Agreed.
Evidence of meeting #99 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #99 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Pursuant to notices of motion given before the constituency break, I move:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee undertake a study on LGBTQ2 health in Canada in order to develop recommendations on actions that the federal government can take, in partnership with the provinces and territories, and that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House, and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee request that the Government table a comprehensive response to the report.
April 16th, 2018 / 3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Yes.
The genesis of this motion is that in Canada the population of LGBTQ2 people is likely under-reported due to stigma. Reliable studies indicate that this community makes up 13% or more of the population, which is roughly 4.7 million Canadians. LGBTQ2 people have continually poorer health than the average Canadian, presenting health outcomes that are only slightly better than indigenous Canadians, a group which is, as we sadly know, poorly served by our health services. This presents significant costs to the Canadian health care system.
The average LGBTQ2 person is vastly more likely to have contracted HIV, is more likely to suffer from anxiety and mood disorders, to have elevated rates of substance use and abuse, and is more likely to attempt suicide than the rest of the Canadian population. Access to gender confirmation surgeries and appropriate endocrinologists varies across the country.
The Government of Canada has not commissioned an investigation into the root causes of these health disparities. This motion is an opportunity for the Standing Committee on Health to conduct a study—I suggest no fewer than five to seven meetings—using two primary questions. What determinants and causes are responsible for continually poor LGBTQ2 health in Canada? What are the barriers to LGBTQ2 people accessing better health care, including structural, institutional, financial, physician-side, and/or other barriers?
With this study, there is an opportunity to identify the root causes of continuing health disparities nationally, to understand best practices, and to address the gaps in the health care system, which is not meeting the needs of the Canadian LGBTQ2 population.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
I have a question, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. McKinnon, for your motion. It is certainly an important issue. You are requesting seven or so meetings on this particular issue. When are you hoping to have this happen?
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
That's a $64,000 question because, of course, we have a very tight schedule on into the fall.
I know there's no time before the fall, but I'm hopeful that we can find time in the fall for it. Whether there are five meetings or seven meetings, that's not part of the motion, but I think we need to discuss amongst ourselves what length of time we need to take for this study.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Madam Chair, a number of us have been here right from day one on this health committee. In the past, when we set our agenda, we all put down our parties' priorities that we thought would be important issues to bring forward to this table. We even had a subcommittee that met to determine our schedule here as well.
I see the trend changing with respect to motions now being brought to the table here. They're all important issues, and I wish we could study them all. What I would like to see is perhaps another subcommittee meeting where we can meet—with your priorities, with the Conservatives' priorities, with the New Democrats' priorities—to hash out the schedule that way, to bring forward these motions and to pass these motions.
This one in particular is great. I support the study of it, but it's just a matter of when. If we can bring our priorities forward as a committee and determine where we rank these specific studies, I think that would be a better way with co-operation from all the parties on this health committee.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you, Chair.
What I would counter to Mr. Webber's position is that there are things that come to our attention throughout the committee. We've had a number of motions that were put up for studies that were not in our original work plan. As Mr. McKinnon said, in no way does this refer to when it is scheduled, other than saying it's going to be no earlier than the fall. That's what we have the subcommittee for, to hash out the schedule. I think there's nothing inappropriate about putting forward this motion today.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Don't get me wrong. I don't find it inappropriate, but I would like to see a change for future motions, if that were possible. It seems to me that it is the trend now that a member just throws down a motion on the study of a certain issue. That's great, if that's the way you want to work, and we can pass these motions or not, but I think it would be more co-operative to get all parties involved and agreeing to this. That was my point.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I take Mr. Webber's point. I think it's a good point.
I'm relatively new to the committee. I haven't been privy to its culture over its full time. This is my first motion of this kind before the committee.
It's important for me to get this in front of the committee. I'm perfectly willing for the subcommittee to meet and discuss this priority as well as other priorities and appropriately schedule them as time permits.
I thank Mr. Webber for his intervention.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Acting Chair Liberal Sonia Sidhu
Is there any further debate on this motion?
All those in favour—
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
The Clerk
On your motion proper...?
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
4 p.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd also like to move a motion:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee undertake a study on the impacts of Methamphetamine abuse in Canada in order to develop recommendations on actions that the federal government can take, in partnership with the provinces and territories, to mitigate these impacts; that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House no later than December 2018; and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee request that the Government table a comprehensive response to the report.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Thanks, Madam Chair.
I won't reiterate what I said earlier. If we want to put motions all day long, then I guess that's the direction we're going in. We can do that as well. We can have the whole meeting be putting motions on what we should study next and what we feel is important to us. If that's what we want to do, then so be it.
4 p.m.
Liberal