SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 30

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 14, 2022 11:00AM
  • Feb/14/22 3:47:54 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Mr. Speaker, if I am not mistaken, the parliamentary secretary just asked us how we will vote on this motion, referring to the vote that occurred after oral question period when we indicated that the government must present a plan to lift restrictions. I would just like to point out to my colleague opposite that asking for a plan to lift restrictions does not mean that we are against health measures. On the contrary, we believe that appropriate health measures must be applied, but the government must also tell people where we are headed. Right now, we are debating Bill C-10. I would like to know how is it that the federal government has the means to provide money for health right now, but every time Quebec has asked for it in the past, the federal level was not there for Quebec.
144 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 6:52:03 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, before I begin, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix. This large riding is home to many communities. It is also a very beautiful riding that I have been able to visit a few times. I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that this is the evening of February 14 and I would like to say hello to my girlfriend. I want to let her know that I am here for a good reason today, which is to participate in this important debate. Why is this debate important? We are debating Bill C-10, which is not to be confused with the government’s defunct broadcasting bill. In fact, this Bill C-10 seeks to allow the government to spend $2.5 billion to buy and distribute rapid tests to the various Canadian provinces, and obviously to Quebec, which we wish were not a province. We might be tempted to say that this seems fairly uncontroversial and few people people would object to having access to tests. Such a position would be irresponsible. However, this goes far beyond simply being for or against spending $2.5 billion on rapid tests. I think that debate would be a short one, or at least it would be for us. That may be why the government did not want us to study the bill in depth and chose to issue a gag order. That may be why it did not want us to dig deeper. If we were to dig deeper and look closer, we might start questioning why the federal government needs to pump extra money into the provinces and Quebec, which need it to deal with the pandemic. We are talking about an additional $2.5 billion, which seems to have come out of nowhere, and the federal government is swooping in with this money like Santa Claus or a superhero. They want to show just how wonderful, generous and excellent they are. We all know, however, that that money is our tax money. It did come from somewhere, namely our own pockets. We are all paying. Quebec's health care system is short on money, and the same is probably true for the health care systems in the other Canadian provinces. That is why this bill calls for deeper consideration. Even though the federal government keeps bragging about how amazing it is, every time we ask if there is going to be more money for the health care system, it tells us it spent money like never before during the pandemic. First, I do not know if that is something to brag about. I think spending like never before is not something to boast about. What the government should be boasting about is fixing problems. Unfortunately, they are still not fixed. The pandemic is still here. I do not blame the government entirely. I think this is a global issue. That does not change the fact that underlying problems resurfaced with the pandemic, are still not fixed and will have to be addressed someday. For example, we could talk about vaccination capacity, which is nearly non‑existent. We used to have a thriving pharmaceutical industry in Quebec a few years ago. It has all but disappeared. Traces of it remain in my riding and on the north shore in Montreal, but it is nothing compared to what it used to be. The irony is that, recently at least, the federal government keeps trying to tell us how Quebec should run its health care system. When there is a disaster and everything is going wrong, it is easy for it to say that it could have done better. However, when we look at things properly, we might wonder if it really would have done better. Consider one of the things the federal government is supposed to look after in case of a pandemic or catastrophe: the national equipment stockpile. It is not as though the pandemic was something that nobody could have ever predicted, and yet when the government opened up the stockpile, it turned out all the equipment was expired. Imagine if Quebec hospitals managed things like that. It would be a bad situation. We really cannot count on the federal government, nor can we count on it to fund our health care system adequately. Quebec's health care system was really put to the test. A lot of people say the system is struggling. It is in trouble. Things are bad. If we want to get to the root of the problem, we need to talk about the federal government's financial contribution. In 1958, the federal government covered 50% of health care costs. In 2022, it covers about 22%. There is a big difference between 50% and 22%. They are not even close. Even so, the federal government will not stop talking about how great it is. When we ask the government when it will give us money for health care, it says it has spent more money than ever during the pandemic. When we look at the actual numbers, the federal government's share of health care funding has been shrinking steadily. That is a fact. Let us look at the real numbers. The government says it is putting more money into health care. Sure, it has increased funding annually in constant dollars, but if we look at the proportion of health care costs, the answer is no. It has not kept up. The government did this knowingly. Members will recall the budgets of Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien from a time not all that long ago. I had not yet been elected, of course, but that did not stop me from taking an interest in politics. At least I was born already. It is not such a distant memory for many people. Members will recall both Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien, rubbing their hands together, practically giddy, when they realized they could balance their budgets by reducing transfers. As a result, on the receiving end of that plan, the provincial and Quebec governments have been struggling ever since. They have had to bring in their own austerity measures, because the federal government is starving them of funds. Jean Chrétien liked to brag about it. In interviews not so long ago, he said that making budget cuts made him look good, and that the world was angry with Quebec. Unbelievable. That is when people began seeing the problem. When people go to the hospital and have a hard time getting good care, they get angry and upset. The Quebec government manages health care, but people forget that a large part of it was funded by Ottawa. I say “was” because that “large part” keeps shrinking, and this is causing more and more problems. The Bloc Québécois is calling for an increase in health care funding to 35%. We are not even asking for 50%, but 35%. It is not huge, but it would make a huge difference in the care people receive. It would make quite a difference. Instead of patting itself on the back every time it spends $5, the government should sit down at the table and tell us what it can do to really change things and address existing problems. That is where the government should be heading, rather than looking for every possible way to starve and drain the provinces and the Quebec government, all of which need help. The feds brag about working miracles, when all they are doing is sticking band-aids on a wound that is not healing. Naturally, with all these cuts to the federal government's contribution year after year, our health care system suffered during the pandemic. Every time that a slightly stronger wave arrives, or every time that case counts rise, the health care system becomes overloaded and can take no more. We could talk about this to all health care workers, who have had enough. They would like to be heard a little and helped. That is why we are speaking out today. We are telling the federal government that it is time to come to the table. I was elected in 2015, and I believe that the Bloc Québécois has talked about health transfers constantly since then. It is a big problem, and it will only get bigger, because health care costs continue to grow, yet the federal government's contribution continues to shrink. That is not right, and that is why the Bloc Québécois has been joined by Quebec and all the provinces of Canada in asking the government to increase health care funding. Sometimes Ottawa is hard of hearing when Quebec speaks, and even more so when the Bloc Québécois speaks, but once in a while, the message does get through. All that is to say that we are not giving up. For that reason, we have proposed a summit on health care, so that the federal government comes to the table and we finally solve the problem.
1558 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:03:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I have to admit that I am not familiar with the measures in Alberta or with how the Alberta government chose to manage the pandemic. What I do know, though, is that the way the Conservatives want to combat the pandemic is, essentially, to lift public health measures. I have a harder time with that because I do not think the pandemic is over. We need to send the message that this is still serious, that the blockades outside Parliament need to stop and that people need to peacefully make their way home. The lockdowns will ultimately be lifted, but for that to happen, we need to start by getting the pandemic under control.
116 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:04:54 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, I think that if we want to go further, we will also have to think about why there is a desire to increase health care funding. It is because we, as a society, chose to ensure that all Quebeckers and Canadians can access health care without being forced to sell their home or take on lifelong debt just because they got sick once or twice and went through some tough times. It can be stressful and extremely difficult on families when one member has to stop working because of a long illness. We must continue to work together to ensure that our health care system reduces social inequalities. We must ensure that everyone has access to care and can have good quality of life, free from undue stress if they become ill.
134 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 7:06:38 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-10 
Madam Speaker, my colleague raises an excellent question. What we have been seeing since the beginning of the pandemic is that the government seems to be making everything up on the fly. When it has the opportunity to make decisions for the long term, it chooses to call an election or prorogue Parliament. Essentially, it is not really willing to delve into certain issues or do things properly. It would rather shove decisions down people's throats as quickly as possible so they do not have time to think about it, analyze it or ask questions. It is a shame that the government is taking this approach.
107 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border