House of Commons Hansard #63 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was amendments.
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of National Revenue. Will the minister undertake to review the Income Tax Act to ensure, in real terms, greater fairness in the tax treatment of families, with tax fairness being a central concern in the context of the International Year of the Family?
David Walker LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, this issue is foremost in tax fairness. As the House knows, it has in front of it motion M-14 from the member for Nepean on the issue of child support. It is a votable motion and the minister and the government look forward to hearing the wishes of the House on this issue.
The minister and other members of the government are quite happy to meet with members of the whole House to talk about this issue. There is also a federal-provincial-territorial task force on the question of child support. We consider this input to be also very important in our consideration.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
As the Prime Minister is aware there is increasing evidence that Canada's health care system is in trouble: hospitals being closed, long lines waiting for surgery, provinces rationing services. At the root of the problems are inadequate arrangements for financing health care.
Does the government acknowledge that health care financing needs to be completely reformed and that Canadians are now prepared to accept substantive amendments to the Canada Health Act?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Health and on behalf of the Government of Canada I would like to commit the government to our full support for the Canada Health Act. It is a very important instrument in ensuring that every Canadian has access to health care, not because of the size of their wallets but because of the size of their health problems.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, I gather that the government and the Deputy Prime Minister will not concede that Canadians would rather have major changes in health care financing than to suffer further cuts in services.
For example, a Compas opinion survey on this subject is being released in Toronto today. It reveals that 58 per cent of Canadians are prepared to accept health care financing mechanisms not permitted by the Canada Health Act, even including user fees, in order to save health care.
Does the Deputy Prime Minister accept that the Canada Health Act should be amended to permit the provinces greater flexibility in health care financing?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I think the member is on very dangerous ground when he chooses to pursue policies because of polls.
I have a copy of another poll done by Insight Canada Research. This poll is from last month and states that only 16 per cent of Canadians support user fees.
I would suggest to the member that he take a look at the red book commitments of the Liberal government. We will be meeting with our provincial counterparts in June to examine the whole issue of how we can better deliver health care, but we do not see user fees as a solution to the problems of Canada's health care system.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, we could argue all day about the validity of polls.
I suggest to the ministers that if they contrast alternative financing mechanisms with the alternative of losing the service, a majority of Canadians favour the alternative financing mechanism.
I ask the Deputy Prime Minister this simple question. If the choice is between further cuts in health care service or changing the financing provisions of the Canada Health Act, which alternative does the government prefer?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, it is a false choice.
If we look at one area of health which is of great concern to women, it is in the whole area of birthing. Anyone who has gone through the process knows that birthing is a natural part of life. It is not necessarily a medical problem. Provinces across the country increasingly are looking to alternative birthing methods, including the use of midwives. It has recently been embraced by the province of Ontario, including les services de sages-femmes dans la province de Québec.
It is a creative way of delivering a service to healthy women to have babies in a healthy fashion. This creative way actually saves money for the system.
That is what my counterpart, the Minister of Health, is going to be examining with her provincial colleagues when she meets with them in June.
Health CareOral Question Period
The Speaker
Colleagues, I permitted the last question but I would prefer in future if questions were not hypothetical and a little more direct. If that could be the case we would do better.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.
Yesterday at the annual meeting of the World Health Organization in Geneva, the Minister of Health said that the misuse of reproductive technologies like cloning and genetic engineering to choose a child's sex must stop.
Does the Minister of Justice agree with his colleague, the Minister of Health, who at that prestigious forum emphasized the importance of criminalizing some reproductive technologies such as genetic engineering and cloning?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I said as recently as last week in this House, the Department of Justice is working with the ministry of health examining the 300 recommendations that came from the royal commission on reproductive technologies in February. Very few of them actually deal with the justice system to the extent to which they recommend changes, for example, in the Criminal Code.
Representatives of justice and health are preparing recommendations for cabinet arising from the royal commission and touching upon all of the issues in relation to reproductive technologies.
Rather than deal piecemeal with this or that part of the proposals, my approach to date has been to await the completion of the work of those officials and bring forward to cabinet policies that we believe are in the public interest and that act upon the recommendations of the commission which spent a long time looking at these complex questions.
In response to the hon. member, I say that rather than identifying policies a bit at a time we are looking at the recommendations as a whole. We will be coming forward through cabinet with the government policy probably in the fall of this year.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, does the minister realize that the government's slowness in acting to regulate and control new reproductive technologies proves that this issue is not a priority for the government, despite the minister's statement in Geneva, and that its inaction will have a major impact on ethics and research?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that conclusion follows.
First, it is a matter of priority. For example, we have designed topics and background materials for the meeting of deputy ministers in mid-June. Deputy ministers of health across the country will be meeting. We will be consulting them with respect to their views and the provincial and territorial perspective on some of these issues. We will be preparing discussion papers over the summer to elicit the views of the research community on some approaches we can take to the recommendations of the royal commission.
It is a matter of priority. It is not something we are going to act upon next week. We are going to consult. We take the issue very seriously. We will come forward with policies probably late in 1994 to deal with these issues. They are matters of concern and of substance, but we are going to deal with them methodically.
Keith Martin Reform Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Health I would like to direct this question to the Prime Minister.
Health CareOral Question Period
The Speaker
As was mentioned before in Question Periods, it would be preferable if the matter of whether members are here or not is not mentioned. Would the hon. member please put his question.
Keith Martin Reform Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about women's health.
A recent Halifax Chronicle-Herald article detailed the case of Mary, a single mother who was waiting for orthopaedic surgery. During this time she has been unable to work because of severe pain. In Mary's words: ``They are all talking about prevention but the fact that I have not had surgery is an example of not using prevention''.
If this government is serious about prevention as a means of solving our current health care crisis, why does it continue to rely on rationing of essential health care with its huge cost in human suffering to shackle Canadians to an obsolete Canada Health Act?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the Liberal government is strongly committed to the establishment and accessibility of health care across the country.
If we actually followed the member's advice and torpedoed the Canada Health Act, the difficult situation that patients are facing now across the country would be exacerbated because what we would end up with would be one system where if people had money they could get the operation and another system for those people with no money. We will not support that system.
Keith Martin Reform Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about torpedoing any act. We just want to make it better so that Canadians will have better health care for always. The system is broken. To fix the system we need innovative, cost effective and compassionate solutions.
We cannot do this under the current act. Does this government care more about the Canada Health Act or the health of Canadians? What solutions does this government offer today? We want answers, not rhetoric.
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, one of the principles of the Canada Health Act is universality. One of the things that is banned by the Canada Health Act is user fees.
When the member talks about rhetoric, he suggests that we make the Canada Health Act better. The fact is that the five principles upon which the Canada Health Act is based are the very principles which have many countries around the world looking to Canada as one place where you can get care no matter what the size of your pocketbook.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. In a letter to the Prime Minister, dated April 26, 1994, the chairman of the Kanesatake Chamber of Commerce blames the carelessness of the federal government particularly for the collapse of native businesses and for the alleged misappropriation of federal subsidies by the band council, in an unstable situation where public security is concerned.
Since the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce is accusing the Kanesatake Band Council of misappropriating federal subsidies, would the Prime Minister make public any information he might have on these allegations?
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, perhaps after Question Period my good friend can show me the letter, we can talk quietly and I can give him whatever information I have.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, I hope I have better luck with my next question, which deals with business.
What real measures does the Prime Minister intend to take in order to alleviate the alarming financial difficulties Kanesatake businesses are faced with, given the unstable public security situation caused essentially by the carelessness the federal government has shown in matters under its jurisdiction?
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, I might remind the hon. member that it was not this government that brought the army out. It was not this government that would not negotiate.
This government is bringing the Mohawk people here to Ottawa and dealing with them. The government of Quebec is bringing the Mohawk people to Quebec City and dealing with them. We will deal with the reeves, we will deal with the mayors and we will deal with the people. We do not create problems, we solve them.
Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
Yesterday the minister said that rank and file aboriginal people in Manitoba want self-government. What I am hearing from more and more aboriginal people is that they have serious concerns about the accountability of self-government. However, many of these people feel too intimidated to publicly speak out.
Can the minister explain how he was able to determine the view of rank and file aboriginal people and how they are directly involved in the negotiation process?
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, dealing with the specific question, how do I know I am dealing with the rank and file? At the meeting where this was discussed two weeks ago there were 60 chiefs all elected by the rank and file. There were 400 people, all from Manitoba, all accountable to the rank and file. They almost unanimously after getting their direction from the chiefs, from the rank and file, want self-government. They have been waiting 150 years for it and they are ready to move on it.