Finance Committee on May 28th, 2026

[Bruce MacDonald]

As it relates to the government's technology, that's probably a question for the government itself. However, we do understand that at least one department is starting to contemplate—even within its own department, where it has multiple granting streams—whether it could move to one, internally. If we have one, then we can expand it beyond departments.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you very much.

Madam Chair, I'll yield my remaining seven seconds to you, if you have a question for the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Garon. You're always very generous.

I'm going to just wrap up this part of the meeting.

I'm going to take a moment, on behalf of the committee, to thank our witnesses.

We will take a brief suspension while we change over for the next panel.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Welcome back, everybody. We are going to continue with our second hour.

I would like to take a moment to welcome our next set of witnesses. From the Canadian Medical Association, we have Margot Burnell, president. From the Canadian Mental Health Association's British Columbia division, we have Jonny Morris, chief executive officer. From the Canadian Mental Health Association National, we have Sarah Kennell, vice-president, policy, advancement and partnerships. From the Canadian Men's Health Foundation, we have Kenton Boston, president and chief executive officer. From the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada, we have Sarah Giles, president.

Just before we begin, I would like to remind participants of the following points.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking.

Those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. Those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor audio, English or French.

Those in the room can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I would like to remind witnesses that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If you will need interpretation, please take a moment now to prepare your earpiece and select the listening channel you need in order to take full advantage of the time allotted for questions and answers.

I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

You will each have five minutes for your opening remarks, and we will begin with Dr. Burnell, please.

[Margot Burnell, President, Canadian Medical Association]

Thank you, Chair. I'm grateful for the opportunity to appear before the finance committee today.

I acknowledge, with gratitude, that we gather here today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. I appreciate their stewardship of the land over generations.

My name is Dr. Margot Burnell. I am president of the Canadian Medical Association. The CMA represents physicians and medical learners across the country and advocates for the patients we serve.

In our 159-year history, we have learned that in times of economic uncertainty, we must never forget to keep our population healthy. No matter the rupture points we face, our health must come first. A healthy economy demands a healthy population.

We also know that our health care sector can help build a stronger country. As a hub of discovery, a proving ground for AI innovation, a repository of data, a source of talent and a base of key infrastructure, our health care sector should be recognized as a driver of growth and prosperity rather than being viewed as an operating cost. Representing nearly $400 billion annually and 12.5% of GDP, Canada's health care sector remains an important contributor to economic strength.

Allow me to focus on key areas where federal leadership is most needed. As we work together to address our shared challenges, we also see opportunities to connect, innovate, modernize, build and strengthen resilience.

First, let's harness digital health tools and AI to connect patients to the care they need. We support the passage of Bill S-5, the connected care for Canadians act, to enable national health data connectivity. We urge the federal government to work with provinces and territories to help primary care clinics, specialty services and offices in the community transition from siloed electronic medical records to interoperable systems.

Second, the number of people unable to find and secure a family care professional remains disturbingly high. We need to realize a national vision for primary care. The first step is to enact a primary care act. Canada lags behind its peers. Every person deserves access to a health care team.

Third, in the face of climate change, which is increasingly disrupting health care delivery, we look to the government to build resilient health infrastructure. Investments in a health infrastructure fund could help anchor climate resilience and decarbonization standards, enable indigenous governments and rural and remote communities to apply for rapid climate retrofits, and allow for the integration of nature-based solutions and green spaces across health care facilities.

Fourth, we're looking for allies in the fight against the spread of false health information. Nine out of 10 people in Canada have expressed the need for government to act. We look forward to the reintroduction of an online harms act to prioritize online safety, especially for protecting our children. We also recommend an investment in the federal health portfolio to combat false health information and elevate trusted health sources.

Fifth, the federal government is responsible for one of the most burdensome forms: the disability tax credit form. Eighty-five per cent of physicians identify the DTC as a significant administrative burden. We look to the government to finalize, enhance and scale, nationally, the two-page renewal pilot form, to reform and simplify the DTC form so that physicians can spend less time on paperwork that is unnecessary for them to perform and more time caring for patients.

Sixth, as we advance indigenous rights and solutions to health care inequities, we await the reintroduction of a first nations clean water act. We look for the government's support in classifying indigenous-led health and support programs as essential services and in overhauling the non-insured health benefits program under indigenous leadership.

Lastly, because of a shortage of 23,000 family doctors nationwide, we recommend aligning immigration policies with health workforce planning.

Chair, in closing, we know a better future for health care is within reach. By supporting a healthier population and advancing a more modern, equitable and resilient health care system, we can secure a stronger future for our country.

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Dr. Burnell.

We will now continue with Dr. Sarah Kennell and Jonny Morris.

I understand you are sharing your time.

[Sarah Kennell, Vice-President, Policy, Partnerships & Advancement, Canadian Mental Health Association - National]

Madam Chair, members of the committee, thank you very much for inviting me to participate in your study.

I'm pleased to be here with you today.

My name is Sarah Kennell. I'm joined online by my colleague, Jonny Morris. We represent the Canadian Mental Health Association, the largest provider of community mental health services in Canada, with a presence in over 330 communities across every province and Yukon.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear today regarding CMHA's recommendation for budget 2026: the renewal of a dedicated 10-year, $5-billion investment from the federal government in mental health and addictions care.

A decade ago, the federal government recognized that too many Canadians were unable to access timely, affordable mental health care and made critically needed investments through bilateral agreements with provinces and territories that explicitly focused on mental health and addiction services. That funding is scheduled to end on March 31, 2027.

This matters, because most mental health services are not covered under Canada's public universal health care system. Canadians therefore must often pay out of pocket for services such as counselling and other supports, if they can afford them at all. During an ongoing cost of living crisis, access to mental health care has become an affordability challenge no less real than housing or food security.

It also matters because having good mental health is an important part of our economic infrastructure. At least 500,000 Canadians miss work every week due to mental health challenges, and nearly one in three Canadians reports that their work is affected by their mental health.

Mental health is also the leading reason for disability claims and workplace disability costs for issues around depression, anxiety and burnout. The Canadian Standards Association recently estimated that Canadians' poor mental health costs the economy $180 billion annually across health care, emergency services, the criminal justice system and homelessness supports.

At a moment of economic uncertainty and geopolitical instability, Canada needs a healthy and resilient workforce. Investments in mental health help people remain attached to work, return to work sooner and avoid crises that place greater strain on hospitals, police and other public services.

Committee members, I'm sharing my time today with my colleague Jonny Morris, the CEO of CMHA's B.C. division, who is joining us virtually to share an example of what this dedicated federal funding has made possible for young people and families in British Columbia.

Jonny, it's over to you.

[Jonny Morris, Chief Executive Officer, British Columbia Division, Canadian Mental Health Association - British Columbia]

Thank you very much, Sarah.

Thank you to the chair and the committee for the opportunity to be here today.

CMHA B.C., through these bilateral health agreements, has received funding that has supported children, youth and families across the province of British Columbia, reducing strain on primary care providers and the hospital system, and thereby reducing health spending.

One example of a program is Confident Parents: Thriving Kids, a free, province-wide coaching service for families supporting children experiencing mild to moderate anxiety and behavioural challenges, which is really important, because untreated childhood mental health concerns often worsen over time, increasing the likelihood of more serious illness later in life.

This service helps families access support early, before problems escalate into a crisis. It also supports pediatricians, family physicians, school counsellors and other frontline providers by offering timely, community-based care at no cost to families. The results have been significant for thousands of people across B.C. Families report reduced anxiety and behavioural challenges, improved mental health functioning and stronger family well-being. We know these kids stay in school.

For many young people and families, there is no comparable alternative waiting in the public system. The federal funding to date has helped to increase access to many other community-delivered programs and service across this country, such as structured psychotherapy and counselling supports in Ontario and Quebec, intensive addiction interventions for at-risk youth in Alberta and 24-7 provincial mobile mental health crisis supports in P.E.I.

These are not nice-to-have ancillary services. They are core to a well-functioning health system.

Without renewed federal investment, these services that are relied upon to keep people well may have to be scaled back or end altogether. This means that kids and parents will sit on wait-lists for longer, get sicker and ultimately end up costing our health systems more, not to mention the significant social impact associated with supporting people experiencing an acute mental health or addictions crisis.

CMHA is recommending that the federal government ensure the continuity of such services by renewing the dedicated 10-year, $5-billion investment in mental health and addiction care for Canadians.

My last comment, Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

I apologize, Mr. Morris. We're going to have to end it there. We've gone over the time, but thank you very much.

We're now going to move on to Mr. Boston from the Canadian Men’s Health Foundation.

[Kenton Boston, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Men's Health Foundation]

Good morning. Thank you, Chair. It's great to be with all of you today.

Right now, half of all young men in Canada are at risk of problem anger, and one in two is socially isolated. We need to come together as a country to make sure that all men in every community know they are not alone and that they have the support they need to live healthier lives.

The Canadian Men’s Health Foundation is one of the few organizations in this country that are purpose-built to reach men before a crisis. Our focus is primarily on young men under the age of 35. Now we are branding that and moving it to a younger age through partnerships. These boys and men face the highest risks and have access to the fewest supports.

We work with partners across the country, not just to conduct research but to move it into action. Everything we do is about translating what we learn into practice through clinical pathways and community-based programs that meet young men where they are.

Canada is currently developing its first national strategy on the health of men and boys, and I want to thank Minister Michel, her team and the team at Health Canada for their leadership on this file.

I'm going to outline our recommendations for you today, because this is a topic that should concern all parliamentarians.

First, when it comes to young men, the single biggest thing the government can do is focus on early intervention. We aren't reaching men early enough, and many men engage only at the point of crisis. For younger men, distress is driven less by chronic diseases and more by suicidal thoughts, substance use, injury and acute mental health challenges. This is all made worse by delayed help-seeking, social isolation, digital influences and the lack of connection.

Young men and boys need earlier, easier access to support in their schools, workplaces and communities and online. As Canada brings more young people into the skilled trades area to help build the country's future, we need to ensure that those young men have the support they need to succeed on the job and in their lives. They need places to talk, people to turn to and tools that meet them where they are. That includes stronger peer support in real-world settings, a national digital space that helps counter harmful online influences, and a coordinated approach in which we learn what's going on and adapt as we go. As such, our core recommendation is to invest in a national early intervention network that builds this capacity across the system.

Second, we recommend that the government designate fatherhood as a primary early intervention point. Men who become fathers are more open to health engagement then than they are at any other stage in their lives. Research consistently shows that engaged fathers produce measurably better outcomes for children in cognitive development, emotional regulation and long-term mental health. This is a critical intervention point that is supported by research.

Third, we recommend that the government address online radicalization as a public health emergency for young men. Our research shows that 67% of men aged 19 to 29 are at risk of social isolation, and screen time is a measurable driver of mental health deterioration in this population. Without credible, engaging alternatives, harmful ideologies and misogynistic online communities fill the void.

Finally, we recommend that the government invest in annual, nationally representative research on men's health. With regular tracking and reporting, we can build a clearer picture of what's working and make smarter decisions that improve outcomes for men and boys. The government's own consultation acknowledges that improved men's health could save $12.4 billion annually. A fully funded national strategy is an investment not just in men, but in families, communities, the workforce and our economy.

Canada needs to build its future. The evidence is in hand. The programs are proven. The need is urgent. It is up to all of us to come together.

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you very much, Mr. Boston.

We will now continue with Ms. Giles from the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada.

You have five minutes.

[Sarah Giles, President, Society of Rural Physicians of Canada]

Good morning, Madam Chair and honourable members of the committee. Thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.

My name is Dr. Sarah Giles, and I'm the president of the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada, the SRPC. The SRPC represents 3,000 physicians and medical learners who provide care to the roughly 20% of Canadians living in rural, remote and indigenous communities.

I'm a rural generalist in Kenora, Ontario. On any given day, my colleagues and I might be in primary care clinic in the morning, in an overflowing ER in the afternoon and in the OR at night.

As you know, rural Canada is the literal engine of our national economy. It contributes 27% of Canada's GDP and accounts for 53% of our merchandise exports, but right now, Canada's economic engine is on life support. While roughly 20% of Canadians live rurally, they are served by only 8% of the country's physicians. As a result, rural Canadians face shorter life expectancies, significantly higher rates of chronic disease and lower cancer screening rates.

The federal government has rightly prioritized multi-billion-dollar nation-building initiatives in remote Canada to secure our global competitiveness. The success of these massive public and private investments depends entirely on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled workforce members in rural and remote regions, but few people or businesses want to relocate to a region if there isn't reliable primary and emergency care for their family members. We need to keep rural clinics and hospitals open for current and future community members.

To do this, we need to transition back to a safe and stable workforce of rural generalists and nurses who both live and work in communities. Resuscitating rural health care will also require infrastructure funding, and allow me to pre-empt any thoughts that health is solely a provincial or territorial responsibility. The federal government is responsible for funding and delivering health care services in indigenous communities, and rural hospitals are more likely to serve indigenous patients, as they comprise a large portion of the rural and remote population.

Right now, there are hospitals in rural Canada facing catastrophic infrastructure failures. Hospitals have, for example, flooded and subsequently all but shut down surgical services. Closing essential services forces patients to travel hundreds of kilometres and to wait unacceptable periods of time for care that should be offered close to home.

Though critical infrastructure issues are putting rural indigenous patients' lives at risk, rural hospitals are often jurisdictional hot potatoes when it comes to funding new facilities. The provinces don't want to foot the bill for indigenous patients, and the federal government doesn't see building hospitals as its mandate.

By appealing to the nation-building goals of the federal government, I hope to move you to invest in closing the infrastructure gap faced by rural hospitals primarily serving indigenous people. The federal government can do both what's right and what is necessary.

At SRPC, we believe we know how the Government of Canada can help.

One, invest in skills and training. We request $25 million over three years to scale up our national advanced skills and training program for rural physicians. Our initial pilot program trained 342 physicians across 187 rural and indigenous communities. We secured essential emergency anaesthesia and obstetrical training for more than double the number of physicians we initially estimated. It is far cheaper to retain our rural doctors than it is to recruit new ones.

Two, establish a pan-Canadian rural and remote health workforce strategy. We urge the federal government to partner with the SRPC to build an interdisciplinary workforce strategy to address critical gaps in the workforce. How can we possibly know how many health professionals to train or recruit through immigration when we have no idea of the current and future need?

Three, secure a rural and indigenous health infrastructure carve-out. We recommend ensuring that the federal health infrastructure fund include dedicated rural and indigenous streams to support the unique needs of these communities. We must stop the jurisdictional finger-pointing and prioritize integrated primary care, mental health services and emergency care, including obstetrics, for rural and indigenous communities.

Finally, mandate a HESA study. We ask that the Standing Committee on Health conduct a comprehensive study on the unique primary and emergency needs of rural Canada, to assess scalable national solutions.

Honourable members, investing in rural communities is not an act of charity; it is a strategic national necessity. By supporting these targeted recommendations, this committee can help stabilize our workforce, protect our supply chain and fulfill the Canada Health Act's promise of health equity for all Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

That's great. Thank you very much, Dr. Giles.

We will now begin our round of questions.

We're going to start with Mr. Lefebvre.

Mr. Lefebvre, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Éric Lefebvre, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being with us today. I want to disclose my conflict of interest right away: My daughter is a family physician. I want to make that clear.

Ms. Kennell, in my opinion, investment in addiction prevention and treatment is essential.

I've had the privilege of being a member of Parliament for 10 years. During that time, I've seen the number of people who came to meet with us to talk about their mental health issues increase. I therefore advocate for the importance of this funding.

I'd like you to tell me about injection sites. Do you think they're a good solution?

Should we instead focus on preventing addiction?

[Sarah Kennell]

Thank you very much.

I thank your daughter for deciding to dedicate her career to helping others.

I'll respond in English.

With regard to the best intervention when it comes to substance use, health and addiction, we at the Canadian Mental Health Association view the delivery of care across a continuum and a spectrum.

There is incredible work that needs to be done in upstream intervention early on. We've talked about children and youth—behavioural addiction, substance use, and health-related addiction. Investment needs to be made, increasingly so, in evidence-based, proven interventions that help create off-ramps for children and youth before they develop a diagnosable condition.

We also know that harm reduction and the suite of interventions that fall within that bucket of services are evidence-based and have incredible research to demonstrate efficacy. When we invest across the prevention and the harm reduction-related interventions, acute clinical services during periods of severe symptoms, and recovery-oriented supports, let's not forget, in addition to delivering across upstream and an acute presenting of symptoms, what happens once someone is discharged from an inpatient addictions recovery program or a more wraparound service. We need to ensure housing supports and other long-term recovery-oriented supports.

We would strongly recommend a full continuum of care across that spectrum.

[Éric Lefebvre, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I would have liked to hear your opinion on injection sites. Do you think they're part of the solution?

Living with injection sites in our communities is more difficult. Are your analyses of injection sites yielding the desired results? Would they be beneficial?

[Sarah Kennell]

Again, we have to ensure that investments made in this space are provided comprehensively and in coordination and collaboration with the communities in which they're located.

We have to recognize that there remains a high level of stigma and discrimination against people who use drugs, and that we all want to live in communities that are safe. We all want to ensure that our children can walk to school and play in playgrounds in areas where they're not going to be at risk of experiencing harm, just like people who use drugs need safety, support and care.

It's about coordination and collaboration. We know that harm reduction interventions, including safe consumption sites, are proven to be effective when they are implemented with those wraparound supports and with access to other community-based services, such as housing and justice-oriented supports.

We would advocate, again, that full continuum of investment across the spectrum of care.

[Éric Lefebvre, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Dr. Burnell, you talked about implementing a simplified form. Could you expand on that a bit?

Why isn't it simplified?

People often talk about bureaucracy and they ask for additional funding, but I think that if we manage to simplify the bureaucracy, that would be a significant form of assistance.

Can you speak to that?

[Margot Burnell]

We commend the government for its initial steps, with respect to the disability tax credit, to streamline some patients with given conditions, but currently the form is 16 pages. It takes our members 20 to 30 minutes to complete. It has criteria that are often hard for a given physician to assess: For mobility, you have to take three times longer walking x number of metres than your given age cohort. We are recommending that we work together with the involved departments, with physician and patient input, so that the form more accurately reflects the lived experience. Patients can basically self-attest as to their conditions and their disability. A recognized professional in the health care team and circle of care can sign off on it, saying that what has been presented is factual, so that there are safeguards.

The other way is to ensure that if one is disabled federally, with a disability tax credit, we would hope that provinces and territories would recognize similar disability and that it would be reciprocated. If you're disabled in one part of this country, you would be—

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

I apologize, Dr. Burnell. We have to end it there.

[Margot Burnell]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

That concludes the time.

Thank you, Mr. Lefebvre.

We'll continue now with six minutes from Mr. Sawatzky, please.

[Jake Sawatzky, Liberal, New Westminster—Burnaby—Maillardville, BC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Hello, everyone. I'm excited to see such a great panel focused on mental health. This is an important opportunity to have a conversation about how budget 2026 will better support mental health care and improve access and services.

I have a lot of questions, so I'll try to be very brief here. My first question will be for Ms. Kennell with CMHA national.

Since 2017, $5 billion in bilateral investments in mental health and addictions care have supported a wide range of community-based services across Canada, including youth, addiction treatment, crisis response services, rural e-mental health supports and many others. As you said, this funding is expiring on March 31, 2027, at a time when demand for mental health services remains very high and affordability pressures continue to impact Canadians.

From your perspective, what impact has this federal funding had on Canadians over the past decade? What lessons should inform future investments in mental health care through budget 2026?

[Sarah Kennell]

Thank you very much, MP Sawatzky. That's a great question. As my colleague Jonny Morris referred to, the impact in community over the last 10 years has been monumental.

Really, this funding has recognized a glaring gap in our system, whereby folks aren't able to access care until they're in crisis. They have to be sick enough to be admitted to a hospital. Often the emergency department is the only place for them to turn. This is particularly true for children and youth. If we invest in community-delivered services, services that are often out of reach for many because they are behind a paywall, we will be able to prevent the worsening of symptoms, achieve better health outcomes and ensure that folks are able to enter the workforce and be productive citizens over their life course.

That's what we've seen over the past 10 years. We've started to fill the gap and respond to the demand that really escalated exponentially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Demand for care hasn't come down since then. We see heightened levels of stress, anxiety and depression at the population level. That means we need to continue to see this investment if we want to continue to see positive outcomes associated with investment. Failure to renew will mean that folks will sit on wait-lists and get sicker. It will cost the system more. We have evidence to demonstrate that. That's not to mention the cost to the economy.

Jonny, do you have anything to add from your perspective?

[Jonny Morris]

Sure.

I would just reinforce that at this particular point in time, investing in mental health care as economic infrastructure for this country to deliver on its economic goals is also a very, very important consideration when we come to consider that this federal funding is ending in less than a year.