Madam Speaker, due to the nature of the issue I am not going to pose an argument with you at this point in time. I will understand what you are saying. It continues:
(Mr. Minister), will you reconsider the research dollars awarded to the cause and cure for ALS?
If you were my husband, I would travel, call, phone or write to the men of importance in government, knowing that if we don't speak up strongly, this thing will never be beaten.
Ron was president of a restaurant chain in western Canada for 22 years, franchising 35 stores. He is a father, a son, a brother, an uncle, a husband, a grandfather, a colleague and a friend.
My greatest gift to Ron, as his wife, is my time. My love for him drives me to help him reach his newfound goal, and that is to see millions given to ALS research. This would give every ALS patient, caregiver and family, hope, which is so vital in pressing on through this cruel and devastating disease.
Last year, we both wept as we heard on the evening news, you awarded $42 million additional dollars to AIDS research.
I'm so happy for them, but what about ALS? It is no longer an old person's disease. My husband was 47 years when diagnosed. This past weekend we had attended an “ALS international symposium” in Vancouver, where 500 scientists meet to communicate and pool ideas and findings, all for the great cause of ALS. I met at least 25 patients, all of them under 52 years of age.
And that's all I have to say. Thank you for your listening ears, (Mr. Minister). I leave you with these words from my heart. “Some days the stresses of life are so overwhelming that my heart can no longer hear a song and then I stop; knowing that if I cannot hear a song, I also cannot sing a song. Without a song there is no hope. Please, please give ALS a song, a song of hope”.
Thank you,
This is but one case. Carole and Ron are both trying to do what they can while there is time to convince people responsible for trying to help others to help research and fund the cure for ALS. I agree that there are many diseases out there that need funding, but it seems to me sometimes that we in Canada listen to the loud voice, the squeaky wheel, for instance AIDS. While I support much research for AIDS, I wonder why this is. I suppose those with ALS maybe do not speak loud enough. Maybe they do not cry out long enough. Maybe they do not have rallies like those who support the fight against AIDS. Nevertheless that does not preclude them from getting the same genuine support from a government that has the money.
I could spend time, perhaps be critical and show people across the country where the government fritters away millions upon millions upon millions of dollars. I have a long list here on my desk of projects on which it just escapes me why taxpayer dollars are even spent.
We are spending over $800,000 on fireworks for the millennium. Yet if we talk about $800,000 to ALS victims and researchers, we shake our heads at it. I cannot help but try to put this in perspective and wonder why that is. Why is it that we always seem to be spending our money on things that are not quite as devastating but have a higher profile, perhaps are more visible and make people feel good? We walk away with a good feeling, but the end result is that problems like ALS are really left to themselves.
I know that UBC, a great university where one of my children went, will do much with research as a result of Bill C-13 on many things, but I still say we are overlooking some of the obvious things that happen. It is just because people inflicted with such diseases as ALS tend not to be those who are outspoken, creating protests, being visible and that sort of thing. They tend not to be like that because they are basically tied up in their own problems and trying to get them resolved.
One of the things the government is responsible for is genuine programs for all people, not just for those who holler loudest or holler longest, not just for those areas that vote Liberal, not just for those areas where there is a potential vote, not just on the issues where they think they can win the next election but sometimes on those hidden votes. Those are the votes of people who may never elect politicians, but deep down their votes are for trying to keep people alive and keep people going for just a bit more time.
I ask in the House today that the minister take the video I have and spend 11 minutes of his time looking at the contents to try to understand the plight of some people, without fanfare, without a grandstand or a soap box upon which to stand. He should take time in his office, put on this video and think about it.
No greater deed can be done by people in power and politics today with billions and billions of dollars at their disposal than that which can help people who do not have a large voice in society. If that is what Liberalism is about or Reform or any other politics, that is what must be done.
I have tried to give the minister two issues that perhaps will not be talked about in the House. In fact, I doubt very much whether drugs and ALS will even be discussed throughout this whole debate. They are two issues that I hold dearly, and I say that if we cannot help young people who are addicted, young people who do not want to be addicted; if we cannot help with those problems and consider them health problems, and if we cannot do more in research for them, we should not be here in the House of Commons. If we cannot help those with ALS who cry out quietly, we should not be here.
I ask finally one other thing. When agencies and organizations are set up in terms of health care and drugs across the country to help our citizens, we should always be looking at the best qualified people, those people with the skills, abilities, qualifications and past performance to head those efforts. We should not be in any circumstances putting our friends, those who work for us politically, into those positions. I do not believe it serves the client who is the drug addict, who is the ALS victim, who is a parent waiting for some assistance. I do not think it helps those clients whatsoever.
Having looked at a lot of the appointments lately from the government, it seems that what pervades our system in Canadian society today are government appointments. I know in some of those cases that the people who are appointed to positions are not the best qualified.
I only ask these three things: (a) let us do a lot more for young people who are becoming addicted and who are addicted; (b) let us do something constructive, for a change, to try to do more for ALS victims and try to help people like Ron Martens; and (c) let us make sure that we appoint those in positions of responsibility on the basis of skills, ability and qualifications with regard to health care.