Debates of Dec. 1st, 2020

Opposition Motion—Support for Health Care Workers

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to stay on that theme of long-term care. We have seen the tragedy that has unfolded in long-term care homes across the country. This is a problem that was there before COVID. COVID has just exacerbated it.

The NDP has put forward a proposal to bring long-term care into the Canada Health Act. The trouble with the provincial standards is not that the standards are too low; it is that none of the provinces are meeting them because they do not have the funding.

Can the member comment on that and the NDP proposal to bring this into the Canada Health Act, so that every province would have adequate funding and our seniors can be taken care of in the manner that they deserve?

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from the New Democratic Party for his excellent question.

We are in the process of negotiating with provinces and territories to establish national standards for our seniors. Indeed all ideas are welcome.

However the primary purpose is to improve and give back dignity to our seniors. They are the ones who built Canada, and they are proud of it. They are our teachers. They are the ones who put us here today. They are our decision-makers. We owe them the greatest respect, which means we should set national standards by working with provinces and territories to give seniors a dignified pension and end of life.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of empathy for my colleague representing seniors who has to go to bat for his government and deliver an empty speech.

The government repeated the same number three or four times, namely, the $300 sent in July, but that was a long time ago. Now it is talking about investments during the pandemic.

Indeed the federal government invested in health care during the pandemic, but it had to do so because no investment was made before that. If health transfers had been increased before, investments would not be needed during the pandemic. What we are asking is that the government invests now so we do not have to go through the same thing again. That is the problem and that is what we are asking this morning.

My hon. colleague keeps saying that people know and that the Bloc is spreading disinformation, that it acts in a partisan way. Last night I received an email from one of my constituents who seemingly had not read the same newspapers as my hon. colleague across the way. My constituent writes that many political columnists and politicians talk about extra money for older people, but he is wondering where that extra money is after being mentioned many times over a long period of time. It was supposed to be for older and low-income people. He concludes by thanking me for my involvement and my interest in helping the cause. A citizen from my riding wrote that to me yesterday, after the speech by the hon. Deputy Prime Minister.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to answer that question.

I can help my colleague answer his constituent if he cannot. It is very simple. He could mention that the $300 helped greatly during the pandemic, but that other measures have been taken. He could reiterate that organizations in his riding benefited from the new horizons program to break social isolation and improve mental health. He could also remind his constituent that we invested another $20 million in projects through the new horizons program, $350 million for charities and $9 million for the United Way of Canada. We did all of that to help seniors. There was also $100 million for food banks that helped seniors. We have been there for seniors and everyone in my colleague's riding. I can certainly help him answer his constituent if my colleague needs a hand.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I wish to take this opportunity to thank and salute all the health care workers in my riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle. They do amazing work on the ground, in CLSCs and at Hôpital Anna-Laberge.

Since March, Quebeckers and the Government of Quebec have taken individual and collective measures to slow and contain the spread of COVID-19. These measures were strengthened by the close and ongoing collaboration between federal, provincial and territorial governments.

The Government of Canada has always proudly supported the delivery of health care services to Quebeckers. In 2020-21, our government transferred over $9.42 billion to Quebec through the Canada health transfer, a 3.4% increase over the previous year and a $1.1-billion increase compared to what Quebec received in 2016-17. This represents 23% of the Government of Quebec's total health care spending.

On July 16, the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of Quebec, along with the other provincial premiers, announced the safe restart agreement. The agreement includes more than $19 billion in federal money to help the provinces and territories, including Quebec, restart their economies safely in the coming months while making Canada more resilient when future waves of the virus hit.

In addition to the $500 million transferred to the provinces and territories at the start of the year to help their health systems weather the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the safe restart agreement included $700 million in additional funds to ensure that Canada's health systems were ready to deal with surges and future waves of COVID-19. That amounted to $270 million in new money to help the Government of Quebec continue to meet Quebeckers' needs and maintain capacity within its health system.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, we also committed to support the efforts of the provincial governments, including Quebec, when it comes to testing, contact tracing and data collection. To that end, our government allocated over $775 million to support the Government of Quebec's testing, contact tracing and data collection efforts.

What is more, in May 2020, the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada announced that they had come to an agreement to support the provincial government in contact tracing. Statistics Canada has currently increased its capacity to 1,980 calls per day for Quebec.

We also support virtual care services and online screening assessments in order to take the pressure off emergency departments and support physical distancing. We also invested $240 million to implement virtual care services to help the provinces and territories carry out this important work. That includes $150 million this year for the provinces and territories to help them expedite their work to improve accessibility to virtual care while protecting the privacy of Canadians. Over $28 million of the total amount allocated to virtual care was given to the Government of Quebec.

We also committed to protecting our most vulnerable populations, including people in long-term care facilities and those receiving home care. That will continue under the safe restart agreement.

The federal government took a number of measures to respond to the major challenges that long-term care facilities in Quebec and across the country are facing, in order to avoid more tragedies like the ones we saw in the spring.

We called on the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces when we found out about the difficult situations in long-term care facilities in Ontario and Quebec. That was the help that was needed to stabilize these situations during the summer months.

After the Canadian Armed Forces mission ended, we worked with the Canadian Red Cross to continue to support the provinces and territories dealing with outbreaks in their long-term care facilities. To date, a total of 1,553 Canadian Red Cross members have been involved in long-term care facilities in Quebec. In addition, 582 Red Cross members are still active in the province to help reduce the incidence of current and future outbreaks in long-term care facilities.

What is more, up to $3 billion in federal funding is being provided to the provinces and territories to support increasing the wages of low-income essential workers, who may include front-line workers in hospitals and long-term care facilities.

The safe restart agreement will provide $740 million in additional funding to help the most vulnerable Canadians, including those receiving long-term care, home care and palliative care, who are at an increased risk of more severe cases of COVID-19. These funds will support progressive measures to control and prevent infections, which will protect those receiving long-term care, home care and palliative care. These new funds, including more than $166 million for Quebec, will be in addition to the financial support measures agreed to between the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec.

Those earlier measures were set out in a bilateral agreement in 2017. They provide support for home and community care, as well as mental health and addiction services. The dollar value of these measures is updated annually and is based on population estimates. At present, the theoretical total for Quebec is more than $10.48 billion over 10 years, including $1.35 billion for home care and $1.13 billion for mental health.

The safe restart agreement will enhance these supports and include $500 million for Canadians experiencing challenges related to mental health and substance use.

My time is running out, but I want to mention that we invested over $46 million to launch the Wellness Together Canada program, a new online portal that provides access to a virtual network of psychosocial supports. Wellness Together Canada is the first national service of its kind to offer access to free, evidence-based resources, tools and supports on a 24-7 basis. These very important resources are there to supplement provincial health care services, like those offered by Quebec's Department of Health and Social Services, and include self-assessment, peer support, and confidential sessions with social workers, psychologists and other professionals.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have proudly supported Quebec's efforts. As my colleague just mentioned, we have a very good relationship with the Premier of Quebec regarding all the work we do together.

We are proud of the co-operation we have seen throughout this pandemic between our government, the Government of Quebec, municipalities in the province and other key stakeholders. We will maintain the same approach going forward to build back better.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

I unfortunately did not hear what she thinks of her government imposing national standards in long-term care homes.

The riding that my colleague from Châteauguay—Lacolle represents is in the region covered by the Montérégie-Ouest Integrated Health and Social Services Centre. I am curious to hear her thoughts on the Quebec premier's recent statement in the media that forcing national standards on Quebec long-term care homes is unacceptable.

A year ago, I was managing a long-term care home for seniors. Did my colleague contact Normand Gaudet, who is the assistant director of the nine long-term care homes in the Montérégie-Ouest region, which did not have a single death among their residents? We did not need the army or the Red Cross.

What does my colleague have to say in response to Quebec's Premier Legault?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for her question.

I also thank her for mentioning the quality of care in the long-term care homes in my riding. We are very proud of the good work they have consistently done, which has been even clearer during the pandemic.

I was very happy to participate in conference calls with all the stakeholders in my region in the early days of the pandemic and with elected officials at all levels of government. We made sure to get all of the necessary equipment, PPE and care.

As for my colleague's question, we are not talking about imposing national standards on long-term care homes. We are talking about collaboration. I have worked in these facilities. It is very important to have discussions at all levels.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot today about long-term care. I have spoken a couple times on it in questions and comments. I would like to talk about another issue that is facing Canadians within our health care system that should have been included from the start, which is dental care. Dental care really goes down the line. If we do not have good dental care, we end up costing our overall health care system millions and millions of dollars. It is one of the parts of health care where one's income is one of the big factors. If someone has a low income, they tend not to have access to dental care.

If we provide a national, publicly funded dental care program for those people who really need it, we can really help Canadians who need that help the most and help out health care system. I would like to hear her comments on that.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for bringing up that area of health care. I do not want to say it is neglected because if we neglect our teeth, we will find out about it very soon.

My brother has been a dentist for 40 years. His first 10 years of practice were here in Ottawa working in a provincial clinic where he was providing dental care for people of low incomes and vulnerable people. It is certainly an area that needs to be explored.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business]

Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed my colleague's speech.

I would also like to point out the work that she has done with long-term care home stakeholders in her community and region and ask her what she thought about the announcement that the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance made yesterday concerning a $1-billion investment for long-term care homes. Perhaps some of that money will go to helping care homes in her region of Montérégie.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues' questions are always the most difficult ones to answer, are they not?

In all sincerity, the announcement that we heard yesterday was very well received by the people in my region. As I said, my region could be a model for long-term care home management. This money will really help and support us in those fine efforts.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the fabulous, wonderful and extraordinary member for Montarville.

I want to begin with some warm words for all of the employees who work in the Quebec public health network. Under normal circumstances, without a pandemic, Christmas is a difficult time because everyone wants to take time off, scheduling is tricky, and it is hard to please everyone. This year, health care workers at all levels, from maintenance workers to those in charge of entertainment and activities, will be having a rather different Christmas.

It is the same thing for patients. This Christmas will be very different since they may not be able to have as many visitors as they would like.

In particular, I want to thank the people who work for community groups. We forget about them because we focus on long-term care homes, community health centres and home care. We do not spend enough time talking about the people who work for community groups, about the community network that complements the public network and works in partnership with it. These volunteers, these citizens, improve other people's quality of life and provide services. I would like to express my deep appreciation and support for them. We know it is not easy. Community groups providing essential services have not had a break since March. They adapted quickly and changed how they operate so they could keep providing the services people need.

We talk a lot about seniors' needs in this pandemic situation. They have been hit hard, perhaps harder than anyone else, by this pandemic. People talk as if that were the only issue, but we need to acknowledge that conditions of care in long-term care homes were the weak link in this pandemic.

I have said repeatedly that I used to work for seniors, specifically managing seniors' housing. It was a big part of my professional life. I can tell the House one thing for sure, and I think my colleague from Châteauguay—Lacolle said this earlier: some long-term care homes did not have the same death toll as those in other parts of Quebec because they had enough staff and good management. The problem is that those people are now worn out. They have been working non-stop since March, not taking vacation, sometimes doing mandatory overtime, yet they have continued to care for our seniors.

Long-term care homes are already regulated by and must comply with many Quebec standards. They are inspected and evaluated regularly by the department. Amongst ourselves, we call these departmental visits. We call this obtaining accreditation from Accreditation Canada. In long-term care homes, there are standards for reducing medication for seniors, including the prescription of psychotropic drugs. There are standards for reducing control measures, formerly known as restraint measures. Long-term care homes have many quality performance targets to meet in order to pass a departmental visit or obtain accreditation from Accreditation Canada.

Therefore, there is no need for Canada-wide standards to improve the quality of care provided in long-term care homes. There is no doubt about that. As the Premier of Quebec told the media earlier, the idea of Canada-wide standards for the supervision and management of our long-term care homes is unacceptable. This does not respect jurisdictions and, let's face it, it is not Ottawa that provides direct services to seniors, youth and the homeless; it is the staff hired and covered by a collective agreement, which is managed by and negotiated with the Quebec government. Additional standards will in no way bring in more staff at long-term care homes or ensure extraordinary service levels. The service is already extraordinary.

The thing that is missing is an extra set of hands. That is clear. There is a shortage of workers at every level. Obviously there is a lack of funding to hire that extra staff. We must not overlook the fact that there is currently a labour shortage. There are not enough people who want to become personal support workers. We talk a lot about personal support workers in long-term care homes, but we must not forget that home support workers and social workers also provide home care. It is hard to recruit people in that field as well.

Standards are not going to fix the problem in long-term care homes, in home care or in the delivery of different services to the people who need it in Quebec and the provinces. There needs to be increased funding to better organize services and meet needs.

No one will be surprised to learn that this requires better federal transfers to the provinces, as we have said repeatedly today. Quebec has to make tough choices. It does not have the necessary financial capacity because Ottawa has diminished that over the years. Year after year, federal health transfers to the provinces have been reduced so much, by both the Conservatives and the Liberals, that they now cover only roughly 21% of needs.

I have listened to the debates. It is often said that the Bloc wants to pick a fight. I am not trying to pick a fight. Earlier, I read that Ontario's finance minister said that he hopes parliamentarians will support the Bloc's motion. It will take federal health transfers to Quebec and the provinces to increase their capacity to meet the needs of their residents. The experts, the pros at organizing health care services, are the ones who know what is needed. We often talk about a top-down approach. The needs are not being expressed at the federal level, and the federal government does not deliver the services. It does not have the expertise or the necessary first-hand knowledge to provide money with conditions to bring in programs.

I am passionate about this subject, and I have two things to say. First, we must not forget that the health care system does not merely consist of services for seniors. These services are important, but other care sectors are also important, especially those dealing with homelessness, mental health and addiction issues. Community groups are known for their innovation and practices, which are often studied by other countries. Quebec's intervention practices are closely followed.

I will repeat that the Government of Quebec must make agonizing choices. We know that 45% of Quebec's annual budget is allocated to health. Obviously, it must increase its capacity.

I implore my Quebec colleagues to understand and to use their leadership to convince the government that it is misguided in its desire to trample on Quebec's jurisdictions and to impose standards. It is playing with words. I am certain that the deputy House leader will tell me that soon. We know that the Liberals do not want to impose them. No provincial government will agree to participate in the negotiation of Canada-wide health standards for long-term care. Not one. If it does not work, it cannot be imposed.

I am asking all Quebec members sitting in the House of Commons to collaborate and stand together with the Premier of Quebec, who requests and requires respect for provincial jurisdictions, and I am asking the government to drop this idea of imposing Canada-wide standards for long-term care homes.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I thank my colleague for her wonderful speech, which gives us an opportunity to explore this worthwhile topic.

My region managed quite well, even though it is no better off than other regions, so I think that is something to look into. I recently learned that my colleague was involved in managing these services. Money is helpful, but do we not also need to consider management, as well as administrative and policy decisions?

Perhaps in some respects Quebec could serve as an example to the rest of the country.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

The Montérégie-Ouest Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux is a striking example. It did not need Canada-wide standards to manage its long-term care homes and to do a good job. As my colleague can see, her government is misguided.

The Government of Quebec's innovative practices are a source of inspiration for other provinces and countries. Quebec is also a model in terms of child care. These are services that Quebec citizens and taxpayers pay for and that other provinces could choose to fund. They choose not to, however, and that is up to them. We are also a model in terms of how we support our community organizations that serve the public.

We are indeed a good example, but that is no reason for the federal government to come in and tell us what to do and how to do it. I hope my colleague understands that and will get her government back on the right track.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to follow up on the comments my colleague just made about ensuring provincial governments have the ability to make decisions. She talks about the fact that Quebec has a wonderful child care program and does not need national standards and these sorts of things.

I am happy the people in Quebec have this access, but I am concerned about people across the country having equal access and it being the same for long-term care in Quebec as it is in Alberta and British Columbia. I see a value in national standards.

I wonder whether she could talk a bit about how we would ensure people in each area of the country could access the same quality of care if we did not have a national standard.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

We do not share the same definition of the word “national”. When I say “nation”, I mean Quebec. If I mention Canada-wide standards, that means all of Canada.

If my colleague wants to influence the scope of social benefits and health care in her own province, I just want to tell her that she is in the wrong Parliament. She should instead try to influence the politicians in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta.

I would point out to her that we pay the QST and the GST in Quebec. We pay a lot of taxes in Quebec, because we have decided to redistribute the money collectively and equitably in order to provide social benefits to everyone.

Ottawa's Parliament is not the place to hold debates on health care and social services; they must happen in the parliamentary assembly of each province. I therefore urge her to use her fighting spirit to influence the politicians in Alberta.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my wonderful and brilliant colleague from Salaberry—Suroît for her compliments. Fortunately, I was wearing my mask. Otherwise everyone would have been able to see me blush.

As members no doubt know, red does not suit me very well. It is not part of my usual colour palette, although, as I often say, it is better to wear or drink red than to be subject to it.

That being said, just yesterday around 8 p.m., my colleague across the way, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, tweeted the following:

On December 10th, the PM—who I will not name since I cannot do so under the rules—and I will meet with Canada’s Premiers to discuss our continued work together to fight COVID-19, strengthen health care, and on the distribution and logistics of vaccines.

Other than wanting to know when they will finally be able to start vaccinating people and when the vaccines will finally be available, the provinces' and Quebec's main request is a substantial increase in health transfers. What is incredible about this statement by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is that this invitation was issued when the Prime Minister of Canada was sure to arrive empty-handed.

Why did he make sure to arrive empty-handed? That very afternoon, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance basically explained how she intends to spend money she does not have, how she will spend that borrowed money. To no one's surprise, there was not a single penny for transfer payments to the provinces.

How ridiculous is that? We are in the middle of the worst health crisis in history and the federal government cannot find a way to increase transfer payments, a very basic demand from the provinces and Quebec to help them face not only this pandemic, but the day-to-day delivery of health care services in their jurisdiction.

The government prefers to invest elsewhere. It prefers a “national” regime. As my colleague from Salaberry—Suroît said, and as former Bloc Québécois leader Lucien Bouchard used to say, there are two countries in this country. We obviously have a different definition of the word “national”. As far as a national child care system goes, Quebec already has one. That is the choice we made, as my colleague mentioned.

Regarding national long-term care standards for seniors, we wonder why the federal government thinks investing in standards is a better idea than investing in health care. It is going to impose standards on the provinces and Quebec in an area it knows absolutely nothing about. The federal government has no expertise in that area, but it thinks it knows how things work and it is going to show provinces and Quebec how it is done.

Why does the federal government think it has to get involved? According to the government, provinces were so negligent that the army had to step in. It is as if the armed forces could only offer humanitarian aid abroad. I will simply remind my colleagues that Quebeckers also pay for that army. It is only normal for the army to intervene when needed.

Let's come back to the Canadian Armed Forces. It is interesting to see that they do not recommend at all that the federal government proceed as it intends to. In fact, they say that there is already an abundant supply of standards and that the problem is elsewhere.

The problem is insufficient staff. There are not enough available and qualified people. The report says, "According to our observations, the critical need for CHSLDs is an improved level of staff with medical training.” The health care system, Quebec and other provinces do not need standards; they need resources.

What has been happening in the long-term care facilities in Quebec and all other provinces since the spring is the result of negligence by the federal government. People will wonder how this can be. It is quite simple. The federal government had agreed initially to provide 50% of the money for health care, but it does not even spend a dime on long-term care for seniors.

The result of federal cuts in health care funding is that 80% to 85% of the money for long-term care comes from the Government of Quebec and the rest from users themselves. To find that kind of money, the Government of Quebec has to draw from the scarce resources left for health care after successive cuts from the federal government. If the federal government had maintained its funding levels at 50%, the Government of Quebec and the provincial governments would have had more resources available to provide long-term care properly. Unfortunately, the federal government chose to disengage.

That is why we are a little afraid when the federal government tells us it wants to impose new standards along with a budget envelope. We know that the funding will eventually run out but that the standards will remain. In fact, the federal government has maintained its requirements under the Canada Health Act even if it does not provide more than 20% of the funding for health care.

I will conclude by coming back to the wording of the motion, which proposes that the House “acknowledge the extraordinary work of health care workers (including doctors, nurses and orderlies) during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly with seniors but also with the general public”. We all agree on that.

The motion also proposes that the House “recognize the courage and sacrifices required from them and their families in order to be on the front lines”. We cannot disagree with that either.

The motion proposes that the House “highlight the work of Quebec and the provinces in responding to the health crisis and note the direct impact on their respective budgets”. The pandemic definitely had a direct impact on Quebec's finances and the provinces'. The federal government may not acknowledge that, but it is a fact.

Lastly, the motion proposes that the House “call on the government to significantly and sustainably increase Canada health transfers before the end of 2020 in order to support the efforts of the governments of Quebec and the provinces, health care workers and the public”. There might be some disagreement on this last point.

I have heard my Liberal Party colleagues' speeches up to this point. I just want to tell those colleagues that, even if they do not really agree with that last point, they should vote in favour of this motion for at least two reasons. The first is that it respects the Constitution that the Liberal Party of Canada imposed on Quebec. The second is that it is consistent with the federal government's promise at the time to cover 50% of health care costs.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his speech.

My colleague is highly educated and I know him quite well through his career in politics. He is saying that, according to his party's former leader, there is a country within a country. I remind him that he represents a province within Canada, a country that we need to manage through the pandemic. Quebec is a province and is part of Canada.

In addition to the $200 billion in health transfers, we have invested $19 billion to help Canadian provinces and territories as part of the safe restart agreement. Does my colleague agree that a portion of that $19 billion for the safe restart can also be used for health care?

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I get the impression that the hon. member was not here when my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert replied to his speech saying that the reason there is a need for financial support during this pandemic is the federal government's negligence when it comes to transfers to the provinces. The WHO has said that there will be other pandemics. If we want to avoid ending up in exactly the same situation, then we need to start reinvesting now to avoid being in the same situation later.

I thought my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert had been extraordinarily clear, but it seems that my colleague from the Liberal Party has not grasped the nuance. A sum of $19 billion is nice, but it does not solve the root of the problem. The problem is that health care in Canada is underfunded because of the federal government's disengagement. If Quebec is part of this beautiful, great country, then perhaps the federal government should assume its responsibilities and part of those responsibilities is to keep its word on paying 50% of health care.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his impassioned speech. He is always energetic and interesting to listen to. The motion before us today is a good one; it contains several interesting aspects.

We in the NDP have always condemned the cuts that were first made by the Harper Conservatives and later continued by the current Liberal government. These cuts have resulted in transfer increases of about 3% per year, while health care costs have risen by 5.4%. Clearly, we have reached an impasse. It is not sustainable, not viable.

We want to acknowledge the work done by health care workers, which is a very good idea. However, among those workers, there are also asylum seekers who were promised that their status would be regularized by last August. Yesterday we learned that the Canada Border Services Agency is going to resume removals and deportations.

I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about the current Liberal government's lack of sensitivity, compassion and solidarity if it ends up deporting people who helped us and cared for us during this pandemic.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my learned colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie can correct me but, as far as I know, neither the federal Liberal government nor the Quebec government has any intention of deporting anyone who has helped care for people during this pandemic.

In that regard, I believe that the answer is clear. We should not be concerned that people who look after our seniors, among others, during the pandemic could possibly face deportation.

That said, we should recognize that being accepted by a country is not a right. A certain number of criteria must be met. If these criteria are not met, the law does provide for deportation. It is not my cup of tea nor my specialty. I will therefore let the experts elaborate on this issue.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for his speech.

I would like him to comment on something I was told today. We are often told that the Bloc always makes demands and that it looks for a fight when what it is calling for is fair health transfers for Quebec and the provinces.

Ontario's finance minister stated earlier today that the provinces are more united than ever under the leadership of François Legault, that the Bloc Québécois motion would be helpful and that it would be a good thing if it were adopted. It was Ontario's finance minister who said so, not Quebec's.

I would like my colleague to comment on that.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Drummond for his excellent question.

He is completely right. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons keeps saying that the Bloc Québécois wants to pick a fight. It was not the Bloc Québécois who said today that federal standards were completely unacceptable, it was the Premier of Quebec. It was not the Bloc Québécois who said what my colleague from Drummond just mentioned, it was the Ontario finance minister.

We are simply a reflection of reality, and that reality is that not everything is peaches and cream between the federal government and the governments of the provinces and Quebec. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons can claim until the cows come home that we are only looking to pick a fight, the reality is that there is some dissatisfaction about the availability of vaccines and transfers to provinces. The federal government has to address that dissatisfaction without pretending that people are looking to pick a fight. Things need to be addressed. We are here to clearly state Quebec's demands and expectations.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to voice my opinion and, of course, talk about what front-line health care workers are going through in my riding.

I will be sharing my time with the member for Outremont.

There is no question that this pandemic has been unprecedented. It has been a challenge right across the country. It has been a challenge for families and individuals. The bottom line is that families and communities have come together. That is so important to note, and I want to thank them.

Health care workers are the backbone of this pandemic. They have played and continue to play an extremely important role. As well, I want to thank the provinces, territories and our government for their excellent work, a team Canada approach, so to speak.

I would like to also mention the individuals who have been helping us through this pandemic: front-line workers, health care workers, those working at long-term care facilities and senior residences, our men and women in uniform, even those working at gas stations, convenience stores and grocery stores. All these people have played such an important role. I want to thank and underline some of them in my riding.

I want to thank the nurses working in long-term care at Ocean View Manor in Eastern Passage, the Ivy Meadows in Beaver Bank and Sagewood in Sackville. They have contributed and continue to do great work. I want to note some of the individuals I visited throughout the summer during the pandemic. Sabrina at the Beaverbank Convenience Store worked to support her community; VJ at Cooks Convenience Store in Middle Sackville; and Sandra with By the Ocean Art in Eastern Passage. So many individuals and groups have been contributing, and I want to thank them. It is extremely important.

Some organizations too have played a very important role. I think of the Boys & Girls Club in East Preston, which delivered boxed lunches; Lions Christmas Express in Fall River; the Beacon House in Sackville; the Eastern Passage-Cow Bay Community Food Bank; and the Waverley Heritage Museum. All these great organizations had to do things differently in order to help and they did a great job doing that.

I want to note some individuals who volunteered, like Stefanie in Porters Lake, who led the Craig's Cause Pancreatic Cancer Society's five-kilometre run. I thank her for her leadership. Sandra MacDonald-Miles in Fall River raised over 800 pounds of food for Nova Scotia. These are great stories and I am sure all members could tell stories as well.

I want to thank the business community that had to do things differently to try to survive. They had to find ways to increase revenue and shed expenses. Some of them pivoted following our Prime Minister's encouragement to look for different ways to support Canadians through this pandemic. Stanfield's in Nova Scotia pivoted its operations to make gowns. Spring Loaded in Dartmouth made face shields. These are very important companies.

I want to thank our government for helping individuals and seniors with its various programs: the CERB, the wage subsidy, the rent subsidy, the transfers for seniors and the program for people with disabilities. I cannot say enough about how important these programs were. As an MP, I was so proud of our government rolling out these programs and then listening to MPs across the country to make the tweaks and adjustments necessary to meet even more demands by Canadians and businesses.

The second part of my presentation is about health care and working with provinces and territories.

I want to thank the Public Health Agency of Canada. It has worked closely with our government, the provinces and territories, our international partners and the world health organizations. Those great networking avenues have helped us through this pandemic and as we continue to move forward.

Health care is a very important area as is the health transfer for Atlantic Canadians in Nova Scotia, because we have the most seniors. The funding based on population rather than ratio it is an issue for us. However, we need to underline that our government has invested not only in the health care transfer agreement, but has also helped with home care, which is essentially what Canadians have underlined.

Top priorities for Nova Scotia are mental health, pharmacare, strategies for dementia and family doctors. Our government has been working very hard in these areas to help Canadians, such as national standards for long-term care and mental health, which are big issues.

With respect to supporting the provinces, I cannot thank them enough with respect to our restart agreement of $19 billion plus an extra $2 billion for education, which is a big investment, to help with testing, creating capacity and PPE.

Now we are investing in child care spaces, as members heard yesterday, which is extremely important.

I want to thank our Canadian Armed Forces for helping us. When we get our vaccine, the distribution will be supported by the Canadian Armed Forces.

I would like to remind the members of the Bloc Québécois of some very important things. They keep talking about areas of jurisdiction because the situation makes them uncomfortable.

I want to tell them how things really are. Our federal government has to enforce certain standards and is required to ensure that people have access to consistent health care services and have the same rights all across the country. We need to stop people like Alberta Premier Jason Kenney who is trying to privatize health care. We are investing in seniors and day care, which are also very important. We need to ensure that we have standards.

That is where the Bloc Québécois seems to be on the wrong track. We can speak on behalf of Quebec because our Parliament represents all of Canada and we have responsibilities. It is not just the Bloc Québécois that knows the truth about the support that is needed.

I am rather disappointed in my colleague from Beloeil—Chambly, whom I admire. He gave two speeches. In his speech last week on the French language, he did not show much emotion and I do not know why. Again today, when he spoke to his motion, he was a little vague.

I see that my friends from the Bloc Québécois, whom I like very much, continue to support the Conservatives. I am wondering if something will happen in the new year. Are we going to see the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives join forces? Will there be an agreement between the member for Beloeil—Chambly and the member for Durham to form a coalition government?

I am asking that question because it is becoming quite obvious that the Bloc Québécois does not have much room to manoeuvre while the Conservatives, on their part, seem to like everybody all of a sudden and increasingly want to help people. However, members will recall that, for a long time, all Conservatives could think of was budgetary cuts.

Our government has restored the health care funding. We continue to make those investments, not only under existing agreements, but also in all other areas that matter to Canadians.

Once again I am not trying to speak on behalf of the Bloc Québécois, but I am worried about the way things are going.

In 2011, when the Conservatives were in office, Ontario's health minister said the following:

“it's a unilateral federal offer...Our Christmas present this year is a lump of coal.”

The Government of Ontario felt that the federal Conservatives had a unilateral approach, but the situation is different all of a sudden, when talking about areas of jurisdiction. As for us, we believe that our government is a national government. We must be there for all Canadians, for families and organizations. We are there for everybody, in all parts of the country.

We want to make sure that acceptable standards are implemented, so that seniors' rights are respected, no matter if they live in Quebec, Alberta, Nova Scotia or New Brunswick.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

It is true that we need standards, but what we need are standards for the Quebec nation. Every province has its own standards because they set them based on their unique circumstances and needs.

I do not agree with my colleague's assertion that this is what the Bloc wants. It is not the Bloc that wants this. All the provinces want it. All the provinces have asked the federal government to respect their jurisdictions and transfer the money to the provinces so they can provide adequate health services.

Why is the government insisting on interfering in areas under provincial jurisdiction as clearly described in the Canadian Constitution?

Why does my colleague not give a fig about that?