Kellie Leitch

[Citizen's Arrest and Self-defence Act, December 15th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, there has been a considerable amount of debate and public concern with respect to the apparent limitations around the scope of citizen's arrest. The Minister of Justice is quoted as saying:

Our government is committed to putting real criminals behind bars. Canadians who have been the victim of a crime should not be re-victimized by the criminal justice system.

I appreciate my colleague's comments and what he had to say about some of those real life experiences that he and his constituents have experienced.

I would ask the member to walk us through the citizen's arrest reforms that are embedded in this piece of legislation.

[Canada Labour Code, December 13th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity today to comment on Bill C-307 presented by my colleague, the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.

This bill proposes adding another section to part II of the Canada Labour Code. This would bring the federal code in line with provincial legislation regarding the health and safety of pregnant or nursing employees.

In Quebec there is a program called “Pour une maternité sans danger”, the safe maternity program, which many pregnant workers use. A pregnant nurse, for example, whose job poses a risk to her health or that of her baby can be reassigned to another task or be allowed to take preventative withdrawal leave on the advice of her physician. If she must take leave, this pregnant nurse will receive an income or replacement benefit equivalent to 90% of her net insurable income.

It is clear that even if this is not spelled out explicitly, the intent of Bill C-307 is to give employees working in Quebec, but under federal jurisdiction, the possibility of getting the same access to the safe maternity program as employees under provincial jurisdiction.

I must admit that the issue raised by the bill is important to me, both as a woman and as a pediatric surgeon who spends most of the time taking care of children. I would be the first to say that pregnant and nursing women have the right to work in a safe environment. This is something that every Canadian would agree with.

Wherever we sit in the House, I am sure that we all want to protect those who give life, the infants they carry, and those who have been brought into the world. In fact, the Canada Labour Code formally recognizes this right. It includes several provisions, including maternity related reassignment or leave. These provisions give considerable protection to pregnant and nursing employees. I am not going to go into the details of these provisions, but generally speaking this is what they allow.

If there is a risk to the health of the employee, her fetus or her child, the employee can get a modification of her duties to be reassigned to another job without any loss of salary or benefits. If these measures are impractical, she can go on leave for as long as the danger persists.

Other provisions allow an employee to take leave during the period from the beginning of the pregnancy up to 24 weeks after childbirth if she is unable to work because of her pregnancy or nursing. This is in addition to regular maternity, parental or sick leave provisions under the code.

It is not my place to give an opinion on Quebec's safe maternity program, which, in principle, is very commendable. But one thing is sure: the program is very expensive.

To note, in a Canadian Press article that appeared at the beginning of November, it was reported that the cost of financing the program is 19 times higher than it was when it was first created. It now costs over $200 million per year, all of it financed by employees through a payroll tax. In Quebec, the same contribution rate, which is 19¢ on every $100 of employees' insurable earnings, is applied to all employees targeted by Quebec's preventative withdrawal program. This is regardless of the amount of benefits their employees receive.

If we assume that the same contribution rate would be applied to their current total salary envelope, employees under federal jurisdiction operating in Quebec, including the federal government, would be obliged to pay almost $20 million a year in contributions. However, given the relatively lower health and safety risks presented by most jobs under federal jurisdiction, it can be estimated the amount of benefits provided to employees would be approximately $5.4 million. In such a scenario, federally regulated employers would on average pay almost four times more into the program than their employees would take out. If only from a financial perspective, this would make no sense.

The financial aspect is one we cannot ignore, especially in these difficult economic times. That is perhaps why a report earlier this year, commissioned by Quebec's workers compensation board, recommended that the admissibility criteria for its program be tightened and that more effort was needed to encourage employers to accommodate pregnant and nursing employees. That is what our priority should be, to focus on allowing women to maintain their attachment to the labour force by ensuring that they work in a safe environment.

We have to consider the potential unintended consequences of the bill on workers that it is meant to help. Increasing business payroll taxes would hinder job growth and could lead some employers to reduce or eliminate benefits altogether for their employees. If Bill C-307 brought significant new benefits and protections for employees, this might also be a price worth considering, but it does not.

From a legislative point of view, Bill C-307 would also be difficult to implement. If Bill C-307 were adopted, many employers under federal jurisdiction would then be subject to most provincial and federal provisions on preventative withdrawal. This could create confusion in regard to the respective rights and obligations of employers and employees. Employees could try to take advantage of either their federal or provincial rights or remedies, choosing whichever system seemed to be the most advantageous under the circumstances. This would lead to problems in application of labour laws.

In addition, Bill C-307 would create disparities in the treatment of employees working in different provinces for the same employer. Given certain rights and benefits only in federal jurisdictions, employees located in one province and having such inequity enshrined in law would be unfair for employees working in other regions of the country. This sort of situation could lead to a complicated patchwork of disparities and legal obligations for employers under federal jurisdiction. Those operating in several provinces, including small companies which cannot afford professional legal or HR assistance, would face significant administrative difficulties.

Bill C-307 would also have the effect of blurring the lines of demarcation between jurisdictions of labour matters. The provinces could adopt laws that would apply to workplaces under federal jurisdiction. Such a development could have broad legal and policy ramifications.

It is clear that pregnant and nursing women have the right to work in an environment that is safe and healthy. If there is a risk to their health, that right is protected under the Canada Labour Code.

I would also point out that the vast majority of employees under federal jurisdiction are entitled to benefits under a disability insurance or sick leave program provided by their employer. Employees are also entitled to employment insurance benefits if they meet the eligibility criteria.

When we propose to make changes or additions to the Canada Labour Code, as is proposed in Bill C-307, we must ensure that we are carefully considering their implications, and weigh the pros and cons. That is what we have done as a responsible government.

After spending a great deal of time examining this bill and for all the reasons I just mentioned, we have decided to oppose Bill C-307 and we ask all members to do the same.

[Poverty, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the numbers speak for themselves, Let t us look at the numbers.

The low income rate for children has declined significantly from a peak of 18.4% under the Liberals in 1996 to 9.5% in 2009 under our Conservative government.

We have doubled our investment in the working income tax benefit to $1.1 billion per year. This encourages more low income Canadians to find and retain a job.

We have raised the level at which the Canada child tax benefit and the national child benefit supplement for low income families are phased out. This allows families to earn additional income and still qualify for full or partial benefits. By raising the ceiling for eligibility, we have provided an additional annual benefit of up to $436 for a family with two children in 2010-11. The child tax benefit assists 3.3 million families. The national child benefit supplement assists 1.5 million families with 2.7 million children.

As the member can hear, we are supporting Canadian families while reducing the conditions for food bank usage.

[Poverty, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan for her concern about the level of poverty in this country and in particular, the rise in food bank usage. I, too, share this concern. In fact, our government has studied Food Banks Canada's annual HungerCount report and we are encouraged to see a decrease in food bank usage compared with last year.

Our government has been taking action to reduce poverty and to address the conditions that lead to food bank use. We are working on two main fronts. We are equipping Canadians with the skills and opportunities to achieve self-sufficiency. We have targeted supports for those who face particular barriers to that self-sufficiency.

One of the best ways to reduce poverty is to get more Canadians working. I would like to point out that almost 600,000 more Canadians are working today than there were at the end of the recession. This is something I have commented on in this House before. The unemployment rate has declined to 7.4%, significantly down from its peak at 8.7% during the recession.

To get more people into the workforce, the Government of Canada is working closely with the provinces and territories.

For example, each year we provide almost $2.5 billion to the provinces and territories to deliver critical services and supports to Canadian workers who need help finding new jobs.

I would also like to comment on our targeted supports.

To help seniors who are economically vulnerable, budget 2011 enhanced the guaranteed income supplement. This additional support is for those seniors who rely almost exclusively on old age security and the GIS. Effective July 1, 2011, these seniors will receive additional annual benefits of up to $600 for a single person and $840 for couples. This represents an investment of more than $300 million per year, which will improve the financial security of over 680,000 seniors. This is the biggest single top-up of the GIS in 25 years.

To help low income families with young children, we have implemented the universal child care benefit. This program helps provide over $2.6 billion each year to 1.5 million families. The child care benefit has lifted an estimated 55,000 children living in 24,000 families out of poverty.

To help people with disabilities, we introduced the registered disability savings plan. This is a program to help Canadians with disabilities and their families save for the future.

The Government of Canada has provided Canada disability savings grants and Canada disability savings bonds to low and modest income Canadian families.

We recognize that families who have children with a disability may not be able to contribute regularly to these plans and that it may take time to set up these plans. Therefore, in budget 2010 we implemented a 10-year carry forward program for both of these entitlements.

Our government is working to reduce poverty in many ways and our efforts are paying off.

[Service Canada, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, we are consolidating and improving the way employment insurance benefits are delivered to Canadians.

The way in which claims are currently processed is outdated. That is why we are increasing automation to make the service fast, more effective and more efficient.

As the minister has said several times in the House, there is a long-standing tradition of providing extra resources this time of year to deal with a seasonal increase in claims. We will continue to do that this year, as we have in the past.

As I mentioned earlier, our government is committed to delivering programs and services that are efficient as well as effective.

The member opposite should stop relying on inaccurate and misleading information from union agitators whose only interest is protecting the old and inefficient way of doing things.

We are standing up for hard-working taxpayers who demand that we find more efficient ways to spend their tax dollars.

[Service Canada, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to the member for London—Fanshawe today on CPP-related calls to Service Canada.

First, let me assure the member opposite that Service Canada is not only meeting but is exceeding its service standards related to the Canada pension plan applications and payments. Over 95% of benefits are paid within the first month of entitlement.

Last week 9 out of 10 Canadians resolved their calls through the automated voice response system or talked to an agent at at least 1 of our 14 CPP call centres.

I find it unfortunate that the member opposite would attempt to mislead or misinform our seniors about the level of service they can except from Service Canada. Our government's support for seniors is a matter of record.

In budget 2011 we increased the guaranteed income supplement to help seniors in poverty. This was the largest increase in 25 years and the money is already flowing to those in need. We provided income tax relief through pension income splitting and enhanced the pension income credit.

We are educating Canadians about elder abuse and increasing seniors involvement in their communities through a number of initiatives, including the new horizons program. Our government wants to ensure that Canadian seniors receive timely services and accurate information, no matter where they live.

At the present time, Canadians have access to more than 600 points of service across Canada, including Service Canada centres, outreach offices and community offices. In addition, there is a Service Canada call centre network that consists of 14 call centres primarily assigned to provide services for unemployment insurance, old age security and Canada pension plan benefits.

Between April 1 and October 1, 2011 our call centre agents answered 1.7 million calls and our automated telephone services received over 3.2 million calls.

Our goal is to provide all Canadians, including seniors, with one-stop accessible service, whether they deal with us by telephone, by Internet or in person.

We also have other ways to reach out to seniors directly. For example, we can identify Canadians who are approaching the age of 65 based on information related to their CPP contributions. Using this update, we mail CPP and OAS applications to Canadians who may be eligible for these benefits.

Through the tax system, we can identify those low-income seniors who are not receiving the guaranteed income supplement, so we can send them a GIS application form.

The government is committed to delivering programs and services that are efficient and effective, aligned with the priorities of Canadians and financially sustainable over the long term for Canadian seniors.

[Breast Density Awareness Act, December 9th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of Bill C-314 regarding dense breast tissue and the importance of breast cancer screening.

Bill C-314 calls on the federal government to use existing programs and initiatives to increase awareness about dense breast tissue and its impact on breast cancer screening. The bill's focus is on working with partnerships to improve information and share information on screening with women and their doctors. Several current government actions are highlighted. They are supported by other partner organizations focused on cancer, breast cancer and breast cancer screening. I will explain more about these actions in my remarks today, but I would like to begin with a few words about how critical the underlying issue is.

Every year, millions of Canadians are affected by cancer either personally or by the experience of a family member, friend or neighbour. I have personally been affected by this disease with the loss of my mother in 1989. Because of this and my role as a surgeon, I know about the importance of breast cancer screening and awareness. Breast health, regular checkups and exams should be a conversation in every home in Canada. It is one that occurred in my family home. As one can imagine, it is not an easy conversation for a single father who has recently lost his wife to have with his young children. However, it is extremely important that parents have this conversation with all of their daughters.

Awareness starts at home, as well as in a doctor's office. Young women across the country should be in constant dialogue with family physicians when it comes to their breast health and determining what practices for screening are best for them. Breast cancer in particular is a major health concern. One in nine women in Canada develops breast cancer during her lifetime, making it one of the most common cancers affecting Canadian women.

In 2011, it is estimated that 23,400 women in Canada will be diagnosed with breast cancer, an increase from 2010. That represents about 450 women being diagnosed each week. Early detection of breast cancer through organized screening programs is an important public health practice. Our government has invested in partnerships that promote optimal screening. Our government works across different health sectors with partner organizations, as well as with provinces and territories that deliver health care services.

Together we want to improve screening and early detection and to provide information to women. That is exactly what Bill C-314 calls for: an assurance that we are doing all we can to increase awareness and to assist health care providers and women in making well-informed screening decisions.

This bill recognizes that we are taking action on this issue through a number of initiatives. We are reinforcing existing investments, commitments and action on prevention, detection and control. The bill also recognizes the important work done by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. This initiative was established and funded by our government. The bill highlights the work our government does through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative. The knowledge generated through these initiatives is then shared with doctors and networks that include health organizations like the Canadian Cancer Society.

The central initiative supported by our government to fight cancer is the Canadian strategy for cancer control. This is a co-ordinated comprehensive strategy developed with government, non-governmental cancer organizations, cancer survivors, researchers and health care professionals. Screening and early detection is the main priority of the strategy. Breast density and its implications for screening is a part of this.

The Canadian strategy for cancer control is implemented by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. The partnership is an independent not-for-profit organization that is working on prevention, early detection, treatment and the support for Canadians living with cancer. This organization has done much to ensure cancer patients and health care professionals across Canada have state-of-the-art knowledge about what works to prevent, diagnose and treat cancer.

Notably, the partnership has encouraged hard-to-reach populations to undergo screening, helping doctors to identify cancer earlier. Funding of $250 million to the partnership was recently renewed for five more years, from 2012 to 2017. This funding will help the partnership continue its invaluable work on reducing cancer cases, enhancing the quality of life of cancer patients and increasing the likelihood of survival.

Through CIHR, the government is funding research on more effective diagnostics, treatment and prevention for all cancers, including breast cancer. Research investments in this area support important Canadian scientific work. I want to stress that the search for a cure is only part of the incredible research being undertaken in this country. Research is helping to reduce the burden of cancer on individuals and families through informing the development of prevention strategies.

As well, scientific research is helping to improve screening in health care settings. It is contributing to early diagnosis and, in many cases, allows access to better quality cancer care. This year alone $22.7 million was spent on breast cancer research.

Bill C-314 highlights the importance of providing women and their doctors with the most recent information. Our government's Canadian breast cancer initiative contributes by making education and information resources available to communities across Canada. This work facilitates action on breast cancer, women's health, inter-sectoral collaborations, and stakeholder involvement.

The government supports the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation's screening initiative, a key component of the Canadian breast cancer initiative. The screening initiative is a joint provincial-territorial collaboration to develop screening approaches. It contributes to improving breast cancer screening programs by developing nationally agreed upon quality indicators.

For women with higher breast density, breast cancer is generally harder to detect using mammograms, resulting in more frequent screenings. The Canadian breast cancer screening initiative supports national standards for prevention, early detection and screening. It seeks to develop and share best practices in breast cancer and women's health. Our government recognizes the importance of participating in cancer screening. Raising awareness around breast density supports this goal.

Through the screening initiative, we are working with the provinces and territories as well as local and non-governmental organizations to increase early detection and screening for populations less likely to be screened, such as newcomers to Canada, rural Canadians and persons with disabilities. This cross-Canada project enables the sharing of best practices, and ensures that information and support programs are available to women with breast cancer.

Through the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative and the Canadian partnership against cancer, our government helps the provinces and territories benchmark performance against national standards. It is equally important to share knowledge through health organizations such as the Canadian Cancer Society. The bill reinforces the current actions on breast cancer screening that reflects the government's commitment to keep Canadians and their families healthy, to help doctors detect cancer, and to give women better information on which basis to make their decisions.

I want to commend the hon. member for Barrie for his initiative which will not only better the information women receive regarding their breast health but will also lead to earlier detection and to more women's lives being saved.

I came face to face with the ramifications of breast cancer when I lost my mother 22 years ago. Compounded by my role as a physician, it is why I am so passionate on this issue. I strongly urge every member of the House to support this bill on the awareness of breast cancer screening, so that we can stand unanimous in this chamber in support of women's breast health.

I once again commend the member for Barrie for his excellent work on this bill.

[Head Injuries, December 9th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to bring awareness to an issue I have championed for years in my role as a pediatric orthopedic surgeon, and that is the prevention of injuries among Canada's youth.

Injury prevention is critical to providing safe environments for Canada's children to grow up healthy and active. Tragically preventable injuries are one of the leading causes of death of Canadian kids.

In my riding of Simcoe—Grey, I was pleased to hold a helmet clinic at Matthew Co-op in Collingwood to highlight to children the importance of wearing helmets.

I am proud to be part of a government that has taken real steps to reduce sports-related head injuries among Canada's youth.

Our government's national injury prevention strategy, launched nine months ago, is making significant strides in investing in the initiatives to reduce head injuries. Organizations like the Sandbox Project and ThinkFirst are just two of the many organizations that have brought awareness to head injuries and concussions.

I urge all members of this House to encourage young people to stay active, play sports and, most importantly, play safe by wearing a helmet.

[National Strategy for Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI) Act, December 8th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, multiple sclerosis is a devastating disease. It attacks the nervous system and affects people's vision, mobility, balance, and ability to maintain a memory. Because MS is progressive, its course is highly variable and unpredictable. The emotional, physical and financial drain on those who are affected and on their families is immeasurable.

Many Canadians living with MS have shared their personal stories on how the disease has led to a loss of their autonomy. Many members in the House have friends or family members who have multiple sclerosis and are aware of the hardship that comes with living with this disease. I know members will share my view that MS patients and their families show tremendous courage in the face of such a difficult illness.

Sadly, there is no cure for multiple sclerosis. Current treatment is geared toward managing the symptoms and slowing the disease's progression.

In 2009 Dr. Paolo Zamboni, who is based in Italy, suggested that chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, or CCSVI, could be a main cause of MS. To treat this condition, he proposed a surgical procedure, venous angioplasty, which involves opening up the blocked veins in the neck of the patient. Dr. Zamboni's findings, and those of other studies on CCSVI, have raised the hopes of MS patients, patient groups and members of this House.

Unfortunately, despite the interest that greeted Dr. Zamboni's procedure, it is clear that there is no immediate procedure for treating MS.

There are many unanswered questions on the safety and efficacy of this proposed procedure. There is also some uncertainty about the relationship between CCSVI and MS.

I understand the motivation of those who argue that there is no need for further evaluation of the safety of this proposed MS procedure. Each of us wants to ensure the best possible solution for Canadians living with MS. That said, the government and we in this House have a moral and ethical obligation to work with the scientific and medical community and proceed only on the basis of the best medical and scientific evidence available to us right now.

The government is not alone in this view. According to the MS Society of Canada:

Adding clarity to the relationship between CCSVI and MS is essential in assisting people with MS [to] secure any treatment they may consider.

The MS Society goes on to say that:

Medical institutions and health care providers require research data confirming the validity, necessity and safety of any procedure they provide, and in their view, that data is not yet available as it relates to the relationship between CCSVI and MS.

Even the MS Society of Italy, where this procedure was developed, announced in June 2010 that it intends to support an epidemiological study of CCSVI.

In September 2010 the Canadian Medical Association concurred with CIHR when they stated:

The CMA concurs with the CIHR's position on the need for an evidence-based approach to the development of clinical trials of the recently proposed condition called “chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI).

Dr. Anthony Traboulsee, a neurologist with expertise in the diagnosis and management of MS, expressed this sentiment very clearly when quoted recently by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.

Dr. Traboulsee is the medical director of the UBC Hospital MS program, the director of the MS clinical trials research group, the president of the Canadian Network of MS Clinics and serves on the CIHR's scientific expert working group on MS. In a November 2011 decision, the tribunal quoted Dr. Traboulsee as follows:

New theories and new treatment proposals are welcome. However, in my opinion, based on the evidence available--both published and unpublished--I cannot recommend or support the use of venous angioplasty or stenting of the veins that drain the brain and spinal cord in patients with MS.

It is clear that experts in Canada and around the world are advising caution on this matter. Being cautious, however, does not mean we are not moving forward.

As a surgeon myself, I appreciate both the need for caution for the safety of patients as well as the need to drive forward with new ideas and innovation. That is why in 2010, a full year before Bill C-280 was introduced, the CIHR set up a scientific expert working group to monitor and analyze research-based evidence on the MS/CCSVI issue.

At its meeting in June 2011, the CIHR's scientific expert working group decided that enough evidence was now available to move forward with a clinical trial on the safety and efficacy of the procedure proposed by Dr. Zamboni.

The following day, the Minister of Health acted quickly and asked CIHR to develop a call for proposals for the clinical trials on that procedure.

I am pleased to advise the House that the call for proposals is now posted on CIHR's website. A competitive and rigorous peer review process will be completed by CIHR to ensure that the successful proposals meet international standards for research excellence. This review will likely be completed by early 2012. The announcement of the research team selected for conducting the clinical trials will come shortly after that.

Several provinces and territories have expressed interest in working with the Government of Canada on setting up the national clinical trial. It is scientifically and medically important to respect the different steps involved in the selection and approval of the research proposal to ensure that it meets the standards of research excellence.

As members can see, our government has already taken significant action. This is why we will not be supporting Bill C-280.

It is important to note that, if enacted, Bill C-280 would require by statute that our government undertake by March 2012 clinical trials on the procedure proposed by Dr. Zamboni. The bill does not specify whether these would be phase I, II or III trials. Surely the sponsor must recognize and realize that due to the legislative process this implementation date would likely come and go before both houses could consider the bill before us today.

It is crucial that we, as legislators, do not inadvertently interfere with the integrity of the clinical trials. We, like MS patients, their caregivers and medical professionals like myself, must respect the steps medical research requires in gathering the best evidence.

More importantly, I am pleased to report that during last month's meeting in Halifax, health ministers from across the country discussed the need for moving forward with phase I and phase II trials. Thanks to last month's announcement, that is exactly what is happening. By conducting rigorous peer review, our government is taking the necessary steps to ensure that the investigation of CCSVI will not have long-term negative repercussions on the health of Canadians living with MS.

Canada is not the only country striving to assist MS patients while also proceeding with appropriate caution. In the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has launched a consultation process on venoplasty for CCSVI for MS. Its consultation document explains that the link between CCSVI and MS is not well understood and that research to resolve this uncertainty would be useful. The consultation process was completed in September of this year and will provide guidance to the institute as well as to the U.K.'s National Health Service on the safety and efficacy of CCSVI.

The fact of the matter is there are many unknowns regarding CCSVI angioplasty. We look forward to reviewing the findings from these and other highly credible institutions that are studying CCSVI. That is what the MS Society, prominent members of the medical community, provinces and international health care services have advised.

That said, let there be no doubt that this government shares the determination of MS patients and their families that new developments should be rigorously assessed and researched. It is our shared hope that this research will lead to medically proven, evidence-based procedures to improve the lives of patients with multiple sclerosis and ultimately to finding a cure for MS.

[Fair Representation Act, December 6th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to comment on the unfair Liberal approach, which would create winners and losers and negatively impact smaller provinces. Could the member tell us where and when Liberals have already consulted Manitobans and other Canadians on their proposal?