Allan Rock

[Hepatitis C, March 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in the period before 1986 hepatitis C was not even known. It was called non-A, non-B hepatitis. In the period before 1986 people in the medical system, acting in the best of faith and with the scientific and medical knowledge of the day, did the best they could. There are risks and benefits in every medical procedure.

In these cases, tragically, before 1986 that risk benefit worked out in the case of tainted blood to cause infections with hepatitis C. However, the period 1986 to 1990 was the period during which something could have been done and was not done. It is for that reason, as a matter of principle, that we distinguished that period from all the others.

[Hepatitis C, March 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, 13 governments, all the provinces, the two territories and the Government of Canada had to make a tough decision. We identified in this tainted blood tragedy a period of 1986 to 1990 which stands apart from all the others.

During that period there were tests available that could have and should have been put in place to avoid infections and they were not. We are compensating people during that period because it was during that period that something could have been done to help.

[Children's Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, and I are currently helping children throughout Canada in co-operation with the provincial governments.

There are, for example, the changes introduced by my colleague with the child tax benefit. There are also the community action programs for children, which are under way in community centres across Canada.

We have plans for helping children and their families. These are currently being developed all over Canada and I am sure the situation will improve in the months to come.

[Health Care, March 23rd, 1998]

Of course, Mr. Speaker, as always.

Right now, we are contemplating such an approach, and I naturally intend to discuss it with my provincial counterparts. In the months ahead, I will be there to discuss needs and the best way the federal government, in partnership with provincial governments, can meet those needs.

[Health Care, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign almost one year ago, we stated the Government of Canada's position regarding the priority of home and community care.

In Halifax a few weeks ago, we organized a pan-Canadian conference. Representatives from hospitals, provincial governments and professional service providers were there to discuss home care. There is recognition for the importance of such care, not just by the Government of Canada, but throughout the country.

[Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my point is simply that this government engages continuously in that process.

The appointment of the National Forum on Health was itself a formal way of asking a blue ribbon independent panel to look at the state of the health care system, to examine the dynamic of the transfers and to assess whether the transfers were sufficient for the purpose. In fact the forum recommended that the cash floor be moved to $12.5 billion which of course we have done.

In the months ahead we will continue to assess, as we have always done, the needs of the health care system to ensure that we are fulfilling our responsibility to keep it strong.

[Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned to the hon. member's colleague, assessing the sufficiency of transfers, assessing everything this government does in support of health care is a continuous process in this government.

The reason we regard the amendment however well intended as unnecessary is it is part and parcel of this government's approach to health care and its responsibilities in that regard to monitor constantly whether the health care system and particularly the transfers for health care and related services are sufficient. It is indeed this government's intention to do exactly what the amendment proposes.

[Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that the first thing we did after resolving the financial situation was to increase the amount of transfers to $12.5 billion a year, the exact amount recommended by the National Forum on Health.

They looked at the situation for over two years and recommended we transfer $12.5 billion, which we did. This testifies to the government's commitment to Canada's health system.

[Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend, the delegates were not advocating spending for the sake of spending, but rather investing in order to strengthen Canada's health care system.

That is what we intend to do. At this point, the whole issue of home care and of community health care—a vital part of Canada's health care system—is under examination.

We intend—

[Health, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, quite simply the amendment in our view is unnecessary because the government continuously reassesses the sufficiency of all its actions in relation to health care. We went through that very process in changing the amount of the CHST cash transfer during the past few months.

I assure the House both in terms of the transfers and in terms of other steps we are taking in relation to health that we will constantly be involved in reassessing the sufficiency of the support for what we believe is an essential service for all Canadians.