Allan Rock

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the contamination of blood with HIV was a national tragedy, just like the contamination of blood with hepatitis C. But what the hon. member should understand is that compensation was offered to HIV victims in that day on the same principle we are offering compensation today for hepatitis C victims.

The government implicitly acknowledged 10 years ago that there was not enough done in terms of surveillance, research and taking steps to ensure that the risk was minimized to the greatest extent possible.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, what this government did, the first government since these events, the first government to act, was gather the provincial ministers together and produced the best possible result given good, responsible government public policy.

We chose the period during which people were injured because governments should have acted and did not and we offered compensation. By so doing we spared those 22,000 people the ordeal of continuous litigation.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the effect of the offer which was made last Friday by the territorial, provincial and federal governments was to spare that ordeal for 22,000 victims who contracted hepatitis C between 1986 and 1990. I want the member to bear that in mind.

The Krever report contains a complete and insightful discussion of the policy of a no fault system. It may be in the future that provinces and territories will accept his recommendation that in the future operation of the blood system there be a no fault compensation system. That is not what is in place at the moment. When we gathered as ministers of health, as governments, and looked back at the chronology of this—

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member knows that the medical system, the health care system, medical procedures that are carried out in hospitals every day carry with them certain risks. There is a risk-benefit ratio in every medical procedure.

We are saying that we have not yet approached the point as a society where we are prepared to say that any time anything goes wrong for whatever reason there will be public compensation. We may get to that point in years ahead but at the moment the public policy choice is to compensate where governments had responsibility and should have acted.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member must know that for years there has been a very broad debate about where individual responsibility ends and when governments should pay compensation if someone is harmed in the system. In 1990 or 1991 Robert Prichard, now president of the University of Toronto, did a rather complete study on that subject for government. It has been the subject of public debate from time to time.

In this case it was up to governments to look at the history of this tragedy and decide where it was that governments should step up and say they would compensate because there was fault in the system.

To take another approach—

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the conclusions of Mr. Justice Krever were clear, including the factual analysis of when governments could have and should have acted.

He made recommendations and in November I spoke on the day his report was tabled. I pledged then to study the recommendations, which we did, with provincial ministers to look at the recommendation on compensation. I know he recommended that everybody be compensated.

We decided the right thing to do for governments was to compensate those who were hurt because those responsible had not acted. That is the position. That is our conclusion. That is the position of all the governments in Canada.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that comes through clearly from the conclusions of Mr. Justice Krever is that in 1986, commencing in 1986 and going forward, there was a time when those responsible for the blood system could have and should have acted to prevent infections but they did not. It is as a result of that conclusion as to responsibility that the governments of Canada have joined together to make an agreement that we will offer compensation to those infected during that period. That result flows directly from the conclusions of Mr. Justice Krever on the facts of this matter.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is not the case that provincial ministers are walking away from the agreement. All provincial ministers support the agreement.

Second, I sat down with the provincial ministers for months and the result was an agreement to which we are all a party and which provides for government responsibility where it should be.

The member talks about doing the right thing by the people. The right thing by the people is having a government that takes the responsible if sometimes difficult and painful decisions based on good public policy.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, most people who look at the facts of this awful tragedy acknowledge, as Mr. Justice Krever did, that 1986 was the point that separated one stage of history from the other.

It was in 1986 that internationally, governments started putting in place methods to test blood for contaminants like hepatitis C. There was a risk before that but only afterward was there an international standard of a test.

It is for that reason that Conservative governments, Liberal governments and NDP governments across the country have chosen that period for the compensation of victims.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member misses the point. This is not politics. This is not partisanship. This is policy. All governments, New Democratic governments, Conservative governments and Liberal governments joined together and came to the same conclusion. In the chronology of these events in this awful tragedy there was a period during which something could and should have been done. As a result we are offering compensation to victims who contracted hepatitis C during that period.

That is a position shared by all governments. All of us believe it is the right thing to do.