Patrick Brown

[Food and Drugs Act, May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by making clear my respect for the hon. member for Mississauga South. There is no question that my colleague has been a relentless champion of this worthy cause and deserves great admiration for his dedication. However, while Bill C-251 is based on good intentions, research indicates it is not based on good science.

I remind the House that this issue has been thoroughly reviewed by the Standing Committee on Health, which heard from many witnesses and experts both for and against alcohol warning labels. No matter on which side of the argument they stood, there was general agreement that there is very little evidence that alcohol warning labels alone will encourage people to change their drinking habits. Even one of the greatest proponents of this legislation, Dr. Tim Stockwell of the Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia at the University of Victoria, has admitted:

--there are a host of powerful economic and social factors that determine the level of alcohol consumption and rates of hazardous use...The idea that a basic informational strategy such as warning labels could compete with such powerful factors as the price of alcohol to affect overall consumption is implausible.

Moreover, the implementation of Bill C-251 will require significant funding from the federal government. Given the need for a broad strategy, diverting resources to labelling specifically at the expense of proven targeted programs is not cost effective.

Then there is a host of legal questions to consider. The implementation of the bill is likely to raise trade and charter challenges which would impose further costs on the government and by extension, all Canadians.

In the absence of clear proof that alcohol warning labels make a significant difference in drinkers' behaviours, it is hard to make the case that Bill C-251 is the solution. Instead, witness after witness told the committee that what is needed is a comprehensive approach that encompasses all aspects of behaviour modification. In fact, most people who appeared before the standing committee said that the programs currently in place would have a much better chance of success than warning labels.

Certainly, no one is denying the need to address the serious health and social challenges associated with problem drinking. The 2004 Canadian addiction survey indicated that while the vast majority of Canadians drink in moderation and without harm, 14% of Canadians, some 3.3 million people, do engage in high risk drinking. There is no question that we must do more to make Canadians aware of the health and safety risks of excessive alcohol consumption.

Alcohol misuse comes at a great cost to the individuals involved and our country at large. In 2002 the cost of alcohol related harm totalled $14.6 billion, or $463 for every living Canadian. This included $7.1 billion for lost productivity due to illness and premature death, $3.3 billion in direct health care costs, and $3.1 billion in direct law enforcement costs.

This is about more than dollars and cents. It only makes sense to prevent unnecessary loss of life and lost opportunity when we see the terrible toll it takes on Canadian families and communities.

Nowhere are alcohol's devastating effects more apparent than in the case of children and adults coping with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, FASD for short. From anti-social behaviour to developmental delays and learning disabilities, people living with this preventable condition face profound problems which may put them at increased risk of dropping out of school and making them far more likely than other people to end up in prison. No one can deny the damage caused by alcohol consumption during pregnancy and our collective obligation to make sure Canadians understand that alcohol poses grave danger for developing fetuses.

We need to bear in mind that the Government of Canada already invests heavily in initiatives dealing with alcohol misuse. Programs within the health portfolio alone include the alcohol and drug treatment and rehabilitation program, the drug strategy community initiatives fund, as well as the national native alcohol and drug abuse program, the fetal alcohol spectrum disorder initiative, and the first nations and Inuit FASD program.

I am also pleased to report that Health Canada, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, and the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission have developed recommendations for a multi-sectoral national alcohol strategy to reduce alcohol related harm in Canada. The strategy has been developed in consultation with relevant federal departments, provinces, territories, non-governmental organizations, researchers, addiction agencies, and the alcohol beverage and hospitality industries.

It recommends a range of both population level initiatives to address overall alcohol consumption and targeted interventions to address specific high risk drinking patterns and vulnerable populations, such as women who are pregnant or who are thinking about becoming pregnant. It should be noted, however, that alcohol warning labels were not identified as an area for action.

In addition, it is worth noting that in its report, “Even One is Too Many: A Call for a Comprehensive Action Plan for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder”, the Standing Committee on Health did not call for the implementation of warning labels on alcohol beverage products.

In the absence of clear proof that alcohol warning labels will make a significant difference in drinkers' behaviours, it is hard to make the case that Bill C-251 is the solution to this or any other alcohol related problems. As well meaning as my hon. colleague may be in promoting this bill, it seems obvious that this is not the right legislation at the right time. With this in mind, while reiterating my appreciation for a steadfast commitment to address the alcohol related challenges, I am not able to support the bill.

[Business of Supply, May 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member can further touch upon who the Liberal Party is really in cahoots with on this. There was an interesting comment by a previous Liberal cabinet minister when she wrote her article on February 21, 2007 in the Ottawa Sun. She said:

--only the Liberals can benefit from a “grassroots” lobby to reverse the income trust decision.

The only problem? The “ grassroots” is not grassroots at all. It is a big money, orchestrated effort, which would leave ordinary taxpayers holding the bag.

What are the member's thoughts about who the Liberal Party is really in cahoots with and in what world would a political party try to side with those who are trying to evade the Canadian tax system? What it really boils down to is taking advantage of regular taxpayers, hard-working Canadian taxpayers. Why would the Liberal Party get involved with a group that has taken on this very unfortunate approach?

[National Blood Donor Week Act, April 24th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to announce my support to designate the second week of June as national blood donor week.

It is easy to say Canadians are lucky to have access to some of the safest blood in the world. Instead, I would like to acknowledge that it is not luck, but the kindness and generosity of a network of dedicated blood donors and volunteers who help to make this possible. A blood system is nothing without these generous individuals. It is the people whom we rely on when times are really tough. As such, it is important to celebrate and honour all blood donors and other volunteers who make the system work by creating national blood donor week.

The second week in June is significant not just because it marks the launch of summertime in Canada when blood donations traditionally decline, but because it also marks the World Health Organization's World Blood Donor Day on June 14th. Canada can join other nations and millions of people and organizations around the world to celebrate blood donors, raise awareness of the need for a safe supply of blood, and increase voluntary blood donation around the world by declaring the second week of June national blood donor week.

One significant reason Canada's blood supply is safe, and all the more reason to celebrate by creating national blood donor week, is that it is 100% donor supplied. According to the World Health Organization, less than 50% of blood collected in developing countries comes from voluntary donation. Instead, the majority comes from paid donors or obligatory blood replacement from the family members of transfusion patients.

The Pan American Health Organization recognizes that voluntarily donated blood is significantly safer than blood donated for payment or replacement. According to this organization, blood for payment or replacement is 40 times more likely to be infected with hepatitis C and 175 times more likely to be infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. The celebration of Canada's blood donors, coordinated with World Blood Donor Day, sets a positive example worldwide.

Many countries in the Americas where just 30% of their blood is voluntarily donated look in awe to Canada, wondering how we can do it. The simple answer is the kindness and generosity of our volunteers. This is all the more reason why I support the designation of the second week in June as national blood donor week.

Acknowledging and thanking Canada's blood donors via a national blood donor week would serve as an example of best practices to nations around the world that want and need their own safe blood systems. It would also keep our system going.

The Government of Canada serves its citizens, including those close to each of us whom we love and cherish dearly, by encouraging existing donors to keep rolling up their sleeves and prospective donors to start. Declaring national blood donor week says to the people of Canada that this is important. This one small act of donating blood, this snippet of time, makes a huge difference in each of our lives.

As good as our system is, a national blood donor week would help it get even better. Although one unit of blood can potentially save three patients, the average patient needs 4.6 units for treatment. Existing rates of blood donation at less than 4% falls short of what Canadian patients need. At least 5% of Canadians need to donate in order to satisfy existing demand.

Furthermore, in all likelihood our aging population and national commitment to improved access to surgeries will mean an increased need for blood. An increased need for blood means an increased need for blood donors. The creation of a national blood donor week would help achieve that goal by telling Canadians that donating blood is a safe thing to do and the right thing to do.

I ask that all my colleagues show their appreciation for Canada's blood donors by voting in favour of Bill S-214.

I note that I received two emails from my own riding: one from a young girl, Lynne Waddington, who had created a facebook and she had hundreds of her friends pledge to give blood, and also one from our MPP Joe Tascona, who is actually organizing a blood donor clinic himself. These are typical of the volunteers we are seeing across Canada.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill and celebrate the many great volunteers we have across this country.

[Business of Supply, April 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is confusing trying to keep track of where the Liberal Party stands on this. The deputy leader of the Liberal Party said:

“Liberals need to remember this is a Liberal mission”, he said. “We're in Afghanistan because of the leadership of the two previous Liberal governments...We, as a party, cannot abandon what is right or what we believe for political convenience.”

Why have the Liberals opted for political convenience today rather than what is right? Why are they abandoning the children in Afghanistan, for example, the 4.3 million who were vaccinated against childhood diseases, or the 4,000 new medical facilities? Why are they abandoning hope in Afghanistan for political convenience?

[Business of Supply, April 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Toronto—Danforth mentioned Chris Alexander, and I think we should share all of Chris Alexander's comments. Before the House standing committee Mr. Alexander said:

--Afghanistan would be plunged back into civil war [if Canada chose to cut and run]. The investment and achievements of the past five years--institutional achievements, electoral achievements, development achievements--would go up in smoke, almost certainly. NATO would fail in its top mission, and the credibility of NATO would be critically damaged. The United Nations would fail in one of its principal missions in the world, and its credibility would be damaged, with all attendant consequences for the future ability of the United Nations to influence affairs in the world.

If the member for Toronto—Danforth would like to reference Chris Alexander, he should heed his advice.

I would suggest that if we did cut and run in Afghanistan, we would be turning the clock back on the many incredible achievements that have been made there, whether it is the 10 million people who voted, the 2,500 villages that have had electricity, or the 190,000 landmines that have been decommissioned. Certainly, we should listen to the people that we quote.

[Persons with Disabilities, April 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is good to be back to speak about this today. During the riding week we have just had, I heard many times from constituents how important this is and how much they treasure the CPP and the CPPD benefit.

It is important to note that a significant number of CPPD recipients also receive benefits from other sources. CPP disability therefore makes up one part of a broad and complex income system for persons with disabilities, a system that includes private and long term disability insurance, workers' compensation, employment insurance sickness benefits, and provincial social assistance. The standing committee may wish to take this into account when undertaking its study of CPPD benefits.

Calculation of the CPP disability benefit is legislated in the Canada pension plan. Any changes to these rates would require provincial approval.

Let us now turn to some of the accomplishments of the CPPD.

The Government of Canada promotes an inclusive society, one that allows people with disabilities to participate in the workforce and in their communities throughout their life transitions. For this reason, CPPD provides support for beneficiaries who are trying to return to work. Since early 2005 beneficiaries have had a new financial safety net that they can count on when trying to return to regular employment: automatic reinstatement of CPPD benefits.

Automatic reinstatement helps CPP clients take a chance on returning to the workforce. Before this provision came into effect, clients were not sure whether they would re-qualify for benefits if it turned out they could not continue working. Automatic reinstatement reduces this uncertainty by providing extended entitlements to clients whose CPPD benefits are stopped because they begin working again on a regular basis.

It provides a two year period during which they can ask to have their benefit payments restarted, using a simple process, if their disability recurs and prevents them from staying at work. There is no limit on the number of times a client can use this provision, a particularly good support for persons with episodic disabilities.

A survey of clients who used this provision shows that the change is doing what it was intended to do and is doing a good job. A substantial majority, 75%, felt that automatic reinstatement would influence their future plans to return to work and a third of these clients indicated that the provision offers security and improved their self-confidence in planning a return to work. Almost 80% were completely or mostly satisfied with all facets of the process, including ease of use.

The government is also committed to client service as demonstrated by Service Canada on behalf of CPPD. As an example, to make it easier for CPPD applicants, telephone contact is maintained throughout the application process. When a decision is reached, a personalized letter is sent to each applicant explaining the decision in simple language.

In addition, Service Canada has made other improvements to the delivery of services to Canadians. Clients are now offered the convenience of a one-stop personalized service. They have the choice to communicate via telephone or in person.

Communication with clients and stakeholders, of course, is an important part of this commitment to client service. CPPD beneficiaries receive an annual newsletter, “Staying in Touch”, that contains useful information on federal programs and services in such areas as student assistance, tax credits and benefits for seniors.

Our government strives to uphold its commitment to Canadians for accountability and for transparency. We believe the Canada pension plan exemplifies both. We are proud of this accomplishment.

This accountability and transparency are demonstrated by the fact that every three years the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of finance review the CPP to ensure that it remains financially sound and to make any necessary adjustments. The triennial review also allows us to ensure that the CPP evolves along with the changing needs of Canadians.

I would like to return to the issue currently before the House and highlight an initiative that complements the motion. A recently initiated comprehensive evaluation of CPP disability will focus on the extent to which the overall objectives and outcomes of the program are being met. This important study will take place over the next 18 months.

I am sure that the evaluators will want to review the study that is the subject of the current motion as additional input. The evaluation goes beyond the scope of the study to look at all aspects of program management, client outcomes, interaction with other disability programs, and documenting best practices.

We want to ensure that the CPPD is meeting all the current and future needs of Canadians without jeopardizing the affordability and financial sustainability of the CPP in the years ahead. These two sources of important information, the study proposed in the motion and the more comprehensive CPPD evaluation, should give us a better picture of those Canadians who receive the CPPD benefit and of how it helps them.

In other words, our government is confident that there are valuable lessons to be learned from these studies. We therefore welcome this opportunity to support the motion to conduct a study of the level of funding provided by the CPPD benefit. We believe it will help our government to achieve its commitment to Canadians to ensure that the Canada pension plan disability benefit continues to be there for current and future generations when they need it most.

[Highway 400 Traffic Accident, March 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, on March 5, 2007 a severe winter storm brought havoc to southern Simcoe County and caused a massive traffic accident on Highway 400 south of Barrie. Many serious injuries were inflicted, but no loss of life occurred. This is a tribute to the many men and women of our fire, police and ambulance services who responded to the scene.

However, there is one other emergency service that responded to the accident that needs tribute as well: tow trucks, big and small, all part of the private sector and all working bravely in terrible conditions to make rescues possible and remove the horrendous mess of crushed vehicles.

Glenn Currie of Currie Heavy Towing deserves a special mention because he was the man at the controls of the biggest, strongest, most versatile heavy wrecker that day.

Glenn Currie made it his mission to be there in the right place at the right time with the perfect equipment to perform a life-saving recovery. He was assisted by others, but his role was central in lifting a tractor trailer off a trapped driver, thereby allowing the fire and ambulance personnel to remove the driver and save his life.

Glenn Currie, like his father Alex, is a humble man who does great things and is an inspiration to all Canadians.

[Justice, March 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, for years victims advocates have been calling for victims to have a more effective voice in the criminal justice system.

In our platform we promised the establishment of a federal ombudsman for victims of crime to help ease the burden for victims of crime and to give them greater access to enhanced programs and services.

Can the Minister of Justice update the House on how our government intends to keep this promise?

[Persons with Disabilities, February 21st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to join the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development in support of the motion calling on the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities to study the level of financial support provided through the Canada pension plan disability benefit, or CPPD. In speaking to the motion I would like to take the opportunity to talk about the CPPD, the current payment structure and its accomplishments.

Canadians are fortunate to have a public pension system that is internationally recognized as one of the best in the world. Of course, most Canadians are aware of the Canada pension plan retirement pensions paid to contributors starting as early as age 60. What many do not fully appreciate is that each month almost 300,000 Canadians with disabilities and nearly 90,000 of their children receive financial support in the form of CPP disability benefits.

The CPP disability program is the largest long term disability insurance program in Canada. Without it, some of the most vulnerable Canadians would be left without basic financial support. CPP contributors who find themselves unable to work at any job due to a severe or prolonged mental or physical disability can count on the Canada pension plan disability benefit when they need it most.

When employees, employers and the self-employed contribute to the Canada pension plan, they are investing in their future, whether it is to ensure a basic level of retirement income in their later years or to provide basic earning replacement in the form of disability benefits in their working years.

Like other investments, the CPP requires careful monitoring to ensure it remains financially sound while staying relevant to the needs of those who contribute to it today and who will draw on it in the years ahead.

Federal, provincial and territorial governments have collaborated for many years to ensure the long term sustainability of the CPP on behalf of Canadians today and for future generations.

Since the motion speaks to the level of funding provided by the CPPD, let us turn to the payment structure currently in place. Monthly CPPD payments are made up of two parts: a fixed amount, which is set at $405.96 for 2007; and a variable amount based on the level of CPP contributions and the length of time over which those contributions were made before the client became disabled. The combination represents the monthly amount a CPPD beneficiary will receive. In 2007, the maximum benefit payable is $1,053.77 per month. Last year on average, CPPD beneficiaries received $763.37 per month. In addition, eligible children of disabled contributors are entitled to a fixed monthly payment of $204.68.

It is important to note--

[Energy Conservation, February 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I stand in the House today to recognize Barrie Hydro in its dedication to keep our community's environment clean.

Recently Barrie Hydro received a certificate of recognition award for its innovative Energy Star awareness program, a program which promoted the use of energy-saving appliances.

Barrie Hydro's latest endeavour is a project to install solar thermal domestic water heating systems. This will result in using solar thermal energy to reduce the amount of electricity and natural gas used to heat hot water. Not only will this project promote a clean environment, it will reduce the monthly utility costs among consumers by 30% to 50%. This groundbreaking project demonstrates how utilities, government, consumers and retailers can work cooperatively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

I would like to recognize the commitment of individuals like John Olthuis and Mark Henderson at Barrie Hydro for their extensive contributions to Canada's energy conservation goals in Barrie.