Steven Fletcher

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member to the House.

The member has made many misstatements and misrepresentations of the truth. We know the Bloc's agenda is to break up Canada but that is not good for the people of Quebec or of Canada. This is turning into a classic example why that is the case.

Pandemics do not respect provincial borders or international borders. However, in her comments the member seems to suggest that pandemics do respect provincial borders. I will let the people of Canada and Quebec make their own assessment on that.

The member said that there was no need for the federal government to play a role and that somehow we were creating more bureaucracy. In fact, Health Canada and the health minister are ensuring that, within the powers and with the resources that exist, we are better streamlining them in order to deal with a crisis. The member seems to neglect that fact.

In public health, the provinces and the federal government have a joint responsibility, although the provinces do have direct responsibility for hospitals and health services.

I will give one of many examples where this member's argument falls apart. Within public health, we have a national microbiology lab in my home city of Winnipeg which is Canada's only level 4 lab. This lab is routinely called upon to support provincial health authorities detecting potential disease outbreaks. The lab has world experts and facilities to test for these kinds of deadly disease outbreaks. No such lab exists in Quebec.

Is the member suggesting that the people of Quebec should somehow go without the services this lab provides? That may be the Bloc's point of view, perhaps, but the Government of Canada's point of view is that the health of Quebeckers is just as important as the health of all Canadians, which is why we invested a billion dollars in pandemic preparedness in this week's budget.

Why does the Bloc Québécois philosophy put the health of Quebeckers in jeopardy, particularly in regard to the level 4 microbiology lab in Winnipeg ? What is Quebec going to do? It needs those services. It is important that Canadians work together to protect each other because Canada is about mutual support.

I ask the member to comment on the microbiology lab and how Quebec would deal with that without the Public Health Agency.

[Public Health Agency of Canada, May 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce to my colleagues in this House that today the Public Health Agency of Canada and its Division of Aging and Seniors will be presented an award from Her Majesty the Queen at Windsor Castle in recognition of its outstanding work on emergency preparedness for seniors.

This award, hosted by the well known international organization Help the Aged, pays tribute to the division's domestic and international lead on emergency preparedness for seniors, and in particular, its efforts to ensure that emergency response measures take seniors' needs into account in emergency situations.

Recent disasters such as the Asian tsunami and hurricane Katrina in the United States have brought global attention to the high numbers of seniors and disabled persons left stranded, injured or killed in emergency situations. Thanks to the efforts of our government, and specifically the Public Health Agency of Canada, Canada is leading the way on emergency planning for the most vulnerable groups during crisis situations.

In light of this award, I encourage all my colleagues to continue to support Canada's lead and its innovation in the areas of public health and emergency preparedness, particularly as they relate to others who heavily rely on our health care system.

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the agency was created by an order in council and there was no legislative framework. The legislative framework that was brought forward in the last Parliament was done during the dying days of the government. However, the legislation is being brought forward in the very early days of the present government. Could the member explain why public health seemed to be such a low priority in the last government and such a high priority in the present government?

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Yes, that is right.

With regard to the points raised by the member around committee work and so on, it seems that the member, courageously, may be challenging part of the record of the previous government as far as its effectiveness and efficiency.

I wonder if the member could clarify his concerns a bit more. He does seem to be out of step with comments made by other parties, including his own earlier on in the debate, in that the legislation was tabled by the previous government. We want to move expeditiously in bringing this legislation through second reading and then to committee.

Is the member indeed contradicting the comments of other parties?

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his comments, particularly those around Allan Rock, but I think he may be dating himself. I remember seeing Mr. Rock on TV when I was in grade school.

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his party's support. This is an excellent example where the Conservatives and the NDP can work together for the betterment of all Canadians.

Could the member comment on the fact that it seems to have taken the previous government forever and a day to introduce the bill, and nothing came of it, while this government, with the support of the NDP, has worked quite quickly to bring the bill forward? Does the member have any comments on the commitment, or lack thereof, of the previous government in the area of public health.

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my question for the member is quite simple. The member correctly pointed out that the previous government seemed to take a long time to bring forward this legislation. The current government is doing it in its opening weeks. I wonder if the member could elaborate on why public health is such a big priority for the government when it did not seem to be under the previous government.

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her comments and also wish the member success in any future endeavours she may have on a larger scale.

However, on the issue of the bill, the previous government waited until the dying days of the government to introduce this legislation. Looking at it from a historical perspective, it only received first reading after a number of years of being an order in council.

This government is acting swiftly to bring it forward and we appreciate the opposition's support. I wonder a bit however about the history.

As the former minister for public health in the previous government the member was very supportive of federal involvement in providing swimming lessons for young people. I wonder if the member still believes that the federal government has a role in providing swimming lessons.

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member may be aware that any private member's bill that passes through the House will go to committee provided government legislation is dealt with first. I do hope there will be strong support for this bill.

The member made note that the previous Liberal government only brought its bill before the House a week before it fell, with the full knowledge that it would fall. Its legislation did not even make it to second reading, which questions the Liberal government's commitment to public health.

I congratulate the member on her appointment to the health committee.

My question for my colleague is this. How we can ensure that we get the message out to all Canadians, including those in Quebec and first nations people, that this government is firmly committed to public health where the previous government failed?

[Public Health Agency of Canada Act, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member may in part misunderstand what this bill is doing. First, it is not infringing on any jurisdiction. It is a machinery bill that organizes the responsibility that the health minister already has. In fact, in the area of public health there is some overlap in jurisdiction, particularly when it comes to peace, order and good government. Part of it is if there ever is a pandemic, there needs to be coordinated role.

The member talked a lot about Quebec in isolation of the world. I do not think Quebeckers or Canadians would accept that Quebec somehow would be isolated from a pandemic. This is why this bill is very important. It provides for a Chief Public Health Officer who is not a politician but someone who has expertise in public health matters, who would be able to address the concerns of all Canadians, including Quebeckers, when such a pandemic occurred. Quebec is only 100 metres away from where we are speaking today and to suggest that it is somehow isolated is incorrect.

Will the member accept that Quebec is not an island unto itself and there are circumstances where the provinces need to work together to ensure the protection of all their citizens? The Public Health Agency of Canada will do that without creating additional cost to bureaucracy but actually will streamline the government's response to a public health crisis. Would the member agree?