Debates of Feb. 14th, 2022

Resuming Debate on Government Business No. 8—Proceedings on Bill C‑10

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, there is a lot to be said on making sure there is a proper accounting at committee of value for money to make sure these scarce dollars are being put to the best use. In British Columbia, we do not even have access to rapid testing, so there will be questions about whether there is value for money in this case.

I want to ask the member about competency, because the government could have made this into a supply bill. It easily could have added it to the estimates or the supplementary estimates, yet it has done this expenditure through an actual bill.

Why does the member think the government has done that? Is it because it cannot budget? Was it because the Prime Minister needed to pull a COVID rabbit out of his hat so he could tell the provinces to look at what the government is doing for them? I would like to find out what the member has to say about the unique nature of this particular proposal and why it was not budgeted for through the usual processes.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, there are a couple of issues here. As my hon. colleague said the other day, there is unfortunately no vaccine for Liberal budgeting incompetence; we wish there were.

As I said, this is a veritable ton of money. If we stacked dollar bills, we would have 30 metres of dollar bills for this $2.5 billion. It is important to remember that it is not an insignificant amount of money. The other part is that my Liberal colleagues do realize the tide is turning in their hard-handed measures, and as they see revolt and dissent inside their own caucus, they realize that is also the mood of Canadians.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to know one thing.

My colleague said that the Conservatives are not opposed to vaccination. As we know, after the SARS crisis in 2003, the Naylor report criticized Canada for not having the capacity to manufacture vaccines. Of all the G7 countries, Canada is the only one that does not manufacture vaccines domestically. That is in part the result of the Trudeau government's inaction.

We lost four or five months of fighting COVID with a vaccine because of the Trudeau government's inaction. On August 10, 2021, the government announced that Moderna would set up a plant in Canada, likely in Montreal, which is what we were hoping for. However, the Trudeau government's investments will not do much—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. The hon. member mentioned the Prime Minister's name.

I know that he knows the rules of the House. I would therefore remind him not to do that.

I would like him to finish his remarks by asking his question.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the following.

Would it not have been a big help if the Liberal government had taken action and we were able to manufacture vaccines in Quebec or Canada?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, certainly we have spoken about domestic capacity in this House previously, as well as the shocking and astonishing lack of domestic capacity, given that we could have an ability here to mobilize to not only create and manufacture tests in Canada but also to produce vaccines and antivirals.

Members on this side of the House have spoken about that multiple times, as well as the shame in not respecting the innovation and intelligence of the Canadian community, which would be more than happy. I also think that before the wedge was driven by the Liberal government, our own vaccines could have been an excellent way to encourage more Canadians to be immunized, in the sense that they would have had a homegrown vaccine. I think that would have been an excellent thing. Unfortunately, we are two years into this pandemic and we still have no domestic production of vaccines, and none in sight, due to the incompetence of the government.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am very perplexed by the position of the Conservative Party. They opposed mandatory vaccination in the chamber 90 days ago, instead proposing rapid testing of MPs as a secure method of our attending here. As I listen to my hon. colleague, he seems to be calling into question the very efficacy and validity of testing. He seems to suggest that testing should be a decision made by the health committee.

What is the position of the Conservative Party? Do its members believe that access to testing is an important way to deal with the current pandemic, or do they question the science of testing?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, I think it is important that people begin to understand that science does change and that it is dynamic. I think it is important to have an opportunity to hear what the science is, and I believe the health committee is an excellent way to do that. If the science is correct and rapid testing is useful and appropriate, why would the Conservatives not support that? However, and I cannot understand why my hon. colleagues want to fight about this, if the science is not correct, then why would we not admit that? What is there to hide behind? This is $2.5 billion.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Science is not an opinion.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order.

It is not time for debate anymore, and the hon. parliamentary secretary knows full well that if she has questions and comments, she should wait for the appropriate time to ask those or make those.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

I rise today in the House to speak to Bill C-10, an act respecting certain measures related to COVID-19. This bill was introduced by the member for Québec and is currently at second reading.

What is the purpose of this bill?

First, this bill would authorize the Minister of Health to make payments of up to $2.5 billion for any expenses incurred in relation to coronavirus disease tests.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I must interrupt the member because there seems to be a problem with his microphone.

It is working now.

The hon. member for Rivière‑des‑Mille‑Îles.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will continue.

Bill C‑10's main purpose is to authorize the Minister of Health to pay up to $2.5 billion for expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2022, in relation to coronavirus disease tests.

Second, it authorizes the Minister of Health to transfer to any province or territory, or to any body or person in Canada, any coronavirus disease tests or instruments used in relation to those tests acquired by Her Majesty in right of Canada on or after April 1, 2021.

Basically, Bill C‑10 provides a one-time sum of up to $2.5 billion to the provinces and territories for testing-related expenses as of January 1, 2022.

It goes without saying that the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C‑10. As our leader once put it so eloquently, “You can't be against apple pie”.

After all, that money is to help the provinces and Quebec absorb extra pandemic-related costs. The government itself has already boosted health transfers by $5 billion in this Parliament alone: $4 billion for urgent health care system needs and another billion for the vaccination campaign.

These amounts are significant; we acknowledge that. However, they are still not nearly enough to meet the Bloc Québécois's calls to increase health transfers to 35%, rather than the current 22%. It is clear that this government is using the pandemic to postpone the heavy lifting that will be needed to negotiate health transfers.

We in the Bloc Québécois see this increase as urgent. It has been called for by the Quebec National Assembly, the Council of the Federation, health care workers through their union, and 85% of Quebeckers and Canadians, according to a recent Leger poll. Even the Liberal member for Louis-Hébert considers his own party's position on this matter untenable.

What will it take for the government to at least sit down with the premiers to negotiate?

Personally I think this shows a lack of respect. It feels as though we are being taken for fools. The Liberal government is the only one that does not see that the Quebec and other provincial governments must be able to depend on stable, predictable and adequate funding to fight this pandemic effectively. I repeat, “stable, predictable and adequate”.

The Liberal government's obsession with centralizing powers and its tendency to interfere are offensive. Quebec delivers all health care services, and this pandemic has obviously weighed heavily on Quebec's health care system.

Quebeckers pay taxes to Ottawa. Unfortunately, the Liberals are turning a deaf ear to our demands, but it is still our money. The federal machine would not work, would not exist, if it were not for the taxes from the provinces.

The Bloc Québécois is calling on the federal government to acknowledge that fact and treat Quebec and the provinces with the respect and deference they deserve. The Bloc is calling on the federal government to plan ahead and give the provinces their fair share, instead of lagging behind and watching from the sidelines.

As we know, pandemics are here for good. There will be more. The Director-General of the World Health Organization said that the pandemic will not end until the rich countries stop monopolizing all the vaccines. Canada, like several wealthy countries, emptied the shelves of the global vaccine market. It acted urgently to protect the public, and far be it from me to criticize it for that.

However, now that there are enough vaccines available for Quebeckers and Canadians, we have a duty of solidarity to those who are not lucky enough to have our collective wealth.

The Bloc Québécois is calling on the federal government to ramp up its efforts so that less fortunate countries can benefit from vaccines.

As I was saying, unfortunately, it is probable that this pandemic will last for some time and that more will emerge in the future. The federal government must therefore plan ahead—an important phrase—and provide Quebec and the provinces with the financial means to manage this crisis and all those that will follow.

The Bloc Québécois knows how to improve this situation. It is not complicated: The government must increase provincial health transfers. Why does the federal government always wait for things to become a crisis before doing what needs to be done? Why on earth is it not doing what is required when we are in the midst of the crisis? This government does not know how to plan ahead, and the Prime Minister does not know how to lead. In my opinion, the protests that have been paralyzing Ottawa for almost three weeks provide yet more proof of these two serious flaws.

Quebec is fortunate to have one of the best health care systems in the world. The next step is to improve what we have. The increase in health transfers that we are calling for will not solve all our problems instantaneously, but it is nevertheless a crucial step in the process of building a universal, public and high-quality health care system worthy of a G7 nation.

Simply put, I think that the Liberal government's stubbornness during this crisis has only highlighted the urgent need for Quebec to take its economic future into its own hands. Jacques Parizeau, may he rest in peace, said that he believed that the main reason Quebec should become independent was so that it could take responsibility for itself in a democracy in which the government is fully accountable to its citizens. In an ideal world, the Quebec government would be the only one responsible for collecting taxes from Quebeckers, and it would not need the the approval of a foreign parliament to govern itself as it sees fit. It also goes without saying that the Quebec government would be fully and completely accountable to its citizens.

Today, the fact that the Liberals will not listen to the call for health transfers reminds everyone why the Bloc Québécois is so necessary and why independence is so desirable.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is no surprise the Bloc raises the issue of health care transfers. However, there is a fundamental disagreement I have with my friends in the Bloc, which is that the constituents I represent, and I would argue they are very much reflective of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, feel that the national government does have a very important role to play in health care. It would be highly irresponsible, I would argue, to do nothing but just hand money over.

There are things that we can learn through this pandemic, such as with the long-term care facilities and the need for national standards. There are other issues of mental health and so many other aspects. Would the member not recognize that there are many people across Canada, including in the province of Quebec, who do want to see the national government play more of a role than just giving cash?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, in answer to my esteemed colleague, I would say that we are the ones who manage health in Quebec. We are the ones who manage people like doctors, nurses, support workers and respiratory therapists in Quebec. Health falls under Quebec's jurisdiction. Yes, the federal government's only role is to distribute money. Health falls under our jurisdiction. We are the ones with the expertise.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Speaker, my riding, Laurentides—Labelle, and my colleague's riding, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, are both in the Laurentian region. The health care network in the Laurentian region is in urgent need of assistance.

People who work in this sector point out that there is a labour shortage across the region. There is no money for staffing or modernization. Although I trust that there will be health transfers, I would like to ask my colleague what would happen if Quebec's health care network, in particular in the Laurentian region, did not receive health transfers.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague has highlighted a major problem in both of our ridings.

The Lower Laurentians are experiencing a drastic labour shortage, but that is not the only problem. The most expensive aspects of the medical system are infrastructure and equipment, which are becoming increasingly expensive and sophisticated.

The transfers could help with modernizing equipment and, in the case of Lachute and Saint‑Eustache, expand the hospitals, which would address a serious problem.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would be happy to talk about health care, the health care system and the things we could do to help. What we are talking about today is whether we should be taking this bill to committee to discuss those things that are important. As the provinces go into cancelling the restrictive COVID measures, there is the potential for the uptake of rapid tests to rapidly decline.

What is important is that we find out what the financial exposure is going to be so that, if there is money needed and there are changes to be done, we can see whether we would be able to deal with that.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I did not quite catch my colleague's question, but I will say that $2.5 billion is not the end of the world. In my opinion, this is an urgent and important investment.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by wishing all of our colleagues a happy Valentine's Day, and I hope they will be able to celebrate it even though many of them are in Parliament, far away from their partners. Nonetheless, I wish them a very happy Valentines Day.

Today, I am pleased to be speaking about Bill C-10, which authorizes a one-time payment of up to $2.5 billion to be made to the provinces and territories for any expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2022, in relation to COVID-19 tests. The bill also allows the Minister of Health to transfer tests and instruments used in relation to those tests acquired on or after April 1, 2021, to any province or territory, or to any body or person in Canada.

This spending is obviously necessary, since health care costs are skyrocketing nationwide. Health care spending grew by 12.8% in 2020, approximately three times the average growth rate from previous years, and 2021 saw record spending.

The government played a role in this increase, of course, by increasing health transfers by $5 billion during the pandemic. Of this amount, $4 billion went to meeting urgent needs in the health care system, and $1 billion was invested in the vaccination rollout. This may seem like a lot of money, and it is. It undoubtedly covers some of the additional expenses generated by the health crisis, but only a fraction, considering that more than $30 billion was needed to finance pandemic-related activities in 2020 alone. These one-time payments are simply a band-aid solution. They do not address the real problem, which is the lack of structural health care funding. This underfunding is one of the major reasons that health care workers in Quebec and across Canada are in distress. They lack the resources to fight the waves that have been hitting us for the past two years.

I would like to reiterate the Bloc Québécois's demand, which has united Quebec and the provinces in a manner rarely seen. Even the National Assembly is unanimous. The federal government must increase its contribution to overall health care costs from 22% to 35%, or from $42 billion to $70 billion. If the federal government is to maintain its 35% contribution, which is far lower than the 50% it used to pay up until the 1980s, the transfers will have to be indexed at 6%. This annual indexation will be necessary to offset the costs associated with population aging, drug costs and technological advances.

Our request that the federal government increase its contribution to health care to 35% of overall costs is reasonable and realistic. The Conference Board of Canada proved that this increase will be economically viable for both the federal and provincial governments. Until the health care systems of Quebec and the provinces are adequately funded, the government will have the Bloc Québécois to deal with. We will not stop pressing this demand, since it is the key condition for ending the COVID-19 crisis once and for all.

We need to face the truth and think about the future. It will take many years and a lot of resources to catch up with the backlog that was already a problem in our health care system before the first outbreaks and that will only get worse with the delays currently caused by the pandemic.

My colleagues and I call on the government to start negotiations on health transfers immediately in order to “strengthen our universal public health system,” as the Minister of Health’s mandate letter clearly states.

I would also like to take this opportunity to remind my colleagues of something I have mentioned before in the House in previous speeches. The fight against COVID-19 will continue as long as Canada does not provide support for the global vaccination effort, especially in developing countries. All of the experts we had the opportunity to talk to are unanimous: As long as the pandemic is not over everywhere, it will continue to threaten us here.

Of course, Canada contributes to the various global vaccination initiatives of the World Health Organization. However, it can and must do more. It must provide logistical support for developing countries so that the vaccines can be efficiently distributed to the population. It must donate its surplus doses in a predictable manner in order to allow the receiving countries to administer them within a reasonable time frame.

The federal government must also stop saying that it is open to lifting the patents on the vaccines and treatments while voting against the proposal when it comes time to take an official stand. The Bloc is asking the government to play a leadership role by openly taking a stand in favour of lifting the patents at the next meeting of the World Trade Organization on the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS.

These past two years have also unequivocally shown the importance and urgency of improving the independence and reliability of our supply chains. This pandemic will not be our last, especially in this era of climate change.

An analysis of the challenges we have faced since the initial outbreaks makes it clear that we must rebuild Quebec’s pharmaceutical sector. We need targeted tax incentives to promote the establishment of biopharmaceutical research and production centres. Partnerships between our university research centres and industry must be encouraged through support for issue tables focused on these goals, and we must continue increasing research budgets.

The consolidation of our supply chains will ensure, among other things, that our national emergency reserve is supplied by Canadian providers. Shortages of rapid tests like we saw last December are unacceptable when the pandemic has been going on for almost two years. Local production would allow us a certain independence from foreign suppliers, who are driven solely by the laws of supply and demand, and help manage our reserves so as to ensure that we have sufficient supplies for our needs and can prevent loss by channelling our surplus doses to NGOs that will make good use of them.

The investments provided for in Bill C-10 are essential, but we expect the government to immediately start tackling the numerous other challenges we face. We have an opportunity here to develop a strategic economic sector while taking drastic and appropriate action to strengthen our health care systems, the institutions that are the very foundation of our social contract and that have been hit hard. I urge the federal government not to miss the boat.

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

Madam Speaker, we have arrived at many of the same conclusions. Conservative cuts to health transfers did a lot of damage, and the Liberals only compounded the error, which bears repeating.

The health care system is under pressure, and the federal government needs to increase transfer payments in a sustainable, stable and permanent manner. We are aware of this, and we agree.

There is also another solution for saving money. Does my colleague agree with the FTQ, the CSN, the CSQ and the Union des consommateurs du Québec that we need a truly universal public pharmacare program that will reduce the cost of drugs for people, businesses and our health care network?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, we agree with the principle of a public pharmacare program. However, Quebec is often well ahead of Canada and the provinces when it comes to social programs.

When the federal proposal clearly includes the right to withdraw with full financial compensation, we will vote in favour. We absolutely support the fact that Canada needs to improve its plan, provided that Quebec can get its hands on its share of the money and improve its own programs.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, and I wish him a happy Valentine’s Day as well.

I would like to know why we have seen a dramatic change in health transfers since the 1960s. We are well aware that what the federal government was really interested in was the world exchanges, what was happening in international markets and its position on the international stage. I would like my colleague to tell me how, all of a sudden, what was a noble gesture on the federal government’s part became a proposal to reduce health transfers, but with conditions.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, Ottawa is always trying to centralize powers.

Canada is increasingly evolving into a unitary state. It is trying to infringe on jurisdictions that are often not its own.

In this instance, we are told that the government is going to move forward but only on the condition that all kinds of programs and supports are created that allow it to encroach on Quebec's jurisdictions. By adding conditions to the funding, the government is condemning Quebec, which has been engaged in state building since the 1960s, to once again becoming a province like any other that is permanently obsessed with funding its health care system. Quebec will be forced to abandon all of its other efforts.

It is becoming more difficult to build our nation state as the home of the Quebec nation because the province is being fiscally starved.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, this bill is two paragraphs long. I agree with my hon. colleague that we need more money in the health care system. I believe in further transfers, but this would give $2.5 billion to buy rapid tests that would then be distributed to the provinces.

I am just wondering whether my colleague agrees with that. Does he think there is any reason why this should be slowed down? Does he see any problem with the intent behind this bill?