Debates of Nov. 4th, 1997

Euthanasia

[John Cummins, Reform, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian troops in Somalia were administered the experimental drug mefloquine. Military doctors got the antimalarial drug because they agreed to participate in a prelicensing safety monitoring study. They ignored their commitment.

The Minister of Health was asked on October 20 if any action under the Food and Drug Act had been taken by his department against either the manufacturer who was responsible for supervising the safety monitoring study or the surgeon general who acted illegally in prescribing the drug.

The minister and his department are responsible for the administration of the Food and Drug Act. They ignored the fact that military doctors used an unlicensed drug that commonly has neuropsychiatric side effects. It is a drug the World Health Organization has expressed concerns about, and I quote from a World Health Organization document:

Mefloquine is taken out of recommendations, based mainly on the concern about the neuropsychiatric side effects of mefloquine. Such side effects are relatively rare, but were considered a particular concern in military personnel.

The World Health Organization withdrew its support for the military use of the drug in April 1992, long before Canadian troops were sent to Africa. But this is not simply about whether the World Health Organization withdrew its support for the use of mefloquine by military personnel before soldiers were ordered to take it. It is about what the Department of Health did after learning the law had been broken.

The minister did not explain what action his department took in 1993 when it learned of the problems in Somalia. The minister did not explain why his department took part in a cover-up of the illegal use of mefloquine.

Officials in the Department of Health believed in 1993 there was a direct connection between the use of mefloquine and the death of Somali teenager Shidane Arone and the attempted suicide of Master Corporal Clayton Matchee.

The minister's reply to my question on the response of his department to the illegal use of the unlicensed drug in 1992 and 1993 was to tell the House that the decision to illegally use mefloquine in Somalia was based on the best evidence available at the time.

Wrong. DND ignored the law and ignored critical evidence from reputable source which I would be happy to make available to the minister. Furthermore, the minister asked the House to await the outcome of continuing investigations before coming to any judgment.

Officials at the Department of Health told us on October 20 and 21 that no research is being undertaken by either the Department of Health or DND. Can the minister tell this House whether his officials are mistaken or whether he was mistaken when he informed the House that there were continuing investigations?

A cover-up occurred at DND and in his own department in 1993 and 1994 as to the illegal prescription of mefloquine by the surgeon general and its possible connection to the attempted suicide in Somalia of Master Corporal Clayton Matchee in 1993 and the suicide of Corporal Scott Smith in Rwanda in 1994. These were Canadian soldiers who deserved better.

I hope this minister is not trying to continue the cover-up of this illegal use of the unlicensed drug or to protect officials who had licensed mefloquine in 1993 at about the time the notorious events in Somalia became public.

The licensing was done based on an incomplete safety monitoring study. Telling this House there is an investigation under way into mefloquine when his own officials deny any study is now under way does not help us get to the truth.

The Minister of Health did not acknowledge the drug was used illegally. Instead, the minister said there was an ongoing investigation. Presumably he is talking about an investigation that has been ongoing since 1993. If so, even the minister's infamous Airbus investigation did not take that long.

I would ask again whether the minister can tell the House whether his officials are mistaken or whether he was mistaken when he informed the House there were continuing investigations. Furthermore, I would ask that he document for the House what action his department has taken with regard to the illegal use of mefloquine by the surgeon general and the failure by the manufacturer to carry out a proper safety monitoring study.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to the hon. member regarding the antimalaria drug lariam mefloquine and its availability to the Canadian Armed Forces in Somalia.

As he knows, lariam has been and continues to be used and recognized worldwide as one of the most effective drugs for the prevention and treatment of a form of malaria resistant to most other antimalarial drugs. Estimated at over 2 million deaths each year, malaria is one of the world's greatest killers.

Prior to its marketing approval in 1993, lariam was available to travelling Canadians through an open access clinical trial, referred to as a safety monitoring study. The study provided Canadians with early access to a drug where few alternatives were available and monitored potential side effects of the drug in the interests of patient safety.

In 1994 Health Canada took immediate and affirmative action when media reported claims of several incidents where lariam may have been involved in Somalia. The Department of Health requested the sponsor to provide all information and adverse drug reaction reports as required under the safety monitoring study.

According to Health Canada directives, researchers involved in clinical studies and attending physicians are bound to report without any exception any significant adverse reaction to drugs. The results of the monitoring study on drug safety, combined with recent information in scientific literature, confirm the prescribing information approved by Health Canada for Lariam.

The decision to use Lariam as a first choice therapy is a matter of responsibility for the patient. It is for the prescribing physician to decide in consultation with the patient whether a drug's potential benefits outweigh the risks.

I am sorry I could not answer.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas.

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on October 21, I asked a question in this House of the Minister of Foreign Affairs concerning the upcoming peoples summit, specifically the concern that many delegates from APEC countries who wish to attend the peoples summit to speak on issues of fundamental human rights, the rights of workers and the environment were refused any federal government funding.

I asked the foreign minister why it was that this explicit bar on the peoples summit, using federal funds to assist people from civil society attending the peoples summit, was in place. I pointed out the double standard and the fact that the federal government is spending something in excess of $50 million for the APEC summit itself for things like security for leaders like Suharto and Cheung Chi Min and others and it is not prepared to provide the very minimal funding which has been requested to assist in the travel of delegates from APEC countries to the peoples summit.

At the same time I questioned the minister with respect to cuts in Canada's overseas development aid, shameful cuts which have led to our being severely criticized by the Canadian Council for International Co-operation and other international aid bodies. We have dropped from fifth place to eleventh place in the OECD.

Now that the Minister of Finance has triumphantly proclaimed that the deficit has been wrestled to the ground, I urged that the minister responsible for foreign affairs, the Minister for International Co-operation, cancel the proposed 8% cut, about $150 million, which is planned for next April in Canada's overseas development aid.

Unfortunately the response to both those questions was completely unsatisfactory.

I point out that as well in the context of the upcoming APEC peoples summit my colleague from Yukon raised very serious concerns about the failure of the federal government to provide requested financial assistance to the APEC women's conference, this despite the commitment that was made by the secretary of state for women and multiculturalism at the conference in Beijing. The failure to provide proper funding has also led to the cancellation of the indigenous peoples forum.

The peoples summit is a tremendous opportunity for Canadians and for people in APEC countries to raise concerns about human rights, about workers rights, about the environment, and I want to pay tribute to the organizers of the upcoming peoples summit in Vancouver later this month.

I want to again appeal to the Government of Canada to honour its own policy, the policy of CIDA, which encourages the involvement of delegates from other countries in important UN conferences and other key intergovernmental and non-governmental fora. They have much to witness; workers from Hong Kong, for example, who will speak about the failure of the Government of China to respect workers rights. It just cancelled the laws passed by the Hong Kong legislature to guarantee freedom of association. It is important that we hear from workers there. It is important that we hear from workers in Indonesia and from others talking about the genocidal policies of Suharto in East Timor. Why are we allowing him to come to Canada when he is guilty of crimes against humanity?

These are some of the questions that I hope will be addressed at the People's Summit. I appeal to the government to provide the funding necessary to those who are coming—

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, the People's Summit requested that the Government of Canada pay $140,000 for the travel of Asia-Pacific NGOs to Vancouver.

After careful review the government decided that the best way to support the People's Summit is to provide funding support for policy discussions, not travel. And this is what we did.

The Government of Canada has provided $195,000 to the People's Summit; $170,000 to help cover in-Canada logistical and administrative costs related to the organization of the event; and $25,000 to assist the People's Summit in developing an interactive Internet-based electronic conference that will provide a forum for an exchange of views.

The Government of Canada is the People's Summit largest contributor. It supports the People's Summit because it includes a broad base group of Canadian and Asia-Pacific NGOs and will feature discussions on topics such as women, sustainability, youth and free media.

As chair of APEC in 1997, Canada has done more than any other member to widen the scope of APEC discussions to include such questions.

Canada has a longstanding tradition of supporting organizations involved in promoting human rights—an important Canadian foreign policy objective—and has always sought to ensure that APEC's activities are informed by the views of civil society, including academics and non-governmental representatives. Canada will continue to so.

CIDA is already supporting several of the organizations involved in the People's Summit for their ongoing work in developing countries.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on October 28 I had the opportunity to rise in the House and ask a question of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Quite frankly I thought the question was fairly simple. Obviously the answers were not quite as simple because they were not forthcoming.

I would like to give the House a little background. What I was referring to was the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation. This corporation is based in Manitoba. It is fishermen operated and those people who ply their trade in the Northwest Territories, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and northern Ontario are the stakeholders of this corporation.

The concept is fairly simple. The fishermen catch the fish, the marketing board markets the fish and sells them throughout the world and domestically. It has sales in excess of $50 million on world-wide distribution. It is a typical board. It has a chairman that is elected. It has a board that is elected. It has no government subsidies. It works extremely well and it is self-sufficient.

It also has working for it a chief executive officer and president. The current president and chief executive officer has been with the corporation for 16 years. He worked his way up as controller, vice-president of finance and then became the president and general manager, which is what we would all like to do within our corporation. Everything is fine. This is where the sinister of music comes in because unfortunately the government has the ability to appoint the CEO under the Freshwater Fish Marketing Act.

Previous history showed that this particular CEO had extended to him contracts of two and three years. Unfortunately, in April 1997, just before the election, an extension of that contract was issued for only six months, which was a bit strange. After the June election the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans announced that there was going to be a new president and general manager and he would be Mr. Ron Fewchuk.

I asked a question of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and it was not that tough. My question was would the minister tell me what the qualifications of Mr. Fewchuk were. Would he also tell me if he consulted with the board and the chairman with respect to that appointment?

Well, I did not get an answer. What I got was some gobbledegook but let me tell you what the answer is. The fact of the matter is that the qualifications of Mr. Fewchuk are that he did not run in that riding because he let another member, a fellow by the name of Jon Gerrard who is no longer with the Liberal benches, run in his stead. He retired as a member of Parliament.

Did they ask the board and the chairman? Did they consult with them? The answer is no, they did not consult with the board or the chairman. It was simply a matter of a political appointment.

My second question was quite simple as well. Unfortunately, now that they need a chief executive officer to actually do the work, they are going to retain the services of their current CEO and they are now going to have Mr. Fewchuk also as a CEO. They are now going to have two salaries. My question to the minister was would he simply tell me that the one salary of patronage would be paid for out of the budget of the minister of fisheries. Do not allow those salaries to be paid by the poor fishermen. All they really want to do is fish and make an honest living. I never got an answer to that question either and I hope I can get one this evening.

The problem I have with this is not just simply for the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board, but we are dealing with another bill right now, Bill C-4. The government is fighting to make sure that it has the ability to appoint the CEO. It makes me very nervous because quite frankly there were a number of defeated Liberal members in the last election. I am wondering which one of those will be appointed the CEO of the Canadian Wheat Board.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I might say on Bill C-4 that what we are trying to do is come up with a bill which producers have asked for. They continue to want us to be able to appoint the expertise in marketing that we did under the last bill.

Is there no depth to the disrespect for a political opponent to which the member for Brandon—Souris will stoop for cheap political gain? The member opposite has nothing of substance to say. He reverts to an attack on the character of the individual in an effort to belittle the individual Mr. Ron Fewchuk.

Although I am responding to this question on behalf of the government in my capacity as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr. Fewchuk happened to be my seatmate in the last Parliament.

Mr. Fewchuk as a member of Parliament was not loud nor bombastic. He did not use malicious comments to attract headlines like the member opposite is trying to do. He did not try to manipulate the media like the member opposite is trying to do. He held a quiet conviction and he did his job.

Mr. Fewchuk brings years of experience to the job of president and will serve the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation very well indeed. He is a skilled entrepreneur and former parliamentarian with diverse experience in business and local government. He has 18 years ongoing experience as a successful business owner-operator and 16 years experience as a commercial bait fisherman and outfitter. He has a long history of local leadership, including 15 years of elected service as reeve, deputy reeve and councillor of the rural municipality of St. Clements. He is well qualified.

[Jean-Guy Chrétien, Bloc, Frontenac—Mégantic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on October 29 I asked the Minister of Human Resources Development a question in this House.

On October 29, we were three days away from the closure of the BC asbestos mine at Black Lake, where 300 workers were laid off on November 1. Their average age is 52. Of the 300 miners, 82% are over 50 and 36% are over 55.

What the workers, the employer, Jean Dupéré, and Louise Harel of the Quebec government want is a pre-retirement program for these older employees.

The minister insists on offering only active measures, namely the transitional job fund, measures for independent workers and the purchase of courses. Try asking Edgar Rousseau, 56, of Coleraine to take a course in electricity or soldering, for example.

Try asking Normand Cloutier, 56, an electrician who knows his job inside out, Louis-Philippe Roy, 56, or Maurice Grégoire, 54, an experienced dynamiter, to train for some other type of work. You will agree with me that, for these people, training would be totally meaningless.

The minister has no compassion for these workers. On October 27, 1997, I asked him a question in the House and he did not even dare to come to the defence of his government's treatment of these workers. Instead, he designated the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs has now replaced the Minister of Human Resources Development. In a few minutes, we will find out who this evening's stand-in will be.

Employees of the BC mine met last week with the Minister of Human Resources Development. André Laliberté, Gaétan Rousseau and Charles Lacroix from the Thetford region met with him in his office. They asked him for an improved POWA program. The next day, in this House, he dared to rise in his place and state that asbestos workers had told him they did not want the POWA program.

At that point, my colleague, the member for Rimouski—Mitis, tabled a letter in the House reminding the minister that the workers wanted an improved POWA program.

This minister has no compassion. Jean Dupéré, I remind the House, is prepared to do his share, a substantial share, he says. Louise Harel is also ready. Only the minister is refusing to budge. He is prepared to go as far as $3 million in active measures. Does he not understand that forcing workers who are 55, 56, 58 or 59 years old, to sit in a classroom is not only unrealistic, but stupid coming from a minister who claims to manage this country's human resources?

It is not surprising—

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Cooperation.

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the for International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is sensitive, open and always willing to listen to Canadians.

The federal government recognizes the difficulties experienced by Canadians who lose their jobs, particularly those affected by the closing of the mine in Black Lake, in Quebec. However, these layoffs cannot be covered by the Program for Older Workers Adjustment, or POWA.

That program was terminated last March because, among other things, it was not fair and equitable to older workers in Quebec and across Canada.

The Department of Human Resources Development Canada has changed its focus from passive income support to active measures in order to help workers reintegrate into the workforce. Provinces are also moving in that direction. Let me point out that the predecessor to the human resources development minister made a commitment to helping older workers adapt to the changing labour market and considered a variety of measures including income support benefits before concluding that active measures would best serve his client group.

I assure the member this decision was not taken lightly and we will continue to help Canadians affected by layoffs in the best way possible.

With regard to Lab Chrysotile, this is reflected in the generous offer of close to $3 million made by our government to help the employees at the BC mine re-enter the workforce.

People will benefit from adequate active measures including self-employment, targeted wage subsidies and skill development, which will increase the employability of these people and help them re-enter the workforce as quickly as possible.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7.30 p.m.)