Lost his last election, in 2000, with 22% of the vote.
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
My point is the provinces should be listened to and that is not happening. All the Reform Party is trying to do is make recommendations on ways and means by which we can deliver a service at a lower cost which is still effective and which still respects the principles of the health act. That is what the Reform Party is about, not what the hon. member for Mississauga South preaches every time he stands up.
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I am sure you have shared this, because with your background as a lawyer you must have met a lot of people in your lifetime who really like to dish it out. They really like to put the knife into people. They just love it. However, when the opportunity comes for them to have to listen for a while, boy, they have a thin shell. They cannot take it. These people were in opposition for so long that they still have that tender shell around them. When they were on this side they said outlandish things. They made promises. To get elected they even promised to quit if the GST was not replaced. It still has not been replaced.
We are debating the organization of the Department of Health as if we do not have one. Canada does not have a Department of Health, ladies and gentlemen. We have to do something about it. We have to pass a bill fast to create a Department of Health. We have to do it quickly because it will bring in efficiencies, it will be effective and it will deliver services. That is important. Give me a break. We have a Department of Health and Canadians know it.
We have a system which is rupturing. It is breaking apart. What we have to do is find a way to help those people who need help in a way which is quick, effective and efficient. That will not be done by reducing the funds and saying to the provinces: "You guys handle it". The way to do it is to say to the provinces: "We know we are in a dilemma. We cannot give you as much money as we have been. We have to give you less. Are there ways you can still deliver the services? We will be flexible". The Prime Minister promised flexible federalism and the only things he is flexible about are his travel arrangements.
We have to let the provinces come up with suggestions and work with them. Will we still have the same health minister if there is a new Department of Health?
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
I have my troops here now. One for one. You guys go at it and I will just talk to the Speaker.
Seriously, we have a major problem in health care. We have a solution called medicare plus. We have a solution that will allow people to have access to the health care they need at the lowest possible cost and the maximum level of service possible. Unlike this government, which just keeps harping about giving them less and they should do with less, we have something to offer.
If the member for Mississauga South really wants to understand before the next time he gets up and points a finger at the Reform Party and says they want to do this, they want to do that, let me tell him two things.
One, the Reform Party has a plan. He would be well advised to read it, because members in his constituency are going to get a copy of it. He had better be able to answer why it is not good and why it will not work for the people who are sick in his riding and are in line ups and are dying, rather than taking cheap political shots in this House.
Two, let me tell him another thing. The time of putting people down the way he does, as he has done for two years, every time I speak about remuneration, salaries, or any time I talk about health care-
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
I know what sexual harassment is, but I have never really felt verbal harassment.
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
I am used to that.
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
It is obvious that I have the government listening to me, but those members really do not want to listen, they just want to interject. That is all right, I am used to that.
Department Of Health Act November 7th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to try to get a point clarified.
I do not know why we are debating the creation of a Department of Health. Do we not have a Department of Health? Do we not have a Minister of Health? Is this the kind of legislation we should be debating in this House, talking about things that already exist? Did not Kim Campbell set it up two years ago and it has already been operating? Is this the best this government can offer? I cannot believe we are taking up two hours voting for the creation of a Department of Health that already exists.
Why does this government not get on with governing the country and providing the provinces with some leadership? Government members know very well that all the provinces are angry that we almost lost one province and this country almost broke up. Why do they not do something about the promises they made during the referendum campaign and get on with some serious legislation that would help this country?
Mr. Speaker, do you really think that debating this bill and creating the Department of Health will now make the province of Quebec want to vote to stay in Canada, that it is going to convince the yes voters to vote no because this is exactly what they were looking for from the Government of Canada? The Prime Minister is now off on another trip. I do not understand what this government is all about.
Where does the member for Mississauga South get off attacking the Reform Party on its health care position in an aside from his scripted speech that was written by the department, as if our health care position is out to destroy health care in Canada. Either the member does not understand our platform or the issue, which is more likely the case, or he has nothing better to do.
Our party has put forth some concrete suggestions to reform health care in this country. I find it ironic that this government prides itself in introducing the health care act, that it is proud of the health care act to the degree it keeps preaching about some of the fundamentals, that it will protect health care for Canadians in terms of accessibility, portability, affordability, and equal access to all, unlike the Reform Party which favours a two tier system and would kill health care. What is the government afraid of in terms of the Reform Party?
We also want to preserve all of the items in the Canada Health Act. However, the one element the government conveniently forgets and the one principle the Liberal government conveniently leaves out of this equation is that in the Canada Health Act it promised to pay for 50 per cent of the services, 50 per cent of the cost of the program. It has now reduced it to 27 per cent.
This wonderful new Minister of Finance who cannot balance a budget and this new wonderful Minister of Human Resources Development are now going to further reduce what they give to the provinces for health care; they are going to further reduce what they give the provinces for education. They are saying to the provinces: "You must stick by these principles; you have to retain this level of services and we are going to give you less money to do it".
If by chance the provincial governments decide to be creative enough to come up with a method of delivering the same level of service with less money, of reducing the line ups at no cost to the federal government, they cannot do it because that is the American style. The government says: "Listen to us. We know best because we are the federal government".
This is a stubborn headed type of attitude that is tearing this country apart at the seams. It makes me mad to come here as an Albertan and see those people sit on that side of the House and not
listen to concrete suggestions, to always put them down and say we are destroying everything. We are here to offer constructive alternatives.
When it comes to health care, we want and need to recognize that the level of support and the level of funding for the various social programs we have are of such a high level that we can no longer afford to sustain spending at these levels. Therefore we must all look at ways and means of reducing the costs while delivering an effective service, ways and means of getting people in and through the system who really need attention rather than preventing them from moving forward.
Let me talk about the principle this government will not talk about. It is out of money; it is broke. Yet it still talks about all the wonderful things it can do for the people of Canada. Mr. Speaker, I know we are not supposed to use certain words, so I will try to get the word right. That is a gross misrepresentation and a lack of intellectual honesty in terms of the Canadian public. Here we have people who are supposed to be responsible, who are supposed to be giving Canadians what they need, yet they play politics rather than play with the facts and the reality of the situation.
Why not have a good debate and a discussion about issues like topping up a health care system that badly needs topping up with a system of an insurance policy in place in provinces if a person wants to do that to have access and pay for certain operations? If somebody's life is saved, what is really wrong with that? Why not? Do the rich not deserve as much as the poor?
I do not understand the debate the Liberals always use. Anything that we suggest always favours the rich and is against the poor. We are talking about lives. Anybody in this country who needs attention should get that attention. We are trying to suggest ways and means by which they can get it quicker, so they can get at the point of service in a way that saves them, that reduces the line ups and the pressures, a complete overhaul of the system itself, the inefficiencies in hospitals, the inefficiencies of visiting doctors and how they go through their check-ups.
If this government really wants to do its job and do it well, why does it not just stop collecting money for health care, impose the rules and regulations by which the services must be delivered in all the provinces, and get back to doing what a government should do? Why does it not get into the area of regulations on behalf of all Canadians coast to coast so that it is standard, portable, accessible, all these things, but leave the collection of the funds and cancel this stupid Department of Health and leave the raising of the moneys for the services to the provinces? This government takes $2 out of every $5 it collects for health care and blows it on a bureaucracy that is ill-prepared to deliver the services in all the regions of Canada.
Let us stop this mismanagement of government programs. The federal government has to get out of certain areas. These guys and
gals are too proud to recognize that the federal government is intruding into a lot of people's lives. It is intruding in such a way that its members are imposing their perceived-
The Economy November 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, let me try to keep the finance minister's feet to the fire.
Two years ago I ran to get rid of a government that ran up a $38 billion deficit. Here we are two years later and nothing has changed. We are still bringing in deficits in the $35 billion to $38 billion range.
Once again for the good of Canada, for the good of the global market, when will this finance minister-if he is not capable, step aside-present a budget that is clear, that sets out a target as to when we will be at a zero deficit? When will he quit adding to the problem and quit playing his games with our future?
The Economy November 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, we both know and a lot of Canadians know there are a lot of problems in this country, not the least of which are the high levels of taxation and the huge debt this finance minister is proud to add to at the rate $37.5 billion per year.
He said this on Wednesday: "This is a marked improvement in the fiscal situation and one which illustrates that making forecasts based on prudent assumptions will pay off. This is another good news report".
I am glad his family business is in trust because if he ran his business the way he runs the country he would be broke.
When will the finance minister do the responsible thing and present a balanced budget to all Canadians?
Points Of Order November 2nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, in light of what you had to do today in naming two members, does it mean that because the numbers have changed that we are now the official opposition?