Nicole Demers

[Guaranteed Income Supplement, November 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, a year ago today, the House of Commons unanimously passed Bill C-301 at second reading, thereby entitling eligible pensioners to full retroactivity for the guaranteed income supplement.

One year ago, all of the Conservatives voted for this bill.

One year ago, pensioners were given reason to hope that the government would give back the $3.2 billion it owes them.

Yet one year later, neither the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development nor the Minister of Finance has made an announcement. The Conservatives' silence belies their November 23, 2005, vote and abandons seniors.

One year ago, the Conservatives engaged in electioneering to get seniors' votes. It was all a sham. Once again, we have proof that the Conservative members from Quebec are not standing up for Quebec seniors. They have betrayed their trust, and we will not forget that.

[Seniors Safety Week, November 10th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to go walking in the winter and enjoy the festive decorations. However, ice and accumulations of snow can be dangerous. Simple rules—such as removing ice and snow, spreading sand, having good anti-slip shoes, and using a cane—can prevent a fall.

Outdoor safety in the winter is the theme of the 18th Seniors Safety Week. A bad fall on the ice can have serious long-term consequences. It can result in chronic pain and debilitating injuries that can lead to loss of independence, isolation and inactivity.

Seniors are the most susceptible to being admitted to hospital with injuries requiring longer stays after a fall on the ice.

More than a third of people hospitalized are between 60 and 79. Their hospital stay on average is 7.6 days, and those 80 and over stay an average of 14.5 days. The safety of our seniors is important if we want them to stay active. They have much to contribute to our society. I wish all seniors a good winter. Be careful.

[November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the minister had had the courage to answer himself. It is his choice to answer through his parliamentary secretary, but I will carry on just the same.

An American patient was fitted with Mentor silicone gel implants during a breast augmentation surgery in 2000. We are not talking about the 1960s, the 1970s or the 1980s; we are talking about the year 2000. Sometime during the year, the patient developed a Staphylococcus aureus infection. The same year, the implants had to be removed, and a few weeks later, the patient died from septic shock and multiple organ failure.

How can the minister have allowed the reintroduction of breast implants instead of making the regulations governing the special access program stricter and waiting until sufficient data had—

[November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on June 9, I asked the Minister of Health why he refused to allow people to get AIDS drugs under the special access program, yet he allowed thousands of silicone breast implants under the same type of program.

Since then, the Minister of Health has approved licences for two companies, Mentor Medical Systems and Inamed Corporation, to manufacture silicone breast implants, which had been banned since 1992, and to put them back on the market, when we know full well that no long-term study has been done beforehand to ensure that these breast implants are not harmful to women's health.

We have been told that the minister had assessed 65,000 pages of studies and research that had been reviewed by Health Canada. However, most of these documents were provided by companies seeking the approvals.

We truly wonder how we can trust two companies that faced a criminal investigation in 2002 for hiding data from the FDA. Mentor Medical Systems is currently facing new allegations that it provided fraudulent data, according to a scientist it formerly employed. This investigation began just two weeks ago. Furthermore, neither the minister nor Health Canada are able to name a single independent researcher among the studies consulted.

Ms. Bell, head of the musculoskeletal section at Health Canada, gave us the name of Dr. Harold Brandon. The problem is that the doctor is one of the four scientists on the expert advisory panel who was in conflict of interest.

Many women today are still having problems with their implants. I receive emails, letters and phone calls every day. A young woman from Quebec named Michelle, who is only 24, suffers from acute pain. She turned to a surgeon for implants because her breasts were not the same size. The surgeon did not warn her of the problems she could encounter. He did not tell her that he had to ask for special permission from Health Canada. But he did tell her that silicone gel implants would give her the best results. She later suffered capsular contracture and must now undergo further surgery to have the implants removed. She must pay for this herself, and it is expensive. It costs $5,000.

Lise, from Laval, who had her implants removed, has chronic health problems. Rose-Hélène, from Laval, suffers from Raynaud's disease and fibromyalgia. Lucienne, from Laval, has pain in her arms and back, even after having her implants removed because they were stuck to her rib cage. They cracked and got stuck.

There are currently two class action suits: one in Quebec and one in Ontario. We want to know how the Minister of Health can spend taxpayer dollars to defend his view of things in class actions suits, when he will not pay for women to have an MRI or to have emergency removal of their implants.

We find this is a shameful use of public money, of money that comes from every citizen who pays taxes. We would like to know whether the minister intends at least to impose strict conditions on the companies who have received authorization to produce breast implants again, or—

[Judges Act, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague’s very incisive and relevant comments.

He referred to social units in relation to older workers who lose their jobs in mass layoffs, but I think that he could also have referred to people who lack affordable housing, senior citizens who have been fleeced out of the guaranteed income supplement, people who no longer have access to literacy classes because of government cuts, senior citizens whose pensions are increased by only 1.5% or 2% a year, people who helped build the country and our wealth today, and the veterans whose programs and conditions suffer for lack of willingness to improve them.

Could my colleague talk to us a little about this in relation to judges' salaries?

[Bloc Québécois, November 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of the Bloc Québécois. True, we will never be the governing party. Therein lies our strength, that which gives us true power.

Therein lies the power that allows the Bloc Québécois to make choices that reflect the values and needs of the people we represent, without having to yield to powerful lobbies such as the oil and gas lobby.

Therein lies the power that gives us the daring and the ability to defend important issues such as the Kyoto protocol and the fiscal imbalance.

Therein lies the power of our private members' bills, through which we can pass important legislation, such as the anti-scab bill. Therein also lies the power to demand accountability, as we did during the sponsorship scandal.

Real power is at the source of every action taken by the Bloc Québécois. This power is what Quebeckers have been giving to us for more than 13 years, because they know that we will defend their interests with rigour, determination and, above all, integrity.

[Criminal Code, November 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, there are a million children living in poverty in Canada. These children are growing up unable to benefit from the services that would help them become responsible and productive citizens. As we all know, poverty is one of the main underlying causes of crime.

According to my colleague, would it not be better to ensure that the provinces have the money they need to fight poverty, rather than having to build more prisons to lock up many people who would have never turned to crime if they had been given even a bit of a chance?

[Food and Drugs Act, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to Bill C-283, which I consider to be very important.

I am sorry if I am not in my usual spirited form or if I do not speak with my usual passion. I listened to Michael Fortier's recommendations and took my little Valium pill to calm my nerves. I am therefore a little less excited today than I usually am.

All joking aside, this bill is very important. It is so important that we made it a discussion point in our caucus meeting yesterday. This is a bill to amend the regulations and legislation in order to require restaurant owners and merchants to list on their menus or on their food items the amount of calories, trans fats, sodium, etc. This is an important matter that should not be taken lightly and should be reviewed very carefully, thoroughly and seriously. Such regulations have repercussions on the industry.

Even if we are talking about manufacturers or restaurant chains that do over $10 million in annual sales, these food chains are very important to the economy of the various provinces, to Quebec's economy in particular. In Quebec, the restaurant industry is quite developed. It provides many jobs to many people. These jobs are very appreciated since, for the most part, they can be filled by women and single mothers because of their very flexible hours. Men also choose this line of work because they find it quite agreeable, even though it is very physically demanding.

As far as Bill C-283 is concerned, we are aware that it addresses a problem and that is important for Quebeckers and Canadians to know what they are eating. We have talked about this a number of times: when we called on the government for the labelling of GMOs; when we called on the government to let Canadians know, through the food guide, what they are eating, what they should be eating and what is good for their diet.

But even Health Canada, in the person of Ms. Bush, who is working on Canada's Food Guide, is telling us that we should not encourage people to count calories. I do not know.

Is Health Canada going against the wishes of parliamentarians who want the public to be more aware of the number of calories they are consuming? In my opinion, this is important, because I myself have a weight problem and I often go to Tim Hortons. Recently, for breakfast, I ordered the healthiest items on the menu: a bran and carrot muffin and orange juice. I told myself that I was starting my day off right, that I had made a healthy choice, and that I was not eating fatty food, but healthy food. To my astonishment, when I went to the Tim Hortons website later, I realized I had consumed 512 calories by having a muffin and a glass of orange juice. Can you believe it? That is one third of the calories I should eat in a day. On top of that, I was hungry again at 10 a.m., because the muffin I had eaten at 8 a.m. was not very nutritious and I digested it quickly.

When someone tells me that putting calorie information on foods is not important, I am sorry, but I do not believe it. In my opinion, the number of calories should be indicated.

That said, we will have to be very careful not to hurt the industry with this bill. When we try to go too fast in passing a bill in order to please certain people, we can end up upsetting a large segment of the population.

In addition, because Bill C-283 targets major restaurant chains that make more than $10 million a year, it is easy for us to forget—and this is quite paradoxical—that the food sold in small restaurants is often loaded with trans fat. I am talking about fries, hamburgers, smoked meat sandwiches, and so on. These restaurants may not make $10 million a year, but they easily sell 10 million calories' worth of food a year. Bill C-283 will not affect these people.

As we consider this bill, we must ensure that we are not pleasing some by causing problems for others just because we want to legislate quickly.

In committee, it would be worth taking the time to examine all of the available options. I believe that restaurant owners are also prepared to make changes. Recently, I read that Kentucky Fried Chicken is planning to eliminate trans fats by changing the oil it uses. That is a good start. Yes, it is still a very fatty food, and it is still breaded, but this is an improvement.

The Saint-Hubert rotisserie chain, which is headquartered in my riding, has a healthy menu. They are making considerable efforts. They will soon be posting the nutritional content of their menu items, including calories, trans fats and sodium, on their web site. McDonald's and Harvey's are also making an effort, although I am a little less pleased with what McDonald's has done. All of their nutritional information is printed on the back of their trayliners. People are unlikely to read anything printed on the back of a liner under their hamburger, fries and Pepsi. When they finish eating, they do not bother removing everything, turning the trayliner over and reading what is printed on the back. People are not interested and, what is more, they do not want to feel guilty. Obviously, they will not look at it. I much prefer what Harvey's decided to do, although they too provide far too much information. It is very confusing for people to look at all the numbers on a Harvey's pamphlet.

There are definitely things to be done, changes to be made. However, these changes must meet with the approval of everyone involved and with the approval of the restaurant industry. That is no small feat. If we are not careful, restaurant chains throughout Canada could suffer greatly. We are asking them to follow rules that will be the same everywhere; however, menus are often not the same everywhere because ingredients are not the same everywhere. So, using the ingredients, how do you calculate how many calories there are in such or such a food? I do not know. Something has to be done, we have to look at this, that is certain.

I would vote for the principle of this bill. However, I am not saying that once it goes to committee I will agree with the rules to impose on the restaurant industry or the merchants. We must ensure that they can comply with the rules and continue to turn a decent profit. We know that the purpose of any company is to make a profit. Yesterday, we saw that even the government decided to axe the income trust program in order to recover the taxes it was losing.

Restaurant owners are just as smart as the next guy, and of course they want to make money. We will have to reach an agreement with them. I am sure that parliamentarians will find a way to do that thanks to all of the advice we will receive in committee when we hear the witnesses, if our colleagues let this bill get to that stage. I am sure we can find a solution that works for everyone; we will have much to gain by doing so.

I would like to know what I am eating, and I want to be careful about the calories I consume. That is not always possible here, but I want to make an effort, and I need help from the industry, Health Canada and my colleagues. Together we can find a solution, but we will not find that solution by legislating against the wishes of the restaurant industry.

[Health, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has decided to no longer seize drugs from Canada ordered over the Internet by Americans. According to the Quebec Order of Pharmacists, this could very likely result in higher drug prices in Canada.

Does the Minister of Health intend to explain to his American counterpart that Canada does not wish to serve as a pharmacy for the United States?

[Autism Spectrum Disorder, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to take part in the debate on Motion M-172. People are always somewhat reluctant to talk about pervasive developmental disorder. The same is true when it comes to talking about cancer: no one can remain indifferent.

The term “pervasive developmental disorder” can at first seem very vague. It is used to describe specific problems that affect the overall development of the child, particularly, cognitive, social, emotional, intellectual, sensory and language problems. Autism is the most well known.

In Quebec, 46,500 people have autism or a pervasive developmental disorder. This affects four or five boys for every girl. Boys are more often affected by these disorders. It is also defined as a neurological disorder characterized by a disturbance in the global development of the individual in all areas of functioning.

The Fédération québécoise de l'autisme et des autres troubles envahissants du développement is the only provincial organization and the only organization to support those with autism in Quebec. However, 80 agencies in Quebec belong to the federation, which is, in turn, a member of the Autism Society Canada. The federation is a frequent partner with the Quebec department of health and social services.

However, the federation has not had much contact with the federal government to date. There was just one intervention within the framework of support for training. The federation believes that the federal government should not get involved in this debate because it finds it hard to believe that supplementary structures coming from Ottawa would have a real impact in the field. It also believes that the intervention strategies are much more likely to involve local players, community groups, CLSCs and schools and that the need is quite simple: money. We are still talking about the fiscal imbalance, unfortunately.

In Quebec, since 2002, we have had our own program. As usual, in Quebec, we are ahead of the game. We tend to come up with our own programs before many of the other provinces do because, yes, we pay more taxes, and, yes, we spend a lot more on our social programs—as some have pointed out—but, yes, we are taking care of the health of our citizens.

There are therefore services that were created for people with pervasive developmental disorder, for their family and loved ones. The organization of the services in Quebec's plan of action is based on social integration, social participation, responsibility of the parents in the development of their child and the interaction between people and their environment. The objectives are to implement an integrated services approach, to offer target recipients a wide range of the services they need in their community, to provide them with the tools to properly support the optimal development of their potential and their social integration process, to obtain adequate support for the families and loved ones and to foster cooperation between the various sectors of intervention, child card services, continuing education and various players in the community.

The priorities set out in this plan of action are: to provide services based on the needs of the person and their family, including: information, awareness, pervasive developmental disorder detection, diagnosis, patient navigators, access to services, comprehensive needs assessment, specialized adjustment and rehabilitation services, services for school-aged children, services for adults, residential support, accommodation and suitable support for families. As hon. members can see, every effort has been put into providing as much help as possible to people with autism.

We also seek to focus on partnerships with other public, semi-public and community service sectors. In Laval, we are ahead of the times. Mr. Germain Lafrenière has established Les Entreprises Qualité de Vie, which operates an organic farm, BioFerme Laval, and also Table champêtre BioFerme Laval. This is a social economy enterprise that promotes access to various trades for individuals with a pervasive development disorder, autism or an intellectual disability.

The social and occupational integration of the participants is supported by professionals who understand the needs of these individuals, who gain confidence and pride along with their practical training.

Each participant learns about various trades and activities including farming, arts and crafts, ceramics, cooking, small animal husbandry, sales, and of course the farm's restaurant. I would like to quote from an article written by a journalist who visited this organic farm. She went away feeling very satisfied with and even enchanted by the experience. She wrote:

One of about 500 Quebec organic farms that grow vegetables and raise animals, BioFerme Laval is worth the drive. The Sainte-Dorothée enterprise has a dual mission, one more vital than the other: not only does it offer an impressive array of fresh food at its restaurant, shop and farm gate, but it also provides autistic individuals with the opportunity to achieve their potential through their work. Travel to a farm that is unique in Canada.

She adds:

With each course, we marvel at the thought that almost everything on our plates (which were made, like all the dinnerware, in the ceramics workshop next to the house) comes from the garden and the animal pens, just over there, in back, and contains no preservatives and no traces of GMOs—

This is very important because working is very difficult for individuals with a pervasive development disorder.

These people take great pride in becoming independent. About 12 people work on the farm at all times. They are divided among the various workshops: ceramics, woodworking, greenhouses, animals, fields, and organic products. These workshops are run by professionals.

The article goes on, and the author quotes the chef:

The therapeutic effect is undeniable...You should see them getting off the bus in the morning. They are happy to be working here, and we enjoy being with them. They have their routine, feel useful and are entitled to make mistakes.

Of course, the Fédération québécoise de l’autisme et des autres troubles envahissants du développement is well acquainted with this farm. The federation is convinced that such projects can further the cause.

Clearly, Quebec has a plan. It knows what people with autism and their families need, and it has put in place services to meet those needs. What is missing is money.

We in the Bloc Québécois recognize the importance of fighting to find a treatment for autism and to provide patients and their families with the support they need to have appropriate quality of life. I agree with my colleague that this is important, but only Quebec and the provinces can determine what services are needed for people with autism and their families.

Government intervention should happen in collaboration with local partners, community education organizations, and other sectors under provincial jurisdiction. We are, however, opposed to the federal government developing a national autism strategy. It would be interfering yet again in an area under provincial jurisdiction.

Quebec already has its own policies. This would be a costly duplication of what is already in place. Instead, the federal government should transfer funds directly to Quebec and the provinces so they can use the money in their own programs.

Correcting the fiscal imbalance will give Quebec and the provinces the freedom to make their own choices and to implement effective programs for people with autism.