Evidence of meeting #49 for Health in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was firefighters.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Is there any further discussion in connection to amendment G-1, which I will confirm to you is in order?
(Amendment agreed to)
Go ahead, Mr. van Koeverden.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Thank you.
I have an amendment for subclause 3(2). I move that Bill C-224, in clause 3, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 2 with the following:
Consultation
(2) In developing the national framework, the Minister must consult
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Is there any discussion in respect of amendment G-2, which is also in order?
Seeing none, shall amendment G-2 carry?
(Amendment agreed to on division)
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I move that Bill C-224, in clause 3, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 2 with the following:
with the representatives of the provincial and territorial governments
It's just adding “territorial”.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Is there any discussion in connection with G-3?
Shall G-3 carry?
(Amendment agreed to)
12:15 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Amendment BQ‑1 is a minor change to add health care professionals to subsection 3(2).
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
I certainly support it. I had similar thoughts for amendments.
I would suggest a subamendment to add “scientists” after “health care professionals”. I think there are people who ought to have some input who potentially aren't health care professionals. Scientists may know more about which drugs are carcinogenic, so they ought to be consulted too.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
The subamendment is in order, so the debate is on the subamendment.
Is there any discussion with respect to the addition of the word “scientists” in amendment BQ-1?
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Amendment as amended agreed to)
That brings us to G-4.
Go ahead, Mr. van Koeverden.
December 13th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm still on clause 3, page 2. I move that Bill C-224, in clause 3, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 2 with the following:
Content
(3) The national framework may include measures to
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I'm afraid I have to speak against this amendment. The bill currently says, “The national framework must include measures to”, and then it lists them. I understand that we can improve the measures, but changing “The national framework must include” to “may include” strikes at the very essence of the bill. Saying it “may” means it may not.
I think this bill is very important. We need to specify what the framework must include.
Again, I think we can improve the measures that follow, but if we're going to pass the bill, let's say what it must do and not what it might do.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Laila Goodridge Conservative Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB
Thank you.
I believe that's critically important. We heard from witnesses about the importance of having early screening for cancers linked to firefighting. This would allow an opportunity for the government to maybe not include that, and I think it is an absolute mistake.
I would urge everyone to vote against this. I think this waters down the intent and kind of takes away from the overall importance of the bill.
I'll be voting against it.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I guess the question here that comes to my mind is why we would use the language of “must” versus “may”. I can't understand that.
This is a bill brought forward by a Liberal member and a Liberal government. I can't understand why the government wants to speak against something that we've heard so much about. It certainly should be supportive of its member in bringing this forward, in my humble opinion.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
It's your humble and valued opinion.
Are there any other interventions with respect to G-4?
Go ahead, Mr. van Koeverden.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
I can provide a bit of clarity and some explanation.
This amendment is not meant to water down the bill at all. It provides a bit of permissive guidance to inform this framework, and it takes into account that provincial and territorial governments have not yet been consulted on this. It was therefore deemed necessary to include a bit of flexibility in the context of co-development and co-operation. It's not meant to be so terribly instructive, but a bit more collaborative.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Is there any further discussion in respect of G-4?
Go ahead, Mr. Jeneroux.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
I want to make sure we get a recorded vote on this one, Chair.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
There's a Health Canada official with us. Mr. Singer is on Zoom. If I could ask Mr. Singer for a bit of context, it might be helpful.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal