44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 14, 2022 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, I am sorry that my hon. colleagues are worried that I am not going to be nice enough for them.
When the hon. member spoke, he said that our government was an affront to democracy. He supports the protesters outside.
However, the Canadian public voted in a democratic election, electing all of us to the House, including the Prime Minister, to enact bills, debate and go to committees. At exactly what point was there an affront to democracy for the Canadian voters who put us here to do the work on their behalf? Maybe speak up and use an example of what part of democracy was undermined, as you sit in your seat.
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/14/22 12:42:09 p.m.
- Watch
First of all, I would like to remind the hon. parliamentary secretary that she is to address all questions and comments to the Chair.
Second of all, hon. members know that it is neither polite nor respectful to be yelling or talking while the hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.
I also want to remind members not to tell another member to sit down when they have the floor, as I have recognized them.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I appreciate that it is important that we maintain our decorum in the House. It is also important that we understand what the democratic process is. For my colleagues across the floor to attempt to ram a bill through the House without debate when we all know the Senate is not even here until next week really does not make any sense.
The question that needs to be answered in my mind is what the harm is of giving due diligence to a bill to understand what the science is behind it and bringing it to committee, as we normally would do. Considering that we on this side of the House have been asking for rapid tests for 18 months, what is now the urgency, when during the height of the omicron variant surge we did not even have tests, and now it appears many restrictions are being lifted? Those are the germane points that are important for people to understand.
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I served on the Standing Committee on Health for two years and remember when the Conservatives were championing the delivery of rapid tests to Canadians, and properly so. We have a bill before us to authorize an expenditure of $2.5 billion, which I am told would purchase about 400 million rapid tests, and Conservatives seem to be opposed to it. It is almost as if they cannot take yes for answer.
I generally agree with the Conservatives regarding closure. We usually do not want to see debate truncated, but we are in an emergency right now, and there is a terrible shortage in this country of access to rapid tests. That is why there is urgency. It is a two-section bill. The NDP worked productively and received assurance from the government that it would report to the House every six months on how many doses were purchased, how much was spent and where those doses were delivered. That is the NDP working productively.
My hon. colleague said that he wants to study whether or not we need these tests. Can he name three scientists in the country who are advocating that we do not need rapid tests in this country in the months ahead?
208 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the important thing to consider about this measure for rapid tests is if it is once again too little, too late, and not at the right time. Everybody in the House wants to understand what the science is. We know it has been a very dynamic situation throughout COVID and we have seen many, many changes, from we should get a test to we should not get a test to maybe we should or maybe we should not, that we should not get one because there are none, that the test we should get is a PCR test and then that it should be a rapid test.
We also know very clearly from the science that during the omicron wave there was a likelihood that someone was contagious much before the time the person would even show a positive test result. We also know from a scientific perspective that the specificity and sensitivity of rapid tests have been brought into question by some. That interesting part is again what we need to study before the health committee with my hon. colleague, who I am glad to hear would be happy to have us study this in committee.
199 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there is a lot to be said on making sure there is a proper accounting at committee of value for money to make sure these scarce dollars are being put to the best use. In British Columbia, we do not even have access to rapid testing, so there will be questions about whether there is value for money in this case.
I want to ask the member about competency, because the government could have made this into a supply bill. It easily could have added it to the estimates or the supplementary estimates, yet it has done this expenditure through an actual bill.
Why does the member think the government has done that? Is it because it cannot budget? Was it because the Prime Minister needed to pull a COVID rabbit out of his hat so he could tell the provinces to look at what the government is doing for them? I would like to find out what the member has to say about the unique nature of this particular proposal and why it was not budgeted for through the usual processes.
184 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there are a couple of issues here. As my hon. colleague said the other day, there is unfortunately no vaccine for Liberal budgeting incompetence; we wish there were.
As I said, this is a veritable ton of money. If we stacked dollar bills, we would have 30 metres of dollar bills for this $2.5 billion. It is important to remember that it is not an insignificant amount of money. The other part is that my Liberal colleagues do realize the tide is turning in their hard-handed measures, and as they see revolt and dissent inside their own caucus, they realize that is also the mood of Canadians.
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to know one thing.
My colleague said that the Conservatives are not opposed to vaccination. As we know, after the SARS crisis in 2003, the Naylor report criticized Canada for not having the capacity to manufacture vaccines. Of all the G7 countries, Canada is the only one that does not manufacture vaccines domestically. That is in part the result of the Trudeau government's inaction.
We lost four or five months of fighting COVID with a vaccine because of the Trudeau government's inaction. On August 10, 2021, the government announced that Moderna would set up a plant in Canada, likely in Montreal, which is what we were hoping for. However, the Trudeau government's investments will not do much—
126 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/14/22 12:49:15 p.m.
- Watch
Order. The hon. member mentioned the Prime Minister's name.
I know that he knows the rules of the House. I would therefore remind him not to do that.
I would like him to finish his remarks by asking his question.
41 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the following.
Would it not have been a big help if the Liberal government had taken action and we were able to manufacture vaccines in Quebec or Canada?
40 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, certainly we have spoken about domestic capacity in this House previously, as well as the shocking and astonishing lack of domestic capacity, given that we could have an ability here to mobilize to not only create and manufacture tests in Canada but also to produce vaccines and antivirals.
Members on this side of the House have spoken about that multiple times, as well as the shame in not respecting the innovation and intelligence of the Canadian community, which would be more than happy. I also think that before the wedge was driven by the Liberal government, our own vaccines could have been an excellent way to encourage more Canadians to be immunized, in the sense that they would have had a homegrown vaccine. I think that would have been an excellent thing. Unfortunately, we are two years into this pandemic and we still have no domestic production of vaccines, and none in sight, due to the incompetence of the government.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very perplexed by the position of the Conservative Party. They opposed mandatory vaccination in the chamber 90 days ago, instead proposing rapid testing of MPs as a secure method of our attending here. As I listen to my hon. colleague, he seems to be calling into question the very efficacy and validity of testing. He seems to suggest that testing should be a decision made by the health committee.
What is the position of the Conservative Party? Do its members believe that access to testing is an important way to deal with the current pandemic, or do they question the science of testing?
107 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I think it is important that people begin to understand that science does change and that it is dynamic. I think it is important to have an opportunity to hear what the science is, and I believe the health committee is an excellent way to do that. If the science is correct and rapid testing is useful and appropriate, why would the Conservatives not support that? However, and I cannot understand why my hon. colleagues want to fight about this, if the science is not correct, then why would we not admit that? What is there to hide behind? This is $2.5 billion.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Science is not an opinion.
5 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/14/22 12:52:26 p.m.
- Watch
Order.
It is not time for debate anymore, and the hon. parliamentary secretary knows full well that if she has questions and comments, she should wait for the appropriate time to ask those or make those.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
49 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.
I rise today in the House to speak to Bill C-10, an act respecting certain measures related to COVID-19. This bill was introduced by the member for Québec and is currently at second reading.
What is the purpose of this bill?
First, this bill would authorize the Minister of Health to make payments of up to $2.5 billion for any expenses incurred in relation to coronavirus disease tests.
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/14/22 12:53:29 p.m.
- Watch
I must interrupt the member because there seems to be a problem with his microphone.
It is working now.
The hon. member for Rivière‑des‑Mille‑Îles.
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will continue.
Bill C‑10's main purpose is to authorize the Minister of Health to pay up to $2.5 billion for expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2022, in relation to coronavirus disease tests.
Second, it authorizes the Minister of Health to transfer to any province or territory, or to any body or person in Canada, any coronavirus disease tests or instruments used in relation to those tests acquired by Her Majesty in right of Canada on or after April 1, 2021.
Basically, Bill C‑10 provides a one-time sum of up to $2.5 billion to the provinces and territories for testing-related expenses as of January 1, 2022.
It goes without saying that the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C‑10. As our leader once put it so eloquently, “You can't be against apple pie”.
After all, that money is to help the provinces and Quebec absorb extra pandemic-related costs. The government itself has already boosted health transfers by $5 billion in this Parliament alone: $4 billion for urgent health care system needs and another billion for the vaccination campaign.
These amounts are significant; we acknowledge that. However, they are still not nearly enough to meet the Bloc Québécois's calls to increase health transfers to 35%, rather than the current 22%. It is clear that this government is using the pandemic to postpone the heavy lifting that will be needed to negotiate health transfers.
We in the Bloc Québécois see this increase as urgent. It has been called for by the Quebec National Assembly, the Council of the Federation, health care workers through their union, and 85% of Quebeckers and Canadians, according to a recent Leger poll. Even the Liberal member for Louis-Hébert considers his own party's position on this matter untenable.
What will it take for the government to at least sit down with the premiers to negotiate?
Personally I think this shows a lack of respect. It feels as though we are being taken for fools. The Liberal government is the only one that does not see that the Quebec and other provincial governments must be able to depend on stable, predictable and adequate funding to fight this pandemic effectively. I repeat, “stable, predictable and adequate”.
The Liberal government's obsession with centralizing powers and its tendency to interfere are offensive. Quebec delivers all health care services, and this pandemic has obviously weighed heavily on Quebec's health care system.
Quebeckers pay taxes to Ottawa. Unfortunately, the Liberals are turning a deaf ear to our demands, but it is still our money. The federal machine would not work, would not exist, if it were not for the taxes from the provinces.
The Bloc Québécois is calling on the federal government to acknowledge that fact and treat Quebec and the provinces with the respect and deference they deserve. The Bloc is calling on the federal government to plan ahead and give the provinces their fair share, instead of lagging behind and watching from the sidelines.
As we know, pandemics are here for good. There will be more. The Director-General of the World Health Organization said that the pandemic will not end until the rich countries stop monopolizing all the vaccines. Canada, like several wealthy countries, emptied the shelves of the global vaccine market. It acted urgently to protect the public, and far be it from me to criticize it for that.
However, now that there are enough vaccines available for Quebeckers and Canadians, we have a duty of solidarity to those who are not lucky enough to have our collective wealth.
The Bloc Québécois is calling on the federal government to ramp up its efforts so that less fortunate countries can benefit from vaccines.
As I was saying, unfortunately, it is probable that this pandemic will last for some time and that more will emerge in the future. The federal government must therefore plan ahead—an important phrase—and provide Quebec and the provinces with the financial means to manage this crisis and all those that will follow.
The Bloc Québécois knows how to improve this situation. It is not complicated: The government must increase provincial health transfers. Why does the federal government always wait for things to become a crisis before doing what needs to be done? Why on earth is it not doing what is required when we are in the midst of the crisis? This government does not know how to plan ahead, and the Prime Minister does not know how to lead. In my opinion, the protests that have been paralyzing Ottawa for almost three weeks provide yet more proof of these two serious flaws.
Quebec is fortunate to have one of the best health care systems in the world. The next step is to improve what we have. The increase in health transfers that we are calling for will not solve all our problems instantaneously, but it is nevertheless a crucial step in the process of building a universal, public and high-quality health care system worthy of a G7 nation.
Simply put, I think that the Liberal government's stubbornness during this crisis has only highlighted the urgent need for Quebec to take its economic future into its own hands. Jacques Parizeau, may he rest in peace, said that he believed that the main reason Quebec should become independent was so that it could take responsibility for itself in a democracy in which the government is fully accountable to its citizens. In an ideal world, the Quebec government would be the only one responsible for collecting taxes from Quebeckers, and it would not need the the approval of a foreign parliament to govern itself as it sees fit. It also goes without saying that the Quebec government would be fully and completely accountable to its citizens.
Today, the fact that the Liberals will not listen to the call for health transfers reminds everyone why the Bloc Québécois is so necessary and why independence is so desirable.
1051 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is no surprise the Bloc raises the issue of health care transfers. However, there is a fundamental disagreement I have with my friends in the Bloc, which is that the constituents I represent, and I would argue they are very much reflective of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, feel that the national government does have a very important role to play in health care. It would be highly irresponsible, I would argue, to do nothing but just hand money over.
There are things that we can learn through this pandemic, such as with the long-term care facilities and the need for national standards. There are other issues of mental health and so many other aspects. Would the member not recognize that there are many people across Canada, including in the province of Quebec, who do want to see the national government play more of a role than just giving cash?
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in answer to my esteemed colleague, I would say that we are the ones who manage health in Quebec. We are the ones who manage people like doctors, nurses, support workers and respiratory therapists in Quebec. Health falls under Quebec's jurisdiction. Yes, the federal government's only role is to distribute money. Health falls under our jurisdiction. We are the ones with the expertise.
67 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
