44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 7, 2024 10:00AM
- May/7/24 10:15:56 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member is from Quebec. He knows that Quebec already has a pharmacare program.
Would he rather have a program run by the federal government or by Quebec?
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 10:16:17 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is quite right. Quebec has had a pharmacare program for years. However, it is a private-public hybrid system with many flaws. It fails to control drug costs, which are extremely high when negotiating collective agreements.
The NDP believes Quebec would have the right to opt out of the federal pharmacare program with full compensation. Furthermore, this is something the major trade unions and consumer advocacy organizations have been asking for in order to lower drug costs for everyone.
We will see what happens during discussions in the coming months. We feel this would be a step forward for Quebeckers.
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 10:16:58 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP sent a letter inviting the Quebec Minister of Health and Vincent Marissal, a Québec solidaire member, to explain the benefits of pharmacare.
I am not sure if the leader of the NDP is aware, but we already have pharmacare in Quebec. Furthermore, I know that the riding office of my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is in the same building as the Québec solidaire member for Gouin.
Could he not have spoken with him so they could explain to the leader of the NDP that Quebec already has pharmacare?
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 10:17:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP is fully aware that Quebec has a pharmacare program. He has said several times during interviews here, in the foyer of the House, that Quebec has the right to opt out with compensation.
While the Quebec pharmacare program was a significant social development 30 years ago, it is showing many cracks today. Even Dr. Jean Rochon, the former health minister who implemented it, has said it is time to finish the job.
Finishing the job means having a true universal public pharmacare program, as requested by the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux and the Centrale des syndicats du Québec.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 10:18:12 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, all the major Quebec trade unions—the Centrale des syndicats démocratiques, the Centrale des syndicats du Québec, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux and the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec—have said that the pharmacare bill the NDP forced the government to introduce in the House is worthwhile and important.
Should Quebec members not listen to these unions, who have long been demanding the implementation of a public pharmacare system that does not have all the flaws and loopholes of the current Quebec system?
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 10:18:54 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we definitely need to listen to workers' representatives because this will have direct impacts.
Take, for example, a person who works part time in a grocery store three days a week and who has to pay for supplementary health insurance. Given the unaffordable and out-of-control cost of medication, we end up meeting people who have to spend 25% to 30% of their pay on supplementary insurance through their employer. That is not sustainable.
If we want to help these people, we need a true public, universal pharmacare plan.
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 11:17:19 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the interesting part about this pharmacare scheme that was put forward by the NDP-Liberal government is that it is not actually a plan. It is a promise to eventually, possibly, maybe explore a plan.
If the NDP-Liberal government was really interested in delivering for Canadians, it would have worked with provinces and territories to expand plans, to go after the 3% of Canadians who did not currently have a plan or had plans that were not sufficient for them. The government would have already been able to have pharmacare delivered to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.
However, that is not what the NDP-Liberal government wanted. It wanted photo ops, announcements and promises, but it did not actually want to deliver for Canadians. This is the tragic trend that we see, after nine years of a government that is not worth the cost. It is all about the announcements; it is not about the delivery.
As I said in my speech on pharmacare, if the government actually wanted pharmacare, it would have worked with provinces and territories to develop their plans out so that Canadians could have already benefited.
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:32:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me start by thanking my colleague for not sharing her time with the member for Winnipeg North. Everyone in the House appreciated that.
I would like to hear what she has to say about a topic that has come up a lot, namely pharmacare.
Quebec already has a pharmacare plan, but it is a hybrid public-private system. It has its shortcomings. It was cutting edge at the time, but now it needs an overhaul. All of the studies say that universal public pharmacare would help control and lower the price of drugs and would generate savings for everyone, including workers, employers and the health care system too.
This budget contains a first step for diabetes medications and contraceptives. That is something that the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux and the Centrale des syndicats du Québec have been asking for.
We are in favour of the right to opt out with compensation for Quebec, but does my colleague not agree that we need a universal public plan, whether at the federal or Quebec level, to control and maintain drug prices?
202 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:49:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the bill includes a commitment to introduce dental care and pharmacare.
The Quebec nation, speaking unanimously through its national assembly, told Ottawa it did not want this. What we want is the right to opt out with full compensation. We will enhance our own programs ourselves based on our own priorities.
Can my colleague tell me how a member from Quebec could possibly ignore the unanimous voice of the Quebec nation, as expressed by its national assembly, and see what Ottawa is going to do as political progress?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:49:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is completely right and he answered his own question.
How can anyone ignore the wishes expressed by the Quebec National Assembly concerning pharmacare?
I heard my colleagues in the NDP say that the unions were on board. I would like to point out to my NDP colleagues that many unions belong to OUI Québec, a sovereignty group. I do not know whether my colleagues are willing to respect the unions' wishes on that issue and support Quebec independence.
I would be glad to hear an answer on this subject.
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 2:29:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are very happy to work with anyone in the House to ensure that Canadians no longer have to choose between paying for groceries and paying for their medication. Yes, we are moving forward with free diabetes medication.
Perhaps we learned today why the Conservatives are so vehemently opposed to it. It is because their anti-choice leader allows his anti-choice MPs to argue against abortion and contraception.
We need to be unequivocal when it comes to defending women's rights, and that includes pharmacare.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 4:32:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, for starters, we call them “Conservatives”. They have the same colour of blue, and they use the same name, but I would argue that this is actually the Reform Party. I think that it is entirely appropriate to question whether or not they are even Conservatives because, quite frankly, although she is no longer with us, I am sure that Flora MacDonald, who was from Kingston and the Islands, would look at the Conservative Party and would say that it really is not what she represented when she was in this place.
However, the member brought up the Conservatives' position on pharmacare. I was here to listen to that debate on pharmacare. Do members know how many Conservatives got up and said that only one in five Canadians want this? It is as though one in five Canadians needing something does not qualify us to actually do something about it.
To answer the member's question about the motivation of the Conservatives, they know that those one in five Canadians are not who they are banking on to vote for them. They know that those one in five Canadians are some of the most vulnerable in our communities who actually really need access to pharmacare, and they are willing to brush them aside because they know that they are not contained within the four out of five who they actually do rely on for their votes.
240 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 4:47:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have heard Conservative or Reform members, or however one might want to address members opposite, say that the federal government does not have a role to play in health care. We heard them say that they do not support a pharmacare program, yet a vast majority of Canadians want a Canada health system that reflects the Canada Health Act and see the value of a pharmacare program.
Can the member clearly indicate why he and the Reform Party or the Conservative Party do not believe that the federal government has a role to play when it comes to a national health care system?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
