Bob Wood

[Natural Resources, May 8th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, as Canadians are celebrating National Forest Week, I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources.

As hon. members know, a great many Canadians rely on our forests for their well-being. With the increased demand on our forest land, will Canadians be able to count on our forests to contribute so much to our way of life in the future?

[Organized Crime, March 12th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have witnessed the increase in the activities of biker gangs across the country on a daily basis. They hear police calling for better tools to fight this problem.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General tell the House what the government plans to do to make Canadians feel safer?

[National Defence, June 13th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the 1999-2000 annual report of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces Ombudsman.

[Criminal Code, May 17th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-334 which if passed will allow relatives to wear a deceased veteran's medal on Remembrance Day on the right side of the chest. On the surface this would seem like a reasonable idea. But if we scratch the surface, we will see why, for reasons of history and tradition, of practice and principle, this bill is not a good idea. Let me start with history and tradition.

Gallantry and war service medals are personal honours. They are intended only for those who earn them by virtue of their service or their action on the battlefield. It is a tradition based in law, a law whose original proponent was the great War Veterans Association which was the Royal Canadian Legion's predecessor organization. It is a tradition that dates back to 1920.

Most veterans then and most veterans now oppose the idea of someone else wearing their medals. They quite rightly feel that for someone else to wear their medals constitutes both a misrepresentation of fact and a misappropriation of the honour.

These feelings are very strongly held, both by veterans themselves and their representative associations, including the Royal Canadian Legion, the National Council of Veterans Associations in Canada, and the army, navy and air force veterans in Canada.

Surely, if we are to listen to anyone's wishes on the matter we must take our primary guidance from the men and women who were awarded the medals in the first place by virtue of their devotion to duty, their sacrifice and their courage.

I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of the public, when they see veterans walking in Remembrance Day parades, assume that the wearers are those who earned them. They would be right. However, if this bill were to pass that assumption would go out the window. No one would know during the parade who was wearing what medal or for what reason.

It is true that the bill calls for the relatives to wear the medals on the right side of the chest, while the legitimate recipient of the medals, the veterans, wear them on the left. Such a distinction would be lost on many.

I might add that the bill does not even define what constitutes a relative. Presumably its provisions are primarily targeted at children and grandchildren of deceased veterans. What about stepchildren if they have not been legally adopted? What about half sisters and brothers? What about nephews and nieces? What about cousins?

One can easily see in the years to come how these medals might be inherited by design or happenstance by relatives who are very far removed in their family relationship to the veterans who earned them. Would they claim the right to wear them also? How diminished would their symbolic value be when there is no personal claim to the service they represent?

Every November 11 we see veterans marching proudly, their medals polished brightly on their blazer lapels. We who watch them applaud them as they go by in admiration and respect for their deeds. With the passage of Bill C-334 it would be entirely conceivable, especially with the passage of years, that we would be applauding people wearing medals they neither earned nor deserved. We could not even be sure they were being worn by a veteran's relative.

Once we let the genie out of the bottle we could never put it back in. The guarantee of proper comportment would be gone forever.

Heroism, sacrifice and service are not transferable characteristics to be worn from one generation to the next. They are the result of specific actions, and each of us must earn whatever distinctions that come our way by our own actions.

What would be passed on are the medals themselves. They should be passed on. They should be kept in the family or the community, proudly displayed or framed, perhaps alongside a picture of a veteran, as many families today have chosen to do. They just cannot be worn, and should not be worn, by anyone other than those who have actually received them for service to their country.

I can appreciate the sentiment that was expressed by the sponsor of Bill C-334 and some of his constituents. I can also appreciate a concern, as our war veterans dwindle in numbers, that somehow allowing relatives to wear the deceased veterans' medals on Remembrance Day would fill the void. I believe this would not be the case, nor is it the point of our opposition to Bill C-334.

Further, I would suggest that there remain many ways of honouring a veteran's memory other than wearing his or her medals. As I have already indicated, their appropriate display at home or even in local museums or community centres would be a valuable contribution to their remembrance. Even better, why not participate in acts of community good in the name of the veteran's memory and participate in or organize events for Veterans' Week each year.

I would suggest that the very best way to keep the memory of our veterans alive is to tell their stories to our children and grandchildren. That is all they have ever asked of us: to remember what they did for us so long ago and what members of the current forces do for us today. To fulfil that promise would do far more to honour their memory than appropriating their medals one day each year.

For all of these reasons, and despite the good intentions that may lie behind this proposition, the Government of Canada cannot support Bill C-334.

[Witness Protection Program Act, April 12th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, sudden infant death syndrome or SIDS, also known as crib death, refers to the sudden and unexpected death of an apparently healthy infant, usually less than one year of age, which remains unexplained even after a full investigation.

Although the specific cause of SIDS remains unknown, several risk factors have been identified through scientific research, including the tummy and side sleeping positions and exposure to tobacco smoke before and after birth.

SIDS is the leading cause of death in Canada for infants between one month and one year of age, touching the lives of three families in this country each week.

Health Canada, through the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System, collects and analyses infant mortality information. Since 1980 the overall rate of SIDS deaths in Canada has steadily declined. This decline in SIDS rates coincides with the identification of risk factors and public education regarding these factors.

In 1993 Health Canada co-sponsored a consensus conference on SIDS with the Canadian Paediatric Society, the Canadian Institute of Child Health and the Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths. This resulted in the development of a joint consensus statement and public awareness strategy to reduce the incidence of SIDS in Canada. The key messages are: positioning infants on their back to sleep; avoiding exposure to environmental tobacco smoke during pregnancy; protecting infants from exposure to environmental tobacco smoke; avoiding too many clothes and covers on babies; and the promotion of breast feeding.

In March 1999 Health Canada and its three partners launched “Back to Sleep”, a national public education campaign to raise awareness and provide information on how to reduce the risk of SIDS. The campaign includes a joint consensus statement, a brochure, a poster and a TV public service announcement.

It is through research, education and promotion that the incidence of SIDS in Canada can be further reduced.

[Witness Protection Program Act, April 12th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Halifax West actually raised two issues in his original question last December: the compensation issue for the merchant navy and the question of compensation by Germany for Canadian airmen imprisoned at Buchenwald. Although the member has chosen to focus his remarks tonight on the Buchenwald question, I would like to address both of his issues since I know he has a deep personal interest and a commitment to both matters.

I am pleased to report on the progress that has been made in recognizing the heroic contribution of the merchant navy to Canada's war effort.

On February 1, 2000, the Minister of Veterans Affairs announced a tax free package for Canada's merchant navy veterans and their surviving spouses. This package is compensation for post-war demobilization benefits provided by the armed forces but not the merchant navy veterans.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has received more than 10,000 applications for the merchant navy special benefit. Today, close to 1,000 cheques have been issued to eligible merchant navy veterans or their surviving spouses. These payments will be paid out in up to two disbursements, depending on length of service.

Thanks to the tremendous effort and leadership of veterans organizations, they agreed upon compensation of $20,000 for service of more than 24 months, $10,000 for service between 6 and 24 months, and $5,000 for service between 1 and 6 months or for less than 1 month if captured, killed or disabled. An additional 20% will be paid to any veterans receiving these benefits who spent time as a prisoner of war.

As expected, when processing the applications the department is finding that a percentage of these applications do not fall within the guidelines agreed upon with merchant navy and national veterans organizations. For instance, some individuals served with the armed forces and so have already received benefits. Some were on vessels in coastal waters but do not meet the qualifications for war related services.

I reassure all merchant navy veterans and their families that the Government of Canada recognizes their valiant efforts on behalf of their country and that Veterans Affairs Canada is giving the merchant navy the special benefit and priority that it deserves.

I now want to address the issues of compensating Canadian airmen who were—

[Veterans Health Care, February 17th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in my place today to respond to the motion of the hon. member for Edmonton East regarding national standards for veterans health care.

The motion calls for maintenance and special needs provisions that would be based upon national standards. These standards would be agreed upon by all provinces before health care responsibilities for veterans were to be devolved to any province for any portion of care.

The government's experience to date is that there has been no problem in the quality of care that could not be solved through its relationship and its agreements with the contract facilities and the provinces. If situations arise where action is required we should let the existing system work, rather than begin the long process of working with the provinces to create a national system.

I am not saying that the system cannot be improved. There is room to do that. Veterans Affairs Canada has 75 contract facilities across the country. The department encourages all of its contract facilities to be accredited. Veterans Affairs Canada also recognizes and respects provincial standards of care and, to provide assurance that the level of care is meeting the health needs of veterans, works with the provinces on quality assurance issues. The department also monitors its own set of 10 outcome areas in its contract and community facilities.

This is the way to improve the system, through the agencies and authorities now in place and through the effective partnership that has evolved with the provinces in the delivery of health care to veterans. That is why we should continue to allow the work that is already under way to be refined and improved upon in the best interests of Canada's veterans.

The problem with the motion is that it involves complex issues and proposes a very simplistic solution. No one who has watched the evolution of health care across the country would say that there are simple solutions, especially when these matters involve both federal and provincial jurisdictions and both the private and public sectors.

In resolving these complex issues there are several constants of which Canadians can be assured. One constant is the good work and continued interest of veterans organizations. They have monitored the provision of health care for veterans very closely over the years. I can assure the House that if the health care delivery system somehow fails to meet the needs of our veterans, these organizations let us know it. They are very forthright in their views and they enable the health care system in this country to respond.

Another constant is the emphasis that Canadians, as a whole, place on ensuring that our veterans receive treatment commensurate with the gratitude we feel as a nation; our gratitude for the sacrifices of those who served their country so well in our fights for freedom and democracy.

A third constant is the importance that the Parliament of Canada places on making sure that veterans receive appropriate health care. Today's debate on the motion of the hon. member is one example. Another is the report done by the subcommittee of the other place, entitled “Raising the Bar: Creating a New Standard in Veterans Health Care”. This report provided input for a new residential care strategy by the Government of Canada.

Finally, a fourth constant in dealing with the complex issue of health care for veterans is the work of Veterans Affairs Canada. I will talk about the services the department provides in a moment.

First, I would like to emphasize that when it comes to actual delivery of the health care services there are many different forces at work. For example, within the health care system there is a shift toward primary health care that emphasizes early identification of problems or potential problems and taking a holistic approach to human health.

The results are a growing emphasis on home care. Veterans Affairs Canada has been at the forefront of this movement with its veterans independence program, VIP. This program was first put in place in the early 1980s and has evolved to meet the changing needs of veterans. Through VIP, clients are offered choices for services based on their needs. The idea is to permit them to remain at home or in their communities as long as possible. This program has been called one of the most comprehensive and advanced home care programs in the world and it may well set the standard for the delivery of health care services in the 21st century.

Another important shift in health care delivery in Canada is the aging of our veterans. This is one of the areas where Veterans Affairs Canada is making a significant contribution, not only to the health of veterans, but to our understanding of the ways to respond to the aging population. The department has been recognized internationally for its work in research and care giving. The department has been involved in a number of research projects and helps the government to make informed decisions on ways to ensure that the health system meets the changing needs of all Canadians.

Another change in the provision of health care in Canada is the shift throughout the country from a clinical model of delivering health to a residential model. Clinical care utilizes nurses as the primary provider of patient care. In a residential model the nurses and other health care professionals serve as team leaders and most of the direct care to the patients is provided by health care aides who are part of these teams. Veterans Affairs Canada, through its review of veterans care needs project team, has determined that this emphasis on residential care is in keeping with the principal needs of veterans. Clinical care is still available for veterans and it is maintained in the larger residential care facilities.

The motion of the hon. member for Edmonton East proposes national standards for residential care facilities agreed upon by the provinces. But given this complex and changing environment, I do not believe that agreeing on a set of standards is realistic. The environment is changing too quickly. We know that reaching agreements with the provinces takes time. By the time an agreement is reached the environment can change so much that the terms of the agreement are no longer applicable.

Moreover, the needs of Canada's veterans are becoming more urgent as these veterans get older. We need to act quickly to address veterans' needs, not wait to reach an agreement with the provinces. I believe that the federal government has taken a more effective course in using the processes now at our disposal to promote a high standard of health care in these facilities.

One of the most important aspects of the process now in place is the vigilance of veterans organizations. Where they have perceived that health care delivery has fallen below a standard they feel should apply to veterans, they have spoken out and the federal government has responded. For that reason, we have a process in place today which helps to ensure that veterans receive good care in these facilities. The process involves an annual review of long term care facilities. Staff of Veterans Affairs Canada, usually the area councillors and district office nurses, visit contract and community facilities. They speak to the veterans on a confidential basis. They ask questions designed to determine whether the needs of our veterans are being met.

The questions they ask involve 10 specific areas of health care that research has shown to be the most important for our veterans. Those 10 areas are: safety and security, food quality, access to clinical services, access to specialized services, medication regime, access to spiritual guidance, socialization and recreation, activation and ambulation, personal care, and sanitation.

This is an extensive list. It is a comprehensive list of the key issues that would likely be negotiated with the provinces if we were to try to establish a national standard for veterans health care. It is a list of key health care deliverables that are already being applied across the country, not as a result of an agreement with the provinces, but through the persuasion of Veterans Affairs Canada.

The hon. member has good intentions with this motion. He wants to ensure that veterans can receive quality health care at long term residence facilities, but it would mean a more complex round of negotiations with the provinces. It would become more difficult, not easier, to make any changes necessary to improve the health care provided to veterans. Such negotiations would delay the real changes that can be made now to improve residential care for veterans. There are already initiatives in place that will deliver the results we all desire, that is, quality health care for our veterans.

[Dr. Charles Drake, December 14th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce today that future students of medicine and health science at the University of Western Ontario will benefit from the legacy of the late Dr. Charles Drake.

The Drake family has committed a gift of $1 million to Western to establish the Charles Drake Student Awards in Medicine. The gift, to be matched by a combination of university based and government sponsored programs, will boost the awards to a total of $2.13 million.

A Companion of the Order of Canada, Dr. Charles Drake was an internationally renowned neurosurgeon at the University of Western Ontario. He pioneered surgical procedures that are now taught around the world.

Dr. Drake passed away in September 1998 at the age of 78. Dr. Charles Drake's son John recently stated, “My father was committed to building excellence in medical education and research in London. We are pleased this gift will help the next generation of students and faculty to pursue that dream”.

I am sure that all members will join me in celebrating the generosity of the Drake family.

[Fort Garry Horse, November 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, 82 years ago, on November 20, 1917, the Battle of Cambrai took place with the aim of creating a breach through the German Hindenburg Line. The Fort Garry Horse, as part of the Canadian Calvary Brigade, was given the task of spearheading the assault and the special mission of capturing a German corps headquarters behind the enemy lines.

On that day, Lieutenant Harcus Strachan took command of B Squadron when his commander was killed by machine-gun fire. With his sword drawn, Lieutenant Strachan led a charge of 129 men on horseback to destroy a German artillery battery. He won the Victoria Cross, an astonishing feat of conspicuous bravery and leadership during operations.

Today, the Fort Garry Horse continue to serve Canada with distinction. In recent years, they have been on operations in Cyprus, the Golan Heights, the Sinai and various missions in the former Yugoslavia with the UN and NATO. The Garrys also helped out at home during the 1997 Manitoba flood and the Pan-Am games held last—

[Merchant Navy, June 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member would know, the committee heard numerous witnesses and has issued a report that was carefully considered. The Minister of Veterans Affairs will give the report the careful consideration it deserves and will, following consultation with his cabinet colleagues, provide the committee with the government's response in due course.