House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 39% of the vote.
Health June 9th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised the member remembers anything. We have heard health care promises from the Liberals for 12 years. They have had a record of broken promises. They have not fixed wait times and no one believes they ever will.
The court has stepped in because of a decade of Liberal mismanagement. Will the government simply admit that it is the Liberal mismanagement that brought us to this point today?
Health June 9th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, under 12 years of Liberal rule, the health care system has deteriorated. The Prime Minister, who goes to a private Montreal clinic, does not care that wait times have doubled for the average Canadian.
Today's landmark court decision is an indictment of the Liberal neglect and mismanagement. Will the Prime Minister admit that the Liberals have seriously damaged the health care system?
Health June 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, that answer is in contempt of the motion of yesterday and it is a slap in the face for all cancer groups in Canada.
Although this House decided yesterday to fully fund the national strategies for mental illness and heart disease, the government refuses to pay. Despite 12 years in office, the government has lagged behind governments in other developed countries.
For the cost of a Liberal scandal, these national strategies could be initiated. Why is there money for Liberal corruption but none for specific strategies, for mental illness and heart disease?
Health June 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the government agreed in the House to fully fund the Canadian strategy for cancer control, which it knows is a commitment to provide $260 million over five years.
By supporting yesterday's Conservative motion, the government has agreed to specifically allocate these moneys to the national cancer strategy.
When will the $260 million for the Canadian strategy for cancer control be delivered?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I note that the member spoke a lot about CIHR, but he did not speak to the motion at hand, which is the Canadian strategy for cancer control and beyond that the strategy for heart disease and mental illness.
However, cancer stakeholders have really set the bar as far as what they have been able to put together. I hope that other organizations like the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the Canadian Mental Health Association will be able to follow their lead.
Having said that, funding needs to be committed to ensure that the strategy is brought forward. The motion today is about that. We have yet to get a straight answer from any of the member's colleagues on when or even if this strategy will be fully funded to the $260 million over five years.
Will the member, on behalf of the Liberal Party, tell us that, yes, the cancer strategy outlined in the motion will be fully funded?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the member talked about working with the provinces, but what about working with the stakeholders? The stakeholders in the cancer community, for example, have come up with a game plan. They have the expertise. They called for a Canadian strategy on cancer control, yet the government has refused to fund it. He talks about $300 million for chronic care. The plan that we are talking about here will cost about $260 million over five years.
On the one hand, we have some members saying that they would support it, then on the other hand, it is clear that the government has no intention of funding it. There is an intrinsic contradiction here. It is very sad that the government would try to mislead Canadians again on an issue that is so important. The member also spoke of national strategies but he does not recognize that disease specific strategies are the way to go in a situation such as cancer.
Will the government fully fund the cancer strategy as outlined in the motion and use it as a model for future initiatives?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her comments; however, I fear that there may be a misunderstanding on what the Canadian strategy on cancer control entails.
The strategy does respect the autonomy of the provinces. It does respect the fact that the provinces are responsible for health care. It allows the provinces to opt in or opt out, whatever the case may be. It would not be administered by the federal government but by the stakeholders. It would be funded by the federal government, but that is it.
I wonder if the member of the Bloc would read again this cancer strategy of mine and pay specific attention to page 15 of the strategy. In light of this new information, and the fact that it is not a national strategy in the way it seems to be interpreted by the Bloc but a strategy that will benefit everyone who lives in this country, would the member be open to looking at it from that perspective?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the recognition that disease specific strategies are important and the way to go, particularly with cancer. I would point out that what the minister is saying actually contradicts what the Minister of Health has said, absolutely it does.
The Minister of Health spent 20 minutes this morning telling the House that disease specific strategies were not the way to go. He spent a considerable amount of time telling us that the chronic disease model was the way to go. He did not recognize the fact that the motion is asking for funding for the Canadian strategy on cancer control, which will be approximately $250 million over the next five years. Of the $300 million that the minister spoke about, $90 million has already been allocated. Already there is not the money we are talking about for the specific strategy.
Why is there a contradiction? Will the government fully fund and implement the cancer strategy that is outlined in the motion and allow the arm's length implementation of the strategy?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, it is very disturbing that the Liberals suggest one thing and do another. There has been talk this morning about $300 million for the chronic disease program, but the fact is that what we are asking for is a commitment that the government fund and implement the Canadian strategy for cancer control. I have yet to hear the minister, the parliamentary secretary or any other person of influence in the government say yes, they will fund the strategy.
This morning the minister dodged questions and implied that disease specific strategies are not the way to go, yet there is a disease specific strategy when it comes to diabetes. This is demonstrated to work throughout the world, in New Zealand, Australia, the U.K. and so on, and yet the minister does not recognize that.
The member talked about working with stakeholders, but the Canadian Cancer Society and many of the other cancer groups have indicated that they have not received the support they have asked for from the government and in fact have been misled and led down the garden path.
Not until today, when the Conservative Party motion, my motion, was brought forward, has the government paid any kind of attention to this. I wonder if the member could tell us whether the government will support the Conservative motion and follow through on it. Yes or no?
Supply June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the NDP for its support of this motion.
Earlier today we heard the Minister of Health say that disease specific strategies were not the way to go, yet the government does have a disease specific strategy when it comes to diabetes. Also, it has been demonstrated throughout the developed world that disease specific strategies are very important. The minister also talked about the $300 million for chronic disease, of which $90 million is already designated for another specific disease, so that leaves only a small pittance for this strategy.
I wonder if the NDP member could share with the House why she believes that the Liberals seem to dodge this issue and why they have not implemented this strategy. Quite frankly, it is a great strategy. The work is already done. It just needs to be implemented. The Liberals have had many years to do it and they have not, and they make claims, as we have heard this morning, that are simply not true.
Could the member share with the House why she thinks the Liberals are not straightforward with Canadians on these national strategies?