House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2015, with 42% of the vote.
Business of Supply June 1st, 2015
Mr. Speaker, how many people living in poverty in Toronto simply cannot afford to pay for daily Internet access? Even if we told them to go on the Internet, they would not be able to pay for the connection. Furthermore, if they do not do what they are told to do, they have to pay fees. Is it common for people to not even be able to afford Internet access?
Business of Supply June 1st, 2015
Mr. Speaker, in her speech, my colleague talked about her excellent bill, which is absolutely related to the issue at hand because it also addresses bank fees. The government indicated that it was going to support the motion. I would like to know whether there are other bank-fee-related measures the government could apply immediately at the same time that it is supporting our motion, in order to lower fees for consumers, especially those with a low income, who cannot keep $3,000 in their account to avoid paying bank fees.
Business of Supply June 1st, 2015
Mr. Speaker, some people with mental health issues might not feel comfortable doing business with banking services. Does my colleague think that is a problem in his riding? Unfortunately, the government forces them to do business with banks to get their benefits, and on top of that, they have to pay to pay fees.
Does my colleague think that this way of doing things marginalizes a group of people, particularly people with delusional disorder, who might be a little more reluctant to do business with banking institutions and a computer system that collects their data?
Business of Supply June 1st, 2015
Mr. Speaker, since my colleague spoke about the measure, I want to ensure that he understands the Canadian tax system. If we reduce taxes on an entire bracket in the middle, the people who benefit are those who have higher incomes. They will benefit from the tax cut for this entire bracket. If we compare a single person who has an income of $50,000 a year and a single person who has an income of $150,000 a year, it is obvious that the latter will benefit more from the tax cut.
Does the member agree with what I just said?
Port State Measures Agreement Implementation Act May 28th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, given the importance of the fishery to my colleague's riding, I would like to know whether many people, young people in particular, are concerned about the future of fishing. Does the hon. member think that his constituents would have liked to see this bill put back on the table much sooner? I believe this bill died on the order paper with the dissolution of Parliament in 2011.
In the hon. member's view, would people have liked this bill to be reintroduced much sooner? This parliament is winding down. It would have made sense for us to address this sooner for the sake of our coastal regions. I would like my colleague to comment on that.
Digital Privacy Act May 28th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I clearly heard the minister mention the absence of my colleague from Terrebonne—Blainville in his answer. I believe we are not allowed to mention the absence or presence of members. Could you please clarify that?
Consumer Protection May 26th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, digital technologies have really helped our country flourish in recent years, but we have also noticed that not everyone has access to high-speed Internet, especially in the regions.
This problem was meant to be addressed with the digital Canada 150 program, but it appears as though Abitibi-Témiscaminque is not one of this government's priorities. We were shocked and saddened to learn recently that the project led by Gestion de l'inforoute régionale de l'Abitibi-Témiscamingue was not selected to be part of the connecting Canadians program.
The project was rejected, even though it was a solid, high-quality proposal, according to the evaluators themselves. Nearly 98% of the people living in this vast area would have finally had access to high-speed Internet through this project. The rejection of this project was a rejection of the economic and social development of an entire community, and yet the project had the support of the public and all the elected officials in the region.
No matter. When the NDP comes to power, it will ensure that everyone across Canada has access to affordable high-speed Internet.
Petitions May 26th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, today, I am pleased to present a petition to eliminate the federal tax on feminine hygiene products. Back in the days when our grandmothers used rags, such products may have been considered a luxury, but they have been considered essential for women for quite some time now. That is why all parliamentarians supported the NDP's opposition motion to get rid of that tax. The petitioners want that tax to be eliminated because it is sexist and it does not reflect the reality in which we now live. It is high time that this tax was abolished.
Health Care May 15th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying that I fully understand where my colleague from Nanaimo—Alberni is going with this motion. He, like me, is a health professional, and he knows the importance of innovating and changing our models and procedures if we want a more effective health care system.
Unfortunately, I have a few concerns about the motion. My first concern has to do with the importance of preserving a public health care system. This motion makes no mention of whether these innovations, this research and these new practices seek to preserve our public health care system and ensure that everyone continues to have access to health care. I had the opportunity to ask my colleague a question about that. He did not directly answer the question on the importance of preserving the public health care system. That is one of my concerns about the motion.
The other concern or question that I have regarding the motion has to do with the understanding of what is written between the lines. When we talk about innovation, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, those things are more about structuring health care, which comes under provincial jurisdiction. I would like to remind the House of the federal government's role in health care. This can be summarized into five responsibilities. First of all, there is access to health care for certain groups, including first nations, veterans, the RCMP, correctional services and the Canadians Forces. The second responsibility has to do with health protections. Third, there is the health promotion aspect, as well as disease prevention and awareness strategies. The fourth area is health research. When it comes to innovation in health research, the two aspects do fit in with the federal government's mandate on health. The fifth responsibility pertains to financial support for the provincial health care systems.
However, the way work is organized in hospitals does not fall under federal jurisdiction. It really falls under provincial jurisdiction. This would include a holistic approach, for example. As a professional, that is the type of approach that I promote. However, it is first up to the professional bodies, which fall under provincial jurisdiction, to determine the direction they want to take and how they want their members to redirect their efforts and change their way of doing things. It is really a provincial issue. It falls under provincial jurisdiction.
There are many other words that one needs to understand. “Cost-effectiveness” and “effectiveness” for example, pertain to determining whether it is cheaper and just as effective to have two practical nurses and two nurses on a health care team rather than two nurses, one practical nurse and one health care attendant. How the work is organized not only falls under provincial jurisdiction but it is also the domain of the hospitals.
Right now, hospitals are already sharing information when they conduct pilot projects or try different approaches, for example, and that is working very well. They will often publish scientific information on what they tried so that other hospitals or jurisdictions that may want to try the same thing can use that information. The information is already being shared. However, having the federal government directly interfere with the organization of work is going way too far.
The third part of the motion moved by my colleague from Nickel Belt with respect to the dementia strategy referred to health promotion and disease prevention. That fits in well with the federal government's mandate. However, the organization of work intrudes too much into the provinces' jurisdiction.
The motion also refers to being collaborative and interdisciplinary in character. Once again, excellent approaches have been tried across the country with good results. Nevertheless, this is a provincial jurisdiction.
I believe that the provinces continue to try to implement initiatives. Their efforts are based on what is done elsewhere, and they use models from other countries, for example, but this is still a provincial jurisdiction. To my mind, the motion goes too far in that regard.
When we talk about a health care model, we are talking about policies for professional practices and the various occupations. When we talk about teams, we are referring here to the provinces, which still have different professional bodies and designations. For example, when we talk about massage therapists, they do not currently have an association or recognized federation in Quebec. Thus, we have a problem. We do not even have the same starting point from one province to the next. There is still work to be done. A motion like this one makes things extremely complex from a federal perspective.
What I want to say is that most professions and provinces realize that they must innovate, and they are already sharing information. However, when we talk about really putting in place a national strategy, I believe that this intrudes too much into the provinces' jurisdiction.
The federal government has really neglected funding for the provinces. Let us not forget that the member for Nanaimo—Alberni was still a Conservative caucus member when the government decided to cut provincial health transfers by $36 billion. It decided to unilaterally end the provincial and territorial health accords and to shut down the Health Council of Canada, which was responsible for introducing innovation. I think there is a contradiction there. The government is not respecting the provinces' jurisdiction. In addition, it is not giving them the funding they need for implementation.
Canada has asymmetrical federalism. Quebec can have separate arrangements with Canada. When the government provides health funding, the Government of Quebec has to use that money to implement its own plan to ensure access to quality health care in a timely fashion and to reduce wait times.
It is therefore critical that the provinces retain their independence when it comes to how they organize how the work is done on the ground. They have to be able to decide how they want to improve effectiveness. I believe the provinces do that by considering the available scientific data and looking at what is being done elsewhere. I believe that they take all of that into account when determining their priorities and that they make changes to improve their health system on the basis of their priorities.
That is why, as an MP, I cannot accept a motion that intrudes too far into provincial jurisdiction. I want to make sure that the health system remains a public health system above all. Unfortunately, the member refused to give me a clear sense of whether he really believes that the system should remain public.
Health Care May 15th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I want to know why my colleague did not choose to talk in the motion about the importance of being innovative and more effective in an effort to preserve Canada's public health care system.
Does he believe that innovation and effectiveness are essential to preserving our public health care system?