Health Committee on Feb. 7th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number five of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health.

Today we are meeting in public to continue our discussions and reach decisions on the committee's future business.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021.

Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. Regarding the speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants to the meeting that taking screenshots or photos of your screen is not permitted. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation, I would ask that we respect the recommendations from public health authorities as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy of October 19, 2021.

Colleagues, at our last meeting we were discussing an amendment by Mr. Davies on the motion of Monsieur Berthold to initiate a study on children's health.

We also made a decision at our last meeting to set aside some time to receive a short presentation from our analyst, Sonya Norris. We are not bound to finish those things before we move on to something else, but I would suggest that it would be in good order for us to finish those things at some point.

With that, the floor is open.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I see on the speaking order we have Dr. Hanley, Ms. Kramp and Monsieur Berthold.

I recognize first, Mr. Davies, with a point of order. Go ahead.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

No, it wasn't a point of order. I was just going to speak to your suggestion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Okay, so we're going to put you on the speakers list then.

Someone raised a point of order and I'm not sure who it was.

Can someone help me out with that?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

It was me, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to point out to you that several people had raised hands here in the room.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes, and the clerk in the room told me that it was Mr. Hanley, Mrs. Kramp‑Neuman and you. I think the fourth was Mr. Davies. Thank you for your help.

Mr. Hanley has the floor.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you.

In the spirit of restarting but acknowledging that I would also like to continue discussions that we left off, I would like to begin with a notice of motion that I have circulated. It is a revision to my previous notice of motion. That is to address the health care workforce crisis.

I'm happy to read the motion, but I'll take that at your direction. Essentially it is to undertake a study on how the federal government can facilitate recruitment and retention of health care providers, including a focus on rural and northern communities, and that this be the first study undertaken—with the understanding that we have the COVID studies starting already, but that it be the first alternate study—and that in recognition of the workforce crisis and the role the federal government plays in addressing this, I propose that we put this as our first study.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Dr. Hanley.

Just so we're clear, are you giving notice of this motion, or are you moving this motion now? If you're moving the motion now, it would be in order and it would be appropriate to create it now, but I need you to declare—

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes, go ahead, Mr. Thériault.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

I would just clarify that I am moving the motion.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chair, I sense that this meeting, which you opened by asking a question about how things work, will be very long.

You asked us, I would remind you and Mr. Hanley, whether we wouldn't be better advised today to continue our discussions on Mr. Berthold's motion and the agenda and studies we want to put in place, and then see what the analysts have to say about the documents that were sent to us today. You asked that question, hands went up, and you gave the floor to the first person, Mr. Hanley, who took us in a completely different direction and ignored your question.

If that is the way the Standing Committee on Health works, I understand that it will take two and a quarter hours before we can discuss and vote on Mr. Berthold's motion. I would point out to you that people are watching us and when, for the sake of consistency, you ask a question of this nature, I expect that the people who raise their hands are not simply trying to take advantage of their time to have the discussion focus on their motion. I expect people to be fair. When we are, we first and foremost answer the questions that the chair asks us when it comes to operational questions. It's common sense.

When Mr. Hanley started moving his motion, it seems to me that you should have called him to order and told him that he wasn't answering the question you had asked. You did ask a question, and I was expecting my colleagues who were raising their hands to answer it.

I would ask you to be a little disciplined in how we conduct our discussions because if we continue in this way, it will never end, and we'll spend the whole meeting trying to agree on an agenda.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

It was Mr. Thériault.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Oh, Mr. Thériault. You're both “Luc”.

Mr. Thériault, thank you for your point of order, but it's up to the committee to determine the order of the questions that will be discussed. It's true that at the last meeting, we had some business that hasn't yet been completed, but it is appropriate to discuss it after another topic, and that's what Mr. Hanley did. It's allowed, and we have a motion to debate.

Debate is on the motion.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

If I understand correctly, Mr. Chair, you asked us a question to start the meeting, and someone can decide to introduce another topic before we've even finished discussing a motion that we're about to vote on. So we are suspending the discussion and the vote on the official opposition motion to start another discussion on a motion that was not planned or covered by your question.

We're not out of the woods yet.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, I made a decision. I don't think I asked a question. I simply commented on the fact that we have some unfinished business. The order of questions is up to the committee. The fact that a motion has been moved indicates that at least one member of the committee wants to start with that motion, and that's their right. We're now going to debate the motion presented.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

I have a point of order.

I would like to speak to Mr. Thériault's point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Very well.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

I just want to get clarification on this.

I understand the ruling and I understand Mr. Thériault's point. I just want to get clarification that, when one of our members gets the floor— Mr. Thériault or one of our members or someone else—and simply moves a motion to adjourn the debate on Dr. Hanley's motion, that's non-debatable.

Is that right? We just vote on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

That's right.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

I'm pretty much signalling where this is going to go if the Liberals continue to derail.... It doesn't make any sense. We almost came to a vote. We simply ran out of two extra minutes of time at the last meeting where we could have come to a resolution.

If we're interested in moving forward as a committee in a productive, meaningful way, Mr. Thériault's point is well taken. We would absolutely be supportive of finishing the conversation that we were having last time and then we can get to other motions that others want to bring up.

It makes no sense at all to go down the road that we're going down right now. We know where this is inevitably going to go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Lake.

Mrs. Kramp-Neuman, please.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I move to adjourn the debate.