Debates of Oct. 18th, 2022

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #190

Canada Disability Benefit Act

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I declare the motion carried.

Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Citizenship and Immigration

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Pursuant to the order made on Thursday, June 23, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion to concur in the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #191

Committees of the House

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I declare the motion carried.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, in relation to the consideration of Government Business No. 20, I move:

That debate be not further adjourned.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. Minister of Indigenous Services is rising on a point of order.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to express my disappointment at hearing members of the opposition, in particular the Conservatives, asking our Deputy Prime Minister to smile a little more. This is recognized as a known sexist remark. I would just say that—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am afraid that this is more of a point of debate and not a point of order. However, I do want to remind both sides that when someone is answering or talking, as I am, to listen and to respect each other.

We will now return to the motion that was put forward.

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places or use the “raise hand” function so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.

The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, here we are again. The Liberal government, which promised Canadians that it would not shut down debate, is doing it again.

It is shameful. These are important measures to get right. There are concerns that have been expressed on this motion, as well as the bill that it pertains to, and the government is not listening. I am very disappointed to see, once again, a lack of transparency and Liberals not keeping their promises, which is what we have come to expect from this government.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad and grateful to be able to answer this question and to agree with the member that this is a very important bill. We should move forward because, as we all know, the next occasion is going to give us more time and a better place to study the bill clause by clause and to look at it carefully to make sure that it serves the needs of Canadians on dental care and rental support.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I find it mighty rich that Conservatives are using all of their stalling tactics to prevent children from getting dental care, while MPs in the House get dental care, Conservative MPs.

I find it extremely disturbing and shameful that they are doing this. We need to move forward with this so that children get help so that they can deal with their dental work.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member is correct. As we do this, we are going to save probably around $2 billion in emergency services in current dental work not having to be given.

A lot of Canadians, and low-income Canadians in particular, do not have access to dental care because of affordability, and $2 billion in hospitalization costs could be prevented with better dental care for children and low-income families.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

This is another slap in the face of parliamentarism, Mr. Speaker. It is a two-handed slap, one hand being Liberal and the other New Democrat. Again, it seems as though we are in a bad movie.

Bill C‑31 is ill-conceived. We should have worked on this bill because it was scribbled on the back of a napkin. Then, we can see there is a desire to expedite debate. There is talk of dental insurance, but there is no clear indication in the bill that it was dental insurance, quite the contrary. What we are seeing now is a government that drafted bad legislation because it was in a too big a hurry to consummate its marriage to the NDP to really put any work into it.

My question is simple. Is the minister embarrassed to introduce this closure motion?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for wanting to take a closer look at the bill. That is exactly what we can do if we vote for the motion today. We can go to committee and take the time needed to listen to experts to see how taking care of our children's dental health means taking care of their health in general. It avoids them having to go to the hospital for emergency surgery that would not be needed if they had access to quality preventive dental care. It is for all children who need it in Quebec and elsewhere.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I found it very ironic that the new shadow minister for civil liberties just tried to lecture this side of the House on not allowing the democratic process to take place when only hours ago, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan moved a concurrence motion in order to stall for time in the House. It is a tactic that we have seen year after year being played by the Conservatives to affect the agenda from moving forward. Now, once again, they are trying to do it on an issue that is as important as dental care for children under 14 years of age, who otherwise might not be able to afford it.

Could the minister comment as to whether he is equally frustrated as I am with respect to the fact that, on an issue that should enjoy the support of all members of the House, we seem to be seeing more Conservative tactics and delays?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, we obviously all feel the urgency of moving forward. December 1 is coming. This is when we would like children of low and middle-income families to benefit from better dental care.

By the way, about a third of all surgeries under anaesthesia for children between the ages of one and five are because children do not have access to proper dental care before they end up in emergency surgery. We know we can do better, and with the assistance of all members of the House, we know we will do better.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Madam Speaker, the minister knows that Ontario, as an example, has five programs that help low-income children access dental care. Dental care is a program that should fall under a provincial mandate for health.

I am very curious as to why the minister would not have collaborated with the provinces to enhance the programs instead of creating another program, more bureaucracy, more red tape, duplication and triplication of programs. Instead of helping more people in a more streamlined way, the Liberals just seem to be adding more layers of red tape when they could just be helping Canadians.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for pointing to the need of having more people having access to better dental care in Canada, including through complementing the work provinces and territories currently do. It is only about 4% of total dental care expenses that are currently covered by provinces and territories. About seven million Canadians, 30% of all Canadians, do not go to see a dentist every year, because they do not have the means to do so. Therefore, we need to do better, and we are doing this in collaboration with and in support to provinces and territories.

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

Madam Speaker, after listening to the minister's speech and reading the bill, I feel certain important elements are missing.

Basically, before any action is taken, there is a fundamental principle to respect. That is the jurisdiction of the provinces. Before doing anything, did the minister even consult or consider the possibility of simply transferring the money to the provinces?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, as my colleague suggests, there are considerable benefits for the provinces and territories in having the Government of Canada invest more in dental health. For example, it costs between $12,000 and $25,000 to treat a child who has a widespread infection because dental health problems were not resolved through preventive services before the child ends up in urgent care, which is very costly for the provinces and territories.

We know that we can do better. We look forward to discussing it in committee to ensure that this bill is as robust as possible.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, as much as I appreciate the minister moving forward with this bill and fast-tracking it, I am deeply disturbed by the Conservatives using all their tactics, like concurrence motions and whatnot, to delay children getting help for their dental work. I also feel the Liberals have not done enough to move on their promise on their mental health transfer, the four and a half billion dollars over five years.

Does the minister agree that the Liberals need to move rapidly also on their promise for a mental health transfer, because we are in the middle of a mental health crisis in Canada?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, the member is correct that we need to do more. We are doing more, in fact, because we have a $6-billion transfer already in place, which will be negotiated over the next few months, on home care, community care and mental health care. In long-term care, there will be an additional $3 billion. Just a few months ago, we announced an additional $2 billion for reducing backlogs in surgeries and diagnostics.

We know there will be more, and we are very proud to work with all members of the House who know and feel that we all need to do more.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to highlight the fact that members in this chamber are making comments about whether it is ironic, or whatever. The facts are the facts, and the fact on this piece of legislation is that it is being sped through this House at an alarming rate. We are not being given adequate time to even study this massive omnibus bill, which brings together multiple ministries, in a timely manner.

It is quite concerning to me that the government has moved time allocation on this, something it said it was not going to do because of some of the abuses that happened in previous governments, but here it is yet again, using this tool to try to force things through. Liberals are also making programming motions to force it through in committee.

Why are the Liberals so scared of this bill having adequate critique in committee?