Health Committee on Oct. 9th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

It is up to the committee to decide whether to adjourn or not. The fact that it is proposed as a two-hour meeting does not necessarily bind us. The members have certainly been arguing for some time, so, Mr. Thériault, if you would like to move a motion to adjourn the meeting or the debate, that would be up to you. Do you wish to move such a motion?

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

What I want, Mr. Chair, is for you to respect the meeting time set by the office of the clerk. When the time for ending the meeting comes, I want you to at least raise that fact and ask whether the meeting can be extended. It has been a while since we should have decided whether the meeting should be extended and, if so, by how much time, instead of continuing to hear from colleagues. I do still want to hear from them, but we must not forget that we have schedules and agendas to respect.

That is what I wanted to hear you on. You are throwing it back at me by saying that I could move a motion to adjourn. I understand perfectly, but is it not your responsibility to raise the issue when the time set aside for the meeting is up?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

We already have Ms. Vecchio's intervention. They do not wish to stop right on the dot within our time slot, and I don't have the power to arbitrarily adjourn the meeting. That is up to the committee. We can carry on this debate as long as we wish to do so, or we can consider a motion for adjournment. It's really up to the committee.

I'll go now to Ms. Sidhu.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I understand Mr. Thériault's frustration. I totally understand when Darren said we need to dig further down.

I would like to take a minute to stress the importance and reasonability of taking some time to reflect on this motion. I think the opposition would agree that instead of rushing forward with the motion, it is important to take time to properly assess each and every aspect of it, because it's so important to Canadians.

As my colleague Dr. Marcus Powlowski said, we need to look at what is in it and what is not in it. That is why we need time to dig down and then collectively come up with what is more important to Canadians. Let us discuss that, but we need to dig down. Canadians deserve the best from this committee, especially during these challenging times. It doesn't mean rushing forward with an omnibus motion that we cannot digest. There's no time to read it.

It is a huge motion that only briefly references the mental health impacts of COVID-19. Over 9,500 Canadians have tragically died due to COVID-19, and every day we are seeing case numbers rise as Canada enters a second wave. As I said before, we need to shine a light on the discussion, hear from witnesses and do a proper study to give proper direction so that Canadians are not falling through the cracks.

My colleague Tony's motion is also very important. As I said earlier, it is so important, because as we know, people are twice as likely to say their mental health has declined in these challenging times. They are five times as likely to feel depressed, three times more likely to have trouble coping, four times more likely to have had suicidal thoughts and four times more likely to have tried to harm themselves.

The motion also mentions long-term care, which I did not have a chance to present. With this motion, we would study long-term care, which is something that is very important in my riding. We have to go through things and dig down. By agreeing to study the impacts of COVID-19 on long-term care, our committee can be the first step in righting the wrongs of our government, which has ignored the issues of long-term care for far too long.

The type of person who needs long-term care assistance is not changing, as 62% of residents have some form of Alzheimer's and 90% of long-term care residents in Ontario have some form of cognitive impairment. As well, people were previously staying in these facilities one to two years, but now the average length of stay is six months. The needs of long-term care residents are changing. This is an important issue too.

To summarize, there are important issues at stake here. We must take the time to analyze the motion. We need to ensure that at committee we are using our time and resources properly. We need time to dig down. As my colleague said, we have to look at what is not in this motion. We need to prioritize what is important to Canadians.

I know we need time. I understand my friend Luc's frustration. It is why we need time to dig down, and I urge all members to agree that we have to look into that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Sidhu.

We'll go now to Mr. Kelloway, please.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move to adjourn.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Kelloway.

We have on the floor a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Is it the will of the committee to adjourn? Is there any dissent?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I ask for a recorded vote, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

We will go to a recorded vote.

I will clarify that this motion is not to adjourn the debate; it is to adjourn the meeting.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

The meeting is therefore now adjourned.