Debates of March 8th, 2016

International Trade

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Health on February 4 addressed the potential rise in pharmaceutical costs in Canada as a result of the signing of the trans-Pacific partnership, and in fact other trade deals. As I stated in my question, a recent study has put that figure at around $600 million annually. This is particularly concerning, because over the last 20 years pharmaceuticals have been the fastest-growing cost to Canada's health care system. Only in recent years has the pace of growth in drug costs in Canada subsided somewhat. However, Canadians still pay the second-highest prescription drug prices in the world, second only to the United States.

The growing costs for prescription medications in our public health care system and for individual Canadians is unsustainable. With the coming tidal wave of baby boomers reaching their elder years, sky-high medication prices are even more concerning for the fiscal sustainability of our health care system.

Most observers and stakeholders of Canada's medicare system agree that federal, provincial, and territorial governments must begin ambitious work to overhaul health care delivery in Canada. We need new ideas, new plans, and innovative approaches to find savings, provide better care, and improve access to health care.

Providing universal coverage to all Canadians for prescription medications is one of the most practical and achievable short-term reforms that could be undertaken by the government.

It is practical because the cost of maintaining the status quo is too high for public health and for the public purse. Recent research indicates that a shocking one in four Canadian households reports that family members neglect to fill prescriptions because of cost. This is unacceptable in a country that purports to have universal health care. This epidemic of cost-related non-adherence to prescriptions means more Canadians become sicker and more Canadians end up in hospital. This costs our health care system avoidable billions every year.

Pharmacare is also achievable because the payoff from national universal coverage for medications outweighs the investment. Canada's leading health economists have conducted groundbreaking research demonstrating that upfront government investments of between $3 billion and $5 billion would result in savings of between $4 billion and $11 billion per year. Better yet, most of these savings would go straight to the pocketbooks of Canadians and the budget lines of businesses.

Pharmacare is a silver bullet for many of the troubles facing Canada's public health care system. New Democrats strongly urge the health minister to make national pharmacare a priority issue over the coming years.

Addressing costs, improving care, and strengthening and growing public coverage of health services will be the number one challenge for the new health minister. This goes beyond just the issue of prescription drug costs. New Democrats are calling on the health minister to conclude negotiations for a new health accord with stable funding between the federal government and the provinces and territories. Our party echoes the calls by many in the health care community for an increase in Ottawa's contribution to at least 25% by 2025 at the latest.

A new health accord must also include strong strings attached. Provinces must be compelled to roll back harmful privatization in the delivery of health care services and crack down on user fees and unfair barriers. Adherence to the principles of the Canada Health Act must be non-negotiable. Canada's public medicare system must be strengthened, not weakened.

Finally, it is also long past time for federal government leadership in community and home care. All major health care stakeholders agree that health care must move into communities and closer to Canadians through multidisciplinary health care clinics and quality home care services. It is time we improved care for Canadians while reducing costs.

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, as a trading nation, Canada's economic growth is directly linked to international trade. Our government supports free trade as a way to open markets to Canadian goods and services, grow Canadian businesses, and create good-paying jobs for the middle class.

The scope of the TPP, or trans-Pacific partnership, is significant. To restate the oft-quoted figures, the TPP encompasses 800 million people in 12 countries, with a combined GDP of US $28 trillion, covering nearly 40% of the world's economy.

Our pledge to Canadians is to ensure they are fully consulted on the outcomes of the TPP. Our job right now is to carefully review the text and continue to consult with Canadians.

The government wants to ensure that Canadians can consult on the TPP, ask questions, and share their views, to determine whether Canada's participation in this agreement is in their best interest.

To do so, the Minister of International Trade is conducting an extensive consultation process in order to give Canadians the opportunity to share their views on the agreement and on Canada's participation in it before the government makes a decision on ratifying it.

Signing the TPP is just the first step in the process and is not synonymous with ratifying it or implementing it in Canada. Signing it allows Canada to maintain its original partner status and keep all the rights and powers that this status confers. This stage also allows our government to pursue its consultations and give parliamentarians the opportunity to discuss the repercussions of the agreement on their respective regions and on the future of the country.

Furthermore, the Minister of International Trade is working closely with her colleagues whose portfolios are affected by the TPP, in order to mobilize Canadian stakeholders and gather their views. These are government-wide efforts. The Minister of Agriculture is in charge of bringing together stakeholders from the agriculture sector to discuss the TPP. The Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development is doing the same with his portfolio stakeholders. All the other ministers are making this effort.

As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, it is also my job to mobilize Canadians on this file.

Since November, the Government of Canada has held over 200 meetings with more than 300 national stakeholders from the provinces, territories, industry, civil society, and university think tanks. Global Affairs Canada has received more than 10,000 letters and emails as part of this consultation process over the same period.

The department will also consult Parliament. The House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade has begun its study on the TPP.

As a knowledge-based economy, Canadians employ innovative ideas and creative thinking that become products, technologies, and services that change the way we live. The intellectual property framework, which our hon. member has noted, is an important element of any knowledge-based economy.

Canada's longstanding approach with respect to intellectual property has been to strike a balance between creators and users. I know this balance well, as I have had the privilege of teaching and conducting research on intellectual property in one of the best law faculties in Canada and the world over the last 20 years.

Over the past months, the government has heard from a range of stakeholders in different areas of intellectual property who have expressed views on TPP and IP outcomes.

We look forward to continuing these discussions. We continue to invite Canadians to tell us what their opinion is on these important issues. We continue to tell our parliamentary committee to study the issues raised by the hon. member in order to—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, if the goal is to substantively improve the health of Canadians, then the Minister of Health must become an advocate for health in all policies.

Major health organizations, like the Canadian Medical Association, have endorsed the view that health outcomes are primarily social in origin. Income, housing, job security, access to education, and social inclusion all fundamentally impact the health and well-being of individual Canadians.

New Democrats believe it is time for the federal government to put the social determinants of health at the core of all policies in this country. This means making a commitment to end poverty in Canada and to provide quality affordable housing for all Canadians. This means making improvements to the quality of public education, and it means affordable universal child care, and greater protections for minorities suffering from discrimination. This means providing resources for mental health services for Canadians seeking help, and efforts to reduce stigma.

In this Parliament, New Democrats will work hard towards these goals and be a willing partner with the government toward them.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to consulting widely with those who have an interest in intellectual property in Canada in the context of trade agreements.

Nothing in these agreements precludes any sort of policy with respect to pharmacare in Canada. Signing the agreement is not the same as ratifying it. On the TPP, we are doing exactly what we promised we would do during the election campaign. We told Canadians that we would take the time to listen to them and to consult widely on this deal. We have begun this process.

A government-wide approach was taken with regard to the consultations and, as I mentioned, over 200 meetings have been held. This agreement is important and Canadians must be consulted on it.

We heard arguments in favour of the TPP and we heard people's concerns about it. We will hold a proper parliamentary debate on the agreement before a decision is made about whether to ratify it.

Foreign Affairs

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to again ask the government what it is going to do with the Office of Religious Freedom.

We and others have been asking it to put ideology aside, to recognize the good work the office has done and to simply renew its mandate. The office is working, is doing good work, and should continue doing that work. When it comes to this office and its mandate, it is worth referencing the old saying, “If it ain't broke, don't fix it”.

Unfortunately, with many important issues hanging in the balance, the government has yet to answer our simple questions about its plans for this office. Has it still not decided, or is it simply not ready to tell us yet?

Canadians, and especially the growing number of Canadians with personal and family connections to hard-pressed religious minority communities around the world, really want to know what the government is going to do with this office. The government has been sending mixed signals and is trying to buy itself time with a short-term extension. Still, Canadians and people around the world want to know what is happening with this office.

We have spoken before in the House about the good work of this office, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Pakistan, and in Ukraine.

In fact, I was recently in India and had an opportunity to speak to students at Indian universities about human rights and religious freedom. I was asked, specifically, about the Office of Religious Freedom.

It is not just something that Canadians are paying attention to. People around the world, students, the elderly, and everyone in between, are listening and asking if Canada is still going to be involved in fighting for human rights and human dignity in this vital way.

This past Sunday, I was speaking about this issue at a major gurdwara in Mississauga. I was pleased to highlight the co-operation between faith leaders in Canada calling for the renewal of this office. Sikh, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian leaders have spoken out together in support of this office. The office advocates for all people. It was officially launched in a mosque, and its advocacy includes for non-believers who have specific representation on the office's external advisory committee.

The government has not answered the central question. All it has said on this subject is, “Human Rights are universal interdependent and indivisible”. Absolutely, they are. We are also well-served by centres of excellence within government and within the Department of Global Affairs, which focus on specific areas.

To name another example, we have a department for the Status of Women. Certainly, human rights are interdependent and indivisible, but we still have, and we should have, a department that focuses specifically upon the status of women.

Why is it important that we have these types of centres of excellence? Because to have all types of rights lumped together risks a situation in which no one is focused upon individual specific areas of rights and rights violations. Without specific centres of excellence, individual areas that need attention can risk getting lost in one murky interdependent and indivisible soup.

What is the downside in keeping this office open? The total budget of the office is $5 million. I am all for cutting costs when it makes sense to do so, but $5 million is 1/180th of the cost of the government's changes to public sector sick leave. The vast majority of that $5 million is used directly to help suffering people caught in regions of conflict.

Will the government just go ahead and say yes already? While we cannot solve every problem, it is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. The Office of Religious Freedom is the candle that is burning bright far beyond its size would suggest it could. I ask the government to please not snuff this candle out.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Consular Affairs)]

Mr. Speaker, the promotion and protection of human rights, including freedom of religion or belief, is an integral part of Canada's constructive engagement in the world.

Canada recognizes that human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated, as the hon. member said.

As a part of broader efforts to cultivate long-term stability, tolerance, and respect for human rights, including freedom of religion or belief, Global Affairs Canada, through the Office of Religious Freedom, is supporting two projects in Ukraine to promote interfaith dialogue and to strengthen the capacity of local authorities to respond to hate crimes.

As the hon. member is aware, the Office of Religious Freedom has advocated on behalf of religious communities under threat, opposed religious hatred and intolerance, and promoted pluralism and respect for diversity abroad.

As the Minister of Foreign Affairs has already stated repeatedly, we are grateful for Dr. Andrew Bennett's service as the head of the Office of Religious Freedom and for his ingenuity, sensitivity, and competency over the past three years.

We are currently examining options on how to build on the work that has been accomplished in the promotion of freedom of religion or belief and to enhance our efforts to champion peaceful pluralism, respect for diversity, and human rights as a whole. Rest assured that we will build on and strengthen the work undertaken by the Office of Religious Freedom.

There is still much to be improved in the field of human rights, at home and abroad, and Canada will work continuously to promote positive change.

However, I do want to take the opportunity as well to comment on the situation in Ukraine, because the hon. member brought it up in his original question. I want to repeat that our government supports Ukraine, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs already stated many times, and particularly during his recent visit to Kiev. This government remains unwavering in its support to Ukraine, which encompasses a broad range of development, financial, humanitarian, and non-lethal military assistance.

Canada continues to condemn Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and its support to separatists in eastern Ukraine.

As the Prime Minister emphasized to President Putin at the G20 in November, we expect Russia to implement its commitment under the Minsk peace process. Canada is maintaining pressure on Russia to do so and will not contemplate the lifting of sanctions until Russia has completely met all of its Minsk obligations. Any engagement with Russia would include direct and blunt messages on Russia's unacceptable action in Ukraine.

We remain concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation in eastern Ukraine. According to the latest report from the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission to Ukraine, more than 9,000 people have been killed and more than 20,000 injured since the conflict began in April 2014.

With respect to freedom of religion, the report documents a number of violations committed primarily against Jewish communities and Jehovah's Witnesses. In the majority of these incidents, the local police failed to intervene or investigate the case. In the city of Luhansk, for example, four Jehovah's Witnesses were interrogated for six hours by the insurgents' so-called state security authorities, with interrogators forbidding them to distribute religious literature and to publicly practise their religion.

Canada's embassy in Kiev regularly engages and advocates on a wide range of human rights issues.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is a paradox in the way the government is responding to these questions because, on the one hand, it is clear that Liberals recognize that Ambassador Bennett and the office have done very good work since the office was created.

Some of the original critics said all kinds of things about this office being a partisan thing or about political pandering, but clearly those who observed the record, and clearly the government observing the record and the experience of this office, know that in fact that is not the case and the office has done very good work.

Why is it so difficult, then, for the Liberals to just come out and assure Canadians, assure communities that are particularly invested in this office, that the office will be able to continue to do its work? Why is it so difficult for them to simply commit to renewing the mandate of the office?

We know it is doing excellent work. We continue to need to have this centre of excellence; so is the parliamentary secretary willing to simply provide Canadians with the assurance today that the mandate of the office will in fact be renewed?

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not understand why it is so difficult for the hon. member to understand that there is always room for improvement. We can always do better. Therefore, we congratulate the work of the Office of Religious Freedom. We congratulate Dr. Bennett on his accomplishment. We will build on and strengthen the work undertaken by the Office of Religious Freedom.

Canada remains committed to supporting and promoting interfaith dialogue across the world, and to defending religious freedom around the world. Canada will continue to promote and protect human rights abroad, including in Ukraine. Human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated. The government is considering how best to enhance efforts to champion peaceful pluralism, and respect for diversity and all human rights, including the rights of freedom of religion or belief.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

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

(The House adjourned at 7:15 p.m.)