Jennifer O'Connell

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the reminder. I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

It is imperative that Bill C-14 and the fall economic statement make it through the House. If members are supportive of creating better conditions in long-term care homes, then they need to support and work with us so we can provide $1 billion that will do just that.

I agree that we do need to look at profit models in long-term care homes. Like my hon. colleague who asked at question in the last round, I have family in Newfoundland. There are private long-term care homes there. My family members talk about how incredible they are as is the service that is provided.

I worry about a motion like this, with a one-size-fits-all approach. I come from Ontario where we were very hard hit with the lack of protections for our seniors. With a one-size-fits-all approach, what happens in other provinces and territories that do not have the same conditions, that have homes where the level of service is quite high?

I support looking at the idea of how we change funding models to ensure that service is at the core of what is being offered in our communities, that any federal funding or government supports is actually going to services and not just to the profits of shareholders. I think this is a fundamental approach with which we could all.

However, what I take exception to in this motion is that it feels like the NDP wants to move forward with policies written on the back of a napkin. There is no background. This motion is not based on evidence or what happens after. We have not looked at how we take the profit model and turn it into a service model or what will happen with the facilities? Would these operators just close up and leave these seniors homeless? Would they get passed on to municipalities and the public service? How would municipalities absorb that?

While I support the idea of looking at ensuring our standards are increased, I cannot get behind a motion that essentially creates a blanket approach, without looking at what would happen to our seniors. Our seniors deserve a policy that is thoughtful, one we can all understand and one that can be worked on with provinces and territories to ensure the delivery and the outcomes we want are delivered.

What we have seen from the government has been reaction and support. There has been a lot of accusations around the federal government claiming that it is not its responsibility. We have stepped up. We have provided $19 billion for the safe restart agreement, which was to help long-term care homes. In my home province of Ontario, the federal government provided funds and supports to the Government of Ontario to prepare for the second wave. These funds went unspent. These funds did not make it into the long-term care homes to protect our community members. Instead, the funds sat there.

We need standards to ensure that every Canadian across the country can access the same level of care, no matter where they live, that Canadians can hold provinces and territories accountable if they do not live up those standards and that the funding is set up to hold these service providers accountable.

In my community, we saw PPE under lock and key. That is absolutely outrageous, but the federal government was there to support these community members. We also invested in increasing wages for workers, but if provinces and territories do not move forward with legislation, then we do not see changes. This is why it is critically important.

The member for Kingston and the Islands continues to ask about consultation with provinces and territories and has yet to receive an answer. This is crucial because families deserve to know that if we are going to move forward on a policy, it can actually be enacted. If we were to pass this NDP motion without any details of how it would impact our communities and family members, if a province said it was not going to pass legislation that would change the funding model, then what would happen?

It is absolutely disingenuous to say that one wants to support seniors and increase standards in long-term care and then come forward with a motion that is nothing but optics and would do nothing to actually create the change we need to see. We need to see changes in infrastructure and national standards to ensure that every Canadian across this country gets a standard of care, and stop playing politics with seniors' lives and move forward on policies that would actually make a difference in this country.

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, it is no surprise that I want to speak on this item, and not only in my new role. I and several of my colleagues have been discussing the conditions in long-term care homes and are outraged by them. My riding in particular was hit very hard, with over 70 residents passing away from COVID in the first wave at Orchard Villa, and we saw, even after the second wave, a continuation of our community members getting sick and dying.

We also saw the horrible conditions. My riding was one of the ridings that had the Canadian Armed Forces in their long-term care homes, and we had to read about the unbelievably deplorable conditions that our community members and elders had been left in. Families were feeling helpless and hopeless about being able to provide their family members with care and to be able to be there with them.

We had been advocating support for provinces and territories and for national standards in long-term care and talking about those needs, and those are things I continue to advocate to this day. I was really pleased, along with my colleagues, when I saw the Prime Minister in the Speech from the Throne recognize and acknowledge moving forward with national standards on long-term care, and then that was backed up again in the fall economic statement by providing a $1-billion safe long-term care fund.

Unfortunately, opposition members have been holding up Bill C-14—

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that the NDP did not allow the amendment, because the proposed amendment spoke to precisely the areas that our government had invested in from the first wave to the second wave, including in PPE and infrastructure to improve long-term care facilities, funding for staffing, and support for provinces and territories. With that said, I do agree with the member opposite's comments that every senior needs to live in dignity. It is precisely why the Prime Minister made long-term care national standards a priority in the Speech from the Throne as well as in the fall economic statement.

If the member is looking for solutions and her party supports solutions, why, on February 9 did her leader comment publicly that he does not support national standards and took that off the table for her and her party to work with us to establish long-term care national standards? Why does her leader not support those standards?

[Women and Gender Equality, February 25th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, COVID-19 is the most serious public health crisis Canada has ever faced. It has laid bare fundamental gaps in our society and disproportionately impacted those who are already marginalized, vulnerable or struggling.

Women have faced steep job losses. Many have bravely served on the front lines of this crisis in our communities and carried the burden of unpaid care work at home.

With International Women's Day approaching on March 8, can the Minister for Women and Gender Equality update the House on the theme for the day, and how we will be marking the occasion?

[Petitions, February 25th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling two petitions on behalf of my constituents. Both are on the same topic, which is the Pickering federal lands. The first petition calls on the House of Commons to rescind all plans for an airport and for any non-agricultural uses on the remaining Pickering federal lands. They ask the House to take action to preserve the watersheds and the class 1 farmland on these lands.

The second petition also calls on the government to abandon any plans for a proposed Pickering airport and requests the House of Commons to designate Parks Canada as the custodian of the Pickering federal lands to preserve them for public use. They also ask the House to mandate the use of long-term leases to initiate support for the revitalization of these lands.

[Legion Branch 170, February 2nd, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, COVID-19 has greatly impacted veterans and the resources they rely on. Legions across the country have had to close their doors, leaving many veterans isolated and without these community-led supports. Legions provide supportive spaces and valuable assistance for our veterans and their families.

Our government understands the important role Legions have in our communities, and responded by creating the $20 million veterans organization emergency support fund. Through this fund, Legion Branch 170 in Uxbridge received $10,000 in support. Not only does Branch 170 honour and support veterans, but it brings together the entire community in its efforts and teaches future generations of the sacrifices that veterans made for us.

The work our community does with Branch 170 is incredibly special, and I am glad our government supported this to ensure veterans' supports will continue in Uxbridge and in so many communities across Canada.

[COVID-19 Vaccine, January 26th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, there were some challenges with the interpretation, but from what I was able to pick up, I think the question was around inaction by the government. I do not know if there was something specific.

I will just say that since the beginning of this pandemic, countries around the world were grappling with the best measures to take based on science. It was evolving. We have come to the table at every step of the way to ensure that the health and safety of Canadians is at the forefront.

The interpretation did not come through, and I apologize if I did not hear all of the question. I think the key is ensuring that—

[COVID-19 Vaccine, January 26th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I do agree that transparency is incredibly important.

This is why I think the opportunity for this debate, in terms of vaccine hesitancy, is a good opportunity to talk about how Canada is a leader in regulation, safety and making sure that vaccines are safe and effective. We have a world-class system through Health Canada and our regulators to ensure that vaccines are safe before they go out to the general public.

Health Canada does an excellent job in providing the science-based analysis to provide the level of transparency that the member spoke to. I agree, and as parliamentarians we have a role to play in sharing that information with Canadians to ensure that when vaccines are available and ready, like the ones that are already in Canada, Canadians feel safe and comfortable receiving them. That is precisely what we need to do to get through this pandemic.

[COVID-19 Vaccine, January 26th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my hon. colleague. In fact, the irony is that as my hon. colleague was speaking and asking about the plan, he actually highlighted several elements of our plan. The Government of Canada website displays timelines and the numbers of doses that are coming, and there is that commitment that once Canadians have received vaccines, if there are additional vaccines, we will absolutely work with other countries and developing nations that need help.

I agree with the member that Canada does have a duty to help around the world if possible, but the government has committed to make sure that we take care of the health and safety of Canadians first and then we will do our part globally. That is going to be good for Canadians, and it is going to be good for our global community and our global economy.

[COVID-19 Vaccine, January 26th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, yes. I apologize.

Thank you. I am splitting my time with the hon. member for Winnipeg North.

That being said, vaccines are going to have an incredibly important role in getting us through this pandemic. That is why our government prioritized the signing of contracts and making sure that vaccines would be available in Canada. That work required a lot of information going into the background. This work began with our government back in July. At that time, there was so much uncertainty about vaccines, including their timing and when they would be safe and effective. That is just something that politicians and politics cannot control. It had to be science-led, which is exactly why our government made sure to have a diverse portfolio and to work with industry experts to prepare for all possible scenarios.

Frankly, the Pfizer delays for the next few weeks are disappointing, but demonstrate precisely how our government's plan was to diversify and to ensure that there would be a variety of vaccines and that once they were deemed safe and effective by Health Canada, Canada could then access them.

In addition to that, even prior to the vaccines' development, our government was working to ensure that we had all the materials we needed to help deal with the COVID-19 virus. That meant we heard early calls to ensure that we would have enough PPE, which we then delivered on, and calls for increasing rapid testing, which we again delivered on. Every step of the way, every twist and turn of this pandemic, we have been there for Canadians in ways that have been very responsive and fast, all things considered, given the dynamics of this pandemic globally and the global competition for all of these same materials.

To see Canada as one of the leaders in ensuring that we have these materials and vaccines for Canadians is precisely why I am very hopeful that we will be able to come out of this pandemic quickly, and also in ways that make us all stronger and, frankly, from which we can learn lessons to ensure that we have strategies in place, not just in pandemic times but throughout governments so that we always keep pandemic planning at the forefront.

Getting back to what we were discussing, which is the vaccines and their procurement, I have heard a lot of members during this debate talk about there being no plan. That could not be further from the truth. Our plan is precisely what we are debating. In fairness, I understand the role of members of the opposition. It is completely their duty and right to pose questions to the government, but there is a big difference between challenging the government or having a difference of opinion and spreading misinformation.

Some members have risen to the occasion in this debate by understanding what is on the line while supporting Canadians during this difficult time, but there are many who, frankly, have used this opportunity to spread misinformation and cause incredible confusion. They have done so for political gain. That is so disheartening. This is an opportunity, whether we all agree or not on the specifics of the rollout, for us to come together as a Parliament and as Canadians to step forward and work together on ensuring the health and safety of all Canadians.

To see members rise in this place but not rise to the occasion is, frankly, very disheartening. We should be discussing strategies and steps for moving forward as a Canadian government and as Canadian parliamentarians looking out for our friends and neighbours, not using this as an opportunity for whatever political game we might see. I remember that back in December Conservative members were claiming we were never going to get the vaccine or we were going to be last, and that did not happen. We had a plan, we stuck to it and we saw deliveries of vaccines in Canada.

We were one of the first countries to get vaccines, and the Conservatives looked deflated after that happened. They should have been elated. They should have been happy that vaccines were delivered for Canadians. Instead, they did not ask any questions about it until this point. There is no question that the Pfizer delay is something we are all disappointed about, but the suggestion that we have no vaccines in this country is simply false. We have over 1.1 million vaccines in Canada to date and we have more vaccines coming next week from Moderna and Pfizer, and as Health Canada continues its work and its reviews, if additional vaccine candidates become approved, we have additional contracts.

As parliamentarians, we have a duty to assure the public that we are working to make sure we have everything that we need in place. We need to build up public trust to ensure that Canadians know that when vaccines are available and it is their turn to receive the vaccine, they can trust that it was not a group of politicians determining which vaccines move forward and which ones do not, that it is instead based on science and evidence and that the regulators at Health Canada are the ones who make these decisions.

This is an opportunity we all have as parliamentarians, and I hope that we will rise to the occasion. The Conservatives should work with us on solutions. I keep hearing Conservatives say there is no plan, yet I have not heard a single solution from them or heard them say that they would have done something differently. Working together is the type of leadership that all Canadians would welcome, and we should get away from the partisanship in a pandemic and crisis like this. If not now, then when? I really think that is what Canadians are expecting.

As we move forward, it is important to assure Canadians that until vaccines are available in their jurisdictions for mass distribution, we need to protect our most vulnerable and continue with these measures. Canada has procured enough vaccines to ensure that every Canadian who wants a vaccination can get one by September. We have six million doses of vaccines coming by the end of March, and from April to June at least 20 million doses of vaccines will be available. They are coming, and we need to work together to ensure that all of us play a role in keeping Canadians safe.