Dany Morin

[Organ Donations, December 5th, 2011]

Mr. Chair, thank you for giving me the floor. This evening we are discussing organ donation in Canada. This is a fairly broad topic that can cover a number of areas. I will try to cover as many as possible this evening.

First of all, in Canada there is currently a shortage of organs for people with serious injuries and those suffering from a chronic condition who need a new organ to maintain internal circulation. I will give an overview of the situation. At present, there are 4,000 Canadians waiting for an organ transplant in Canada. That is a large number of people who are waiting at home or in hospital. For example, 75% of the people waiting for an organ require a kidney transplant. They have to go to hospital several times a week for dialysis, which really complicates their lives.

For those not familiar with dialysis, it involves spending several hours at the hospital hooked up to a machine. Because the person's kidneys do not work properly, the blood is filtered by the machine to remove waste products that would ordinarily be eliminated by the kidneys and the excretory system.

Just imagine having to go to the hospital several times a week for dialysis. These people must be on friendly terms with hospital staff, but it does restrict their lifestyle. Imagine having to organize your life around spending time in hospital and the money that is invested in very expensive equipment. We are very lucky because, in 2011, there are machines that are artificial replacements for kidneys. However, the cost of this technology is very high. Ideally, the best scenario would be for everyone to sign their organ donor cards. I am very pleased that the Conservative member who spoke before me mentioned that she has signed her donor card. So have I.

If every Canadian did their part for our great health care system, many people could benefit. In the event of one's death, donating organs that are still viable is a beautiful, selfless act of giving. It allows people to live much longer or to have a better quality of life.

The situation is rather grim right now. At present, some 4,000 Canadians are still waiting for organ donations. Last year, there were 1,803 organ transplants, out of the 4,000 people who are waiting. Every day, every week, every month, every year, the list grows longer. What should we do as a society to solve this problem?

We need a public awareness campaign to convince people that signing their organ donor card could help a lot of people. There is a reason it is also called a gift of life. It is a beautiful gift that is passed on from someone who dies to another person, to people he or she does not even know.

Some myths persist about organ donation, but I will try to debunk some of them. People who are afraid of signing their organ donor card are often afraid that all of their internal organs will be stolen. That is truly not the case. The family is consulted at the hospital when the time comes to make the decision about whether the viable organs of a loved one are to be donated. The solution is for everyone to talk to their families about it, so that they are prepared to give their consent for the donation.

I encourage everyone to sign their organ donor card. I also encourage the federal government to launch an awareness campaign to urge Canadians to make this meaningful gesture. Beyond that, however, there are some problems with Canada's organ donation program. I would like to quote Canadian Blood Services.

This is what Canadian Blood Services thinks about the federal government's lack of leadership on creating a national, coordinated system for organ and tissue donation and transplantation. It says:

Canada is one of the only countries in the western world without a national, coordinated system for organ and tissue donation and transplantation. The system as it stands today is at capacity, and is struggling to cope with current needs and projected future demand.

Yes, more people need to sign organ donor cards, but the government also has to do its part and set up a national, coordinated system. There is currently a lack of leadership compared to many other developed countries that have implemented a national, coordinated system for organ donation that works quite well. As a result of this lack of leadership, the system is broken and could be vastly improved.

There is a third aspect. I touched on it a bit with the hon. Conservative member. There is discrimination when it comes to the rules for organ donation. I have already mentioned it, but it bears repeating. Men who have had sex with another man even once in the past five years are automatically deemed to be in the at-risk category for organ donation. This includes many additional complications compared to heterosexual men and women who have had multiple partners over the course of many years, yet who are not deemed to be in the at-risk category. The reason I bring this up is because we are talking about discrimination.

I will share a short story. Imagine a couple, two men who have been together for 20 years in a monogamous relationship. They love each other very much and having sex is part of their private life. Even though they have been together for 20 years and they have had no other sexual partners, if one of them wants to donate his organs, every one of his organs is deemed to be at risk. In contrast, a heterosexual person who engages in high-risk behaviour—we know there are people who are not very careful—will not be put in the at-risk group. As a man who has been having sex with his male partner for the past two years, I find it discriminatory that my organs are deemed to be at risk, unlike my New Democratic, Conservative and Liberal colleagues, my colleagues from every party, whose organs are not at risk.

This is governed by the regulations of the Canadian Blood Services because it is the organization that makes these decisions with the support of the government.

The reason why this discrimination is very troubling is that scientific studies prove that there is no reason to have this discrimination in the regulations. I understand why this measure was initially introduced in the 1980s. It was to restrict donations of blood and organs from homosexual men because of the AIDS epidemic. However, in recent decades there has been such progress that both blood and organs can be tested within two weeks to determine if they are affected or if an infection is present.

For organs to be considered to be at risk for five years is very discriminatory. It does not encourage the homosexual population to contribute and make organ donations. Just imagine being in the shoes of the people who discover that their organs or blood are not valued by the authorities that make the regulations for this matter.

In conclusion, establishing a national, central organ donation registry, in co-operation with the provinces and territories, is very important. That is the main conclusion of the document entitled Organ Donation and Transplantation in Canada. I recommend that the Conservative government establish this type of registry and, at the same time, conduct an awareness campaign to encourage organ donation.

[Organ Donations, December 5th, 2011]

Mr. Chair, my Conservative colleague and I both sit on the Standing Committee on Health. I expect that she is familiar with the latest science and is sensitive to all health-related matters.

What is my colleague’s opinion about the fact that men who have had sex with another man in the last five years are systematically considered to be in the at-risk group for organ donation?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, December 5th, 2011]

What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 2004-2005, up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, identifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?

[Public Safety, December 1st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, that answer tells me that the Conservative government does not believe that the federal government can play a role in this area. I believe it can.

The NDP introduced a bill to establish a national suicide prevention strategy. It is part of the solution that made the headlines one day and was written off by the Conservatives the next. We have to put in place a coordinated plan to fight bullying. Ontario and Quebec are taking action; now it is Ottawa's turn to do so.

I will be introducing a bill in the near future to directly attack this serious societal problem. I am asking the Conservatives to set aside partisanship and work with the NDP to effectively fight bullying and its devastating effects on our children.

[Public Safety, December 1st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, over a month ago, following the tragic death of Jamie Hubley, I asked the Conservatives to tell us their plan on youth bullying. The Minister of Foreign Affairs replied, “Bullying and intimidation have no place in our schools. Our society needs to engage in promoting tolerance and acceptance”.

The tragic suicide this week of Marjorie Raymond, a bullied teenage girl in Gaspésie, proves once again that we must act now.

Ontario is acting. Quebec is acting. What will the federal government do to protect our children from bullying and how long do we have to wait for this?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, November 29th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleague on the other side spoke about the treatment offered to prisoners, in particular for addiction. I like this approach that the government is looking to include. However, I do have some concerns. Correctional investigator Howard Sapers said that only one in five inmates has access in prison to programs for anger management or substance abuse.

I would like my Conservative colleague to tell me whether the government plans on expanding the measures in the crime bill to ensure that addicts have access to programs that will help them and will make our streets safer.

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, November 29th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, last Sunday, under the Access to Information Act, The Canadian Press obtained an internal report by the federal Department of Justice. The report raises doubts about the effectiveness of harsher sentences, the linchpin of the Conservative government's tough-on-crime policies. To quote the author of the study, André Solecki, “There was no evidence to suggest that the imposition of a fine or imprisonment had any effect on the likelihood of whether an offender would re-offend or not.”

Thus, I have a question for my hon. NDP colleague about the following observation. Either the Conservative government does not read its own internal reports, or it ignores any reports that it does not agree with, stubbornly sticking to its ideology and forsaking all expert opinions that call for more emphasis on prevention and rehabilitation than on harsher sentences.

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, November 29th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, Quebec has made it clear that it does not want to foot the bill for Bill C-10, the omnibus crime bill.

When the office of the Minister of Public Safety was asked to clarify, the minister's spokesperson responded that it would be up to each province to allocate the resources of the Canada social transfer according to its priorities. If I understand correctly, the Conservative government is asking the Government of Quebec to cut the budgets for post-secondary education, social assistance, social services and early childhood services, since these are areas covered by the Canada social transfer, in order to pay for the megaprisons.

Is that what the Conservative government is telling Quebec, that it should make cuts in order to pay for the megaprisons?

[Business of Supply, November 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we can talk about this major issue for the aboriginal communities—although it is unfortunate that it is still an issue in 2011. I represent the NDP on the Standing Committee on Health where I am responsible for aboriginal health issues. Every time I ask our witnesses in committee to tell us what the federal government can do to improve health for the aboriginal peoples, who have a number of health problems—often more than the general public—they often tell me the same thing: improve their basic sanitary conditions. This includes better housing to ensure that the problem of overcrowding does not affect public health, and it is also includes improving the drinking water supply.

I am quite pleased that the Liberals have proposed this discussion today. I simply want to agree with the hon. Liberal member that, in 2011, it is high time for the Conservative government to address the drinking water problem in aboriginal communities to ensure that the aboriginal peoples can finally enjoy decent living conditions and flourish like all other Canadians.

[Keeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing Act, November 15th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question for my Conservative colleague.

Bill C-13 is called Keeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing Act. For months now, the NDP has been talking about a significant measure to stimulate job creation and give some tax relief to the job creators that create more than half of new jobs in Canada—small and medium-sized businesses, or SMEs.

Will the Conservative government commit to lowering the small and medium-sized business tax rate from 11% to 9%, as the NDP has been calling for? It is a very simple question. I want to see if the Conservative government can show some leadership and support our entrepreneurs who work so hard and if it can support our SMEs and create more jobs in the regions.