Anne Minh-Thu Quach

[Health, March 12th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the shutdown in production at the Sandoz plant has plunged the entire country into a serious crisis, and this is only the tip of the iceberg. The whole drug supply system has been shaken. There is an increasing number of shortages. There has even been a shortage in chemotherapy drugs since the fall. Our patients are being deprived of vital treatments. Putting a band-aid on the wound and blaming others is clearly not effective.

When will there be a real strategy to avoid fresh drug shortages?

[Business of Supply, March 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague and thank her for her outstanding, comprehensive and extremely heartfelt speech. She aptly explains for us how these sorts of fraudulent and dubious tactics kill voter interest. In the end, this is a strategy that casts doubt on the very legitimacy of the members who are part of the government, since it is they who represent the voters. If the voters’ right to vote has not been respected, all of this is cast into question.

There is talk of engaging young people in the discussions so they can make their opinions known. How indeed can the involvement of young people be restored with this sort of enterprise?

[Health, March 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are still refusing to explain the impact of this crisis on health. Sandoz was sanctioned because it failed to abide by the rules for ensuring quality. That is why it has had to scale back production.

The only solution from the Minister of Health is to import drugs. The government is doing nothing to avert further shortages or to make sure that the drugs Canadians take are safe.

Are the Conservatives finally going to live up to their responsibilities? Are they going to ensure patient safety, or are they going to assign the job to the American government?

[March 7th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, the global trade agreement will leave the door wide open to the privatization of health care. As far as I know, health is not a consumer good. No one chooses to become ill or to pay for treatments. It is quite different from consumer goods that are sold on grocery store shelves.

I see that the government still does not want to commit to protecting our public health system. What a pity. It will be Canadians who pay the price. Canadians have not been consulted and may pay dearly for the decisions of this government. This will affect not just the citizens of today, but those of tomorrow.

Another problem with this agreement is the extension of patents. It is not just the NDP who are saying so. Health experts—more than 15 came on Monday—municipalities and researchers do not agree. Extending drug patents is questioned by many. If no one is committed to excluding patents, who then will do so?

[March 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, health is a priority for the vast majority of Canadians. Year after year, survey after survey confirms that Canadians want to preserve their universal public health care system. But there is currently a looming threat to our public health system in the form of the trade agreement Canada is negotiating with the European Union. This ambitious agreement covers services, agriculture, intellectual property and much more. According to Canada's chief negotiator, this is an unprecedented agreement.

To protect our existing and future public health care services, Canada must insert clear reservations excluding these services from the agreement. Yet the government is refusing to tell us whether it will exclude Canada's public health care system. We also have reason to believe that some provinces will not be asking for the exclusions that are critical to preserving our public services. Moreover, the exclusion process requires provinces to add public services they wish to exclude to a negative list. Because each province is doing this on its own, the process is complex and chaotic and will create major differences between them.

On Monday, health experts came here to Ottawa to explain to us what Canada has to do to prevent a potential agreement from eroding our health care system. Michael McBane from the Canadian Health Coalition, Michèle Boisclair from the Association des infirmières du Québec and Marc-André Gagnon, a pharmaceutical researcher from Carleton University, agree that Canada must add reservations in order to exclude health from the agreement.

Those reservations have to clearly define what we mean by public health care services. What is more, according to these experts and a dozen or more other health care stakeholders, Canada and the provinces should make sure that the reservations protect future public health care. For example, if Canada wanted to have a universal drug insurance plan in future, the free trade agreement must not allow insurance companies or the governments we do business with to sue our government.

That is the risk we are facing with the free trade agreement currently being negotiated. According to experts from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the reservations in NAFTA, which was negotiated years earlier, do not protect our future public health care, and the member countries could dispute medical insurance coverage expansion.

We also believe that this agreement must be fully debated by the general public, by all members of Parliament in the House of Commons and in committees. We deplore the lack of transparency and democracy that the Conservative government is imposing in this case in particular, and also in a number of other cases.

What we want are free trade agreements that encourage trade while respecting our public services, which are so important to Canadians. It is possible to encourage economic exchange without bargaining away our common resources, our health care system, the education of young people, and water, to name but a few of these services.

And so, this is what I am asking today: will this government commit to protecting our public health care system by putting it, as well as Canada's future health care services, on the list of exclusions?

[Health, March 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, shifting the blame to others is the only thing this government is capable of.

The Conservatives claim that everything is under control, that they are going to expedite the process for importing drugs. The problem is that they have not even identified alternative drugs. They are making things up as they go along. At best, the process will take weeks.

In the meantime, in the Outaouais alone, more than 60 surgeries have been cancelled. Patients are paying the price for the Conservatives' inaction. This is completely unacceptable.

Where is the plan to guarantee the quality of the drugs manufactured here and to avoid future shortfalls?

[March 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, what I find to be completely pathetic is that as we were closing the Franklin border crossing, the United States was investing millions of dollars in a new facility. When we say that we have to continue asking questions it is because the answers are not satisfactory.

Once again, RCMP officers continue to say that they have an increased workload and that there is a resurgence of crime at the border because the border crossing was closed.

Furthermore, here is an economic example. Leahy Orchards is a company located in Franklin that has 225 local employees and it exports tonnes of products to the United States. Not just security, but the economy is affected as well, and the customs officers at that location have also lost their good jobs.

Not only is this a flaw in the action plan, but it also does not help the economy and it does not enhance security. Both are being destroyed. The operating hours of other border crossings have been reduced. Some crossings have closed and at others there is no point of entry.

The Conservatives brag about making economic recovery a priority. What will they do to keep our border jobs and, at the same time, to help us maintain border security, which is very much threatened right now?

[March 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in November 2011, I asked the Minister of Public Safety a very simple question: why was he closing Canadian border crossings, such as the Franklin border crossing in my riding, when the Americans were investing in their border infrastructure in order to improve security and the flow of goods?

All I received from the government in response were facile and arrogant judgments about the NDP's platform. I would like to quote the Minister of Public Safety. He said: “...what we know is that the New Democrats are focused on shutting down the Canadian economy....The New Democrats want to shut down not only the province of Quebec, they want to shut down industry right across Canada.” We want to shut down the province of Quebec? This is news to me. Where did the minister come up with such nonsense? How does this empty answer help to move the debate forward?

In December, the Canadian and U.S. governments released the details of a border action plan entitled “Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness”. This plan involves greater information-sharing between the two countries and the harmonization of border security regulations. Some aspects of the plan will improve the flow of goods between the two countries. However, other measures create sovereignty issues for Canada and decrease the level of security on the Canadian side of the border.

In a working document that was leaked to the media in December, the Canadian and U.S. border agencies revealed a border crossing restructuring plan. This joint plan sets out the two countries' intentions to share the facilities at 35 border crossings, to close 11 others—more closings—and to share the hours of operation of 30 border crossings or to close 23 and replace them with surveillance cameras.

Surveillance cameras? Really? That is laughable. Are we really talking about border security? This is not even a bad joke.

Closing these border crossings and replacing them with surveillance cameras may have very serious effects on the level of border security. Already, in Dundee in my riding, there has been in increase in criminal activity, such as the smuggling of weapons, cigarettes and drugs. And it is not just me who is saying this; it is the RCMP officers, residents and mayors in the area. In fact, the RCMP has said that the closure of the Franklin border crossing has made its job more difficult since there is now less surveillance and no customs agents are present.

This flies in the face of the fight against terrorism and crime that this Conservative government says it wants to wage. The action plan states: “Addressing threats early is essential to strengthening the shared security of both countries and enabling us to make the flow of legitimate people, goods and services more efficient than ever across the Canada-U.S. border.”

Is closing border crossings not a contradiction of the very objectives of this action plan?

I am therefore asking the government to reopen some of the key border crossings, such as the one at Franklin, and to harmonize their operating hours with those of the U.S. crossings.

[Health, March 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that there are people today who are experiencing delays in their health care because of this shortage, which is due to the government's lack of responsibility. Today, just on the other side of the river in Gatineau, people are being forced to wait. The minister told these people not to worry, and that she will speed up the importation of foreign drugs, but that worries me. The public is also worried.

Will the Minister of Health do what is necessary to put an end to this shortage and prevent such shortages from happening again?

[Health, March 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, not only are the Conservatives imposing the future costs of the health care system on the provinces and territories, but they are also unable to ensure the quality of drugs on the market. The Quebec company Sandoz had to slow down its drug production because it was not meeting the quality standards. The result is that hospitals have had to postpone surgeries and the public is paying the price. The Conservatives' solution is to import more drugs. That is wonderful.

Before going to our neighbours for help, why do the Conservatives not start by guaranteeing the quality of our drugs in order to avoid another—