Debates of Sept. 23rd, 2010

Health Care System

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to Motion No. 513 this evening. I would like to read it again into the record. I actually think it is a very good motion. In fact, it is proposed by the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. It reads:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should encourage and assist provincial and territorial governments, the medical community and other groups to lessen the burden on Canada's health care system through: (a) an increased adoption of technological developments; (b) a better recognition of the changing roles of health care professionals and the needs of Canadians; and (c) a greater focus on strategies for healthy living and injury prevention.

Based on that particular motion, I really cannot understand why anybody would have a big problem with this resolution. This is a very complicated and complex problem which is gaining in cost. The health care system is eating up such a high percentage of provincial budgets.

I remember when I was first elected, and even before that when I was assistant to a minister in the Schreyer government in Manitoba in the 1970s, the health minister of the day had himself been a long time member of the legislature. He would tell me that we could not sustain the growth in the cost of the health care system. That was 30 years ago, but in those days we were looking at different concepts, different ideas, and one was a capitation system that had been working quite well in the Minneapolis area. We were looking at that. We approached the doctors on that issue and got a bit of resistance.

Things have changed, however slowly, over the years, to the point now where I am told we have doctors in England, for example, who are compensated and get paid on the basis of the health outcome. I think that is what we should be looking at. Rather than people with, for example, diabetes, going to the doctor and receiving their prescriptions and their medications, as is the case now, presumably these patients go to see the English doctor, who would be approached on the basis of compensation, that if the patient's nutrition could be changed, if the doctor could get the patient to lose weight and stop smoking, then that doctor would be compensated for each of those positive outcomes. Perhaps that is what we have to look at.

My Bloc friend will know that in the last week there was a news report from Quebec that the Quebec government evidently gave some sort of incentive to people to take the non-smoking treatments, the patch. Perhaps the federal government should be looking at that, some sort of incentive to get people to quit smoking and stay in that state of having quit smoking. Once again, a lot of good ideas come out of the province of Quebec and that is one I think we should be looking at here.

That deals with the member's third item. The greater focus on strategies for healthy living and injury prevention are just some examples of what we have to be looking at. I realize that we are dealing with silos. We dealt with government online programs in Manitoba and across the country, and federally we do here too. The government's biggest problem is breaking down the silos that exist in its departments. Government members think they are making decisions as a government, but just two or three levels below their ministerial offices, they will find out that people are doing, in some cases, the opposite of what they are asking them to do. It is very frustrating. That is why we have a very difficult time.

I will just give one example of electronic health records. I had been to numerous United States legislature conferences in the midwest, which consisted of all of the states, 11 states from Illinois to North Dakota, for probably six years or so. Every year we discussed progress regarding electronic health records.

There they have a real incentive for getting electronic health records in place because of the liability issue. There are so many accidental deaths caused by people not reading the chart properly and having the wrong information because of bad handwriting. I know Dr. Gerrard, the Manitoba Liberal Leader and MLA, had some statistics a couple of years ago in the Manitoba Legislature indicating an atrocious number of people who died in the hospitals because of mess-ups in medications due to bad handwriting. The electronic health record will go a long way to preventing that from happening.

In the United States there has been a lot of effort made in that area. A recent report in Canada indicated that after a huge amount of money had been spent over a number of years, we only have 11% or 15% of the records in an electronic fashion. Why is that?

I think if the Auditor General were to look into it a little further, she would find that a lot of it has to do with the saddles, the reluctance of people to work together.

Another really good example is the area of computer programs. A number of years ago when Paul Martin was still the Prime Minister, we had a conference here in Ottawa on the IT issues. Reg Alcock, who was a minister at the time, made sure that I was invited to that and I did go to that.

The federal government was looking at giving the provinces money. Reg was saying that we cannot just hand them the money without indicating how we want it spent. Reg wanted the money to go to the provinces to be used for technological changes, to purchase gamma ray machines and new equipment.

He was concerned that, in fact, the money was being sent there but it was not going to be used for that, that it would be used for some other purpose, perhaps still within the medical system, but it was not going to be used for what the federal government wanted it to be used for.

I think that is a big part of the problem here. I suggested at the time that the federal government should mandate a national program, an IT program for computer programs. Let us say there is a certain program developed for hospital usage, then that program should be offered by the federal government and simply provided to the provinces. The same system should be in place right across the country in all the hospitals.

We had a department of industry, trade and commerce putting up money for software developers. I toured its facility one day. What did we find out? We found a software company that was just thrilled. The government had paid half the cost of developing a program. It was a receivables program for the hospitals. The owner told me he was so happy that he had sold it to five or six hospitals.

The taxpayer has paid for the development of the software, and now has the pleasure of paying again, over and over, as each hospital buys that particular program when, in fact, the program could have been developed once and sent out to the hospitals.

This is a case where one arm of the government is really acting at odds with another part of the government. For example, when we were dealing with online programs dealing with a simple matter like the Securities Commission, we found in Manitoba we could have taken the system for free from Alberta or B.C. But, no, the Manitoba department involved in the Securities Commission came in and said, “No, we want to develop our own because we have specific legislation”.

It had all sorts of reasons why it could not take this free software program from Alberta. I think this is where the federal government has a strong role to play in directing the policies of health care in the country, by offering these options. The federal government could say, “Here is a software program”.

The province could have it for whatever the cost is so that it does not have to go and develop its own programs. Then there would be 10 different provinces developing 10 different programs that cannot talk to one other. That is a very big problem. We could spend hours on this whole area of compatibility problems with software programs and so on.

We need to have some sort of standardization. In the old days when the railways were made, it was necessary to have a single gauge across the country to make the railway system work

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour today to rise to support Motion No. 513 to assist and encourage provincial and territorial governments, the medical community and other groups to lessen the burden on Canada's health care system.

I must take a moment to thank my colleague, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, for this excellent motion and all her good work in the health committee for her constituents and all Canadians.

Specifically, I wish to address healthy living and injury prevention and share with Canadians the great work our government is doing in these areas. Our government takes healthy living and injury prevention very seriously. We have made investments to address a variety of health issues, we have been working collaboratively with the health community and other sectors, provinces and territories and we are actively promoting healthy choices and behaviours in support of environments across our great country.

Motion No. 513 underlines the importance of focusing on healthy living and injury prevention, to support the country's economic activity, to contribute to the sustainability of the health care system and to encourage children and youth to become healthy adults.

My hon. colleague's Motion No. 513 clearly reflects and aligns with our government's healthy living initiatives. For Canadians, it means creating environments where healthy food choices and opportunities for physical activity are available. These are important health considerations for all of us and we are all responsible, parents, community groups, governments and the private sector. Our children need to be raised in health-promoting and safe environments in which healthy choices are easy choices. We know childhood is a critical stage for establishing these positive trends for life.

These environments support all Canadians: young, old, men and women, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, recent immigrants and people who have lived here for generations. It is never too late and the time is always right to start a healthy living path. I encourage all members here to do so.

To date, I am proud to say that the Government of Canada has undertaken a number of significant initiatives to demonstrate its commitment to healthy living. This government proudly works with provinces and territorial health and healthy living and wellness ministers on these issues.

Most recent, on September 14, the federal health minister, together with her provincial and territorial counterparts, endorsed a declaration on prevention and promotion, which will guide their efforts to promote healthy living across Canada. It signals the need to achieve a better balance between prevention and treatment.

In addition, in response to Canada's high rates of childhood obesity, ministers also released “Curbing Childhood Obesity: A Federal, Provincial and Territorial Framework for Action to Promote Healthy Weights”. As a first step, they will engage citizens, governments and non-government partners and industry to develop a shared approach to turn the tide on childhood obesity.

We all agree that childhood obesity is a national health challenge and will require all sectors of society to get involved to change the social, economical and physical environments that influence the health of children and their families. As a parent, I am proud of our endorsement of the framework to promote healthy weight among children.

This government also has a long-standing relationship with provincial and territorial governments on the pan-Canadian healthy living strategy, which has addressed the issues of physical activity, healthy eating and the relationship to healthy weights, just to name a few.

The pan-Canadian healthy living strategy acts as a focal point for organizations across all sectors to collaborate and build upon each other's innovative strategies and initiatives in an integrated and coordinated way. The strategy focuses among other priorities or issues of physical inactivity and obesity. It also includes injury prevention as a priority.

It is through the integrated strategy on healthy living and chronic disease that the federal government advances the objectives of the pan-Canadian healthy living strategy. The federal effort addresses common risk factors for disease, which are largely preventable. It measures the impacts of chronic diseases on Canadians, it identifies and promotes effective prevention programs and makes specific investments in major chronic diseases, including cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Recently, the government has taken innovative measures to tackle lung and neurological diseases as well.

The government is providing $10 million over three years to improve the respiratory health of Canadians and $15 million over four years to work closely with stakeholders on a national population study on neurological diseases. In addition, we continue our work on surveillance of physical activity and healthy eating trends and we are committed to meeting the healthy living targets for 2015 set through our collaborations with provincial and territorial ministers of health and ministers responsible for sport, physical activity and recreation.

By 2015, we aim to have a 20% increase in Canadians who make healthy food choices, a 20% increase in Canadians who participate in regular physical activity, a 20% increase in Canadians at normal body weight, an increase of seven percentage points of the proportion of children and youth between the ages of 5 to 19 who participate in 90 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity daily.

Another initiative to increase the physical activity of children and youth is the joint policy statement called “Intersectoral Action on Children and Youth Physical Activity”. This statement was signed by the ministers who are responsible for sport, physical activity and recreation. These ministers are collaborating with their health and education counterparts on this joint policy statement, demonstrating the commitment to see children and youth including physical activity in their daily lives.

I am confident that Canadians are familiar with our governments work on the children's fitness tax credit, Canada's physical activity guides and the Canada food guide.

Through Canada's economic action plan, $500 million was also allocated to create the regional infrastructure Canada program, supporting the construction and renewal of community recreational facilities across Canada. These facilities will reach Canadians in their communities.

Highlighted in budget 2010, the government has committed to give participaction $6 million over two years to promote healthier lifestyles for Canadians through physical activity and fitness.

Along similar lines of support has been the government's commitment to seniors through the new horizons for seniors program. This program funds non-profit organizations to ensure that seniors can benefit from and contribute to the quality of life in their communities through active living and participation in social activities.

Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the government has provided $87 million in funding for obesity related research since 2000.

All these partnerships and collaborations help promote healthy living. Yet there is much more to do.

The will to make healthy living improvements is evident at all levels of government with the non-government, community and other stakeholder organizations.

Given that chronic diseases cause Canadians more than $40 billion each year in direct health costs and $70 billion every year in lost productivity, we must take further action now to relieve the burden. With our continued focus on healthy Canadians this government is on the right path.

Injury prevention is also an important aspect of a healthy lifestyle. We can all agree that injuries, unintentional and intentional, are an important health concern involving people of all ages, backgrounds and settings. Injuries are largely preventable.

Injury totals represent a significant economic and societal burden estimated to be greater than $19.8 billion per year. These numbers are staggering and the statistics speak for themselves. Unintentional and intentional injuries are the leading cause of death for Canadians between the ages of one and forty-four. Injuries are the fifth leading cause of death for all Canadians.

Injury hospitalizations for 80% of seniors 65 and older are the result of unintentional falls. We know certain groups are at higher risk for injuries than others. These include younger adults, men, people living in lower income households, people with problems such as depression or substance abuse, those living in isolated communities and in particular our aboriginal peoples.

There is still much work to be done and our government has taken action. We are moving forward with our food and consumer safety action plan to modernize and strengthen product safety laws to protect Canadians from injuries resulting from dangerous consumer products.

We have already been working with a variety of partners, including provincial governments, non-governmental organizations, health professionals and their associations. It is these professionals who are important to getting both the injury prevention and the health promotion messages out to Canadians. They believe that more can be done to prevent injuries in Canada and we agree.

The Government of Canada is committed in partnership with all those involved in our health care system to lessen the numbers and impacts of injuries for all Canadians.

Our health affects every aspect of our lives from the personal to the professional. Clearly stated here today is the impact of focusing on healthy living and injury prevention, a focus which strives to ease the burden for all Canadians for now and for future generations.

I am confident that my constituents in Oshawa and, indeed, all Canadians would probably support this motion. Focusing on strategies for health living and injury prevention are clearly part of the health care solution.

With the Government of Canada investing significantly and working collaboratively, we are ensuring that we have another made in Canada success story for improving the health of all Canadians.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak Motion No. 513, brought forward by the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. It is a motion that encourages the federal government to both encourage and assist the provinces in their health care delivery.

It is a rare opportunity to speak about health in the House. I applaud the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for raising the issue of health as a federal issue in the House. It is a rare opportunity because time and again the current government says that health is not a federal issue, that it is a provincial issue, that the federal government does not hold any responsibility for the health file. However, I could not disagree more.

The Canada Health Act is federal legislation that earmarks funding for health care that is delivered by the provinces, but there are certain strings attached to this funding. Health care must be accessible, portable, universal, comprehensive and it has to be publicly administered, so dedicated funding with strings attached.

The agreement under the act, or the accord, expires in 2014, which is just around the corner. This date should not just mark a time to reconfirm our commitment to our health care system. In fact, we need to use this opportunity to revision health care and begin our commitment to the health care system that we deserve.

In Canada, if we go to the doctor, if we go to the hospital, it is free. That is the great legacy of Tommy Douglas and his vision for medicare. However, what many of us forget is that was just phase one of Tommy's vision. Phase two was tackling all of those things that would actually keep us healthy and out of the hospital, such as pharmacare, home care, health promotion and prevention, social determinants of health.

My conversations with Canadians over the summer reflect what we have seen in recent polls, that we are concerned about health care. We are concerned about the lack of universality of coverage for all Canadians, the rising costs of pharmaceuticals, the need for an immediate solution to health care staffing and training issues and the protection of Tommy Douglas' medicare vision.

We need to address these concerns.

However, first, let us set the record straight. The hue and the cry about unsustainable health care is a myth. Health care costs are rising dramatically as a share of total public spending. However, huge corporate tax cuts, resulting in the lowest corporate tax rate of any G8 nation, have deprived our system of much needed revenues and have made our health care costs seem bigger by comparison.

In my lifetime, as a percentage of GDP, health care costs have actually risen only slightly, about 4% or 5%.

Right-wing ideologues ignore the reality that medicare costs are stable and they promote the fallacy of an unsustainable health system. However, “unsustainable” is code for “privatization”.

We can make our system better. We can do this by identifying potential savings and efficiencies within the system. Huge savings could be achieved by implementing a national pharmacare plan. Just as an example, having a single buyer negotiate for cheaper drug prices could save Canadians billions and relieve Canadian businesses of the burden of paying for private drug insurance. This would free up more money for them to invest in our communities.

We could also save on administrative costs, because private drug plans cost 10 times as much to administer as public plans.

We also need to invest in smarter health information technologies, something that this motion touches on, improved access to diagnostics and testing and better staffing and human resources strategies in health care, particularly in rural and northern areas.

If we fail to adapt medicare to the way that health care should be delivered today, private alternatives will fill the gaps. If we fail to act, we will lose control of the health care agenda and we will end up with a more costly and less accessible health care system. Time is of the essence: 2014 is practically tomorrow. The majority of Canadians who want Tommy's legacy protected cannot sit back and let that happen.

As 2014 and the time for health care renegotiations quickly approach, I hope that all Canadians, including the Canadians in the House, continue to fight for the best health care for everyone by preserving our achievements and extending Tommy's dream for medicare to its second phase.

One thing is for certain, federal leadership is needed. With Ottawa taking the lead, together with communities, we can make the system stronger. We can make it more responsive and modernized. In turn, we can help each other live better, healthier and stronger lives.

This motion articulates a very small step towards this vision, and when it comes time for voting, I will be pleased to support it.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague in this place, a colleague in the great profession of nursing, for the privilege to speak to her motion today. Indeed, it is a great pleasure to speak to our government's commitment to support the development and adoption of quality innovations in our health care system.

First and foremost, the federal government contributes significant funding towards health care through the Canada health transfer. In 2010, our government will provide provincial and territorial government with $25.4 billion in cash support. The cash amount has grown by $1.4 billion since 2009-10 and our government remains fully committed to increasing the Canada health transfer by 6% each year until 2013-14.

By keeping our promises in fulfilling this commitment, we are assisting provinces and territories to fund their particular health priorities, including those areas listed in the motion from the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. We are committed by the principles of the Canada Health Act to making Canada's population one of the healthiest in the world.

The adoption and appropriate use of health technology are crucial to achieving this objective.

Health technology is more than just a simple feature of the modern health care system; it is a reality that has repercussions on all aspects of the system.

New diagnostic tools allow for earlier detection of illnesses, which means treatment can begin sooner.

We are working to provide new treatment support for patients who previously had no treatment option, and approved treatments are leading to better survival rates and quality patient outcomes. New administration practices are supporting a more efficient use of health care providers and the use of interdisciplinary approaches to care.

In the area of electronic health records, technological developments are enabling healthcare providers, system administrators, and governments to implement faster and more efficient ways to store and manage patient information. This government is well aware of the significance of technological innovation in improving and maintaining the health of Canadians. It is with this in mind that the government has brought forward a number of policies and initiatives supporting the development, assessment, and adoption of health technologies.

This support begins first and foremost with the research and development activities that serve as the basis for innovation. Investment by the federal government in research and development activities takes several forms.

Private sector research is supported by generous tax concessions through tax credits for scientific research and experimental development.

Every year, this program provides over $4 billion in investment tax credits for over 18,000 claimants, approximately 75% of which are small businesses.

The OECD, an organization made up of the world's most industrialized nations, ranks Canada second out of all of its members in terms of tax breaks for every research and development dollar spent.

In an effort to fuel the ingenuity of Canada's best and brightest, and to drive the adoption of new technologies across this country, this government's science and technology strategy is also investing directly in health research. The health-related component of this strategy is primarily implemented through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

The CIHR was created to provide targeted funding to priority health research, to train the next generation of health researchers, and to support the translation of research into practices, procedures, products, and services. CIHR serves a principal role in the development and growth of Canada's greatest asset, a highly skilled community of medical researchers. In recognition of CIHR's important role, the government has increased CIHR's research funding by $16 million. This investment will bring the CIHR's total research budget for 2010 to nearly $1 billion.

To ensure that the outcomes of research investment are appropriately protected and rewarded, Canada also maintains an intellectual property regime that mirrors those of the most generous in the world. From the date of filing, patented innovations receive protection for a period of 20 years. It is worth pointing out that in 2008 the IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook ranked Canada second in the G7 for patent protection.

Through these combined measures, our government is demonstrating its ongoing commitment to a culture of science innovation. I am pleased, as a parliamentarian and as a nurse, to stand in this place and report that Canada's policies in support of health research have received such high praise from international bodies.

A key feature of this initiative is to ensure that e-health systems will one day be compatible from coast to coast to coast and be able to talk to each other. This presents an important and complex challenge for Canada's Health Infoway. We need the capacity to enable someone from Manitoba, for example, who happens to be in British Columbia receiving care to have his or her health record readily accessible to health care providers. The Government of Canada has to date invested $2.1 billion in the Infoway. Those investments have been critical in establishing a blueprint and standards for an electronic health records system, developing its key components, and enhancing our capacities in areas such as public health, surveillance, and telehealth.

To this end, in budget 2009, as part of Canada's economic action plan, of which we hear so much, our government has allocated $500 million to Infoway, and this investment will enable Infoway to focus on compatible systems, speed up the implementation of electronic records in physicians' offices, and develop linkages with hospital information systems and patient portals.

This continued investment of our government in electronic health has positioned Canada to reap the benefits of technological developments for the health of its citizens, and to strengthen the safety, quality, and efficiency of our health care system as a whole.

The introduction of new health care technologies is a delicate matter and one that carries real implications for patients, something that I and my colleague, as nurses, care deeply about.

This government wholly embraces the principle of innovation. But we must avoid falling into the trap of equating new with better. Being responsible in the choices we make in adopting technologies will help us to guarantee continued access to quality health care systems.

To do this, we need to have collaboration. This collaboration with provincial and territorial governments, and indeed our first nations governments, is of tremendous importance, since each jurisdiction is responsible for, and plays an important part in, the delivery of health care for its residents.

As I have noted, our government is an active supporter of science and innovation. It is prepared to stand behind policies that drive new health technologies from discovery to development.

I thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, my colleague in nursing, for this opportunity to speak to her important and well-crafted motion.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand and summarize the debate on my Motion No. 513.

I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the House who have contributed to this debate in a very important way. I will speak to some of the specific issues and comments that they made a bit later.

We have to recognize that the role of the federal government is guided by our legislation and our Constitution and it is a delicate balance in terms of not stepping on provincial jurisdiction.

As I listened to the Liberals, I heard that I was too cold. As I listened to the Bloc, I heard that I was too hot. I would like to suggest that our Conservative government has it just about right in terms of how we approach health care.

As a practitioner and also as someone who has studied international systems for many years, I have seen public-public systems, public-private systems, all sorts of combinations of health care systems. Regardless of the systems and regardless of the country, and some perhaps do a better job than us and some definitely do not do nearly as well as us, the element in my motion talks to something that would improve outcomes for Canadians and increase opportunities for sustainability. We need to focus on these important elements.

I noted the comments made by my colleague from Vancouver South. In response to that both the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and the parliamentary secretary for official languages have spoken clearly to the importance that we are putting on many of these elements and the considerable investment of federal government dollars. I believe the message has been heard clearly that it truly is important.

For my colleague from the Bloc, I would love to fall off my chair one day when that member stands to vote with me on this motion. If I had more than five minutes to summarize, I could actually convince that member of how important it is. We can all benefit, whether it is decreased sodium in soup, which is across the country, whether it is support for technology through Health Infoway - Canada, Quebeckers and all Canadians would benefit. I would love to see that member stand and support the motion.

In response to the comments by my NDP colleagues, I appreciate the large lens that they put to this issue. Health care and the health care system is about more than just these elements, but this motion is somewhat focused. I do appreciate their expanded scope, but the motion is very specific.

Imagine a day in terms of technological developments where thoracic surgeons are seeing patients in remote areas, where we have hospitals without walls and patients who have chronic disease can get their lab results directly on their iPad, taking responsibility for monitoring their own conditions in partnership with their health care team.

Imagine a day when we have utilized all our resources to the full scope of their practice, whether it be the physician assistant with the army, the dental therapist working with our aboriginal communities, the community health representatives, the nurses working in primary care, a strong, solid primary health care team.

Most important are strategies for prevention and healthy living. That will be a huge step toward a sustainable health care system.

This general discussion is very timely with the expiry of the accord in 2014. These areas of focus all have an important role to play in the future of a sustainable health care system.

I ask for the support of all members of the House on this important motion.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

On division.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I declare the motion carried.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The motion is carried.

[An hon. member]

I said no.

[An hon. member]

And I said no.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. When you called for all those in favour, I know there were at least a number on this side who said no and others who said yes and one that said no over here, but you never did direct us as to whether or not we would be standing or if there would be an audible vote. That is what we were waiting for from you.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I am going to revisit this. It is correct when I asked whether it was the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion. I did hear many yeses and one or two nos. When someone said that the vote would be carried on division I thought that had satisfied it. I did not seek clarification.

Having said that, is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The hon. member for Ottawa—Vanier.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a very simple question to you, if I may. You have declared the bill carried on division. Are you now rescinding that decision?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I misunderstood. I thought that there was nobody saying no. It has been clarified to me that there were people who said no, so it is the Chair's decision that I am going to call for a voice vote on this.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

You are rescinding your decision, Mr. Speaker.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I am revisiting this issue.

Will all those in favour of the motion please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

All those opposed please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.