Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my great colleague from Cloverdale—Langley City.
In hearing the debates and discussions, I would say we all know this is a tough topic to talk about. It is an issue that affects everyone deeply. I am not here to change anyone's mind; I am here to raise concerns that I see on this issue.
I want to start by first sharing a story with the House. In 2014, my uncle was admitted to the hospital and then was moved to the ICU. He was not breathing on his own and had internal bleeding. The doctors said to us that his time was up and that he was not going to make it. We were told to make the funeral arrangements. My cousin and I went to the funeral home, booked the funeral, blew his picture up for the ceremony and called our family in the U.K. We were by his side for what we thought were his last moments.
The doctor then asked us if the family was done spending time with the patient, and we said no. She said she wanted us to witness his transition into his new life. My aunt asked what the doctor meant by “new life”. The doctor said he was not going to make it. He had internal bleeding in his brain, he was not breathing and he was in the ICU. My aunt said that God brought him in and God would take him out. Thankfully she said that, because he was alive for 12 years after that. He just passed away in August. He got to see his children's wedding, and he got to play with his grandkids. Those are moments with him that we will never forget. Had we taken the doctor's advice back then, he would not have been with us for them.
I was in the emergency room of another hospital, where people go to get help, and on the wall was a massive TV that asked, “Have you considered MAID?” Patients go to hospitals to get help and support, yet the hospital was pushing MAID.
This is a very touchy topic for everyone. I understand that the Liberals are now having conversations on this topic, and that is fine, but in this bill, there are two main components. One is the mental illness side and the other is advance requests. All parliamentarians have said that mental illness should not be the sole illness when it comes to MAID. We all agreed to it, yet the Liberals decided to vote that down a few weeks ago. They had the opportunity to have a bill that would satisfy the Supreme Court's requirements and meet the deadline for 2027, but they voted it down.
We all agree on the mental illness component in this bill. The Conservatives are united on that. That is why we have asked the government to work with us. We should work together and pass the bill. We should also split the bill. We all agree on the mental illness side, which would take care of the time constraint being put on us and would save lives, but the Liberals said, no, they would not do that. They have added the advance request to the equation. They are two separate issues that require two separate discussions.
I understand that the Liberals want to rush this bill through, but Canadians want an open, honest discussion. We want to bring in medical experts, provincial leaders, researchers, families, veterans and folks from indigenous communities to share opinions. The member opposite said that we have to get this right. Absolutely, we do. Let us put the mental illness side to rest. We all support it, and we would pass it tomorrow if the Liberals had a desire to do that. We would pass it at all stages tomorrow so we could focus on the issues that are still outstanding on advance requests. That seems like a common-sense idea. That seems like the right thing to do.
The statistics on MAID are insane. In Canada, 5% of all deaths are by MAID. Over 5% is one in 20. One in 10 people has said they know someone who has been offered MAID for a treatable condition. Safeguards have to be in place. We need to make sure there are safeguards protecting the most vulnerable.
I have talked to provincial leaders and spoken to doctors about the bill who are saying to hold on and are asking what the rush is. They ask, “Why are they combining these two issues into one vote?” They are confused. I understand that my colleague was talking about the studies the Liberals have done, so they should not be afraid to get back to the table and have a lengthy debate about this and call in the experts. There are two separate issues, and there are provincial jurisdictional concerns as well.
When I have conversations with members of the party opposite, they tell me that there might be some patchwork. Some provinces might buy into it and some might not, and that is a problem as well. We want to have a unified approach when it comes to these issues.
The other challenge we have is that MAID cannot be a substitute for bad health care. I understand that it is a provincial responsibility, but we have to make sure that any legislation we put forward can handle the current system. Sixty-three per cent of Canadians believe we are in a state of crisis when it comes to our health care. Canada has one of the worst wait times in the world for surgeries. We do not want people to feel so pressured and burdened when looking at the state of health care that they decide to end their lives. We have heard stories of that already, and it is a huge concern for us. MAID cannot be a substitute for bad health care.
I also believe that the language being used in this legislation could be tightened up. There is lots of room for amendments, but it has to go back to the drawing board. We have to have these conversations. We have to have these discussions. Again, we have offered the Liberals that solution. We have told them we will work with them. We made it very clear that this is not about party politics. Let us not make it about party politics. Let us make it about the lives of people, the innocent and vulnerable, who need that support. That will be my request going forward in this debate.
Conservatives are united on this: please, split the bill. Give us the time we need to study it. If we get this wrong, lives will be lost. This is a matter of life and death. I know my colleagues across the aisle agree that we have to get this right. They have the opportunity to do what is right to get this bill done. We have a responsibility as parliamentarians to protect the most vulnerable. It is our responsibility. We have to look at all options on this.
If someone needs help, we should have a health care system that supports them. We should be giving them care. We should be giving them the tools they need to get their lives back. If those do not exist, people will be pushed toward something they do not want to do. We do not want to be in a situation where we are taking away lives.
I always say that a person's worth should never be measured by their illness, their disability, their age or their need for care. I generally believe in that. I believe in the sanctity of human life. I believe that when someone is struggling, we should be there for them. We should be a country that is united in providing that care.
As we progress, as we have conversations and debates, my only ask, again, of the Liberal government is to split the bill. Lives are at stake. Let us slow down. Irrespective of what side someone is on, whether they support advance requests or not, there are legitimate concerns with this bill the way it is written. We need the time and the expertise from across the board to analyze this so we do not lose any lives. Every single day that I stand in this House, that I have the honour of serving our country, I will fight for that.