Allan Rock

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, now we see what the source of the problem is. The Reform Party has not read the fourth volume of the report.

My point is that it is a careful and detailed report which indeed I have read. Mr. Justice Krever went through the history of this whole matter, examined what happened and when. It was very clear that from and after early 1986 those responsible for the system should have acted. They did not. People were harmed. The principle on which we are offering cash payments is not because people became sick. We do not do that in this country. We cannot. We are offering cash payments because there was fault.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Justice Krever wrote four volumes of the report. If the member will look at them he will see that it was clear that by early 1986 the governments and those responsible for the blood system should have put tests in place and did not.

Canadians understand there is a difference between someone who is harmed when we could have prevented it and someone who faces a risk inherent in the clinical medical system. They also understand that if we offer cash to people who become ill just because they become ill, we cannot go on.

Governments have taken the tough decision to make that distinction and do the right thing.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have an agreement with the provinces and I have heard no province say it is abandoning that agreement.

The agreement calls on both levels of government to contribute a sum of money to be offered to people who were harmed when it could have been prevented.

Let us remember the basis of this. Money or damages or cash payments are being offered to people who were harmed when it could have been prevented. That is what is at issue here. For those who were infected before when it could not have been prevented, we are taking a different approach.

The Canadian people support that and I invite the member and his colleagues to join with us in our ambitious agenda to strengthen medicare to provide—

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, for the last five weeks in this House we have stood on the principle that governments should pay cash compensation when they have caused damages and when those responsible for the system could and should have acted. That is an important principle.

It is true to say that in the last couple of days some of the health ministers and some of the premiers of this country have departed from that principle, but Canadians will see that for what it is. They depart from the principle but they then say that Ottawa must pay, not them. It is easy to cry crocodile tears and then say that someone else should be responsible.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, nothing is less edifying for the people of Canada than to see this kind of display of name calling.

People have watched the theatre over there this week. They have seen the member for Macleod, that party's health critic, who has become the chief ambulance chaser for the opposition. They have seen the opposition refer to a 15 year old child as a victim of this tragedy without even knowing if that 15 year old is covered by the compensation that has been offered. They do not even understand the package. They do not even know what we offering. Yet, they stand to call names—

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I shall do what the Prime Minister and this government have done from the outset. I shall do the right thing.

We have proceeded on the correct principle in offering cash payments to those who were injured as result of institutional fault.

For the others, I invite the hon. member and all other members of this House to work with this government on its agenda to strengthen medicare so that all of those who are ill in this country can have the highest possible quality of care. That, at the end of the day, is our most fundamental obligation.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, as the Deputy Prime Minister pointed out just a few moments ago, there is not one provincial or territorial government that has said it is withdrawing from the agreement to contribute to an offer of compensation of $1.1 billion.

Instead, what has happened is that some provincial ministers have engaged in the empty, hollow, cynical exercise of saying “Oh, yes, others should be offered compensation too. But we are not going to do it”.

The Canadian people will see that for what it is. They will also see the federal government standing on the principle it thinks is right and showing courage and leadership.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, as Premier Romanow was saying last Friday when he visited Ottawa, governments are doing the right thing. They are showing leadership; the federal government most of all by offering compensation to those who were injured at a time when governments could have prevented it. The governments of Canada are taking that position because it is the right thing to do and the hon. member knows it.

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. He should read the replies by Lucien Bouchard and Jean Rochon. This week they said “We have adopted the appropriate principle to protect the health care system by compensating only those infected during the period of time authorities should have acted”. That is what Lucien Bouchard and Jean Rochon said this week.

They changed their position—

[Hepatitis C, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec government and the Bloc are very sensitive to the issue of provincial jurisdiction, particularly for Quebec.

Minister Rochon has often told me that health is an exclusive provincial jurisdiction. This is not true. But now, the Quebec government is saying that the federal government alone must pay for the victims infected before 1986. This is cynical and totally unacceptable.