Allan Rock

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member would do well to be careful what he believes about what he reads in the newspapers.

Let me come to the point of his question because I think the hon. member misses the rationale.

The governments of Canada, all of them, have agreed that the appropriate rationale in terms of assisting those who were infected with hepatitis C is to look to that period when something could have been done to prevent it. That is the reason we will be providing, by way of an offer to settle the outstanding claims, over $1 billion for the benefit of over 22,000 Canadians who might have been kept healthy.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member sees here is a decision, a responsible decision, taken by every government in the country. We looked at the record and saw that during the period in question something could have been done, but it was not done.

As a physician I know the hon. member is well aware that every medical procedure involves risk as well as benefit. As a matter of public policy one cannot go back and erase the risk of the past, but we can deal with the period during which those responsible should have acted and did not, and that is what we have done. Those are the people who will be assisted by governments throughout this country.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member obviously does not know is that I have met with those victims. I have met with several of the people he has referred to. I have met with them on more than one occasion. Last week, as I said, I spoke to them directly to tell them what the decision of the governments was.

Last week every government in this country agreed on the appropriate approach in public policy to compensate those who were infected during the period when governments could have acted and did not. That is an appropriate and responsible approach.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member shamelessly exploited victims for his own reason. I think he should be ashamed of himself.

The record shows that I have met more than once with the very people who were in our company yesterday. In fact, last Thursday I spoke by telephone with Mr. McCarty to tell him personally about the decision that was coming Friday. It was not because I thought he would like it. I knew he would not, but I wanted him to hear it from me.

This is a minister who accepts his responsibility, who has met with victims.

[Health, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I can understand how the view of things would be distorted from that perspective. Let me fill the hon. leader of the third or fourth party in on some of the facts of the matter.

The facts are that this minister and this government have identified the important priorities in the health care system. Home and community care; strengthening the system of health care throughout the country; enforcing the principles of the Canada Health Act; working toward pharmacare to make pharmaceutical products available. Those are the priorities for the health care system and those are the priorities of this government.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes governments are called upon to make tough decisions as a matter of public policy. When we look back on the tragedy of the tainted blood, it is plain that the period 1986 to 1990 stands out. It stands out because it is a period during which those responsible could have and should have acted. Had they acted, many of those infections would have been prevented.

Every government in the country thinks it is good public policy to provide assistance to people who were infected in that period. That is the reason we put aside more than $1 billion to assist the more than 22,000 people who were infected.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we made very clear the reasons why every government in this country believes this is the right and responsible course to take.

The hon. member should remember that over 22,000 people will be receiving assistance, all of those who were infected during the period when the system did not work as it should have. And those who were infected by those people, their spouses and children are also going to be compensated.

This is the right thing to do. All governments are taking their responsibilities in an appropriate way.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Justice Krever did his job as a commissioner on a royal commission. He dealt just with the blood system. Then it was up to governments to fulfil their responsibilities by making public policy. We did that last Friday. As a result, governments are spending over a billion dollars for the benefit and assistance of over 22,000 Canadians who were harmed during a period when something could have been done to prevent it.

Governments are taking responsibility and doing the right thing.

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the decision that was announced last Friday was a decision made and shared by every government in this country. It was made in a difficult situation with tough factors to take into account.

In listening to the hon. Leader of the Opposition one would think that decision did not show compassion. Twenty-two thousand people are going to be compensated as a result, everyone who was contaminated with hepatitis C during a four year period when governments, when the Red Cross could have and should have acted.

[Tainted Blood, March 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, if I may say so, the Red Cross is not really in a position to make comments.

Where is the Red Cross? Has it contributed one nickel to this compensation package? Of course not. The Red Cross is not exactly in an ideal position to comment on the compensation paid by governments to the victims who are in part the victims of the Red Cross itself.