44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 24, 2022 10:00AM
- Mar/24/22 4:17:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will share my time with the member for London North Centre.
There is no overstating the fact that the past two years have not been easy. As individuals and as a society, we are all worn out. The pandemic truly was a tragedy, and it had many and varied impacts on all aspects of society. Businesses had to close their doors either temporarily or, in some cases, permanently because they went bankrupt. Seniors were affected. In some residences, the death rate was utterly unacceptable. Some residents could not leave their rooms for weeks. They were totally isolated. We also know the pandemic had a terrible impact on everyone's mental health, especially those in isolation, such as seniors who had to stay in their rooms, as well as frontline workers who were so brave and did such amazing work to keep us safe. It also harmed young people, students who could not get the kind of educational experience they normally would. Basically, it was very hard for everyone.
The fact is that Canada chose a more careful approach. We were much more careful than many other countries. That is why we had a lower mortality rate than many other countries, including our neighbour to the south. Our mortality rate was roughly one-third of that in the United States. I think we should be proud of that. The Minister of Health has repeated many times that if the vaccination rate in the United States had been the same as in Canada, they would have saved 135,000 lives. That is a lot. We do not think about that so much these days. We no longer think about the lives that were saved. We only think about making life a bit easier by lifting all sorts of restrictions and mandates, even though we have lifted many so far and life has returned more or less to normal.
Our success in saving lives is a result of the wisdom and sacrifices of Canadians who have shown exemplary solidarity by following the health rules. It is also the result of the leadership shown by the federal and provincial governments. That leadership was crucial. In this crisis, the governments had to lead by example by working together. In other words, the governments were able to get on the same page.
The same cannot be said for the United States, where each state followed its own course. Sometimes the states worked against the current. In Florida, they wanted nothing to do with masks or vaccines. I even heard that in Florida, if someone went into a restaurant wearing a mask, they were kicked out for scaring the customers. California's approach, however, was similar to Canada's and the governor was nearly thrown out of office.
In a crisis, we cannot underestimate the vital importance of Canadians maintaining faith in their institutions. That is when it is most important for citizens to have faith in their institutions.
Institutions, in order to keep that faith, have to be consistent. They have to be judicious in the decisions that they are making. Any signs of inconsistency or arbitrariness can be fatal in terms of creating a loss of faith and confidence on the part of the people. If that happens, then no one is going to follow anything the government is suggesting. If that had happened in Canada, we would have had many more deaths than we experienced.
It is important also for governments to show leadership. That is why we have a vaccination mandate for federal employees. We are showing leadership. We got the support of the Canadian people to do that in an election where the Canadian people gave the Government of Canada a mandate to show the example across the country. That was very important in terms of saving lives and helping us to get out of the worst of the crisis sooner rather than later.
Canadians responded to the leadership that their governments showed. They obliged and the proof is in the fact that as of March 13, if we are looking at people five years old and older, 85% of the population has been fully vaccinated. If we look at the age group 18 and over, 56% have been fully vaccinated plus have obtained a booster.
An hon. member: One of the best in the world.
Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: Yes.
Why is it important for the most people possible to be vaccinated? As André Picard said in The Globe and Mail, the pandemic playing field is not level. What did Mr. Picard mean by that? An 85-year-old is 340 times more likely to die from COVID than a 20-year-old. A 75-year-old is 140 times more likely to die from COVID than a 20-year-old. A 65-year-old is 65 times more likely.
André Picard is an expert in public health. His columns are consistently dealing with that issue. To quote him in The Globe and Mail recently, he wrote, “Now, by abandoning all mitigation measures at once...we’re shifting the pandemic burden entirely [to older Canadians] onto the immunocompromised, the unboosted”. That is very important to keep in mind. When we argue that we should just drop everything, we are doing harm to the most vulnerable in our society.
The other point I would like to make is that all pandemic-related decisions are extremely complex. Not only are they a function of many factors, but these factors are dynamic and constantly changing. The Minister of Health mentioned some of these factors in question period in his wonderful responses to the questions he received. Here are some of the factors that public health has to consider and the government has to consider when deciding when to remove restrictions: the vaccination rate, hospital capacity, domestic epidemiology, international epidemiology and social impacts. This is a very long list of complicated factors that have to be looked at.
We are making comparisons that are a little too facile. We say that if the provinces do this then the federal government should do this. This seems to be the rhetoric that is coming from the other side, creating this kind of equivalency that is confusing if one is not listening closely. However, it is important to distinguish between the federal and provincial contexts. Federal measures focus on international transmissions. Provincial restrictions do not. There is a big difference between a crowded conveyance like an airplane or a train and movie theatres, gyms, shopping malls, grocery stores and the like. We have to use our wisdom to make distinctions that are important, especially in times of crisis.
I will conclude by quoting Mr. Picard one more time. He says, “We should not, after two years of solid effort and no small amount of sacrifice, be so foolish as to abandon prevention.” We must remain vigilant, responsible and wise.
1160 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 4:28:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, again, the opposition is simplifying things. There are very few absolutes in anything, whether it be environmental protection or public health. We work with a risk management approach. That is what governments have been doing all along.
We cannot just have blanket statements or blanket policies that overlook certain exceptions that have merit. I am sure that for anyone coming over here from the crisis overseas, there will be public health officers helping them along the way. I do not think we can just paint everything with one brush. We have to be a little more nuanced than that.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 4:29:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the biggest obstacle in the tourism sector, in my opinion, was the pre-arrival test needed to enter Canada. Now that those tests will no longer be required as of April 1, I think that will mean fewer barriers to tourism, especially within Canada.
I am sure there are many Canadians who would like to visit my colleague's beautiful region. What I heard from my constituents, however, was that they were more concerned about the required tests that were so expensive.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 4:31:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a good question. As someone said, we will not be safe until everyone in the world is safe.
I am not particularly ideological about how we ensure that everyone is vaccinated. Whatever approach is most efficient in terms of getting the rest of the world vaccinated is the one we should go with. Intellectual property is, of course, a very complex field. We want to ensure that whatever measures we take actually result, at the end of day, in greater production and greater distribution of the vaccines.
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 4:32:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first of all, I wish a happy birthday to Sara. She is very fortunate to have such a wonderful grandfather, whom I am sure she is extremely proud of.
The last time I looked, I think we were second or third in the G20. I know it tends to change over time, but all I know is that we were very much near the top and that is something we as Canadians can be very proud of.
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 5:12:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is always a great pleasure to listen to my colleague. He is a great orator here in the House. I think he has already been recognized as the best new MP in the House.
I would like to ask him the following question. Does my colleague believe that someone who arrives from overseas who is not vaccinated or who received a less effective vaccine than Pfizer or Moderna is a greater threat to the Canadian community than a traveller who enters the country and is fully vaccinated with recognized vaccines such as Pfizer or Moderna?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
