Health Committee on Feb. 17th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Are there any comments on those?

Mr. Webber.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Thank you.

I'd just like some clarification, Ms. Sidhu, regarding home care and palliative care. You're from the Mississauga area?

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

I'm from Brampton.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Are you hearing from your constituents concerns about health care and palliative care?

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Yes, there are a lot. People don't want to go to the hospital because of the long, long waiting lines, even though we've reduced the waiting period. Still, the old people don't want to go there. It's a big hassle.

For home care, there's a telemetry program through the hospital, but not in all hospitals. We should look into that. The telemetry program is very successful. A nurse can phone the home and say, “Your blood pressure's fine. Your sugar is fine.” The diabetes patients' nurse can phone them and say, “You need to increase your insulin.” Some old people don't know that.

Another thing is that sometimes there's a malfunction. They don't remember which medication to take or whether they already took it.

If we increase home care, we can increase a lot of those things.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

The reason I ask is that I've had personal experience with home care and palliative care in my home. It was absolutely fantastic in Calgary. I can't say enough about the health care system in that particular area. It would be interesting to know what is happening throughout the country in that regard.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

In Brampton there's a long wait time. Even at the seniors home there are no spaces. We need to make more, or we need to change our strategy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you.

Mr. Davies, you had a comment?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Yes. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

I thought it would be helpful for us to review what the committee had recently studied, so I went through the briefing book.

Starting in June 2015, we studied lung cancer in Canada. Mental health in Canada was studied in May 2015. “Health Canada Safety Code 6” was looked at in March 2015. In 2014-2015 the committee studied “Best Practices and Federal Barriers: Practice and Training of Healthcare Professionals”. There was a statutory review of the Pest Control Products Act in January 2015. E-cigarettes were studied in late 2014. There was a study of marijuana's health risks and harms in May and October 2014. Government's role in addressing prescription drug abuse was in 2013-2014. We looked at technological innovation in health care in 2012-2013. In October 2012 the committee studied vaccine priority lists during pandemics, and in March 2012, neurological diseases. We looked at the role of government and industry in determining drug supply in Canada in March to June of 2012. Finally, there was a study of chronic diseases related to aging and health promotion and disease prevention in 2011-2012.

I just thought it would be helpful for us to know what had been studied. This was triggered by Sonia's reference to mental health. I agree it's an important thing, but it was just studied by the committee, so we may not want to—

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Wasn't it incomplete?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

We haven't received a response from the government.

Maybe it would be good for you to look at that report to see if there are areas in there that you think aren't covered well. Maybe we could zero in on them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Mr. Kang.

[Darshan Singh Kang, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

I think long-term care is a big issue too. That's where the problem comes in the hospitals. Lots of the people there have long-term illnesses. In the hospital they use the term “bed-blockers”, but if there was long-term care in hospitals or nursing homes or whatever, it would reduce the pressures on the hospital itself in terms of reducing wait times in the emergency department. I think the committee should look into that.

Home care is great. I know from personal experience that home care works. If you put more money into home care, I think the pressure on hospitals will be reduced as well. I've had personal experience with home care. It works wonders. It would also reduce the overall costs in health care. Lots of seniors want to be in their homes. They don't want to go to a nursing home. They want to be looked after, and with a little bit of home care, I think we can keep them out of the nursing homes and out of the hospitals.

Another thing is the one-stop shop, the clinic where a person can go in and get a blood test and an X-ray. As Sonia suggested, if we had 24-hour health clinics where they do the X-rays and blood tests and all that, that too would reduce the pressures on the hospitals.

I'm wondering, Mr. Davies, what came out of those studies by the committee. Were the recommendations implemented? Did anything come out of those, or are the reports sitting and collecting dust? What happened with those recommendations?

I think we should follow up on that, as a committee, and see where we're at. Maybe those recommendations could be implemented, and maybe that would be a step in the right direction to maybe cut costs or improve health care.

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Kang.

[Darshan Singh Kang, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

When the reports are done by committee, they're issued, they're filed in Parliament, and their work is done. They remain available to government. Government looks at those reports as they wish. I'm not sure it's the committee's role to....

We do our work, provide those recommendations to government, and then hope they pick it up, I guess. That's why I think it would be helpful to have the minister come here. I mean, that would be a good question to ask the minister: of the reports that have been issued, is there a process for the government to review the recommendations and maybe implement them? I'm not sure.

[Darshan Singh Kang, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

I'm new here too, so I don't know how the process works. We all have to come up to speed.

I think if a committee has no teeth, if we do something and nothing gets done with it, then that work is not really.... That makes me wonder why the committee is there if we bring in the stakeholders and do all the work, and then those reports just sit there and nothing happens. I think it's just lip service.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Mr. Oliver.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I was going to raise that question as well.

I think we should finish our work. I don't think Doug has stated his priorities yet, so we should finish that. We need to see what the members of this committee would like to do.

I also think it's worthwhile reviewing the past work of the committee to see if there are any standing items that didn't get through. As a committee, we don't need to repeat those items, but if we think they are important, we can move them forward as well. I think that should be one of the things we could do. When we look at our agenda and what we're going to put on it, that's one area.

I know the issue of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation and health of Canadians died just as the House rose. I think there was more to be done at the House level.

There are a few that we probably need to consider. They are something else to put on the agenda for what we look at in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

The process would be that when we conclude a direction, then our research department would see what has been done before. If it's out of date, we can still consider going ahead. The research department will lay out a work plan and indicate possible witnesses. We can choose our own witnesses, but they'll come up with a plan for us. It takes a little while, but not long.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

This would be when all that's been done. The previous committee did all of that and completed all that work, and then it just died.

I think it's worth doing a quick check. We could ask the staff that question. Are there outstanding things to be completed by the previous committee, and do we as a committee choose to see those through, to finish the work of our previous colleagues?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

When we're done with this subject, Mr. Davis is going to move that we ask for a report on the mental health report that the government was supposed to reply to. We could add yours to it as well. That's appropriate.

Go ahead, Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I have a list here—I think it was in the briefing—and perhaps the analyst can reissue the last five years of reports to all of us. There are not that many, about 15. Then you can actually see the reports and read the recommendations.

I would caution about looking backwards, because we're in a different Parliament with a different committee and a different majority. I'm not sure how helpful that would be. I would rather start in this Parliament and look forward. However, I think it's helpful to be familiar with those reports and what's been recommended. It may give you some ideas. I don't suggest that we block that off.

I think we should take a clean slate in front of us and decide what we want to do, going forward. After we work collegially together to get a good report with recommendations, then we can stand right behind Mr. Kang as we try to get them implemented.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Okay. Are any other comments?

Dr. Leitch, you're up.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I have a few things.

First, I know Mr. Davies was going to come forward—and it's listed here—about having the Public Health Agency of Canada and Health Canada officials come to present. I think that would be very valuable. There are some of us who have worked in the system and have some ideas about the system, but I think the overview of the departments would be extremely valuable to all the committee members, especially to those who haven't been here on Parliament Hill for a long period of time.

Second, I think we should have a full discussion with respect to marijuana and its impacts on individuals under the age of 18. I'm happy to discuss the impacts it also has on adults.

I am a pediatric orthopedic surgeon. I have met children in the emergency department who are under the influence. It's exceptionally concerning to me. I think this committee should be aware of what those impacts are, both in the short term and in the long term. There is now documented evidence that exists, at least from the medical profession. I can't speak for others who would like to pontificate on this issue, but I think it's important that at least this committee be well aware of it.