Thank you. I believe—
Evidence of meeting #5 for Health in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #5 for Health in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
There was no interpretation of the previous member's intervention or yours. So I would like the hon. member to repeat what he said.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Is the interpretation working now?
Okay. Dr. Ellis, just for the benefit of Mr. Thériault, could you just repeat your point?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wasn't sure if it was a point of order or a clarification as to whether we were debating or bringing forth more motions.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
The debate is on the amendment to the motion by Dr. Hanley to remove the reference to it being prioritized.
Mr. Davies has the floor.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll finish up.
I was speaking to the motion to amend to remove the prioritization, because I think at some point we have to decide what we're going first on. I'm happy to go first on this. I just want to make it clear that my support for it may be conditional upon how we handle the witness question.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Certainly I want to echo the comments of our colleagues, that we want to get moving on this committee lest we all look like we have our skate laces tied together. That's never a good thing, for those of you who don't play hockey.
I do believe that Mr. Hanley's motion is very important and I've spoken to him offline with respect to that as well as to Dr. Powlowski. Being a physician myself, I totally and utterly understand the issues. The only caveat, Mr. Chair, that I will bring forward for our honourable colleagues is the fact that the study on children is unique. The problem with respect to health care resources in Canada is a well-known issue. I'm not entirely sure how much we need to study it, because at some point there does need to be action on it. I'm not sure that studying equates to action. That would be my biggest issue with respect to that.
The future of our country is really reliant upon our children and adolescents. We have no idea of the COVID-related impacts on the health and mental health of children and adolescents. Therefore, my conclusion would be that with respect to starting off with a study related to health care resources when we already know there's a giant problem, whereas we do not know the untold effects on children and adolescents, the argument could be made that the study on children and adolescents is more pressing than a study on the already known fact that we are short tens of thousands of nurses—perhaps 70,000—and multiple thousands of primary care providers. Therefore the only thing I would ask my honourable colleagues to take into consideration is the urgency of the item.
The only other thing I would bring forward is if my colleagues—and I'll take them at their word—would say let's do six meetings on the health care study and bring forth the children study second.
Let's get moving.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I don't want us to be debating what's the most important in the health care system between nurses, nurses and doctors on the one hand, and children's health and the effects of the pandemic on children on the other. It's absolutely ridiculous to be debating what's more important between the two.
For me, as for many Canadians, it's obvious. We're concerned about the impact of the pandemic on our children and grandchildren. That said, more broadly, we need to go further to find out how the health care system and Canadians in general can better help children.
Since the beginning of the pandemic, children have been put on the sidelines and tugged in so many directions. That's why we absolutely must begin our study quickly to show them that their MPs in Ottawa are interested in them. That's important to me.
A critical first step is to look at the effects on children of the pandemic, of school closures and of being confined for so long in the same space with their parents, sometimes with parents who may be abusive, sometimes with no other external resources. This has been the reality for many Canadian families.
As parliamentarians, we can't turn a blind eye to what happened during the pandemic.
With the agreement of my colleagues, I would like to start the COVID‑19 component of our studies by looking at the effects of the pandemic. We could start the study with two meetings on the effects of the pandemic on children, and we could continue the study after the six meetings on human resources that my colleague mentioned. I think that's important too.
I have a lot to say about the Liberals' handling of the pandemic, whether it's child care, human resource management, or the promise of 7,500 health care professionals, which we have not seen the first glimpse of. I'm all for talking about it, but I don't think nurses need us debating and tearing our hair out about whether it's the medical profession or children that are the most important. I think they're all equally important.
It's unfortunate that we're witnessing political jousting to give priority to one study at the expense of the other, because I had started to present my study proposal, and I was very motivated. We should have finished with that, but you want to start with the other study. That's fine. Both are important to Canadians. It's just a matter of switching them around to satisfy everyone.
Mr. chair, I'll let my colleagues speak, but we'll be ready to speak to my amendment whenever you want.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
No one wants to discuss it anymore.
Mr. Lake is next up.
You have the floor, Mr. Lake.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Chair, I had my hand up before Mr. Berthold. You didn't see it.
May I have the floor, Mr. Chair?
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
February 7th, 2022 / 4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON
Mr. Chair, we all know the pandemic has strained the health care system and, as a result of burnout, the stress rates among health care workers.... We have a code orange in a Brampton hospital. As long as my colleagues are willing to study [Technical difficulty—Editor] attach our motion by Brendan, I'm okay with that. There's urgency in there, too.
We know child care is also...nutrition. It's also important. That is why I just wanted to know. As long as we are studying it, that will be good.
