Rob Merrifield

[Question No. 211, June 3rd, 2003]

With regard to dental plastics containing bisPhenol A (BPA), also known as BisGMA: ( a ) is Health Canada aware of studies questioning the safety of this product; ( b ) is Health Canada convinced of the safety of this product; ( c ) how does Health Canada test and approve dental plastics before they are allowed on the market; ( d ) what tests were undertaken on “Conquest”, a dental plastic containing BisGMA; ( e ) how many enquiries has the minister received from alleged victims of dental plastic containing BPA; ( f ) is Health Canada considering compensation for alleged victims of BPA; and ( g ) is Health Canada aware of jurisdictions which have banned dental plastic containing BPA; if so, what are they?

[Health, June 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, on March 27 the WHO recommended a face to face interview of outgoing passengers. Singapore implemented aggressive screening and quarantine measures and the WHO, this last Saturday, actually deemed it as SARS free. Vietnam, a poor country by most countries' standards, brought about those tough screenings and it was declared SARS free three weeks ago.

Why are the screening procedures left to the discretion of the airlines in Canada when they should be applied across the board?

[Health, June 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, last week the health minister said that the SARS screening measures were still being ramped up at the airports. We are now headed into a possible third wave of the SARS outbreak in the Toronto area.

Is the health minister saying today that she is interviewing all outgoing passengers at the Pearson airport?

[Health, May 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the measures at the airport are still voluntary in and out. The WHO recommended interviews of all outgoing passengers. Passengers are flying out of Pearson right now without being questioned.

Very simply, how could the government possibly risk even one more case of SARS being spread outside the country?

[Health, May 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, SARS has now spread outside the hospitals and we hope that the health workers are able to contain this outbreak. We can only imagine the stress that they are under as they walk into their workplaces every day.

SARS having spread outside the hospitals makes screening at our airports even more urgent, but the government still has not fully implemented the promised screening measures. When will these measures be put in place?

[Health, May 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister failed to reassure Canadians that the appropriate screening measures were actually being fully implemented at Canadian airports. The WHO recommended mandatory interviews but exit screening is still voluntary. In fact, incoming screening is still voluntary.

Why has the minister failed to implement the mandatory measures recommended by the WHO?

[Health, May 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, Health Canada officials said yesterday that a screening of incoming and outgoing passengers is necessary so that the WHO will be assured that we are doing our job. The health minister is now saying that thermal screeners are too invasive.

The day after the health minister said that she is increasing screening, she is now saying that she will pull thermal screeners from the airports. Why the mixed message?

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, May 26th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege and a pleasure for me to speak on this important issue. It is an issue that certainly grips my riding in a way like no other issue I have seen to date since becoming a member of Parliament and being the voice of the riding in the House.

I do not think people in central Canada or in other parts of Canada quite understand the impact that this has in a riding that has a predominance of cow-calf operators, auctioneers, feedlot operators, and the number of truckers who are actually involved in the agriculture industry. I could go on and on to describe just how many people are impacted because of one cow that broke out with the mad cow disease.

My hon. colleague for Peace River just talked about the one farm that was quarantined in his area, actually the farm where the animal was found. We are pleased with the news that came out yesterday with regard to all of the trace-out animals from that herd being negative. It certainly looks like that was the only animal out of 13.4 million cattle in Canada that came down with this disease.

We are hoping that is truly going to be the case in all of the rest of the trace-outs. It is imperative that we do everything that we possibly can and do it as quickly as we can because we are talking about a very short timeline to be able to stop the bleeding from the negative impact of trading with the United States and open up the border as soon as possible and get the cattle moving again.

It is a small window of opportunity before it has some devastating impacts on the industry. I do not think ordinary Canadians quite understand that because they do not understand how the feedlot operation really works. It talks about nickels and dimes, and actual pennies of profits per animal and it is a very tight margin. These margins are based on pounds per day. If an animal stays in the feedlot too long it gets too fat and the quality goes down. It affects things in a significant way and we are talking a small amount of time before an animal has to be moved or the quality is considerably compromised.

I was trying to get a bit of a handle on how it was impacting the individuals in my riding of Yellowhead today. We have three large farms that have been quarantined in my riding. One of the large farms is a 10,000 animal feedlot. The individual who I was talking to was absolutely devastated because his farm was quarantined and it means he cannot move an animal off the farm.

The chance of him having any animals on his farm with BSE is very slim. Nonetheless, he has been put in a compromised situation that is absolutely devastating to him. When I talked to him and asked how it was actually impacting on him, he had a difficult time describing what it was like.

Farmers in western ridings have just come through the most horrendous year that we possibly could imagine. There was the drought situation in our riding last year. They are survivors. They are individuals who have gone to the wall to save their industry. The feedlot operators are paying additional prices for the products they are feeding the animals. It has been a very difficult winter, difficult last summer, and they were just coming into spring and finally getting a little bit of grass growing. Finally there was an opportunity to feed the animals some fresh product in a fresh start to the year, and to be hit by this is absolutely devastating to the industry. I cannot emphasize enough just how that impacts.

There is another thing we must realize about agriculture. In the oil and gas industry, every time there is a primary job lost it has a ripple effect of four other jobs or every time there is a job created it is a one in four or one in three increase, but in agriculture every time we lose a primary job in agriculture the spin-off is one in seven. That means that for every job lost there are seven others that it impacts. So, it is seven other jobs or seven other families.

The ripple effect is massive. It is absolutely imperative that we understand the dynamics of that as we see the crippling effect this one animal has had on the industry and how it could impact it.

Therein lies the reason and the rationale for an emergency debate in the House. We take this very seriously and we do everything we possibly can. That is why we asked the minister today, what will it take with his counterpart in the United States, what criteria have to be met, and what exactly does the industry have to do to be able to open that border up and allow the product to move back and forth and regain some stability?

Hopefully by the end of this week that will happen. However, even with the trace-outs coming back, the opening of the border, and we start to rebuild back to where we were before this disease started, we must know that the government is there to stand beside the industry. We must ensure that the industry knows that the government is there to help and assist as it did with the SARS crisis that has impacted the Toronto area.

We know that it is very important to rebuild the credibility of the Toronto area and all of Canada because of the black mark that has been inflicted because of the SARS disease. The government was there to hand out at least $10 million to bring back the international market. We are certainly expecting a nod from the government. Having the Prime Minister eat a plateful of beef does not quite do it.

Most Canadians have no problem understanding that the beef is safe. That is not the issue. The issue is that the international community must know that. To do that we must put some investments into that to be able to ensure that those markets are rebuilt. If we do not, the devastation and the impact will be phenomenal.

Members might say that this devastation and the impact is a natural thing, that we should expect that. Why would a government treat one industry different than another? Why would the government look at tourism and the impact on that differently than the impact on agriculture? People in my riding are uncertain of what the government is prepared to do as far as standing up for the industry because of what the industry went through in the last year. Last year was a one in 133 year drought. This was a natural disaster that impacted my riding and agriculture in a way that has never happened before.

Yet we saw absolutely nothing coming from the federal government to assist in drought relief in our area. It was a shameful year. It was a year that our farmers more or less shrugged their shoulders and wondered what is actually happening. They wondered if they counted and if they mattered. Are they not Canadians and do they not pay taxes? These are the questions that I get from my riding every day when I talk about representing my constituents and being their voice here in the House of Commons.

It is very important that we get that nod. It is interesting and I listened with great interest this evening as we heard from Liberal members on the other side, in fact, some ministers said that they would be there for the beef industry. I will be holding those ministers to their words. I will say that I heard it here. Canadians have heard it here. It was not very specific, but the indication was there. We will have to make it specific so that the people in my riding will know that the government will not treat them as second class citizens. They want to know that the government will be there to assist them in their time of need. Believe me this is a time of need.

In this debate we must understand, that although it was one animal, that the survivors, the farmers in my riding and the industry, they are survivors because they are very aggressive. They are survivors because they are proactive. One of the things that will save this industry is the proactive measure that farmers have provided and that is the identification of animals. Last July this became compulsory. Due to that compulsory tagging we can follow a product from the shelf right back to the actual herd that it came from. Because of that we have the safest product in the world as far as beef. We also have the best product in the world. Alberta alone, if it is looked at as an export nation, is the fifth largest exporter of beef in the world.

It is a phenomenal industry that must be protected, not only in Alberta but across Canada, because of its importance as an economic driver and a social driver, and as an engine that will sustain Canada in the long run. The government must take this very seriously.

[Supply, May 26th, 2003]

My hon. colleague says it is right here and looks at the Minister of Health. That is exactly the problem. The Minister of Health did not play quarterback for the national engine to deal with the problems, to stop it from moving outside our borders and deal with the security at the airports. In fact, even today as we speak the security is not there as was appropriately called for by the WHO.

What can we learn from this? We can learn lots and we had better learn lots because it has major repercussions. The repercussions are not only for SARS, not only for what we have seen happen here and what is happening in Taiwan.

I would like to take a quick look at what might happen in the future because it is very important in light of what we are talking about. Let us look a little further in the past before we look at some of the things that could happen in the future.

We can look at what was expected for the influenza problem and the epidemic that comes every 11 years. It is a very deadly influenza problem and we were expecting something in that regard. That was what alerted the two hospitals. We have to understand that influenza comes in many forms.

This is an alarming stat which I do not think most Canadians know and certainly I was surprised to learn that in 1918-19 the Spanish influenza epidemic killed 50 million people worldwide. It killed more than the great war did which just preceded it. It is amazing. The number of dead in Canada in that one year period was 50,000. The Asian flu in 1957 claimed 70,000 in the United States. The Hong Kong flu of six years ago killed half of the serious cases that it infected. When we see SARS and the seriousness of it and the 27 deaths we grieve for in Canada and the 700 we grieve for around the world, it is mild in comparison to what it could be and what will likely be in the future.

We have to be very cautious, stand on guard and be vigilant with regard to information. We must work internationally because these viruses know no borders. They do not care much whether there is a 49th parallel between the United States and Canada, or water between Taiwan and mainland. It is important that we discern how much information is given and that the information is given liberally.

Just to mention a few, there is the West Nile virus, HIV, and the mad cow disease which we are going to talk about tonight in an emergency debate. I could talk about all of these as well as the foot and mouth disease in the United Kingdom, but my time has gone.

It is very important that we discern what is really being asked for in this motion. It is nothing more than to allow recognition status at the World Health Organization for Taiwan, which is only the right thing to do. There is no reason, no true justification, why we should not allow this to happen and to not encourage it to happen. I believe it reflects where most Canadians are on this issue. I would encourage members of the House to consider all the facts as they vote on this issue.

[Supply, May 26th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I too wish that all of the facts would come out. I am sure my hon. colleague will consider them intently and perhaps even change her view and her decision.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Nanaimo--Cowichan. Because of the interest of this topic we need to lend as many voices as we possibly can to this debate.

It is indeed my pleasure and privilege to speak to this motion as the health critic for the Canadian Alliance. It is a very important issue. Many of my colleagues have talked about it being of political and economic importance, but I would like to spend most of my time talking about the health importance of this.

I was an observer at the WHO. I was not a recognized observer but I was there the year before last. I had the opportunity to see how it actually worked. It is a great opportunity to dialogue with colleagues from around the world, to discern exactly how they feel on very important health issues. Things are done there by consensus and by trying to get along. For Taiwan to have observer status and be able to lend its voice to that dialogue is very important. Make no mistake as to where I am on this issue. I am 100% in support of observer status for Taiwan at the WHO.

It is an important health issue. That is where I would like to lend my voice to this debate because of what actually has happened over the last little while with regard to the SARS issue. If there is one thing we have learned in spades in Canada when dealing with an infectious disease such as SARS, it is the importance of time and of being very aggressive in dealing with the SARS virus with everything we have. Perhaps in some ways it is a forerunner of some worse viruses that are to come, but hopefully we have learned some lessons. One lesson we have learned is that we need to act quickly.

The question being asked all day long is where China was with regard to SARS. It started there and it carried on for at least five months prior to the world knowing about it. We have to really discern why that would take place. In fact, if we did not know about it, I am sure Taiwan did not know anything about it as well, and it is part of the exact same country, and the WHO did not have the opportunity to inform the world or Taiwan. It is very important that we make communication number one. This is certainly an opportunity to engage Taiwan in this kind of debate.

I would like to take a look at exactly where we are at with SARS and some of the things about this virus. It has a tremendous human and economic toll, as we see what has happened in Taiwan. Just over the last two months SARS has become such a common term. Two months ago we did not really know what the acronym meant. Now we mention SARS and everybody understands it full well. In just a two month period of time it has come on to the world stage and is a common term around the world. In fact I was in the Baltics last week and there is no question that the number one issue on their minds is what is happening in Canada with regard to SARS.

It looked as if Toronto had it under control and we were very pleased with the way the containment had come along, then all of a sudden SARS raised its ugly head again and is now infecting more people in Canada. There are 350 probable suspected cases and 27 deaths in Canada. Most of those are in the Toronto area. Around the world 8,000 have been infected and over 700 have died up to this point. It is very important that we look at that.

SARS continues to be a global threat, not least of all in Taiwan. We have to look at Taiwan and see exactly what went on there. Are they suffering from the same problems that we have had in the difference of how the patient in Vancouver was dealt with compared to the patient in Toronto? I am not blaming anyone, I am just saying that they were handled differently because of the information that was given to both those hospitals. One patient was put instantly into quarantine and in the other case it took 24 hours. We can see in a 24 hour span how many lives were lost, how many people were affected, how much economic damage has been done to Canada and to the Toronto area. We must discern how important this information is.

SARS has killed 27 people. Many hundreds of people have been sick. Thousands have been in quarantine. Our health care system has been pushed to the breaking point, as we saw five nurses at the height of the first outbreak in the Toronto area just walk away from their positions because of the stress of it. There is public fear out there that we are trying to alleviate. It is there, it is real and it is not only here but around the world.

The city of Toronto has such a black mark because of it and is something we will have to work to overcome. Hundreds of millions of businesses have been losing millions and millions of dollars in the hospitality and tourism industry. It is not just in the Toronto area, it is right across Canada. In the riding of Yellowhead, where I come from, in the national park tourism is a major economic driver particularly in the summer months. We are feeling some of the effects of this even in western Canada.

We understand how this has taken place. We talked about the difference between the two hospitals. We also have to ask where was the Liberal government? Where was the strong leadership? Where was the coordinated national response? Where was the ability to alleviate some of the public fear?