Debates of Dec. 1st, 2020

Opposition Motion—Support for Health Care Workers

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the member can elaborate. He is talking about the ongoing funding aspect of a national health care system, so how much does he or the Conservative party believe should ultimately be transferred to provinces in health transfers? Does he have a percentage that he is prepared to share with the House?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I know that the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader is anxious to be back on this side of the House to ask us questions when we are in power, to find out about the percentages and our plans.

The Liberals are unable to give us a single date, but they have the nerve to ask us for a percentage on the transfers. We are asking them on what date the first person will be vaccinated in Canada. The Liberals are unable to give us a date. We are asking them when the vaccines will arrive and their response is that the government has a portfolio of 50 vaccines per person. We do not want to know if there are 50 vaccines per person. We want to know when the first vaccine will be administered to the first person.

Before asking the opposition questions, the Liberals might want to answer the real questions Canadians are asking.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a message for my colleague. My party has no aspirations of forming the government. My party stands up for the interests of Quebec and Quebeckers.

As such, I can ask the question on the transfer rates. In the meantime, the Conservatives can call themselves the government in waiting. It is always a pleasure to hear them say so in the House of Commons.

Might the Conservatives respond favourably to the joint request of the premiers to increase health transfers by $28 billion, shifting the federal government's share of health care funding from 22% to 35%?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, once again, I agree with part of what my colleague said.

Questions from the Bloc Québécois always have a double meaning. We agree on one aspect, but not so much on the other.

We agree that the Bloc Québécois will never form the government and will never be able to see any projects through or invest more in health care, because the Bloc members will never be able to sit around the cabinet table where decisions are made to increase or decrease a given budget envelope or to deal with the economic impact of the Liberals' bad choices, for example. Bloc Québécois members will never be able to do that. I completely agree with my colleague on that.

I would like to point out that he was very honest when he said that the Bloc Québécois will never be in power and will never be able to decide on any percentage. Whether the Bloc members like it or not, it will never happen.

The Conservatives will ensure stable, predictable and adequate funding for health care systems across the country.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, health care workers have been at the front lines of this crisis for nearly a year now and they need more than just words of gratitude. What they need is for the federal government to support them to win the fight against COVID.

The federal share of overall health care funding in Canada has plummeted to 22% over the years between Liberal and Conservative governments. We started at 50%, when medicare was first established in Canada.

The Harper government, instead of providing stable funding, cut health care transfer dollars. In fact, the Conservatives negotiated the health accord with the provinces and territories and unilaterally cut the health care transfer escalator from 6% to 3%.

The member talks about funding that is stable. Would he and the Conservatives support increasing transfer payments to 25%, with escalators continuing thereafter?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her comments.

As she mentioned, during this pandemic it is important to clearly tell all health care workers that the elected members of this House are there to support them. We are thinking of them and we are here to make decisions. That is why we will support the Bloc Québécois motion, which:

...call[s] 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.

That is quite clear.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

It being 5:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion. If a member of a recognized party present in the House wants to request a recorded vote or request that the motion be passed on division, I invite them to rise and so indicate to the Chair.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, we are requesting a recorded vote.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Pursuant to order made on Wednesday, September 23, 2020, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, December 2, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

The hon. parliamentary secretary is rising on a point of order.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you will find unanimous consent to call it 5:30 p.m. so we can begin private members' hour.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Do we have unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from October 26 consideration of the motion that Bill C-210, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (organ and tissue donors), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Canada Revenue Agency Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it has been an interesting day today. We started the day off talking about health care and just how important it was. Now we are in private members' hour. The member for Calgary Confederation has brought forward a bill that has fairly good support from all sides of the House. I anticipate a willingness to see the bill go to committee at which point in time I am sure there will be a lot of interesting discussions and possibly a number of presentations. We will leave it up to the standing committee to establish that.

I want to recognize the member for Calgary Confederation and other members. For example, the member for Oakville North—Burlington has been a very strong advocate in our caucus, ensuring, as much as possible, that we move the bill forward. I believe that after today, the opportunity for it to go to committee will be there. Knowing the efforts of some of the members who have been lobbying for the bill, I suspect the committee will be dealing with it in a relatively quick fashion. I wish them well in getting it processed.

I would like to share some comments on this with the House. When we talk about issues, such as organ transplants, and look at what the legislation attempts to do, it is really about the CRA, the Canada Revenue Agency, working with different provincial and territorial governments to see how we can establish and maintain an organ and tissue registry. This is worth pushing forward.

A name that comes to my mind is Hank Horner, who has since passed. For the longest time, Hank was waiting to get a transplant. It is hard to really appreciate it, but these organ recipients often have amazing attitudes. As opposed to being angry, the exchanges I have had with people who are on a waiting list are quite touching. People want to go that extra mile. We often wonder why a higher percentage of people are not registering as organ donors.

In Hank's case, he use to lobby me, saying that we should have MPI, Manitoba Public Insurance, work with the provincial government to get a registry established through drivers' licences. For good reason, it made a lot of sense. Some people might say that we should put stickers on the licence plates of registered donors. There is obviously a great deal of passion in regard to this issue. We have heard that in a number of the speeches. This is not the first time we have debated this legislation.

I applaud the member for Oakville North—Burlington and the member for Calgary Confederation on their efforts to bring this legislation to the point where it is today. In particular, the member for Calgary Confederation used his priority in bill placement and was also able to get additional support to get the legislation bumped up to have that second hour of debate today.

I thought I would share some interesting statistics from the Internet. They come from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. It is somewhat pertinent to what we are talking about. It puts into perspective some actual numbers. In 2018, a total of 2,782 transplant procedures of all organs were performed in Canada. That was an increase of 33% since 2009.

The next thing I will go over will clearly demonstrate why it is so important that we continue to take the necessary actions to support people to register to donate organs. I have a table I would like to reference, and I will speak specifically of organs.

The top organs used in transplants are kidneys, liver, heart, lung and pancreas. Kidneys are the highest number for organ transplants, at 1,706. The number of patients on a waiting list are 3,150. There is some qualification to that because not all provinces could provide the hard numbers, but that is roughly the number of people on a waiting list. An active amount in 2018 is 2,045. The last column really wakes us up to the importance of it. The number of patients who were on the waiting list and died was 95. That speaks volume. We have to wonder what would have happened for those 95 individuals. What kind of future would they have had if they had received that important transplant.

A high number of people who were on waiting lists for a liver transplant died. The total number of organ transplants was 533. The number of patients on a wait list was 527 and 377 were active. The number of patients who died while waiting for a transplant was 82. We can get that sense of just how important this is.

Very quickly, the number of heart transplants is 189, lung is 361 and the pancreas is 57. Obviously, there are tissues and so forth.

The point is there are things the government can do. We have to be cognizant of jurisdictional responsibility. Ottawa can play a role. Hopefully we will get a better understanding when it goes to the standing committee about the CRA working with the provinces and territories.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-210, an act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act, which would enable the CRA to use tax returns to collect the information required for establishing and maintaining an organ and tissue donor registry in the province. The second part of the bill would allow the CRA to disclose this information to Quebec and the provinces and territories with which it has entered into an agreement.

Today I will talk about three different points connected to this bill.

First, I will talk about our party's position on this matter. Second, I will read some excerpts of articles and will share some cases that describe the state of organ donation in Quebec, Canada and the world. Third, I will talk a little about how the pandemic has made organ donation difficult.

I want to start by saying that the Bloc Québécois supports this bill, which should have absolutely no impact on Quebec. We also want Quebec to manage a single tax return. Even if that does not happen, Quebec will have to get all of the information required from its own tax returns. Allow me to explain. The Bloc Québécois has no problem with this bill, but Quebec is unlikely to sign an agreement with the Canada Revenue Agency, since Quebec already has its own tax return.

What the Bloc Québécois wants instead is a single tax return handled by Quebec, which means that this bill would not affect Quebec at all. Even if Quebec wanted an agreement, we would have no problem with sharing this information. Quebec is free to sign an agreement or not. This bill does not commit Quebec to anything or limit it in any way. It lets the CRA collect information if there is an agreement with participating provinces, and sharing that information with the provinces is not a problem. It actually makes sense because the CRA handles all the tax returns outside Quebec.

Now I would like to show how Nova Scotia recently legislated to reverse consent for organ donation. Nova Scotians are now deemed to be consenting unless they state otherwise. Quebec is just getting started on a debate to do the same as Nova Scotia. I had a chance to sit in on a passionate debate on the subject. Right now, Quebeckers have to indicate on their health card whether they want to donate their organs when they die. Quebec has all the information it needs to improve the situation.

According to experts, increasing the supply of organs would be very helpful, but we need more doctors who specialize in organ and tissue retrieval and transplants. This brings us back to the subject of the debate raised in the motion moved by the Bloc Québécois here today, that is, the importance of increasing health transfers. It is only logical. Without additional funding, it would be difficult for Quebec and the provinces to have these medical specialists.

As Raôul Duguay said, everything is in everything.

In addition, the number of potential donors is relatively limited, which further complicates things.

Second, I will share some statistics drawn from current events that illustrate some of the problems that exist in organ donation in Canada.

There is not enough supply to meet the demand. Even though the number of transplants has increased by 33% over the past 10 years, there is still a shortage of organs in Canada, according to the latest data published by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. In 2008, 4,351 Canadians were on a transplant waiting list according to CIHI figures. In the same year, 2,782 organ transplants were performed in Canada, while 223 people died while waiting for transplants.

The increased need for organ transplantation is in part being driven by the rising number of Canadians diagnosed with end-stage kidney disease, which went up 32% over the 10 years studied. According to Greg Webster, CIHI's director of acute and ambulatory care information services, improved organ donation practices across Canada have resulted in a 33% increase in transplant procedures over the last decade.

For most organs, patient survival is greater than 80% after five years.

One of the reasons for the increased number of transplants is that many countries have expanded deceased organ donation practice beyond brain death cases to include donation after cardiac death, meaning the heart has permanently stopped beating. This has led to an increase of almost 430% in the number of donation after cardiac death organs used for transplantation, from 42 in 2009 to 222 in 2018.

According to Dr. Gill, transplant nephrologist and associate professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, with the increase in donation after cardiac death, there has been a substantial increase in the number of organ donors in Canada, and this has shortened wait times, particularly for those waiting for kidney or lung transplants.

The number of donors after brain death also increased by 21% between 2009 and 2018. That is an encouraging trend given that a deceased donor can provide up to eight organs.

Data published by CIHI also reveal that there were 555 living donors in Canada in 2018. These are people who donated a kidney or a lobe of liver. There were also 762 deceased donors in Canada. The number of deceased donors increased by 56% between 2009 and 2018, whereas the number of living donors remained stable.

Nova Scotia's decision to adopt presumed consent for organ donation has pushed several provinces to ask themselves the question. Is this the best way to increase the number of donors? Survivors and family members believe it is, but for some experts the solution is not that simple. As we heard earlier, we need more specialists.

I will talk about a few cases. Four years ago, Sammy, a young boy from Montreal, was diagnosed with Kawasaki syndrome, a childhood illness that leads to heart complications. He has been living with a new heart for three years. He is in good health. At age 11, Sammy is on the short list of patients who have benefited from organ donation.

Linda Paradis's life was turned upside down at age 60, two years ago, when her lungs started to deteriorate. This active businesswoman fit as from Quebec suddenly ended up with a few weeks to live, a few weeks away from death's door. She ended up getting a double lung transplant. Of course for her, automatic consent does not hurt. It also takes doctors who are able to perform the operation.

Nova Scotia adopting legislation that assumes all citizens are organ donors has given the rest of the country something to think about. The Premier of Nova Scotia, Stephen McNeil, hopes that his initiative will snowball, but for now, nothing is certain. New Brunswick is looking at the idea closely. The governments of Quebec and British Columbia are saying that they will be monitoring what happens in Nova Scotia, and Ontario says it is happy with its system.

Some European countries like France and Spain adopted presumed consent several years ago. At this time, the data do not show a clear correlation between presumed consent and an increase in the number of donors. Marie-Chantal Fortin, a nephrologist and bioethicist at CHUM, said that it is a simple solution to a complex problem. She pointed out that countries with presumed consent like Spain have excellent organ donation rates, yet the United States, which does not have presumed consent, also has a high organ donation rate.

What experts do agree on is that we need better training for medical teams and, above all, people have to talk about organ donation with their friends and family. I mentioned training for medical teams. This brings us back to the debate on increasing health transfers.

The pandemic exacerbated the problems related to organ donation. According to an article published in July 2020, the organ donation rate is the lowest it has been in five years because of COVID-19. That is what Transplant Québec warned. The provincial organization responsible for organ management counted only two people who donated organs to save five patients in April 2020, while the number of donors was already low. According to a press release from Transplant Québec, executive director Louis Beaulieu said, “The slowdown that occurred in April was mainly due to the exceptional circumstances we found ourselves in. The need to ensure the safety of transplant recipients and the massive reorganization that occurred in hospitals contributed to this situation.”

Despite the resumption of activities in May, Transplant Québec noticed a 50% drop in the number of organ donors and a 60% drop in transplants for the second quarter of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019.

In closing, I hope that we can come up with better solutions in this debate so that we can save lives without feeling uncomfortable talking about the signature on the back of the card. I would like to read a rather interesting testimonial from the oldest organ donor in Quebec. He said, “Just because I'm 92 years old, that doesn't mean that I can't donate an organ.” He gave part of his liver, and the recipient is doing well. As for Quebec's youngest organ donor, it is a much more tragic story. He lived only 48 hours, but he was able to donate his heart. Let's give from our hearts and sign the card.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a real pleasure to stand in the House today and support Bill C-210, with great thanks to my hon. colleague from Calgary Confederation. I had the immense pleasure of serving with him on the health committee for a number of years. I cannot think of a finer parliamentarian and a more collegial, publicly minded representative than he. I am so pleased to support legislation that I know he has fought so hard to make a reality in this place.

This legislation would amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act to authorize the Canada Revenue Agency to enter into an agreement with a province or a territory regarding the collection and disclosure of information required for establishing or maintaining an organ and tissue donor registry in the province or territory. In short, what the act would do is allow Canadians to indicate on their tax return that they wish to have their information shared with a provincial or territorial organ and tissue donation program to help facilitate and expedite the donation of organs and tissues in the country.

Canada's New Democrats believe that we must make every possible effort to ensure that every Canadian who needs an organ or tissue transplant receives it. Just one donor can save up to eight lives and benefit more than 75 people, yet, at 18 donors per million people, Canada's current donation rate puts us in the lower third of developed countries. Allowing Canadians to register as an organ and tissue donor through their tax returns will help increase registration rates, improve consent rates and help build a donation culture in Canada.

This legislation was first introduced in the 42nd Parliament as Bill C-316. Despite passing unanimously in the House of Commons, Bill C-316 was one of several bills that unfortunately were allowed to die on the Order Paper in the Senate before the last election. By the way, the Senate also blocked legislation to give mandatory sexual assault training to federally appointed judges, implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ban unhealthy food and beverages marketing directed at children.

However, this was a life and death matter. Canadians are currently dying while on wait lists simply because our organ and tissue donation rate is so unacceptably low. At present, only 20% of Canadians have joined their province's organ and tissue registry. Provinces like Ontario are taking steps to make it easier by asking about organ and tissue donations on health card and driver licence renewals, which has increased registrations. However, even when everything is in place, some 20% of families refuse to transplant a registered donor's organs and tissue.

In our recent study on organ and tissue donation at the Standing Committee on Health last Parliament, we learned that of the 4,500 Canadians on the wait list, 260 died waiting for an organ in 2016 alone. In order to better meet this demand, improved coordination across provinces and territories is needed.

Bill C-210 would allow the federal government to coordinate with provinces and territories to allow Canadians to register as an organ and tissue donor through their federal tax filing.

The act would align with the long-standing advocacy and legislative work of New Democrat MPs around organ and tissue donations. The bill is essentially a version of the previous proposal to create a pan-Canadian organ donor registry to coordinate and promote organ and tissue donations throughout Canada.

In February 2016, Conservative MP for Edmonton Manning, whose son had been the recipient of three donated livers, reintroduced a private member's bill calling for a national registry. That bill had been previously introduced seven times by both the Liberals and two New Democrats, Lou Sekora, Judy Wasylycia-Leis and Malcolm Allen.

Unfortunately, the Liberal caucus voted to defeat the member for Edmonton Manning's bill. The Liberals defended their decision to kill the bill, without study, by claiming that it was a matter that was under provincial jurisdiction and it was for that reason the bill was unsupportable.

Leaving that question aside, I want to quote from a couple of important stakeholders. The Kidney Foundation of Canada says, “In an environment where the supply of donor organs is so low and demands are so high, missed opportunities for donation are literally a matter of life and death. Donor organs are rare and precious and every opportunity needs to be pursued to ensure that no potential donation is missed or lost because it also means lost lives of those waiting for transplant.”

Dr. Philip Halloran, professor of medicine at the University of Alberta, said, “Donations in Canada are not performing at the standard that our colleagues in the United States are performing and there isn’t really any excuse except organization and accountability.”

I was therefore quite disappointed to see jurisdiction thrown out by the Liberals as being a barrier to facilitating organ and tissue donation.

Here are a few facts.

While 90% of Canadians support organ and tissue donation, less than 20% have made plans to donate. Unlike the United States, Canada does not have a centralized list of people waiting for an organ or tissue transplant.

The efficiency of donor registration varies greatly from province to province to territory. In the case where someone dies outside of the province where they are registered for organ and tissue donation, it is highly unlikely the hospital would be able to identify them as a donor. Online registration is available only in five provinces: British Columbia, Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba and Quebec.

Even if someone is registered as a donor, the family has the final say. As I pointed out, about one in five registered organ and tissue donors had their wishes overridden by family members, according to a 2016 report in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

For every patient in Canada who does receive an organ transplant, there are two more on the wait-list. In the past 10 years, the number of deceased organ donors has gone up by 42%, so there is progress, but the number of people needing a transplant has also gone up at the same time. Over 1,600 Canadians are added to the organ wait-lists yearly.

Canada is the only developed country without national organ donation legislation, such as the U.S.'s 1984 National Organ Transplant Act, so it is time that parliamentarians united and addressed this very pressing need. We cannot let jurisdiction, difficulty, party interests and technicalities get in the way of doing what we all know is necessary: We must make it much more efficient and simple for Canadians, who overwhelmingly want to donate organs and tissue, to do so to save their family members and other Canadians.

It is my view that the best system of all is an opt-out system, where everyone is considered to be an organ donor unless they specifically opt out. This respects the rights of everyone who does not, for various reasons, whether religious, philosophical, health or any other reason at all, want to be an organ and tissue donor. There are many countries around the globe that have such a system, and what we see in those countries is that their rates of organ and tissue donations and transplants dwarf Canada's rates. This saves lives.

I hope that all parliamentarians can work together, support the bill, expedite it through this place and ensure that the Senate passes it as soon as possible. Let us do everything we can in this country to facilitate organ and tissue donation and transplantation as soon as possible.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway for his speech and his call for support for this very important issue. It is very close to my heart and I have always hoped to see this debated on the floor of the House of Commons.

After five years in the House, I cannot think of a bill that I have agreed with more than this one, Bill C-210, which was proposed by the hon. member for Calgary Confederation. He is to be commended for his vision and desire to help Canadians.

Bill C-210, an act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act regarding organ and tissue donors, is a short bill that has only two clauses. It is a simple, effective and life-saving act. With a “yes” vote, we can all save lives. Bill C-210 authorizes the Canada Revenue Agency to ask those filling out their tax forms if they wish to be organ donors. It allows the CRA to provide that information to provincial health authorities for their organ donor lists.

When we talk about organ donation, we frequently talk about facts and figures. I intended to give some of those today. Sometimes, though, we forget that behind each number there is a human being involved. Lives become impacted for better or worse, depending on the availability of a much-needed transplant. It is that human element that makes this bill so important.

For example, let me tell members about my son, Tyler. When a child is born, parents always have great dreams for them. There is unlimited potential. We are excited to see how they will fulfill it, and so it was with Tyler, who is now a young adult. My wife and I are very proud of him. Tyler is alive, thanks to not one but three organ donations. Without them, I would be standing here telling the story of a life lost, not a life saved.

Tyler was born with a defective liver. When he was very young it became apparent that without a transplant, he would die. The liver is a remarkable organ that can regenerate itself. That means that the transplant can be from a live donor, that is, if the two people are compatible. With any surgery there are risks, and 20 years ago, liver surgeries were much riskier than they are today. No one undergoes such a procedure without much thought beforehand.

I was a compatible donor. Would I risk my life to allow my son to live? Of course I would and the operation was a success. That, though, is not the end of the story. That first liver transplant did not last.

On Christmas Eve, 2003, it looked like Tyler's time had run out. His life expectancy was now days, perhaps hours. I was not allowed to make a second donation. Almost miraculously, a liver became available from a Quebec man who had just died. We were told it was not the perfect solution. It would only buy time, but time was what we were desperately looking for.

After a decade that liver also began to fail. One more time we entered the medical system. Our emotions were a mixture of hope and fear. There were no guarantees. We knew the statistics. We knew the odds and, as we had done before, we prayed for a miracle. Once again, a grieving family offered a loved one's organ for the good of the community and a match was made. Today, we are so grateful to have a healthy son.

There are no sufficient words in any language to express the gratitude my wife Liz and I still feel for the anonymous donors who saved Tyler's life.

Our family's experience is not unique, but there are not enough available organs to meet the need. Bill C-210 seeks to alleviate that.

When Tyler first began having problems, I became aware of the unmet need for organ donations in Canada. There are literally thousands of people waiting for the telephone call that will change their lives and the lives of those around them. Tragically, for more than 200 Canadians every year time runs out before the phone call comes.

More than 90% of Canadians support organ and tissue donation, which is a great yield, but in theory less than 25% make plans to donate. I will not embarrass hon. members by asking for a show of hands as to how many of them have registered to become organ donors should they die. It is probably not as many as one would expect.

Canada's organ donation rate puts us in about 20th place in international ranking. We need to do better. After all, one donor can benefit more than 75 people and save more than eight lives. A single donor can provide lungs, a heart, liver, kidneys, corneas and more.

According to the Canadian organ replacement register, in 2018 there were 762 deceased donors in Canada and 2,782 organ transplant procedures performed. However, there were 4,351 people on organ transplant waiting lists and 223 of those people died waiting for an organ to become available. That is a sad statistic. The demand for organs is increasing, but the supply is not maintaining the pace.

The number of patients on the waiting list for kidney transplants is approximately two and a half times higher than the number of transplants performed. More than 1,600 Canadians are added to the wait-lists each year, which means we are falling behind.

The various ways of registering to be an organ donor are good, but more effort is needed. It is not that people are opposed to the idea of organ donation, but we do not seem to be that great at putting the idea into practice. By expanding the number of those willing to be organ donors, Bill C-210 could help save lives. By allowing people to indicate their wishes before death, medical personnel would not have to approach a grieving family at the worst possible time to ask about the gift of life.

What if it was a member's son or daughter who needed a transplant? Would they not do everything in their power to make sure it could happen? By making a simple change to the income tax forms through Bill C-210, we would be giving Canadians an easy way to do the right thing.

We are talking a bill that could literally save thousands of lives. Think about that. Think about what we do here in the House and how we are frequently unsure of the effects of our actions. With Bill C-210, we know we would be doing good. How many lives lost is too many? In many ways that is the question we are asking today.

We have an opportunity to do good for all Canadians. Why waste it? I urge every member to support Bill C-210.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Calgary Confederation for bringing the issue of organ and tissue donation in Canada to the forefront.

I would like to start by sharing some national data on the subject to paint a picture of the situation. Some 4,400 people in Canada are waiting for an organ or tissue donation, and more than 1,600 people join the waiting list every year.

It is devastating to think that 250 people die in Canada every year while waiting for a transplant. Many of those deaths could have been prevented, and the reason for that is simple. Canada has too few organ and tissue donors. This is all the more devastating knowing that a single organ and tissue donor can save up to eight lives and improve the lives of 75 people.

That is why I am happy to support this bill at second reading, and I have to say that I am eagerly looking forward to an in-depth examination of this legislation in committee. We are all touched by the fact that too many people are waiting for organs and tissue, and we all want Canada's donor list to get longer.

That said, at committee stage, we will need to ensure that the bill actually meets its objective in the most efficient way possible. I believe that we will also need to ensure that the legislation specifies the most efficient means possible for the Canada Revenue Agency to collect donor information.

Then, we will also need to ensure that the CRA can dialogue with the provinces and territories to see if any amendments could be made to improve the bill. It could also be worthwhile to hear the testimony of the agency's non-partisan and professional officials who might be involved in the process. To the extent possible, it might also be interesting to hear what provincial and territorial experts would have to say on the matter.

To be sure, we will need to study this bill closely to ensure that it will create the best possible framework in which the provinces and territories can easily and safely share donor information with the CRA. The idea is obviously to end up with the best bill possible, because it is painfully obvious that far too many people are waiting on organ and tissue transplants in this country.

I am also proud to say that the Government of Canada is already turning its attention to this issue. As announced in budget 2019, effective in 2019-20, Health Canada will receive $36.5 million over five years, as well as an additional $5 million per year thereafter, to help in the development of a pan-Canadian data and performance system for organ donation and transplantation in collaboration with provincial and territorial partners. The funding will also support the promotion of organ and tissue donations to the Canadian public.

According to polls on this issue, 90% of Canadians support organ and tissue donation but less than 20% of Canadians plan to donate their organs and tissues. In light of these statistics, it is clear that we need to raise awareness of this issue among Canadians.

Public awareness about organ and tissue donation is urgently needed, since year after year, despite gains made here and there, the end result brings its fair share of disappointment.

For example, we have noticed in the past few years that the number of deceased organ donors has gone up by 42%.

While that is encouraging, unfortunately, the number of people needing a transplant has also gone up during that same time, and the situation remains concerning. As a result, Canadians are dying because they are not getting an organ or tissue transplant. This is utterly tragic.

I recently heard a very inspiring story about Logan Boulet.

Logan played defence for the Humboldt Broncos, a junior hockey team. The team was travelling to a game together when their bus was hit by a transport truck in April 2018.

That story made headlines and struck a chord with Canadians. Logan was a registered organ donor and had made his wishes known in the weeks before his death. He was able to donate his heart, lungs, liver, both kidneys and both corneas.

News of these generous donations produced what was called the Logan Boulet effect. More than 60,000 people across Canada signed up to be organ and tissue donors in the weeks that followed. His father launched an initiative the following year called Green Shirt Day. This initiative honours his son's actions by promoting awareness of organ and tissue donation. The addition of 100,000 donors would be heartwarming news to come out of this tragedy.

There is no question that more must be done to address the serious need for organs and tissue available for donation. Today transplants can help burn victims recover, remove the need for long-time dialysis, reduce the need for amputations, repair childhood heart problems, assist in heart bypass surgery, replace lungs affected by cystic fibrosis with healthy ones and replace the disfigured facial features of accident victims by providing a cosmetic solution. Living donors who are of the age of majority and in good health can donate a kidney, part of the liver and a lobe of a lung and continue to lead full and rewarding lives. What could be more rewarding than saving someone else's life?

By promoting awareness among Canadians, we can increase the number of donors. The Logan Boulet effect is proof of that. Furthermore, when we work together at the national level, with the provinces and territories, we can continue to improve the organ and tissue donation and transplant system, to guarantee Canadians timely, efficient access to health care.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is a real honour for me to rise today to speak to Bill C-210.

I believe that the subject we are discussing has the potential to meet the urgent needs of many Canadians, and I want to emphasize the word Canadians. It is true. Quebec can sleep well at night knowing that this bill will not really have any impact on it.

I commend Nova Scotia for the steps it has taken to make organ donation automatic and make opting out voluntary, rather than the other way around. Bill C-210 will facilitate this approach through close collaboration with Ottawa to get the relevant information from people's income tax returns.

As I just mentioned, Quebec will not be part of that Canadian collaboration because it is already collecting that information. However, members know me and I will not turn a deaf ear. It is clear that, in due course, the Quebec National Assembly will move forward and it will be very simple. I hope it will be simple for all of the provinces that have to manage their health care systems and meet an ever-growing need for organ transplants.

Provinces know what they are doing. Once again, the Quebec formula of national, responsible, grassroots governance is paying dividends. I can only agree with other provinces taking the same approach or with other governments choosing to collaborate, especially on a matter of health.

That is a welcome change from the arm-wrestling matches we too often see in this House. Actually, I will digress for a moment, because my fellow Quebeckers would be upset if I did not take this opportunity to remind all hon. members and everyone watching that Quebec is still asking for a single income tax return. I also want to point out that processing Quebec taxes costs the federal government an arm and a leg. With the spending announced yesterday and the looming deficit, I again urge the government to consider that option, which is completely in line with its willingness to listen and collaborate on this bill. Now might be the ideal time to go down that road since the federal government will need public servants to deal with all that was announced yesterday. A lot of elbow grease will be required if this country, now more generous than ever, is to also become more efficient than ever. Now back to the matter at hand.

It is up to Quebec and the provinces to decide what works best for them when it comes to organ donation and transplants. This issue literally speaks to peoples' values and intersects with different peoples' funeral rites. Society's many perspectives can create sparks when they intersect.

In the House, our colleagues in the NDP and in the Liberal Party are fighting tooth and nail for a centralized government. Our Conservative colleagues always wrestle with collective decisions that are connected to their social and religious beliefs. In the Bloc Québécois, we are working non-stop for Quebec's independence.

How does organ donation work elsewhere? This is not always a simple debate, and that makes sense. Brazil has even taken a step backwards. This is why every society needs to move at its own pace.

I would just like to be parochial for a moment. Things can be done locally to significantly increase the donor pool. On that front, people may be surprised to hear that few governments can match Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. In my region, the number of donors per million inhabitants is neck and neck with Spain, which sets the bar. That is impressive, and it might raise a few eyebrows, but it is by design.

Where I am from, there is a strong culture of organ donation and health organizations identify potential donors. According to a 2019 La Presse article, my region is impressively effective, mainly because health professionals have access to training and there is constant follow-up. The author added that a culture of organ donation makes it easier to convince family members of the deceased, who always have the final say in Quebec, to consent to organ harvesting.

If I could just plant a seed, reading between the lines, what matters most is a solid, well-funded health network capable of innovation and adaptation. That is the foundation of a better health system.

This brings me back to one of our demands: increased federal health transfers. Quebec and the provinces are scrambling to support health care systems whose costs have increased exponentially. Meanwhile, the federal government expects us to welcome it with open arms as it dictates how long-term care centres should operate, when just yesterday it showed up to the family party empty-handed.

As they say, out of sight, out of mind. The federal government withdrew so much from health care that it ended up losing interest. Now it is suddenly newly aware that this is a big responsibility, and it wants to take some of it on.

This is totally inconsistent with its record of inaction. Members will recall that over the past few decades both Liberal and Conservative governments have systematically paid down their deficits on the backs of Quebec and the provinces. Today, as many regions teeter on the brink of disaster, Ottawa might have had the good idea of introducing Bill C-210, but that does not make up for the fact that it has messed up pretty much everything else. In the circumstances, the government should think long and hard before invoking the pandemic as an excuse to interfere in such clearly defined areas of jurisdiction.

All of this brings us back to the basic argument for Bill C-210, namely that the federal government can and must support the provinces and provide them with the tools they want, when they want them, and how they want them. In this case, that consists in the federal government's immediate and unconditional payment of $28 billion to Quebec and the provinces.

At its core, Canadian federalism was designed to prevent all levels of government from stepping on each other's toes. When Ottawa decides to encroach on the jurisdiction of health, it is essentially proposing to rewrite legislative jurisdiction. Before this government goes full-steam ahead, I would like to invite the federalists to think carefully about their role and the files they were entrusted with when they were elected to Parliament, this distinguished chamber.

Something tells me that my hon. colleagues have a lot of questions for me. Unfortunately I will not be able to answer them. We could always meet in the lobby.

In closing, I would like to wish the thousands of people waiting for a transplant the best of luck with this difficult ordeal, especially during these times and with the holidays right around the corner.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Madam Speaker, I must say that I am very pleased with what I heard this afternoon and also in the first hour of second reading just a few weeks ago. I would like to thank all the members who spoke to the bill.

From the very beginning, my goal with the bill was to avoid making it a partisan, political debate. In fact, in the last Parliament, as in this one as well, I have been genuinely touched by the multipartisan support the bill has received. From what I have seen so far, Canadians should feel proud that when a sensible idea comes forward in the House of Commons, we can put politics aside to improve the lives of Canadians and, in this case, save the lives of many who are waiting for a life-saving organ donation.

My bill will go to a vote, and I am quite hopeful, after what I have heard, that it will be supported. It was supported unanimously in the last Parliament, before it eventually died in the Senate when the election was called in 2019. I will call on my colleagues to please show their desire to improve our organ and tissue donation procurement system in Canada and vote in favour of the bill.

I am confident that Canada is on the verge of setting a new global standard for how to reach potential organ donors. Each of us in the House can play a role in that step forward.

However, we do need to find a way to expedite the bill as it makes its way forward: first, if it passes tomorrow, to the health committee, then back to the House for a final vote and then off to the Senate. I would welcome the support of all parties in the House in this regard and in whatever we can do to expedite this process. There could be an election call at any time, and that would once again kill the bill. It happened before and it may happen again. That would be a shame.

I must thank the hon. member for Calgary Centre for graciously giving me his private member's bill time slot today so we could move the bill through the process more quickly. Believe it or not, I was not scheduled to be up again for the second hour of second reading of the bill until the end of January or into February, so I thank the hon. member for Calgary Centre profusely and sincerely. I know he sees the value of the bill and the importance of getting it passed and implemented expeditiously.

I would also like to thank many of my former colleagues on the health committee, in particular the member for Oakville North—Burlington, who was the parliamentary secretary previously. She has provided incredible support for the bill and has lobbied on my behalf within her own caucus. I thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, the chair of the health committee, and the member for Vancouver Kingsway, also a member of the health committee, as well as many members in my own caucus. They have all gone out of their way to show their support for my bill and advocate for its swift passage. That has meant a lot to me.

I would also like to thank the 20 members of Parliament from all political parties in the House of Commons who seconded my bill. It really would be tragic if the bill were to die yet again before it fully passed into law. It is my hope that every one of my colleagues will speak with those they know to help ensure the timely passage of this legislation.

In closing, I have one final ask of my MP colleagues. I implore all MPs, over the Christmas break, to have a conversation with their families about organ donation, and to please express their wishes clearly to them and find out what their wishes are. Even through these COVID-19 pandemic days, donating blood in Canada remains safe. Canadian Blood Services and Héma-Québec have robust cleaning, infection control and screening practices in place to protect all donors, staff and volunteers. Please donate some blood during the holiday season. There is no greater gift than a blood donation.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to order made on Wednesday, September 23, we will not call for the yeas and nays. As a result, if a member of a recognized party present in the House wants to request a recorded vote or request that the motion be passed on division, I invite them to rise and so indicate to the Chair.

Seeing none, I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Health.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you might find unanimous consent to call it 6:30 p.m. at this time so that we can move to Adjournment Proceedings.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I greatly appreciate the fact that all of the orders of the day have been dealt with, and we do not actually need a motion to see the clock.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.