Health Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Ms. Pilon, go ahead.

[Elisabeth Pilon]

I hear you asking about how we measure the amount of brain injury on the front lines of the people who are homeless and experiencing housing insecurity. I don't really know. Brain Injury Canada released those statistics, but what I do know is—

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I'm sorry, Ms. Pilon. I think the question is more, knowing that fact—and Ms. Biagioni stated some numbers as well—what do you think is missing in order to have better legislative policies and better actions to resolve the gap between knowing how many people are on the street with a brain injury and experiencing the social crises that you've mentioned?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Give us a brief answer, please, Ms. Pilon.

[Elisabeth Pilon]

I would say we need a comprehensive first-line intake process across the mental health field where it meets the shelter system and substance use, and we need communication among those organizations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Our conversation shows that the cornerstone of Bill C‑277 is research. Promoting research is a major part of this bill, and I think that it's vital. In my opinion, this should have been the central pillar of the bill.

We were talking earlier about access to treatment. It's great to have access to treatment. However, if the treatment is outdated or not entirely suitable, then we fall short of our objective.

Ms. Beauchamp, you said that funding should be increased. You spoke of a specific and direct investment in the brain injury issue. You also talked about collaborative Canada‑wide initiatives aimed at sharing expertise and developing a coordinated strategy.

However, you also referred to the recommendations made in the Bouchard report, meaning the report of the advisory panel on the federal research support system.

Could you elaborate on this topic?

[Miriam Beauchamp]

Of course.

I won't go into all the details of the report, because it has already been tabled in Parliament by other people. I think that it's available.

The report includes many recommendations. Some of these recommendations have already started coming to fruition. I'm thinking in particular of the increased research grants for students. However, many of the recommendations have yet to be implemented.

Basically, the message is that the federal government must spend a great deal of money on research. I agree with you that this message was echoed in a number of remarks, not only my own. However, people with significant personal experience are also making this point.

A few minutes ago, we heard that some people experiencing homelessness were suffering from head injuries. We know this because of research, since researchers have made it their purpose. They approach these people while following protocols submitted to ethics committees and they document this information.

This is another example of how these figures come from somewhere. Epidemiology and statistics also come from research.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

We can't claim to promote research if our information isn't up to date and on the cutting edge. First, to promote research, we must start by investing in research. We must ensure that we produce cutting‑edge research and then convey information that could help us become a leader in the field.

Is that right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Please give a brief answer.

[Miriam Beauchamp]

Research is an iterative process that constantly changes. We implement things, test them, see how they work and change them. In other words, we're always moving forward and evolving. This process is expensive, but so important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Beauchamp.

The last round of questions for this panel will come from the bill's sponsor.

Mr. MacGregor, you have two and a half minutes.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Janelle, I'll come back to you for this final intervention.

In your opening statement, you mentioned that “the incidence and prevalence of brain injury in Canada surpasses” other well-known conditions like “HIV-AIDS, multiple sclerosis and breast cancer”. You said that “despite these crushing figures” it seems to be “left far behind while other conditions receive more attention and resources.”

You also mentioned the costs, not only in lives, but in the interaction with the criminal justice system, homelessness and the mental health issue. Those all have very serious economic costs to Canada as well. I believe you summed it up by saying, “The cost of inaction far outweighs the investment in proper care.”

In that context, you talked about your second husband and the care he received when he had cancer. Maybe you could take the final minute and a half to talk a little about what you would like to see with that proper investment and to expand on the kind of care model you're looking for, but also talk about how that is really an investment that is going to save our country a lot of money and also a lot in human misery and lives that have been lost.

[Janelle Breese Biagioni]

Well, I will say two things first off. One, I believe with all my heart that all of you were doing the best you could with what you knew. Our job—my job for these 34 years—is to bring that awareness so that people will do things differently. I will tell you that the second thing that's most important to remember is that hope begins with a heartbeat for every family member. I felt it: hope until there is no hope.

If we can have a proper framework, like the cancer care model, where people know they're going to be cared for and they have hope that their loved one and their family will be able to go through the process and receive the services and supports they need—regardless of what the outcome is, because you may not know that—if you have that sense of care, you can then focus on your family and your loved one to get them through what they need to get through. That's what I would pray that everybody would have.

I received those calls: “Ms. Biagioni, we've read your husband's file, and we know this and this and this. This is what I'm providing, and the next person who calls you will be from this department, and this is what they provide.” That's what happened. They all said to me, “I have read your husband's file.” That doesn't happen in brain injury. Families and the survivors are put into the place of having to prove over and over why they need the support.

I see this as being a prayer answered for everyone. If that framework is there, they know what services and supports they need. They'll be guided to that, and they can focus on recovery and begin to thrive in life.

Again, I applaud all of you. I know you've been doing the best you can with what you know. My job is to bring you more information so that you can now do it differently.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Breese Biagioni.

Thank you to all of our witnesses.

I think that's a good note to end on.

We very much appreciate your bringing your lived experience and expertise. We admire you for your advocacy on this topic. As you can tell by the unanimous passage of the bill to bring it to committee, you have the attention of the Parliament of Canada. As you can tell by the constructive dialogue we've had, we all seem to be aligned in what we want. This is a good day. This is a good session. It's very much appreciated.

I'm going to indicate to our panellists online that they're welcome to stay, but they're free to go.

We have some housekeeping, colleagues, so please don't run away.

Ms. Breese Biagioni and Mr. Fleiszer, I would also encourage you not to go away, because I think we're going to get through this housekeeping fairly quickly, and I suspect there are some people around the table who want to shake your hand before you go.

Thank you to all.

In terms of housekeeping, colleagues, yesterday you would have received two study budgets, one for this study and the other for the examination of Bill C-368, a private member's bill. Unless there's a willingness to deal with these jointly, we'll deal with them separately.

With respect to Bill C-277, is it the will of the committee to adopt the budget as presented? Is there any discussion?

I see no discussion. Do we have consensus to adopt the budget as presented?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

That brings us to the budget for Bill C-368.

Is there any discussion? Do we have consensus to adopt the budget as presented?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I see consensus. The budgets are adopted. Thank you.

There are two things. The analysts would like to be able to give you a work plan for the study of Bill C-368 and an updated work plan for the opioids study, but it's difficult for them to do that when we don't have sufficient witnesses to round out the panels, so this is a reminder. If you have submitted witnesses, please take another look at your list to see if there are more names you want to offer. If you haven't, please get them in so that we can get those work plans done.

Mrs. Goodridge.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Which parties are missing witnesses?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Ms. Trinh.

[Tu-Quynh Trinh, Committee Researcher]

[Inaudible—Editor] for opioids, and the NDP for Bill C-368.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Is there any other business to come before the committee?

Dr. Ellis.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I move to adjourn the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Well, I think that's a great idea.

Is it the will of the committee to adjourn the meeting?