Government Operations Committee on June 20th, 2011

[Glenda Yeates]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be very brief.

I think the question of first nations and mental health is one that we're all very thoughtful and concerned about. There are two aspects that I would refer members to. There is the national aboriginal youth suicide prevention strategy as part of our aboriginal prevention and promotion programs, so we have some specific targeted initiatives that we think are very important obviously in this area.

The member specifically asked about the Indian residential schools resolution health support program. We do have supports in that program as well to make sure that as people are going through with that process we have the mental health and emotional supports to eligible former Indian residential school students.

Those are two parts we have specifically in the areas the members raised.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

That's very helpful. Thank you.

Your time is up, Joy.

Alexandre or Denis.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

If we look at the numbers in the Main Estimates, we can see that three or four programs are being cut back. The First Nations and Inuit program is one of them. The budget for the environmental health risks program has also been reduced by 63%. There is also a 27% decrease in the pesticide safety program, which is quite worrisome given how dangerous and insidious some of those products are. It takes a long time for people to notice any effects on their health. And cuts in consumer product safety amount to 12%.

Could you tell us how Canadians are going to be served better when investments in safety are being cut?

[Glenda Yeates]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm happy to speak to this important area.

I can absolutely understand the challenges that the mains to mains comparison gives in this circumstance, because we are obviously not at the time when we have the supplementary estimates. But with specific reference to the area the member raises, in terms of pesticide safety, they are also part of the department that is a recipient of the chemicals management plan, for example. Again, as that funding came to the end of its sunset, as it was reviewed and evaluated, the money came out of the main estimates. But then, of course, the government announced in the budget that the government intends to renew the chemicals management plan and some of the other environmental health agenda items. The government announced the $200 million funding in the budget, and that will then only appear, as budgeted initiatives do, in supplementary estimates. I just wanted to make it clear that also applies.

Thank you for the question, because it might not have been clear that the chemicals management plan affects several parts of the department, but it includes our pesticide area as well. Similarly, the reduction that was mentioned in the environmental area as well is this chemicals management plan being renewed. So I just want to mention that, again, with the budget announcement we will see those moneys be allocated to the departments and come back in the supplementary estimates.

But I appreciate that for members of the committee, at this point in time, what looks like a reduction would raise concern, and I would just want to reassure members that once we see the supplementary estimates you will see those funds get reflected back into the department's budget.

[Denis Blanchette, NDP, Louis-Hébert, QC]

The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health receives $18.9 million in funding. That's an increase compared to last year.

Could you tell us what this funding is for, what the idea behind it is and what the benefits are going to be exactly?

[Glenda Yeates]

Thank you for the question.

CADTH, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. I believe the member is referring to that line. And I'm very pleased, Mr. Chair, to be able to speak to that agency. As its name implies, it's a joint federally, provincially, territorially supported agency.

There was a sense a number of years ago, when I was the provincial health deputy, that there were economies of scale, looking at some of these new technologies one time, to gather the expertise and then share that among the provinces and territories. They do drug assessments. They do medical device assessments and other things.

One of the challenges we faced in the last number of years was a shortage of medical isotopes. What we learned through that period was that there are a number of ways, through good information sharing and working together.... Provinces coped with that shortage and actually worked very hard--positions on the front line.... We did a good deal of coordination as well to try to effectively make sure that patients were not harmed as different kinds of responses, different isotopes in some cases and different procedures in others, were used during that situation.

As part of this, we have given a grant, an increase, of $3 million to CADTH over two years--some of it is reflected in this year's budget--to do some follow-up work on isotopes, to make sure we learn the lessons, in a sense, that we're looking forward to the new technologies: what do we understand from what we learned in that experience, and how do we share those lessons? Some parts of the country did things differently from others. Who had the best outcomes? Can we understand that? And also, to work internationally, do a piece of research essentially on what is our best way going forward.

Again, we felt it was a positive experience. We wanted to make sure we learned the lessons and assessed that experience. That's why there's an increase in the CADTH budget.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Ms. Yeates.

Mike Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Before I begin, I've questioned a number of departments on estimates over the years, and you are doing a fantastic job today of being prepared, which hasn't always been the case. I appreciate the effort you've put in.

I have a question on page 162, an increase of $45 million due to the 3% Indian envelope. That's what it says. It's called the “Indian Envelope Growth”. Is that 3% an annual increase that's built in? Does it have a sunset clause? How long has it been in place? And how is it allocated?

[Glenda Yeates]

Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Chair.

As I mentioned, the basing of these programs is always a challenge over the year, because a number of changes take place. But yes, it is something that's been long-standing, in terms of a portion of the increase. It's not the whole increase that we would get every year, because again, we go forward with the very specific.... And there may be other adjustments to the budget--

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

But that 3% has been there for a while. Will it continue to be there?

[Glenda Yeates]

That 3% has been there, I'm told, since 1994. And of course, as a public servant, I would never preclude or prejudge parliamentarians' rights to give us future budgets, but that has been a long-standing investment.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I have two more questions. My next question is this. On page 167 we have the Canada graduate scholarships, which are down a bit. Then we have the Vanier Canada graduate scholarships, which are up a bit. And then on page 171 we have another program of grants for graduate and post-graduate students. Can you tell me why we have three programs doing exactly the same thing, or are they doing different things?

[Glenda Yeates]

My colleague Dr. Beaudet, from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, will speak.

[Dr. Alain Beaudet]

Banting is a totally new program. It's a prestigious program to attract the best and the brightest to Canada to do post-doctoral studies. It's a program that's open both to Canadians and to foreigners.

The Vanier program is much the same. It was started a few years back and it's to attract students at the level of graduate studies, PhD students.

The Canada graduate scholarships program went through a temporary increase in the amounts invested in it. It's also a doctoral program for Canadians doing graduate studies in Canada.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

The last one is for Canadians only.

[Dr. Alain Beaudet]

Yes.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

The other one is to attract people from other parts of the world.

[Dr. Alain Beaudet]

That is correct.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Can Canadians also apply?

[Dr. Alain Beaudet]

Canadians can also apply.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Dr. Butler-Jones, you had a comment on that.

[Dr. David Butler-Jones]

Just to supplement on the reference to 171, that is specifically focused on public health training. It is not a duplicate of the others.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Those graduates have to be in that field for that to happen. Is that correct, then?

[Dr. David Butler-Jones]

That's correct.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

My last question is on sunsetting.

I was a municipal councillor for 13 years. Once a program went into existence, it was very difficult to take away. Are there examples of when a program from the Ministry of Health or Public Health was evaluated--it was supposed to last four or five years and was funded, but it's done its day and isn't meeting its criteria or whatever--and the sunset actually meant that it's no longer? Does that actually happen, or do you just hope that through supplementary estimates you can get those things refunded?