Debates of May 6th, 2026

Silver Alert National Framework Act

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today, as someone who represents an area where a lot of attention has been drawn to the issue because of an outstanding individual in a very sad situation.

When we have discussions or debates inside the House, they take many different forms. On this legislation that has been brought forward, there is a great deal of interest. I am anticipating that after today, there might be another hour of debate, but eventually we will see the legislation go to committee. It reinforces something that the government has been talking a great deal about: Working in collaboration, we can do some wonderful things for Canadians.

Last week we had Bailey's law. With the support of both sides of the House, we were able to advance that legislation.

Today, in talking to the ministry, and the minister in particular, we understand and appreciate that here we have legislation that, in principle, the government can support. We would like to see the legislation go to committee. There are some areas of concern, not only for the government but for other stakeholders, that need to be discussed. I think it was important to hear the introducer of Bill C-263 indicate that she is open to amendments. We will get to some of those shortly.

We have seen ideas that can have a very real impact, and there is a sense of collaboration. When we have government and opposition working together, wonderful things can happen, whether it is a private member's bill or a government bill.

We have before us an example. Earl Moberg was 81 years old and had dementia. Back in December 2023, he went missing in Winnipeg. It was amazing, in of the bit of research I was able to do while the debate was going on, how the community came together in a very wonderful way to try to support the family.

Today, Britt Moberg is on Parliament Hill. She has been an ongoing, strong advocate and is ensuring that politicians at all levels, of all political stripes, will not forget about her dad. I give my best wishes to the family and the community that have been affected. I am thinking of the family and their friends in particular. There was a great deal of energy, and one can only imagine the frustration of not being able to have that final closure. I hope there will come a day when that final closure will be there for the family.

Dementia is a very serious health condition. It is one of the reasons that we, as a government, have invested in community involvement. Dementia community investments are something to which the Prime Minister and the government have provided substantial amounts of money, recognizing that we need more community engagement and more awareness on the dementia file.

When we think of jurisdictional responsibility, we often hear about provinces and the federal government, but all levels of government have a role to play. There is also the police, in this case. Whether urban or rural, usually law enforcement officers in one form or another will become engaged, along with community volunteers, community groups and, of course, family and friends.

We can only imagine the impact it has when a loved one with dementia, whether they are living in a family home or a short-term or long-term care facility, goes for a walk and does not return. There is a certain amount of alert awareness brought to the community, which has already been highlighted, and that is a good thing. What is being proposed about having it go through telephones, for example, in the same fashion as Amber alerts, has a great deal of merit. I am very much interested in hearing what others have to say.

I believe the Alzheimer Society of Canada estimated that in the next number of years, close to one million Canadians will have some form of dementia. We had another speaker talk about the level of frequency. Those are some legitimate numbers. As parliamentarians, in particular members of the standing committee that will have to deal with this, working with the department, we should be looking at the numbers to ensure that we put in the very best mechanism we can.

As it has been illustrated, a quick and safe recovery is a priority. We all want to see that. There is an obligation for it. The member proposing the piece of legislation has a limited number of questions that can be asked of her because of time limits, but my curiosity is about trying to narrow down how we can work with other jurisdictions in dealing with some of those raw numbers. These are absolutely critical for us to know so we can be as effective as we can in making sure there is a quick and safe recovery of every senior who goes missing. We owe it to the senior, and we owe it to the family and friends.

I have had a relatively recent experience with a gentleman I have known for over 30 years, Fred De Villa, a wonderful community member who was cared for in a very big way. In recent months, he sadly has passed. Dementia quickly consumed him and had such a significant negative impact, but the people around him, family and friends, wanted to be there for Fred in a very real and tangible way, as we see from family members who are there for loved ones with dementia, as well as from health care facilities and, more importantly, from the staff, with the caring attitudes and love they express to individuals with dementia.

It is important that we recognize and appreciate the efforts of so many who are there to directly support individuals who have succumbed to dementia, and we can support them in different ways. We can support them, as the government has done, financially, by providing supports for dementia community investment opportunities. I think there are three dozen projects out there today from the government. We can also look at legislation such as this one. At the very least, let us see it go to committee.

We also need to recognize that maybe there is more that other levels of government can do, and we do need to continue the collaboration. There is more that I would like to express in the second hour of debate.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

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

Health

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to be at the late show to follow up on some questions that need to be answered.

Last week, Conservatives called an emergency meeting of the health committee to investigate the $300 million the Liberals wasted on PrescribeIT. When we moved a motion to call on the Auditor General to investigate the program, the Liberal parliamentary secretary for health moved a motion to turn off the committee cameras.

My question is simple: Why did the Liberals turn off the cameras?

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, Canada Health Infoway has received funding from the Government of Canada for 25 years. That is 25 years of Liberal and Conservative governments alike recognizing that we need to come together with the provinces and territories to jointly fund an organization that promotes improving our health data infrastructure. This collaboration with provinces and territories is essential in a country like Canada, where health care falls under provincial jurisdiction. This means that we need to work together, alongside the provinces and territories, ensuring that our health care system responds to the needs of all Canadians.

That is why the previous government worked with Infoway and the provinces and territories to launch PrescribeIT in 2017. The federal government heard from our provincial and territorial partners that our health care data was being held back by a long-standing dependence on paper and fax to transmit prescriptions. We should not be relying on fax machines at a time when information is so easily accessible.

To try to address this challenge, the previous government provided seed funding to Health Canada Infoway for a program that would replace this outdated reliance on fax machines. This was never intended to be long-term, ongoing funding. From the beginning, the plan was for PrescribeIT to become self-sufficient. Nearly a decade later, it was clear this plan had failed. While nearly 11 million prescriptions were fulfilled last year using PrescribeIT, that number is only 5% of prescriptions across Canada. Doctors and pharmacies alike did not use the system.

Our new government came into office and took a look at what was working and what was not. Based on our careful review, we saw that there was no path for PrescribeIT to become financially sustainable, and we ended the funding for the program.

The Conservatives seem to think there is something wrong with ending a program that has low uptake, but the fact is that our new government takes its role as steward and custodian of taxpayer dollars very seriously, especially when it comes to health care. We are committed to focusing on resources where those dollars will deliver the greatest benefit to patients and our health care system.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am sort of confused, because yesterday at the health committee, the board chair of Health Infoway actually said that the program was a success, yet the Liberal government has been shutting it down. However, it still managed to spend $300 million and was still sending fax messages after 10 years.

I will go back to my original question: Why did the parliamentary secretary for health vote to turn off the cameras at the health committee while we were investigating the $300 million spent on PrescribeIT? Why did she turn off the cameras?

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it sounds like the Conservatives seem to think the government should continue funding programs that are not being used. A previous government worked with Infoway and our provincial and territorial partners to launch PrescribeIT, because that is what the provinces and territories said was needed. A decade later, it was clear that doctors and pharmacies were not using the system, so we ended funding for it.

Our government will always work to ensure we are delivering programs for policies that are smarter, faster and more effective for all Canadians. That means, in health care, that it works for everyone.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak about a scandal that is only growing in size, complexity and cost to taxpayers.

The Liberals' PrescribeIT was launched in 2016, promising to put every prescription in Canada into a digital system, allowing our pharmacies to move off their reliance on fax machines. At least $300 million in taxpayer dollars was spent in the following decade in pursuit of this goal. The result was complete failure. This taxpayer-funded boondoggle failed to fill even 5% of all prescriptions and cannot be shown to have replaced a single fax machine. It is now being shut down entirely, with the few partners who used it now likely to have to find someone who can reinstall a fax machine in 2026.

Canada did not invent e-prescription services. Health care systems and private firms around the world have upgraded their prescription systems from fax machines to serve doctors, pharmacists and patients better. We did not have to reinvent the wheel. Only in Canada and only under the Liberal government could yet another government-funded IT project create absolutely nothing of benefit to Canadians.

It is another ArriveCAN, except with an even higher price tag for taxpayers. In the time that I have spent in the House and on the health committee, it has become apparent to me how much better $300 million could have been spent on our health care system. It could have gone toward health transfers to British Columbia, to hire dozens more doctors, nurses and specialists, especially for rural regions like mine that suffer constant closures of many of our emergency rooms for lack of staff. It could have gone toward treatment beds, to give people with addiction in my province a path to recovery.

Instead, it was hundreds of millions handed off to a quasi-governmental agency, Canada Health Infoway, in partnership with Telus, with nothing to show for it and the vast majority of the IP created left in private hands rather than the public interest.

This disastrous waste of taxpayer money on the Liberals' $300-million PrescribeIT deserves a full investigation but Conservative attempts to do so have been stonewalled every step of the way. When I questioned Michael Green, the CEO in charge of the agency that oversaw PrescribeIT, Canada Health Infoway, about what went wrong, he could not provide a straight answer despite having worked on the failed Liberal program for 10 years.

When I asked how much he was paid, he refused to answer, saying that it was in the public record, but, as his own board chair later admitted, that was a lie. Mr. Green's compensation was not public at that time. There is a reason he wanted it that way. He was paid almost $900,000 when we include the hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses and a taxpayer-funded car.

Between our first and last meetings on this topic, the board of Canada Health Infoway fired Mr. Green to prevent him from returning to answer questions.

Was the $300 million spent on PrescribeIT a good use of taxpayer dollars, considering that it did not permanently eliminate a single fax machine?

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for her question, and I will say many of the things to her that I said to the member's colleagues.

As my colleague knows, PrescribeIT was launched by the previous government in collaboration with Canada Health Infoway, the provinces and territories because it saw that there was a need for it. The provinces and territories wanted to move doctors and pharmacies away from using fax machines and toward a system where important health care data could be sent electronically.

Infoway was chosen for the job because it had received funding from Liberal and Conservative governments alike since 2001. The organization has long been a place for federal, provincial and territorial governments to come together to work on improving Canada's health data infrastructure. The resulting program, PrescribeIT, was launched in 2017, following extensive consultations with the provinces and territories.

It is important to note that the goal was never to have the federal government fund PrescribeIT indefinitely. From the outset, the plan was for the program to be self-funded over time. This meant that, when our new government came into office last year, we took a hard look at what was working and what was not working. We take our responsibility as stewards and watchdogs for taxpayer dollars very seriously. We saw that PrescribeIT did not have the level of pick up that was expected when it launched nearly a decade ago.

As was mentioned, only 5% of prescriptions were filled using the system. Rather than continuing to fund a program that no one was using, we decided to end funding for PrescribeIT. At a time when Canadians expect that we will spend health care dollars wisely and carefully, we wanted to make sure that we were investing taxpayer money in a way that delivers the greatest benefit to patients and the health system alike.

Are there questions about the future of lnfoway following this decision? Of course there are. That is why we are refocusing government spending and ensuring that Canada Health lnfoway focuses on what it was intended to do, which is to build up Canada's health data infrastructure and support the development of national health data standards. This work is important, and it speaks to the future of Canada's health care system.

Canadians deserve and expect a system that meets their needs and adapts to the world as the flow of information changes. Our government will always be there for Canadians, for our health care sector, and for our provincial and territorial partners, to make sure that we are helping to deliver health care in a way that puts the needs of patients first.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, what Canadians deserve is transparency. Conservatives want to get to the bottom of how $300 million of taxpayer money was wasted on this project, PrescribeIT.

When Conservatives demanded that Mr. Green return to the committee to account for the millions of tax dollars that he had been paid for no results, the Liberals voted us down. When the Bloc moved to have the Liberal health minister appear within the next month to testify to her role in this scandal, Liberals ended our meeting entirely. When Conservatives moved to call on the Auditor General of Canada, a non-partisan official, to investigate, the Liberals moved to turn off the camera and seal the records of that committee for the next 30 years.

My question is simple: Why did the Liberals turn off the camera and seal the records of that meeting for the next 30 years?

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let us focus on the facts of this situation. The previous government launched a program in 2017 that was intended to become self-sufficient over time. After 10 years, it was clear that doctors and pharmacists were not using the program and that it had no path to self-sufficiency. As our government takes its role of defending taxpayer dollars seriously, we decided to end funding for the program.

Our new government will always make sure that we are focusing resources and investments so they deliver the greatest benefit to patients and our health care system.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South not being present to raise during Adjournment Proceedings the matter for which notice has been given, the notice is deemed withdrawn.

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:55 p.m.)