Evidence of meeting #7 for National Defence in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was quebec.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
As an Individual
No, I absolutely did not say that, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. What I said—
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Regarding national standards, that's what that means.
2:45 p.m.
As an Individual
No, that is not what that means. It means that all of Canada's scientists will be able to work together to set best clinical practices, as they do in other fields.
You know, science doesn't stop at the border between Quebec and Ontario. Science is happening across Canada and around the world. So I think that jingoism isn't really helpful in this area.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
No, this isn't about jingoism.
So as Quebec's minister of health, you would have accepted national standards coming from Ottawa.
2:45 p.m.
As an Individual
I always accepted that Quebec needs to conform to the highest standards of practice. Whether it's service quality, treatments or diagnostic methods, Quebec must be at the cutting edge of national, Canadian and international standards.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
So you believe that Mr. Legault is out to lunch when he says he is against national standards and that, as the Parti Québécois minister, you would have been for such standards.
2:45 p.m.
As an Individual
You are putting words in my mouth, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. I didn't say that.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
The question is whether you would have accepted that.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
2:45 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
One thing I'm very pleased to see today is the discussion of long-term measures for long-term care that might help prevent the future need for the Canadian Forces to use their resources to provide this assistance.
I was particularly pleased to hear Mr. Hébert talking about the need to move from a hospital focus to a home care focus, and Professor Estabrooks and Ms. van Beusekom talking about the need to recognize and appreciate care as an important service in terms of accreditation of staff, training of staff, living wages and all those kinds of things.
I know we're nearing the end of our time. My last question is about short-term measures. I think I'll ask Ms. van Beusekom first.
Do you believe the measures taken before the Canadian Forces departed from the long-term care homes were adequate to guarantee the health and safety of patients in those homes in Ontario?
2:45 p.m.
Co-Founder, Protect People in Long-Term Care, As an Individual
Thank you for the question.
No, I don't think the measures were adequate. In my view, the biggest issue was testing, which I spoke about. Long-term care should be given priority for testing. As soon as there is a confirmed case, everyone should be tested so that this population can be appropriately cohorted, negative with negative and positive with positive. If that can't be done, you take the positive people out of the location. That was a problem in the spring, and it's still a problem now.
It's testing and it's the cohorting. Those basic things that allow the teams on site to manage the outbreak are not systematically in place, and they're still not in place in Ontario.
2:45 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much. I'm sorry that's the answer we have to hear, but I think it's important for all of us to hear that.
Professor Estabrooks, I would ask you the same question about short-term measures. Are there important short-term measures that you see could be put in place now to help mitigate the negative circumstances that we're certain to face in the coming months in long-term care homes?
2:45 p.m.
Professor, University of Alberta, As an Individual
Obviously, we have to address the testing issue. We have to address the infection and the adequacy of PPE. That's just fundamental, and it's not addressed everywhere. We have to continue to hammer away at the staffing issues because we're going to be.... We have outbreaks right across this country right now. The death tolls and the toll of suffering are not restricted to Ontario and Quebec right now. They're right across from border to border.
The one thing I think we have failed quite significantly at is that we haven't understood that public health measures affect long-term care. Long-term care doesn't sit in a bubble hidden away in some mountain range. If people aren't complying with public health measures, it will ultimately affect the positivity rate in long-term care, and it will ultimately result in deaths and untold suffering. We have to try to understand and help the public understand that we must enforce public health measures because the people in the long-term care setting have no ability to protect themselves beyond what we do for them. That would be, I think, a key issue that we have to address.
We also have to address loneliness. We talk about people dying alone as if it's just a sad thing that happens. It's a catastrophic event. Loneliness and isolation kill people before they ever get to the very end of life. We have to manage visiting in as a safe a way as we can and not shut it down entirely like we did before.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My questions this round are going to be directed towards Mr. Shimooka.
You have done quite a bit of analysis of military spending in the past, and we know there's been a lot of spending during this pandemic to stimulate...to fill in the gaps in incomes for individuals and businesses.
Once we get this under control, have you put any thought into how future budgets by the government could impact defence spending?
2:50 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
Yes, absolutely. It's interesting to take an international view right now. I'd like to point out that many countries—I'll point out France and the U.K.—have actually boosted defence spending, specifically in the acquisitions sector, and have accelerated purchases of equipment partly as a way to stimulate the economy. I think in the last year you've actually watched, or during a certain time in the pandemic we've actually watched, three major tactical fighter air programs that are somewhere in the region of 20 billion to 30 billion dollars' worth of spending be announced. We've seen the seed money in those programs in order to.... It's sort of as a stimulus measure, partly because the aerospace industry in particular has been extremely hard hit, as we all know, and not just with regard to travel but also with regard to the actual manufacturing and MRO side.
With that being the case, Canada hasn't really done that. Canada just doesn't have a national defence procurement strategy in the sense that it is well-developed and providing money for the investment of capabilities and the like. I think what's going to happen—
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
Absolutely. I think that's part of it. We have what are called the key industrial capabilities or KICs, and what we do is we take the ITB—the industrial and technological benefits—funding and use that to support Canadian industry. It's not really an effective strategy. A lot of countries have moved away from such strategies. I think the government is going to look at the KICs and try to use them to fund domestic priorities in a kind of roundabout way. That's just going to cut into the budget of the Canadian Armed Forces for procurement and also increase time and delays for equipment.
I would probably caution the government about looking at that way as a stimulus measure for the economy, and I'm quite worried that this is actually what it is looking to do.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
How then would you balance off the interests of economic drivers with the capabilities required for the armed forces, and trying to procure that in the best interests of the taxpayer?
2:55 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
I think that there's a balance. I'd probably point to some of the stuff that the United Kingdom and Australia have done in the last decade or so. They've moved away from very rigid formulas requiring 100% domestic offsets for foreign-purchased equipment to more flexible arrangements that actually look at the value of what they're getting and at the development of domestic industries.
They also provide significantly large, direct investments from the government rather than trying to do it completely through the ITB format. I think it's a real danger that we have in Canada and you start to see real problems associated with it, especially now that you can alter the selection of military capabilities based on the value proposition, the number of ITBs, where they're located or the value according to the assessment criteria. So—
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Let's just look from the standpoint of one thing we've learned through COVID-19, through this pandemic. We didn't have sovereignty over the production of PPE. We don't have sovereignty over the production of a COVID-19 vaccine. We're depending upon other nations to provide that.
Is there critical infrastructure within the Canadian Armed Forces that we should have sovereignty or control over? Some of these supply chains are critical and paramount to the protection, safety and defence of Canada.
2:55 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
I'd say it's stuff like cyberwarfare, stuff that requires really rapid and quick development and having the IT control over that, especially within Canada. Those are the areas that Canada should look at, towards maintaining a domestic industrial base.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair. You run a very tight meeting. That's very good. Of course, it's what we would expect.
Major Martin and Colonel Malcolm, the Canadian Armed Forces must have gained some experience 102 or 103 years ago with the Spanish flu. Was there a playbook? Were there learnings from that that you've been able to carry forward into the situation you're facing now?
