Health Committee on Feb. 12th, 2026

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

They're not allowed to repeat.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

—repeat themselves as much as they want.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

No, standing order.... No repetition....

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

As long as it's made to the order of the day, which is a motion....

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

It's Standing Order 11.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's what a point of order means. Are we straying from the orders of the day? The order of the day is a motion we're discussing. Ms. Chi is reading components of the motion and then debating them. I think she's in order with what she's doing.

Mr. Bailey, do you have a point of order?

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I just want to get on the clerk's list, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

All right, continue, Ms. Chi.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

There are a lot of disruptions and interruptions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Continue, please.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I really question the point that the members of the opposition are making about how we're discussing the relevancy of the motion. The chair makes the decision.

I am on topic. I really believe that I am on topic when I discuss the program. That's the program, the subject of the study. I really question that, first of all.

The point—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

I have a point of order, Chair.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I keep getting interrupted.

Once again, Mr. Mazier, I'm getting interrupted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Mazier, do you have a point of order?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Chair, will you please...?

It is not relevant to the motion. I don't know how many times I have to say this. She's talking about what's allowed or not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Mazier, I will decide what is relevant to the motion. We are sticking to the motion.

Ms. Chi is reading a piece of the motion. Now she's discussing why she doesn't like it and what she feels is wrong with it. This is speaking to the motion. She's relevant, Mr. Mazier.

Thank you.

Ms. Chi, go ahead.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I'm just going point by point here. I feel like I really need to address my last point again.

To the point that was discussed in the motion, it says, “the fiscal impact of changes announced in 2025 to the interim federal health program, including the copayment policy and any related measures”. I was halfway through going through the changes to the program.

As the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the fine folks here have highlighted, the changes are coming in. There are changes that will bring the cost down, but I still question whether or not it's appropriate for this committee to study and not another committee like OGGO or—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We've already decided on that position.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I'm just speaking to the point.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We're not debating whether this is appropriate anymore.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I'm not debating that. I'm just opining.

I'm still going. I feel like my time has been taken away by a lot of these interruptions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Chi, speak to the motion, for or against it, please. Thank you.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I will.

Point (a), I'm not supporting that. Is it clear that I'm speaking to the motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, you are.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

This is why I don't support it: Point (a) is.... This is a program administered by IRCC. Immigration oversees the level of asylum seekers and refugee claimants. It is the one that controls the numbers. It is the one that is administering the program.

I'm opining on this point: I think the health committee is not the most appropriate committee to study this, because we have a mandate to study things that are health related. We did that for AMR. We studied the impact for immigration or foreign credentialing. We had a lot of great testimonies on that, and that's relevant to this committee.

I feel that point (a) is more appropriate to be studied either at the immigration committee or at OGGO.

To that point, we're making changes through budget 2025. There will be a decrease of cost. The level projection will change as well.

Point (b) is “a detailed breakdown of supplemental health benefits by category, province, utilization and contribution to overall program growth, including utilization rates”. I think this is a good point. Again, study it at another committee. This data, this information, provided by IRCC, would be really better studied at a different committee. Whether health is impacted or not impacted.... When the driver is the number of claimants and the number of refugees, I think the immigration committee or OGGO would really give a deeper analysis on that point.

Point (c) is “Cost implications across different asylum claim pathways and outcomes, broken down by province”. With regard to the different asylum claim pathways, that's immigration; that's IRCC. That's all information coming from them. Are we the most appropriate committee to study that?

This is the subject of a lot of people's interest. However, again, it's more appropriate to be studied somewhere else so that we can really do the deeper dive on the program, which we all have an interest in.

Again, with the mandate of this committee, I feel like this may not be the most appropriate setting. I find a lot of members agree that our resources could be better used. We have various upcoming studies that I really believe can be beneficial to Canadians.