House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 56% of the vote.
Hepatitis C March 17th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what we have done. After years of inaction by a Tory government, this government went to the table with the provinces and found a solution. We found a solution. We put $1.3 billion into a settlement for tens of thousands of victims. The court has now approved that. As soon as the court gets the administrator to mail those cheques, which I believe will be in the next short while, they will get money they never got under the Tories.
Hepatitis C March 17th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, we have been before the court urging it to ensure that those cheques go to the claimants as soon as possible.
I want to remind the member that this settlement was only possible because the government went to the provinces, went to the claimants, and proposed to spare them even longer litigation.
We want those cheques in the hands of the claimants as soon as possible.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, we have had this exchange before. Let me remind the hon. member what I said to her. I said that if she has a legal opinion with respect to Bill-11, I wish she would share it with us.
The second thing I said to her was to wait until we found out what the bill is all about. The premier himself is speaking about amendments. We do not have the regulations. Let us find out what the bill contains before we pronounce a final position.
Finally, I have not been shy about expressing the government's grave concern. We do not agree with the policy of private for profit clinics. It will not help with costs. It will not help with waiting lists. We have urged the premier to reconsider, as he has done twice in the past.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Madam Speaker, the government has already stated its position on this. We have stated our commitment to be there over the long term to fund the health care system with the provinces. We have already stated our commitment to be there to take part in the changes necessary in the delivery of services in order to support the provinces in introducing the necessary reforms.
I cited Bernard Landry, who said himself a few days ago that it is a question not just of more money but also of how our health care system is run.
Responsibility for the delivery of services is in the hands of the provinces, and the Government of Canada also has a role to play in co-ordinating the changes and supporting the provinces in their efforts.
In reply to the questions put by the hon. member for Jonquière, we have already stated our intention to honour our responsibilities in this regard.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Madam Speaker, I am delighted to table the document and the member can look at it from any angle he would like to.
One message emerges clearly from that document, and it is that for their own purposes some people understate the contribution of the Government of Canada. I insist that we tell the truth. I also insist that we look at the last four years in which in every budget we have increased the transfers to the provinces for health; a 25% increase over the last four years. Transfers this year to the provinces are at an all time high. Those are the facts.
As I have said, it will take two things to solve the problems facing medicare: First, a long term plan with the changes we will need; and second, a commitment to long term financing. Let us focus on both. We are ready to get to work on each of those elements.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Madam Speaker, if we are going to have a debate, which the member started with his motion today, then let us do it on the facts.
When I hear his colleague suggesting that Ottawa is contributing 15 cents on every dollar to health spending, that is plain wrong. Let us put the facts on the table and let us have this debate framed by reality.
The Government of Canada contributes one-third to all health spending every year in this country. Let us get that straight. These are not figures we are pulling out of the air. As I said, they come from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. It tracks actual spending on health in this country.
I went beyond figures and talked about what we need to fix the health care system. I encourage the member and his party to join us in that effort.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Madam Speaker, I would be delighted to table the document which is publicly available from the Canadian Institute of Health Information.
I want to make one other point on funding before I leave it. The platform of the Conservative Party in the last federal election was that all transfers to the provinces by Ottawa should be by tax points without cash. That is its policy. If we were to do such a thing we would remove entirely the influence of the Government of Canada and its ability to enforce the principles of the Canada Health Act. It would be ruinous for the future of a national health care system in the country.
This motion is wrong because its premise is fundamentally flawed. The government is already doing what it said it would do and what it was called upon today to do which is to develop a plan in partnership with the provinces and commit to long term financing for our health care system. We have called upon our provincial partners to work with us to fix the single most important feature of Canadian life, which is our medicare system, and to marshal and mobilize a national will to achieve that purpose.
If the status quo is not acceptable, neither is the prospect of private-for-profit health care. The American style system is not acceptable in this country, and so we reject the position of the Reform Party. We say that is not the answer to the problems we confront.
There is a third option. The third option is to work constructively with partners toward solutions that will work, solutions that will improve access and quality of care. If we are to succeed in that we must put aside partisan politics and work in common cause on an issue that is bigger and more important than any one of us.
The Prime Minister has now written to the first ministers. He has suggested a meeting among first ministers late this year. He has asked health ministers to develop an interim plan by June.
The Prime Minister has given us a timetable. Canadians have given us a mandate. The provinces have shown that innovation can work. It is now up to us to get behind that innovation, to turn it into a long term plan to assure long term financing and to fix this cherished national asset.
Let me close by saying that this is something we can do. The answers are available to us. We need the political will. We need the focus. We need the commitment that is necessary. A nation that had the wit to invent it can find the will and the ways to save it.
Supply March 17th, 2000
Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by telling you that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Broadview—Greenwood.
This motion should be rejected. Although there is much in what was said by the hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest with which I agree, the motion is fundamentally flawed. The government is doing the very thing he is calling upon us to do by his motion today.
It is obvious that the status quo, the current situation is unacceptable. One can see the problems that exist everywhere: waiting lists, overcrowded emergency rooms, shortages of doctors and particularly certain specialists, and shortages of nurses.
It is also obvious that just investing more money will not solve these problems. Major changes in our ways of providing health care services are also necessary.
This is evidenced, as the hon. member for Eglinton—Lawrence mentioned, by the fact that certain provinces are not using some of the money given to them for health by the federal government.
Why? As Quebec Minister of Finance Bernard Landry explained a few days ago, it will take more than just money to face the problems in our health care system. This issue also involves management and organization.
We need two things if we are to deal with the issues in our health care system, if we are to save it, as the hon. member proposes, and if we are to improve the quality and access to services within the principles of the Canada Health Act. Those two things are: first, a long term plan on how to improve the way we deliver services to ensure timely access to quality care; and second, long term financing.
As the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have said, if that long term financing requires additional money from the Government of Canada, we will be there to do our part to support that long term plan.
I will first deal with the plan. The House knows that in January I invited ministers of health to join me at the table so that we could get all the ministers on one side of the table and the problems on the other and start working toward solutions and find out what we have learned from best practices, the pilot projects that many of the provinces have themselves put in place and the innovations that the provinces themselves have undertaken.
I have made it clear that I will not go to that meeting with a fixed agenda or a settled approach. We are open to ideas and proposals that the provinces themselves will bring forward.
Let me now deal with money.
The hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska suggested that the federal contribution to our health care system is 13 to 15 cents per dollar. That is not true. The hon. member is mistaken.
The reality is that the Government of Canada contributes on average more than 33 cents to every dollar of public spending on health every year in the country. I will refer to figures produced by the Canadian Institute for Health Information which demonstrate that in New Brunswick, for example, the Government of Canada contributes 55 cents of every public health dollar spent every year. In Nova Scotia it is 47 cents. In Prince Edward Island it is 64 cents. In Newfoundland it is 52 cents. In Quebec it is 47 cents and in Manitoba it is 48 cents. A national average of 33 cents on every dollar of public spending on health in Canada comes from this government.
Health Care March 16th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I can give the hon. member and the House the following assurance. We will do whatever is necessary to protect the principles of the Canada Health Act and to protect medicare in Canada. If the hon. member has legal opinions he would care to share with us, we would be happy to have them.
In the meantime, let us work together not only to discourage private for-profit medicine, which we think is wrong, but to strengthen medicare in Canada. Let us work together to renew medicare for the 21st century.
Health Care March 16th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the member knows I have not been shy at all in speaking about Bill 11. I went to Calgary last week and I said it is not the right thing to do because it will not help with the problems we face. Private for profit medicine in Alberta has been proven to have longer waiting lists, higher costs and there are issues about quality of care.
The issue of the Canada Health Act depends on what the bill is. Right now the premier is talking about amendments. We have not seen regulations. It is not even at second reading. Let us wait and see what happens in the legislative process.
In the meantime it is the wrong thing to do from a policy point of view and we have said so.