Debates of Nov. 28th, 2002

Hazardous Products Act

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government representative has said that history cannot be rewritten, but the fact is that there is nothing to prevent the government from issuing an official apology to the Chinese Canadian community. There is nothing to prevent the government from reviewing and considering the issue of compensation. There is nothing to prevent the government from looking at, for example, a community-driven anti-racism fund or an educational trust that would provide some level of redress for this horrible injustice that was done.

I want to pay tribute to people like Sid Tan and Victor Wong from the Vancouver Association of Chinese-Canadians and the Chinese Canadian National Council. They have continued to advocate to bring this issue forward. I know they believe in it, and they will continue to work until the government not just recognizes but is willing to take some action to ensure that this issue is properly resolved and dealt with.

I introduced a motion in March 2001 and again I called on the government to issue an official apology, to look at the issue of compensation, and I would ask the minister's representative, what is preventing the government from taking that course of action?

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier, we believe the best approach is to continue to put our efforts and resources toward building, in close collaboration with communities, a more equitable society today and a better future for generations to come.

Immigrants and refugees have come to Canada from every part of the world, often bringing with them little more than hope and dreams of building a better life for themselves and for their children. History records that many experienced hardships, yet they endured, settling the land, building communities and forging links across the vast land.

Respecting our history involves recognizing the fact that people from every corner of the globe have contributed to building Canada.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, last week I asked a question of the Minister of Health regarding the hepatitis C compensation package. The reason I raised the question in the House is that it is about five years after the Krever inquiry, where Krever said that all victims of hepatitis C should be compensated.

The government made a unilateral deliberate decision only to compensate those victims between 1986 and 1990. We on this side of the House, and in fact some members on that side of the House, felt that was wrong at the time.

That question came forward from me last week because in that five year interval between the Krever inquiry and today, the RCMP has laid criminal charges against the Red Cross, Health Canada officials and officials in the corporate sector.

We do not know what the outcome of those trials will be. In fact they could be proven innocent. We are not trying to prejudge what might happen in a criminal trial, but we do know this as we stand here tonight.

There is a very casual and sometimes cavalier attitude by some of the officials. At the very minimum it is sloppy behaviour by those people. We know that because of that sloppy behaviour, people died and people got sick. We know that because of that type of behaviour by officials who have been charged, lives were lost and families have been destroyed.

The question again is, why would the Government of Canada compensate some of those victims but not others? I pointed out to the minister that day in the House that out of the compensation fund of approximately $1.2 billion--the minister says $1.4 billion, so let us take the minister's word, $1.4 billion--the first group of people to be paid were the lawyers. They received $55 million before any of the victims received a nickel.

As we stand here, only 2,000 people have been approved for compensation in that artificial timeframe of 1986 to 1990. For months on end, the government, and health ministers going back to 1997, claimed in the House that it could not afford to pay those people outside that artificial date the government had set up arbitrarily.

Now we know there are only 5,000 people outside that timeframe who should be compensated. The fact of the matter is that the interest on that fund is sustaining the fund. The government has not drawn down enough from that fund to jeopardize it.

There is a very strong and compelling argument why all victims should be compensated.

I challenge the minister to bring the actuaries to a committee of the whole and report to the House what that fund is capable of doing.

Our belief is it can sustain itself over that period of time and all victims can in fact be compensated as they should be.

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, there has been much discussion about the rationale used by Canada's government in deciding on a collaborative approach to hepatitis C assistance. It would be useful to review some of the events of the past to better understand why those years were so significant.

Although an antibody test for hepatitis C was not developed and put into use in the Canadian blood system until 1990, surrogate testing was used in the United States from 1986 to 1990. Since implementation of a specific blood test for hepatitis C in 1990, the Canadian blood system is considered as safe as it can be.

The 1986 to 1990 timeframe is significant and was the rationale for Canada's government to use in offering assistance.

In total, the government has committed approximately $1.4 billion for compensating and assisting people infected with hepatitis C through the blood system. Of this amount, the government already paid $875 million to fulfill our financial obligations to victims under the 1986 to 1990 hepatitis C settlement agreement.

Through this agreement, which was approved by the courts, we have managed to save probably 10 years of litigation. An independent administrator has been named by the courts, a claims process has been put in place, and cheques to claimants are being issued.

As of March 2002, the latest date that figures were reported, the administrator has received and reviewed more than 7,300 claims and more than 5,400 individuals have received over $220 million in compensation benefits. While as of June 2002 there was approximately $900 million in the fund, this is not a surplus. These funds belong to the beneficiaries of the trust. Payment out of this fund may continue for up to 70 years.

In addition, for individuals infected before 1986 and after 1990, the federal government has committed approximately $525 million to provide care. Care is what people need when they are sick.

We have consulted with people across Canada. We have listened and responded by dedicating $15 million for hepatitis C prevention and research, and for establishing community based support programs. We are also spending $125 million for enhanced safety and surveillance of the blood supply.

Another important component of our contribution is an agreement with the provinces and territories to pay half the costs, up to $50 million, to identify and notify all individuals who have been infected with hepatitis C through the blood system so that they can receive the care and treatment that they need. Many of these people are not aware that they are infected and they are not being treated.

As well, we have offered a $300 million transfer to the provinces and territories, of which over $100 million has been transferred to date. This money will ensure that all those who contracted hepatitis C through the blood system will have reasonable and ongoing access to the medical goods and services needed for appropriate treatment and will not incur out of pocket expenses for appropriate hepatitis C care, such as drugs, immunization and nursing care.

Our plan is sensible. It provides the care that people living with hepatitis C need, and it is compassionate.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the plan is neither sensible nor compassionate. The parliamentary secretary has thrown out so many numbers and figures tonight that her own team of lawyers would have trouble understanding exactly what the government has done.

This we know. There is almost $1 billion left in the fund. Many of those have been compensated with lump sums. Many of the victims have actually died. The fact of the matter is there is more than enough money in that fund to compensate all victims, regardless of when they became infected. That is the bottom line. Why the government would not recognize that is beyond my comprehension.

I would like the government to simply go back to the actuaries, bring them to a committee of the House and step through those numbers. They are telling me that the fund would sustain itself if the people who were left outside that package were brought in.

If the government wants to be compassionate and fair, everyone should be included in that package. It should not have excluded that group of people. It is not fair. It is not compassionate.

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the $900 million in the fund is not a surplus. These funds will be used to make payments over time, a period of up to 70 years. People are beneficiaries of that trust fund. It is a trust fund. It is not excess funds that are available.

One of the things the hon. member should know is that the settlement agreement which was arrived at is an arm's length agreement. It is operated by an independent, court appointed administrator who is responsible for those claims. As I said, as of March 2002, the latest date for which we have figures, approximately $220 million had been paid to claimants.

We have consulted with Canadians. People want and need the care. That is why we have put in place a compassionate plan that provides the care that people living with hepatitis C actually need.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.17 p.m.)