of new money going into our health system: $41 billion dollars in new money to the provinces and territories over the next 10 years, with a 6% increase for inflationary purposes each and every year.

Canadians want, and demand, to know that this money is being managed effectively. They want, as our government has promised, greater transparency in terms of what their tax dollars are delivering and they want greater accountability for those results.

As members saw in September, when our government announced the results of its expenditure review, we expect taxpayer dollars to be carefully spent and programmed to be properly managed.

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Essex mentioned that there was an escalator clause put in the health budget. I wonder if he could expand on that clause and on some of the amounts that were mentioned by him.

The member mentioned a few big dollar amounts and I think Canadians need to know exactly how much money we are talking about. We are not talking about tens of thousands of dollars. We are talking about millions, hundreds of millions and, indeed, billions of dollars that this new government intends to spend in the health care system to improve not only the lot of all Canadians but the times they have to wait, times that under the previous government doubled.

As the hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Essex mentioned, the health minister today notified the House of the historic agreement to reduce wait times for those first nations people who need testing for diabetes. He previously announced the prenatal program that my hon. colleague mentioned just a few minutes ago.

I wonder if the hon. member would just mention what the 6% escalator clause means and give some of the other figures that he was so graciously able to provide the House.