Debates of May 13th, 2003

Supply

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Chair, in relation to the last point raised by the hon. member, absolutely, there is no question that one's level of good health is directly related to the degree of education, which is usually directly related to one's level of poverty or whether one is well off. Poverty is an important determinant of health. The hon. member has raised an important point.

We need to ensure that people have a good education. We need to ensure that people have a decent standard of living. That helps guarantee better health outcomes. If people are not living in poverty, chances are they can buy nutritious food. Chances are they can provide for themselves and their families and have opportunities for physical activity and recreation. That leads to healthier people and a higher quality of life. The hon. member's point is a good one.

In relation to home care, I could not agree more. Home care has to be seen as part of the continuum of care. That is why the first ministers agreement speaks to home care, including that basket of insured services to provide for home care in certain defined circumstances, especially post-acute when leaving the hospital or in relation to palliative care for those who are dying or terminally ill. That does not cover the whole spectrum of home care. It certainly makes an important start in terms of an insured service that recognizes the fact, which is the point the hon. member made, that often it makes much more sense not to have people in hospital, but at home. It is better for them. It is safer for them. They recover more quickly. It is more cost effective.

[The Assistant Deputy Chair]

It being 11:33 p.m., pursuant to Standing 81(4), all votes are deemed reported. The committee will rise and I will now leave the chair.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos)]

The House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 11:33 p.m.)