SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Senate Bill

Bill S-209

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 30, 2024
Pandemic Day Act
  • Bill S-209, also known as the Pandemic Day Act, designates March 11th as "Pandemic Observance Day" in Canada. This is a day to commemorate the efforts made to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, remember its impact, and reflect on ways to prepare for future pandemics. The bill acknowledges the effects of the pandemic on individuals and highlights the disproportionate impact on vulnerable and historically disadvantaged groups. Each year on March 11th, Canadians will have the opportunity to observe this day and honor those affected by the pandemic.
  • H1
  • H2
  • H3
  • S1
  • S2
  • S3
  • RA
  • Yea (198)
  • Nay (116)
  • star_border
Context: Senate Volume 153, Issue 194 - Apr/18/24
Speake

The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons returning Bill S-209, An Act respecting Pandemic Observance Day, and acquainting the Senate that they had passed this bill without amendment.

[English]
41 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 301 - Apr/17/24
The Speaker
It being 5:44 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at third reading stage of Bill S-209 under Private Members' Business. Call in the members.
38 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)
Mr. Speaker, as always it is an honour to rise in this place to talk about the issues that are so important to my constituents and all Canadians. Particularly, on Bill S-209, I find it interesting that we are debating the creation of a day, which happened approximately four years ago, for when COVID-19 became a big thing. I remember that four years ago well. I was in this place as a newly elected member of Parliament, and it was a chaotic time. Many people did not know what was going on. We had differing intelligence and news. In fact, it was not even called COVID at that time. However, then it was declared a pandemic, and then this place and basically the country was shut down. Now, four years later, we have an attempt to memorialize this in the context of a day of recognition. What I think is interesting, and I would suggest very troubling, is that we have an effort by a member of the Liberal Party to sponsor and bring forward this pandemic day act in the House of Commons, which was put forward by a senator. However, what I think needs to be said very clearly is how impactful COVID was, and not just the virus, which had an unquestionably significant impact on so many lives. As I have reflected back, and because the debate of the bill was bumped back a couple of weeks I have had additional time to consider it, what I find very troubling is the mismanagement and the efforts of the Liberals, in particular, to squash and disregard the rights and freedoms of Canadians and the division that took place. I think of the 2021 election. In fact, I was reflecting the other day on how unbelievably divisive that election was. Literally, in this place two months before the Prime Minister went to Rideau Hall to call an election, he promised that he would not do that. However, he used vaccinations. Again, he promised that he would never force Canadians to get vaccinated, and then he used that as a political weapon to divide Canadians against each other, splitting families apart, churches, organizations and communities, and for what? The purpose was in pursuit of power. I reflect back on the early days of the pandemic when the actions of this place were shut down and there was, I would suggest, cross-partisan collaboration and a willingness to say, “Okay, we do not know what's going on.” We certainly could not trust what was coming out of China. There were questions about what the WHO was saying, and we had to figure things out. However, what did the Liberals do instead of being willing to work together? They would claim on television that a team Canada approach was needed, which is simply code for “they failed” as we have learned time and time again since that point. What we saw was that there was not a willingness to collaborate. They wanted unlimited taxation and spending authority for a year and a half, which is something that would have defied 800 years of Westminster democratic tradition. We look time and time again at the tumult of COVID-19 and the pandemic, and there were certainly significant challenges. We saw our health care system put under tremendous strain. It was unfortunate that the result of that was not a realistic conversation about the fact that we had a virus that brought our health care system to its knees, even though we invest hundreds of billions of dollars a year into that health care system. We have not had those realistic conversations in the follow up to that. I was speaking to someone earlier today who talked about the trauma to him and his family. They talked about how a member of their family committed suicide because of the isolation they faced during COVID. We see tragic stories like that, and we still have concerns, whether they are concerns around vaccine injuries, which the Liberals seem quick to suggest are simply conspiratorial, or concerns related to long COVID, where there are individuals who still cannot get access to the care that they need to deal with some of the consequences of a virus that we still do not necessarily have a good understanding of. I would just note a practical impact of the mismanagement. There used to be a pretty significant consensus, and I have been very vocal in my support for the use of vaccines, dating to long before COVID. However, because of the Liberals' intentional dividing of Canadians, today we see greater vaccine hesitancy than there was only a few years ago. I happened to be on the ethics committee, on which I have the opportunity to serve during this Parliament as well. We saw that, when Liberals spend money, along with that money, comes scandal. Whether it was the WE Charity, ventilators or arrive scam, on and on the scandal train goes. We see how things that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago have been normalized because of the willingness of the government to take advantage, and the members even use language like this. They used it in trying to reshape the economy to some utopian vision that is certainly not leaving Canadians better off, so it is the furthest thing from a utopia, but that is the language the Liberals use. I would simply suggest this: There are still many Canadians who want answers about the spending, the actions and why things were allowed to devolve. So often, still today, we hear how COVID is still being used as an excuse, whether that be for the debt or deficits, yet we learned that, of the COVID spending, 35% of that money expended during COVID was not even related to the pandemic. We see mismanagement. When it comes to the national response, especially in the early days of the pandemic, the economic inefficiencies with which the government managed its programs are astounding. The government was unwilling to work with industry, but encouraged sectors of the economy to lay people off, subsidized their being laid off, and then subsidized those businesses to continue to keep their doors open. Talk about inefficiencies. No wonder we have such a productivity gap existing today. Four years ago, on March 11, I remember that briefing that took place, and the irony. It was interesting because there were a couple of hundred people packed into a committee room that had been set up in a theatre style in the Wellington Building. There were health officials there who were basically saying that they did not know what was going on. We see how, in times of crisis, the virtue of leadership shows up, and in that regard, Canada was left lacking. We saw, instead of bringing the country together, the Prime Minister attempted to enrich himself and his friends. We saw a government that, instead of trying to collaborate, tried to consolidate and bring forward more authority upon itself. Do we need a day to acknowledge the trauma that so many faced? I still hear from people who have broken relationships, broken family members and have lost loved ones, and they are on all sides of each debate, whether that is for vaccines or against vaccines, for lockdowns or against lockdowns. They are on both sides of the debate whether to support action on COVID, taking it seriously, or to not support that. The trauma that was unleashed upon our country because we had a government that was more worried about self-preservation than working in the best interest of Canadians is a legacy that certainly bears reflection. However, I do not think the way to do that is through a day of recognition because, on the division, I think Canadians would far rather see accountability.
1318 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be able to rise and add a few thoughts in regard to the pandemic observance day that is being proposed. I would first like to acknowledge both my colleague and the Senate of Canada for coming up with the initiative and the idea of designating March 11 as pandemic observance day. We have so many days, weeks and months that are recognized for all sorts of different reasons. When I think of March 11 being pandemic observance day, I see that as a positive thing. We all went through a great deal during a very difficult time. We are talking about a worldwide pandemic during which so many people died, because the pandemic did not discriminate. There is a lot to be learned from the last pandemic. Seeing that designation here in Canada would allow individuals, whatever their background, their career choice or understanding of the issue, the opportunity to have that day as a day on which to highlight the concerns and issues that maybe they encountered during the pandemic, and to briefly provide comment in regard to what actually took place. We all know about the worldwide pandemic and the individuals, non-profits and governments here in Canada, with a team Canada approach, that took on the pandemic. I am very proud of many of the things we were able to do here in Ottawa to support and have the backs of Canadians. It is something that we will no doubt continue to talk about into the future, about the government's role and how the national government worked with provincial entities, how the Prime Minister, for example, originally on a daily basis, provided a briefing for Canadians, and the financial supports that were put into place, whether it was for small businesses through the wage subsidy programs and loans, or the CERB program, which literally helped millions of Canadians to have an income. There was a great deal of co-operation that took place with different levels of government and different political entities. We had Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats, and governments at all levels working together, recognizing the needs. We often hear about mandates. Some of the mandates were at the federal level, and others were at the provincial level. There was everything from curfews to the wearing of masks to restrictions of businesses and so forth. There was the creation of programs that were put into place to have the backs of Canadians in all regions of the country. That is one aspect that could be reflected on, on a future March 11. Then there is the whole idea of heroes, individuals who really stepped up to the plate. I am thinking of first responders and our health care workers. I think about other individuals. We often think about our health care workers and recognize the amazing work they did, but I also think about public transit drivers and taxi drivers. People were going into those vehicles, and those drivers continued to provide a public service. I think about the long haul truck drivers who continued to provide the essential groceries to our stores, as well other types of consumer products, whether it was toilet paper, which was a challenge at the very beginning of the pandemic, or other supplies. There were so many individuals, non-profits and governments whose actions made a huge difference for Canadians as a whole. We had our military step up. We had organizations like Red Cross that stepped up. After mentioning those two, I think about our seniors in care facilities, where there were huge concerns about the outbreaks and the number of deaths, and so forth. It was an all-encompassing, holistic approach for the different sectors of society. We had private companies that managed to keep people employed, even when it was challenging in terms of the type of work they might be able to do. They did not want to let people go or fire people, recognizing the impact that would have on the economy. We had some businesses retool and start production of some materials needed during the pandemic. In hindsight today, there was a great deal of effort by so many people in every capacity of society that enabled us, ultimately, to get out of the pandemic in a relatively positive fashion. In comparison to other countries around the world, like the United States or many of the European countries, Canada did reasonably well. That was, in most part, because people recognized what we needed to do, came to many different tables in many forms and ultimately made a difference. As a direct result, lives were saved. Not as many hospital expenses were incurred. The family unit, in good part, was protected as much as possible. We were able to get some sort of normalcy back in a quicker fashion, depending on the area of the nation. Some provinces had more quarantine types of issues than others. I think recognizing March 11 as the pandemic observance day would be a positive thing where many people in many ways could reflect upon the pandemic. I think of all the different types of special days, weeks or months that we, as the House of Commons, have taken a position on and have said that we support. We have done quite a bit of that. I suggest that recognizing a day to observe the pandemic would be of great value to Canadians. For school systems, professional organizations, working environments and governments to have that day would provide an opportunity to talk about it in the hope of ultimately moving forward. It would keep Canadians better informed, going into the future, about some of the very basic issues of medical attention and making sure things like vaccinations are done when necessary. In fact, I just recently had a constituent talk about shingles and the vaccines for shingles. The level of heightened awareness about a series of different medical issues is a direct result of the pandemic. I think there is a lot to be learned. I would encourage all members to get behind this and to give their support to Bill S-209.
1032 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)
Uqaqtittiji, I rise to speak in support of Bill S-209. I thank my colleague from Vancouver Centre for sponsoring this bill. A pandemic observance day, if passed, would honour the loved ones we lost to COVID-19. It would recognize the countless sacrifices made by frontline workers in Canada and abroad. It would provide us with a chance to reflect on the ongoing impacts COVID-19 continues to have. On behalf of Nunavut, I will reflect on our experiences during the pandemic. I thank Dr. Michael Patterson, who was the chief public health officer for Nunavut during the COVID-19 pandemic. While I was apprehensive at first, I gained great respect for him and his role. Because of his great leadership, it took much longer for COVID-19 to reach Nunavut compared with other provinces and territories. I remind the House that all 25 of the communities I represent in Nunavut are fly-in only. That was part of the reason it was easier to isolate, quarantine and screen for infections. Starting on March 25, 2020, the territorial government restricted all travel into Nunavut. Only residents and essential medical workers were allowed to enter, and they were first required to quarantine for 14 days. The territory was essentially on a complete lockdown. While cases surged in Canada and abroad, Nunavut remained without cases of COVID-19. For once, our isolated communities were protected. I thank the decisiveness of members of the territorial government, whose fast and aggressive actions kept Nunavummiut safe. I thank the former premier, Joe Savikataaq; the current premier, P.J. Akeeagok; the minister of health, John Main; and the chief medical officer, Dr. Michael Patterson, for their leadership in these difficult times. For many months, Nunavut’s pandemic measures were controversial. Many Nunavummiut struggled with being isolated in hotels, waiting to go home. Mental health supports were needed as people struggled in their journey home. The following June, many restrictions were lifted. First, parks and day cares were reopened, and outdoor gatherings were allowed. By the end of the month, even bars and restaurants reopened, subject to social distancing. Nunavut would not see a positive case until eight months after the pandemic officially began in Canada. On November 6, 2020, Nunavut’s first case of COVID-19 was confirmed in Sanikiluaq. In a week, this increased to eight confirmed cases. A week after that, cases exploded to 84. I am positive that this huge spike in cases is 100% related to the overcrowded housing situation that Nunavummiut are forced to endure. While new lockdowns and social distancing measures sought to keep COVID-19 under control, the bubble had burst. Overall, Nunavut recorded 3,531 cases of COVID-19. I am very sad to say that 10 of my constituents died. These were people I knew, who were mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, parents, grandparents and friends. Extended family is important in my riding, and more than 10 families changed forever because of the pandemic. In a territory as small and tight-knit as Nunavut, these losses are amplified. While the pandemic may be considered over, its effects persist. Many have spoken about the impacts of social isolation on mental health. The profound impacts on Nunavummiut of increased loneliness and two years without socialization remain; these include worsening anxiety and depression. With colonial policies, the mental health needs of Nunavummiut continue to be ignored. There are more completed suicides there than in any other jurisdiction, especially among youth, and this is extremely concerning. While I have complete faith in Nunavummiut to support each other, they are given hurdles that make healing beyond their reach. The Liberals must invest in Nunavut. We need better access to culturally relevant and trauma-informed mental health care. The health care system in Nunavut is already extremely strained. COVID-19 highlighted many of the issues that my constituents must live with every day. Just last year, health services had to be reduced in six communities because of the lack of staff. More than two dozen key positions were unstaffed. Some are still operating on an emergency-only basis, meaning people cannot access primary health care. The life expectancy in Nunavut is 71 years, while in Canada overall it is 82 years. Even when a doctor or nurse is available, for most basic and specialized services people must fly thousands of kilometres south to hospitals in Iqaluit, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Yellowknife or Edmonton. The federal government must do more to support, train, recruit and retain qualified health care workers in Nunavut. More must be invested in health infrastructure so that families are not separated just to get the care they need. COVID-19 is not the only respiratory disease that people in Nunavut endure. The Nunavut Department of Health announced tuberculosis outbreaks in Pond Inlet last March, in Naujaat last May and, more than two years ago, in Pangnirtung. Tuberculosis has been practically eradicated in the rest of Canada, but it persists in my communities. According to a 2018 report by the Public Health Agency of Canada, the average annual rate of TB among Inuit is 290 times higher than in Canadian-born, non-Indigenous people. This number is Canada’s shame. It is evidence that the government does not meet its obligations to Inuit. Hopes were high in 2018 when the Liberals announced a plan to end tuberculosis in Inuit communities by 2030. Six years have passed, and infection rates remain high as federal funding continues not to be enough. Five people in Inuit communities have died by TB since 2021. I should not have to call on the federal government to recommit funding to address tuberculosis and save lives in Nunavut, yet here I am, practically begging the government to please invest in Nunavut. This includes investing in housing so that respiratory diseases are prevented from spreading based on overcrowding. To conclude, the NDP supports the intent of Bill S-209. COVID-19 had immeasurable impacts on Canada and abroad. My thoughts are especially with the 10 Nunavummiut who died from COVID-19, and their families. We must do better. We must be better prepared if there is ever another pandemic. I hope that the Liberals will address the persistent health issues that I outlined. I hope that the budget tomorrow will include major investments in Nunavut.
1059 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)
Mr. Speaker, first I would like to inform you that I may not use all of my time to speak to this bill because it has been a while since it was introduced. The bill is landing here about three years later and, as I like to say in speeches where I am not the first to speak, I feel that everything has already been said, although I would not repeat what the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan said. On the contrary, I will offer my colleagues a much more conciliatory tone that is far more focused on those who have suffered as a result of the pandemic. The purpose of Bill S‑209, which we are currently studying, is to commemorate the pandemic and remind everyone that many people suffered during that period. This bill was introduced by Quebec senator Dr. Marie-Françoise Mégie, and it seeks to make March 11 a day of observance but not a statutory holiday. Perhaps it is a way to remember a time that took the entire world by surprise. It was the first time in history that such a surprising event took place, and it was something that everyone experienced both together and on their own. I think that the important thing about this bill is that we remember the people who suffered and the people who helped us during the pandemic. We remember the good things taken away from us during the pandemic, which we too often took for granted. I like to compare it to the ice storm. I grew up in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. In 1998, we got caught in the triangle of darkness. Someone commented on the strong sense of unity that took hold at the time, which unfortunately vanished as soon as the power came back and the lights were turned on. If March 11 can serve as an occasional reminder of the sacrifices made by many, or keep alive a few reminders of that sense of unity, then it will have not have been for nothing, at least in that regard. Among those we wish to remember are, of course, all those who died from COVID-19. Sadly, I imagine everyone in the House knows someone who has succumbed to COVID-19, either directly or as a result of a comorbidity. One person in particular comes to mind, someone I have already paid tribute to in the House and who passed away as a result of COVID-19. This individual was really well liked among Bloc, PQ and separatist supporters across Quebec. Just think of seniors, for example, who were the first to be confined and the last to come out of lockdown. These individuals, who unfortunately often struggle with isolation, were even more isolated during the pandemic. Just think of women, especially those who were self-employed in areas that were rapidly closing down. Think of women who worked as aestheticians, for example, and in other rather precarious jobs usually done by women. They lost significant sources of income and suffered disproportionately from the pandemic. Take, for example, the guardian angels, all the people who saved our skins during the pandemic. If they had not been there, the situation would have been even worse in many health care facilities, such as hospitals, long-term care homes and so on. I am also thinking about frontline workers in general, all those who could not work from home during the pandemic because the nature of their job would not allow it and who had to go to work day after day in difficult conditions. We needed them and they were there for us. We can think of the young people, a generation sacrificed at a pivotal moment in their lives. We can think of all those who had to attend their prom remotely or who simply did not have one. That may seem a bit childish, but it is certainly a milestone in a person's life. High school prom is often a turning point before post-secondary studies. We can also think of the scientific community, the scientists who were unfortunately treated badly by disinformation agents, but who nevertheless tried to some insight and information to support our collective well-being during this rather dark chapter in history. March 11 will be the day we remember the sacrifices made by some, the work accomplished by others, everything we lost during this period that we had taken for granted and that this period helped us realize was important. March 11 will be the day we reflect on how lucky we are to finally have gotten through it and, for the most part, to have regained the same quality of life we had before the pandemic but have only now learned to appreciate. If it can serve that purpose, then it will be worth celebrating, in spite of everything. I hope we can celebrate it with a positive attitude, contrary to what I heard in some speeches earlier. With that, I will conclude my remarks. As I said at the beginning, I do not intend to use all of my time, because others have spoken more eloquently than I have.
871 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 272 - Jan/31/24
Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.)
Madam Speaker, it is wonderful to be here with all of my colleagues this evening as the House has returned for its first week back sitting. Before I begin, I wanted to say one or two personal remarks. This morning I was able to return to my riding for a wonderful announcement with the Attorney General, the public safety minister, the Premier of Ontario and a number of his cabinet ministers in relation to an investment we are making to tackle gun and gang violence. When I returned to my riding, I found out from very good family friends of my wife and mine, whom we have known for nearly 10 years in the riding, and who are family to us and vice versa, that the patriarch of the family had passed away, so I was able to go to the visitation this afternoon. I rearranged the schedule, just as we all do in the House, and I was able to pay my respects to the family, who are dear friends of mine. The funeral is tomorrow morning, and I paid my respects this evening. However, I wanted to say to Domenico and Carm, as well as to their sons, Matthew and Michael, and their wives, Mia and Vanessa, along with the grandchildren and all the siblings, that their patriarch, the grandfather Serafino, much like millions of immigrants and newcomers who have come to this country, came to Canada for the opportunity that Canada has provided for all of us. They and their family are in my thoughts. He lived a full life, and he was one tough son of a gun from that generation. I send them my condolences. I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Bill S-209, an act respecting pandemic observance day. I am also pleased to announce the government's support of the bill. It is not often that bills are tabled in the House that we can all rally around, but I think this is one of those times. Bill S-209 proposes to designate March 11 as pandemic observance day throughout Canada. It was on March 11, 2020, that the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. What would this day be all about? First and foremost, it would be a day to honour the over 6.8 million people who have died of COVID-19 globally, more than 51,000 of whom were in Canada. I will take a moment to let those words and those numbers sink in. COVID-19 is now the deadliest disaster in Canadian history, excluding acts of war. It has surpassed the 1918 influenza pandemic, which led to nearly 50,000 deaths in Canada. We can imagine if, in early March 2020, someone had suggested that 51,000 people living in Canada would be gone forever due to this terrible virus, it would have been unfathomable, but here we are, almost four years, and too many deaths, later. Collectively, we have lost friends, parents, grandparents and siblings. Nothing can change that, but a pandemic observance day could help us acknowledge these profound losses. We should let this day forever be a formal recognition of our collective grief. This day would also be an opportunity for us to recognize all the frontline workers who experienced higher risks of COVID-19 exposure in their work environment while ensuring continuity of critical services. The pandemic has placed unprecedented pressures and demands on Canada's health workforce and health care system. Since March 2020, health care professionals have extended themselves to meet the increased demands of COVID-19, but they are now stretched dangerously thin. Reports of burnout are increasing, and a significant number of health care professionals, particularly nurses, are considering leaving their profession altogether. Studies have shown that frontline workers are more likely to screen positive for post-traumatic stress disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and/or major depressive disorder than those who are not frontline workers. The pandemic has contributed to labour shortages across Canada, most critically in the health care sector. Without human health resources, there is simply no health care. Without those brave men and women who are nurses, emergency room workers and ambulance attendants, there is no health care. While this symbolic day of observance would not fix these problems, recognizing this outstanding group of Canadians would signal how grateful Canadians are for their work and dedication. Finally, this day of observance would acknowledge the serious impact COVID-19 has had on the health of Canada's population, both on health in the traditional sense and on mental health. While deaths are the ultimate, irreversible consequences of the pandemic, millions of Canadians have contracted and continue to contract COVID-19. Over 4.5 million cases have been confirmed in Canada, but we all know that this is a gross underestimate since the emergence of the omicron variant in December 2021, when we began increasingly to rely on at-home rapid testing. By now, we have all had personal connections with people who have contracted the virus, some more than once. While the majority of those infected will recover, some continue to experience ongoing physical and/or psychological symptoms. Based on the World Health Organization's estimate that at least 10% of those infected develop a post-COVID-19 condition, there could be thousands of Canadians who suffer from ongoing symptoms. Many consequences of this condition and its negative long-term impacts are yet to be understood. In addition to the long-term physical impacts associated with contracting the virus, many Canadians also experienced worsening mental health during the pandemic. For some, the pandemic experience was coupled with the stress of a job loss, isolation from loved ones, restrictions on community, learning and recreational activities, and/or the need to balance work and caregiving responsibilities. The breadth and depth of these challenges negatively affected the feelings and perceptions of mental health and well-being of many Canadians, especially among women, younger Canadians and frontline workers. Social distancing restrictions strained social ties, causing feelings of isolation and damaging mental health. Many people across the country have faced hardships as a result of the pandemic, as we all know. Again, while a national day of observance will not solve these issues, it would at least signal the importance of recognizing our losses while continuing to work towards understanding and addressing the health, socio-economic and broader consequences of COVID-19. I do hope that everyone here this evening can rally behind this bill. Since the pandemic was declared, COVID-19 has had an immeasurable impact on every single Canadian and every single Canadian family. It has impacted the way we have all worked, learned, connected with friends and family, and lived our daily lives. It is important to recognize that this national day of observance is not prescriptive. Everyone will be able to commemorate this day as they wish, leaving room for the imagination and creativity of individuals and communities, recognizing that there is a wide range of potential activities to memorialize this day. Individuals and groups can recognize this day in a way that will reflect the nature and intensity of their suffering, their needs and their communities. For governments, this could be a day for reflection, a time for an assessment of what worked and what did not. Every March 11, from here on, going forward, will serve to remind Canadians of the tragic events and the display of solidarity and empathy within communities. It will be a day to come together on what we have learned and how to collectively define a new way forward. I am thankful to have had this time to speak to this bill this evening and to indicate the government's support for a pandemic observance day.
1301 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 272 - Jan/31/24
Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)
Madam Speaker, today I stand on behalf of the residents of Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra to respect the reality of the losses they suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic. I want to take this time to honour the lives of their family members who were lost during the pandemic and recognize that many of them died alone in those early days. I want to acknowledge the family members who could not be with their loved ones and still have not been able to heal from that trauma. I see them, and I recognize how hard it was and how hard it remains. At a National Pensioners Federation meeting recently, I heard from seniors from across the country that the hardest part of the pandemic was having friends and loved ones pass in hospitals or in long-term care homes. That is heartbreaking both for those who have passed and for those left behind, who could not say goodbye in person. These were the realities of the pandemic then, and they stay with us now. I want to take a moment to follow up on something my colleague from Vancouver Kingsway said earlier. Although this is about the pandemic observance day bill, this is the time for the Liberals to step forward and make sure they do the work, take the responsibility for living up to the confidence and supply agreement and get those national standards for long-term care. No person in Canada should die in long-term care from a preventable disease. The hurt people suffered during COVID-19 can be recognized with Bill S-209 by having a pandemic observance day each year, and that is why the NDP is supporting it. I want to note that caregivers also suffered during the pandemic. For nurses and long-term care workers, their work was and is exceptional. I know they deserve better wages, better working conditions and much more respect. The NDP will continue to fight for them. I say this to caregivers watching my speech tonight: We will continue to fight for them. The care economy, as well as the treatment of care workers in Canada, is an ongoing crisis. Care, paid and unpaid, is the backbone of Canada's economy, and it employs one in five Canadians. The physical, psychological and emotional care of people is essential work and needs to be recognized and compensated appropriately, yet this is not done in Canada, because of gender discrimination. Women are overrepresented in care and in the care economy. According to Statistics Canada, they comprise 80% of workers in health occupations, 68% of teacher roles and professorships and more than 95% of child care workers. All are underpaid and undervalued by our society and economy. I should not say by our society. I should say by these governments, the Liberals and the Conservatives before them. This needs to change; it is wrong. The pandemic has showed us that neglecting care workers as an underpinning of our economy, a hidden area that has not received the recognition it deserves, hurts society and our health care system. We especially see this in Conservative-led provinces, where child care and health care are fodder for private profiteers. Along with gender discrimination, racism is intertwined with the care economy's systems. Immigration policies for care workers are designed to control access to status and citizenship. Newcomers, undocumented people and low-income women are especially vulnerable to the exploitation and precarious working conditions of care. Black and Filipino women are overrepresented within the care economy, and they are some of the most exploited workers in Canada. This needs to change, and the Liberal government can make that change today. The NDP supports status for all. The pandemic has shown that care workers are essential. Immigrant care workers deserve their status; they should also be able to bring their families to Canada. The collective prejudice towards care workers has resulted in an unfounded belief that care work is unskilled work and, therefore, cannot receive better compensation. This too is wrong. Now is the time for the Liberal government to step up and end discrimination of care work. It is time for the Liberals to do the work required to improve working conditions for nurses and other care economy workers, and to immediately fulfill their promise to make the Canada caregiver credit refundable for any family caring for loved ones at home, to compensate some of that unpaid work that all of our society relies on. First Lady Rosalynn Carter, who passed recently, is quoted as saying that there are only four kinds of people in the world: those who have been caregivers, those who are currently caregivers, those who will be caregivers and those who need caregivers. The COVID-19 pandemic certainly proved that. Caregivers have gone above and beyond to support our communities, but while many stepped up to help their community, partisan politicians used it as an opportunity to advance their ideologies. Easy public health measures, like masks, were politicized and weaponized in our community. As the disability critic, I can say that the rejection of that simple gesture to keep people safe left the most vulnerable at risk. Persons with disabilities have spoken out about the reality of being socially isolated and experiencing worsening anxiety and depression during the pandemic, because even a trip to the grocery store was not safe due to the lack of masks. The isolation has been particularly acute for folks living with disabilities, who were medically advised to reduce their contacts with others, and for people living with mobility restrictions or who were and are immunocompromised. Today we are seeing the effects of increased loneliness and that two years without socialization have had a profound impact on the mental health of society. At this time, the Liberals have continued to hold back national funding for mental health resources. This is unconscionable. To leave low-income individuals unable to connect to private counselling, which is all that is available to them, is leaving them behind. I will echo my NDP colleague from Courtenay—Alberni by saying the Liberals need to live up to their promise and spend the billions they are holding back on for mental health funding. In addition, with the reality of long COVID, I must mention that the Liberals are also withholding implementing the Canada disability benefit. This, too, must change. It is unacceptable that in this time of rising costs of living, the Liberals would leave persons with disabilities behind and not recognize how the pandemic has exacerbated their lived reality. Before I close, I want to take a moment to recognize the incredible work that community members in the riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra did during the pandemic to rescue and redirect good, healthy food. Organizations like the Tri-Cities Moms Group, United Way, the Immigrant Link Centre Society, CityReach and The People's Pantry all stepped up to ensure that food from restaurants that needed to close, airlines that cancelled flights and food suppliers that had excess food was redistributed and not wasted. That work continues today as, unfortunately, more and more Canadians are forced to the food bank because the Liberal government and the Conservatives before them have been cutting and gutting affordable housing for decades. In this time of pandemic observance, I will close by saying that the NDP supports this bill, but the Liberal government needs to implement the standard of care that I mentioned; it needs to revisit extending that CEBA loan that we have asked for, and it needs to really get to work on improving working conditions for caregivers in this country. People in our communities deserve no less.
1291 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 272 - Jan/31/24
Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)
Madam Speaker, as I was saying earlier, I thank my colleague from Vancouver Centre for introducing Bill S‑209, which designates March 11 as pandemic observance day. It has not been amended, and therefore the Bloc Québécois's position remains unchanged: We support the bill. The Bloc Québécois stands with everyone in Quebec and Canada who was directly or indirectly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Bloc Québécois would like to offer its condolences and sympathy to the families affected by the crisis, and to thank health care workers and all workers who could not work from home. They are many of them, and they are often forgotten. My speech will highlight their work and recall the many people who lost their lives to this pandemic. Above all, I will approach the subject from an environmental perspective, which I am sure will surprise no one. I will talk about how pandemics are made. What I am going to say is not about the origins of COVID‑19, not at all, but about the fact that a significant number of emerging diseases of the past 40 years are zoonotic. Everyone has heard of SARS, Ebola, the avian flu, rabies. There are a dozen on the government site. Serge Morand, a French environmentalist and biologist explains it well when he talks about the “dilution effect caused by man, who by encroaching on wild natural habitats and thereby creating more interactions, is accelerating the spread of new viruses by disrupting the animal ecosystem”. The issue is deforestation, industrial livestock production and globalization. According to the Institut de recherche pour le développement, or IRD, website in France, at the height of the COVID‑19 pandemic, Marie‑Monique Robin, an investigative journalist, producer and writer, co-produced with the IRD the documentary called La fabrique des pandémies, “The Pandemic Factory”. The documentary's key moments appear on the IRD's website. For this project, Ms. Robin travelled to eight countries to understand the factors driving the emergence of infectious diseases. For the scientists who were questioned, the answer is clear: Environmental upheaval is the major cause of epidemics and pandemics. Some 20 researchers were filmed while doing their research and during their interactions with local communities. In the field in Asia, Africa and the Americas, scientists and indigenous peoples seek to understand how and how closely health and biodiversity are linked. The documentary explains that the species most likely to transmit new pathogens to us are the same ones that thrive when diversity decreases. The more biodiversity we lose, the more epidemics we have. Science has shown that epidemics are becoming more and more frequent. We should expect more of them. The documentary warns us that if we continue to destroy our planet, we will experience an epidemic of pandemics, because biodiversity plays a protective role for humans. We need to rethink the way we live, so that damage to the environment is kept to a minimum. The problem is us, not the animals. Now let us talk about the consequences of the COVID‑19 pandemic. Let us talk about the most vulnerable members of our society. The leader of the Bloc Québécois, the member for Beloeil—Chambly, clearly expressed his thoughts when he said, “My thoughts go out to the most vulnerable, those whom the pandemic has made even more vulnerable, and to the people living in isolation, poverty and anxiety who are suffering even more and have become more fragile because of this disease.” The Bloc Québécois leader's words bring to mind another film I want to talk about. It is not a documentary, but it is a fairly realistic portrayal of the isolation seniors may have experienced. Tu ne sauras jamais is a dramatic film directed by Robin Aubert and Julie Roy. The camera work is effective. The slow pace captivates us and shows us exactly what these seniors went through: isolation, cold meals, distress, staff shortages. Martin Naud, age 88, plays an isolated senior in his room in a long-term care home during the COVID‑19 pandemic. He is an old man who does everything in his power to see the woman he loves one last time. Martin Naud is not an actor. He is not on IMDb. He lives in Repentigny and he is a member of the Bloc Québécois. He went to an audition and turned out to be the best person to really connect with audiences and convince them, even though he is not a professional. Take it from me: he did a great job. There was so much suffering, particularly among seniors. Seniors who stayed in their homes or apartments experienced boredom, loneliness, anxiety, sickness and fear. There are those who died, those who lived in isolation and those who survived in fear. I am thinking about health care workers, as I said at the beginning of this speech, and about others who did not have the option of protecting themselves by working from home, those who are too often forgotten because they are invisible to us, because our lives are moving too quickly and we are not paying attention to the people around us, to those essential workers. I will talk more about them in a few moments. Of course, I want to start by talking about frontline staff, all types of health care workers: nurses, doctors and orderlies. They all put their lives at risk to care for COVID-19 patients. We are forever grateful to them. It was not easy for them either. Everyone in society was scared. Imagine how the people on the front lines felt, working directly with the sick. Then there are young people. Of course, this age group was not as impacted by deaths. However, young people still made the collective sacrifice demanded by health restrictions. This meant many of them missed out on the opportunity to socialize at a pivotal moment in their lives. We must think of them and thank them for their courage and resilience at that time. We must also acknowledge the work of the scientific community. Although imperfect by definition, our scientists' explanations informed our debates and answered our questions and concerns throughout the pandemic. We are fortunate to have been able to count on them and to still be able to count on them. My colleague from Vancouver Centre talked about how science helps us better understand. Finally, let me go back to the invisible workers I mentioned earlier. Many of them are women and young people. They may be grocery store clerks, pharmacy cashiers or shelf stockers. They may be delivery people, cleaners, construction workers, subway drivers or bus drivers. They could not work from home. They were essential during the pandemic, and they are no less essential now to our society's ability to function effectively. Too often, however, they remain invisible and forgotten. The pandemic shone a light on them, as workers too often relegated to the shadows. In conclusion, do we really want to go through something like this again? Do want to mourn the many people who will die, relive the same fear and isolation? To connect back to the start of my speech, without biodiversity, life is not possible. Our fates are inextricably linked. By preserving biodiversity, we reduce the risks and impact of global warming and its effects on our health. However, we must change now. Otherwise, we are treading the same path toward extinction as today's endangered wildlife. Biodiversity is our home. We can still save it, but we must act quickly. That will require courage on the part of politicians. Do we have that courage?
1316 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 217 - Jun/20/23
Ms. Louise Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville, BQ)
Madam Speaker, I usually say that it is a pleasure to rise and comment on a bill, but this time I am not sure it is a pleasure. The bill seeks to amend the Financial Administration Act so that the Treasury Board can no longer impose mandatory vaccination. The bill also seeks to amend the Canada Labour Code, the Aeronautics Act, the Railway Safety Act and the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. According to the bill, all those laws should provide that mandatory vaccination is a thing of the past and can never again be required for COVID‑19. I feel there is something missing in this bill. In the health bill, we could also prescribe a disinfectant to make sure that we do not get any germs, as Trump did in his public statements when COVID‑19 first hit and we were waiting for a vaccine. That element is missing from the bill and we could move an amendment to that effect. This bill is just one more attempt to politicize vaccination. The hon. member for Niagara West was behind Bill C‑285, which was similar to this one. It is easy to descend into demagoguery. At the time, the hon. member compared the vaccine mandate for federal public servants to something that the totalitarian regimes of China and North Korea would do. I can say right away that the Bloc Québécois will be voting against the bill and that it refuses to play into the hands of conspiracy theorists. I say this with all due respect, because everyone is entitled to their opinion. The hon. member's past positions on vaccines and the kinds of petitions that he has sponsored, however, make it difficult to see what he is trying to do with this bill as anything other than yet another attempt to discredit vaccines. I only have 10 minutes to speak, but if I had more time, I could go back in history and talk about the times when there were no vaccines. I could talk about infant mortality, the Spanish flu and the First World War. We have seen how much of a difference vaccination has made. The sole purpose of this bill concerns an issue that should be off-limits to partisan games. COVID‑19 has been a tragedy, not a conspiracy. The seven waves of COVID‑19 took the lives of nearly 18,000 people in Quebec, more than 50,000 people in Canada and 6.5 million people worldwide. The Conservatives, however, have no sympathy for the victims, for the health care workers or for our young people and all the sacrifices they made to protect our seniors. Their sympathy is for pandemic deniers. The Conservatives decided to turn their backs on it all and vote against the principle of Bill S‑209, which called for March 11 to be designated as COVID-19 pandemic observance day. Shame on them. Pandemic denialism may be part of their DNA, along with denying climate change and insisting that it is not real. Both these realities, however, are having profoundly negative societal effects in terms of health and poverty. I think these issues deserve more attention, not a sideshow. The Conservatives not only do not want to recognize this tragedy, but they are now proposing to deny the vaccination that allowed us to save many lives and get through the pandemic. I am not absolving the Liberals, who were not entirely innocent throughout this pandemic. They also used vaccination for partisan purposes. Let us not forget that in 2021, they called an election for no reason in the middle of the pandemic, when health measures were in force. The Liberals hammered home their message on mandatory vaccination for partisan purposes. It was a game against the Conservatives to go after a segment of the electorate. It was no more edifying than that. That is a dangerous game, because it just diminishes a debate that should be based on knowledge and evidence, not partisan interests. As we know, the government often improvised or delayed taking action when managing the crisis. Take, for example, border controls and the delays in procuring equipment and vaccines. We understand that it was a crisis situation and that sometimes urgent action needs to be taken. However, in the end, some major setbacks fortunately forced us to rely on getting people vaccinated very quickly. It was almost unprecedented how it was possible to create a vaccine that then helped us to significantly stabilize the situation. France, Germany, the United States, England, the list of countries that adopted a vaccine passport for transportation is very long. We have to remember the situation we were in. Hospitals around the world were overburdened. We saw the images, not just in Canada, but in Europe. So many people died that people did not even know where to put the bodies. That was a tragedy. Vaccination finally enabled us to see a little light at the end of the tunnel. I think that goes to show that research and development and science help us move forward when we are confronted not with a minor cough but a global pandemic. To deny that by banning vaccine mandates in labour laws and in transportation, and to say that if someone has COVID-19, it is open season and they can show up without being vaccinated and completely ignore a vaccine mandate, that is like giving up the tools we have to protect ourselves in a public health situation. Making vaccine mandates permanent would have been going too far, much like saying that Parliament should be hybrid permanently is going too far. That is too much. We have to be able to consider the context. The Bloc Québécois has never been in favour of making vaccination mandatory, because that would be impossible. Mandatory vaccination is not possible, unless you round people up and force them to get the shot before they can leave. That would be impossible. There were, however, constraints placed on those who did not want to be vaccinated, and those constraints were warranted. What is regrettable about the Liberals' partisanship at the time when it was made mandatory is that it did not take into account a position-by-position analysis. Were there any positions where this was not an issue? Were there any other work positions? This is true for both federal employees and those in federally regulated businesses. Labour relations analysts and advisers were very serious in saying that employers should assess the situations in which the work was carried out by staff. That was not done either. It was done indiscriminately. Some unions decided to go to court on behalf of their members. There was not much in the way of case law, but case law did support demanding this as a condition of employment, given the specific context we were in. With this bill, the Conservative Party wants to say that they are against this, that it does not make sense and that it should be eliminated from all our laws. Our labour and transportation laws already do not require vaccination. Our laws say nothing about this. They will certainly not be amended to explicitly say that, in the future, there will never again be an obligation to be vaccinated. Just think of the H1N1 flu epidemic. It was a serious flu. People were asked to be vaccinated if they wanted to travel. I had to travel, so I got vaccinated. That is life, when there are—
1274 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 171 - Mar/22/23
The Speaker
I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Health.
16 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 171 - Mar/22/23
The Speaker
It being 3:16 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill S‑209, under Private Members' Business. Call in the members.
50 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)
Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, March 22, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
27 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Hon. Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre, Lib.)
Madam Speaker, I want to thank those members in the House who spoke so passionately and eloquently in support of this bill. The bill was brought forward, as was said, by Senator Mégie, who is a fellow physician from the Senate. I then brought it to the House. The need to remember is very important. With Bill S-209, we want to remember, and we want to learn. Remembering means that we learn from our mistakes. There are so many things we did wrong. We need to learn from them for the next time there is a pandemic, and there are going to be more pandemics because we are now a global world in which everyone travels. Everyone moves from place to place, and therefore disease can spread globally very rapidly. Therefore, we need to learn from our mistakes. We also need to learn from the things we did well; we should maybe do them sooner or deal with them differently. A pandemic is all about science. Science is all about evidence. There is evidence in this pandemic that we need to learn from. That is one of the reasons for remembering. The second reason for remembering is that we need to honour the frontline workers, the heroes in this pandemic. They went out there, gave their lives and suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. We now have a problem in our medicare system because all our frontline workers are burned out. They do not want to work anymore because they are so burned out by the trauma of going through this. We also want to remember the victims, specifically all those people who died. We heard everyone speaking eloquently about the seniors, as well as about the youth, whose education was interrupted and who were alone and did not have anyone to turn to. We heard about all of the people who were not able to meet and the families disrupted. We need to remember that. We need to remember the 50,000 Canadians who died from this particular pandemic. We need to remember those things. A day of remembrance is not unknown. We have Remembrance Day every November 11 because we want to remember World War II. This was the war we thought was going to end all wars, but it did not. As we are now living through the war in Ukraine, we remember what we should have remembered and should have learned to prevent some of these things from happening and to make sure they do not continue to happen. Pandemics are like wars. They indiscriminately affect, kill and wreak destruction in the path of people. They do not pick and choose. Now that we are a world that is together, as my hon. NDP colleague said, we need to remember that we are now a global community. We are no longer isolated in our own little nation states. The next time there is a virus, bacteria or something that is going to destroy us, we know it is again going to be a global pandemic. The World Health Organization remembers and recalls this pandemic. It is warning us about future pandemics to come. If we can learn, remember and honour, then this is what this pandemic remembrance day is all about. I want to thank those who supported my bill from Senator Mégie.
562 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Ms. Sylvie Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ)
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to debate Bill S-209, an act respecting pandemic observance day, although it would have been better if we had never gone through this dark period in our history and never needed to commemorate it. I want to begin by acknowledging International Women's Day. I congratulate the women who broke glass ceilings, and I have a special thought for those who are no longer with us as a result of the violence they suffered. I want to come back to Bill S‑209. To give some background, the text of the bill designates March 11 as “Pandemic Observance Day”. Bill S‑209 was introduced in the Senate on November 24, 2021 by Dr. Marie‑Françoise Mégie, a senator from Quebec, and introduced in the House last June. It is important to note that the bill does not create a new statutory holiday. March 11 was chosen as a day of commemoration because it was on March 11, 2020, that the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic. As we all know, this pandemic, which is still not over, has unfortunately created many victims. The current death toll is very high. There have been about 6.5 million deaths worldwide, including more than 47,000 in Canada and more than 17,000 in Quebec. On March 11, 2023, Canada offered its condolences to the victims through statements from the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health. Quebec also designated and organized days of remembrance in 2021 and 2022 to honour the victims of COVID-19, their families and their loved ones. Quebec also acknowledged the invaluable contributions of all the tradespeople and members of civil society on the front lines of the fight against COVID-19. March 11, 2021, was marked by an invitation to observe a minute of silence at the stroke of 1 p.m. The white rose was designated as a symbol of remembrance, and commemorative ceremonies were held. The March 11, 2022, commemoration was more sombre and was marked by symbolic gestures such as the lowering of the Quebec flag to half-mast at the Quebec National Assembly and in several cities. Memorialization is important, but we must also learn from this pandemic. Establishing a pandemic observance day is a response to the 27th recommendation of the Quebec ombudsman's special report, entitled “COVID-19 in CHSLDs during the first wave of the pandemic: Identify the causes of the crisis, act, remember”. This report focuses on COVID‑19 in long-term care facilities. Here is the recommendation: “Propose that there be an annual day of commemoration for the COVID‑19 victims and those who worked with them directly or indirectly, in order to remember what they went through during the first wave of the pandemic and the suffering and loss experienced by these sorely affected people.” The Bloc Québécois stands in solidarity with all those in Quebec and Canada who were directly or indirectly affected by the COVID‑19 pandemic. My Bloc colleagues and I want to take this opportunity to offer our condolences to families affected, and we want to respectfully thank health care workers. As we know, the few pandemic years we just experienced were difficult for each of us. Obviously, they were even harder for some, including health care and frontline workers; people who lost a loved one or who had to care for or are still caring for a loved one; people who were harder hit by the COVID‑19 virus. Each day, we would wait impatiently for the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of Quebec to give their press conference. Often, they would announce new guidelines to slow the spread of the virus. Things changed quickly. This was uncharted territory for us. Luckily, our scientists provided explanations, they enlightened our debates, and they answered our questions and our concerns throughout the pandemic. We are lucky to be able to rely on them, not to mention the scientists who developed a vaccine at lightening speed. In those days, we had to get used to wearing a mask and sanitizing our hands often. We had to gather in smaller groups, which impacted our birthday and holiday celebrations. We also had to isolate during lockdowns. It was a very difficult time for single people and couples who did not live in the same home or the same country. I really feel for the young and the old. We know kids had to make big sacrifices. They had to isolate from certain family members and friends. They had to do school at home, which was not always easy. We know how important it is for young adults to have in-person social contact during their school years. Students were less motivated to do well in school because of the pandemic. Being with parents and other family members 24-7 and, for many young people, not having access to a quiet place to study or a fast, reliable Internet connection also affected their motivation and their academic success during lockdown. The pandemic also had an impact on young people's mental health, finances and ability to work. Teenagers were disproportionately affected by the psychological impacts of the lockdowns that were put in place to halt the spread of the virus. According to experts, they are coming out of this pandemic in pretty rough shape. Youth are experiencing higher rates of anxiety and often have symptoms of depression. We know that youth tend to get their information from social networks rather than from traditional sources. In summary, young people have had quite a difficult time. They have experienced a great deal of sadness, isolation, loss of motivation and disruption in their daily routine. Despite the many problems they encountered during the health crisis, most young people have shown resiliency, and we can only be thankful for that. I also want to talk about what seniors experienced during the pandemic. According to some studies, seniors who lived in retirement homes during the first year of the pandemic suffered more from the isolation than from COVID-19 itself. Seniors need social interaction and social support networks to stay healthy, maintain a sense of well-being and feel satisfied with life. During the first wave, seniors were confined to their apartments or rooms. For several weeks, they were not allowed to eat in the cafeteria, walk around the residence or even receive visits from their loved ones. They were even prevented from taking their own cars out. Isolation and loneliness among seniors are common and have a negative effect on their physical and mental health. I would like to talk about my mother, who passed away in 2020, during the pandemic. She was living in a residence because she had been losing her independence, and she was confined to her room. I could not even visit her, and she did not understand what was going on. I talked to her regularly on the phone. She was bored and often cried. She hated the isolation. She passed away, and her funeral was private because of the pandemic. I could only see my children from a distance. I had to spend the holidays without them and could not celebrate their birthdays with them. We wondered if things would ever go back to normal. Who would have thought that one day the whole world would come to a standstill because of a virus? In closing, I would like to say that the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of Bill S-209, in part because this bill enshrines in law a day that has already been established as a day of commemoration since 2021.
1311 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)
Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to stand in this place and represent the constituents of Edmonton Strathcona. Today, we are talking about Bill S-209, an act respecting pandemic observance day, which is a bill to make every March 11 a day to remember the COVID–19 pandemic. I know all of us in this House remember the day that we were here in 2020 and it was announced that the House was rising and we were all going home. None of us expected at that point that it would be years before some of us came back, or that we would be dealing with the pandemic even to this day. As I reflect on this bill and the need for it, it is very important, as members have said before me, for us to take a moment and remember all of the people who died. More than 5,600 Albertans have died from COVID–19 to date. I think it is also important to recognize that people are still dying from COVID–19 in this country. In 2021, the last year that data was available, COVID killed more Albertans than heart disease, lung disease, strokes or Alzheimer's disease. More than 50,000 Canadians lost their lives across this country. Each one of those people had a family, had friends, had loved ones. It is a loss, and I think the opportunity for us and for all Canadians to acknowledge that and remember those people is very important. Everyone we know has either lost somebody they loved or knows somebody who lost somebody they loved. I think about the grandparents who were lost, the friends and the families. In my own riding of Edmonton Strathcona, more than 100 people lost their lives, at least 50 of whom were in long-term care. I think about what we have lost in our communities: the loss of wisdom, the loss of love and the loss of laughter. I think about Edmonton entertainers. As I have said many times, Edmonton Strathcona is the heart of the entertainment sector in Edmonton. Entertainers like Victor Bird and Ricky Lam will never again step on stage. They will never enchant audiences again. I think it is also relevant to remember that it is not over. In fact, COVID–19 continues to take lives and continues to have long-term impacts on so many people. There is a woman in my riding named Kath. She is a powerhouse and an incredible individual. She works very hard to find homes for pets without homes through Zoe's Animal Rescue. She was incredibly active before she got COVID, and now she is facing fatigue and other symptoms and has to use a walker to get around. I think it is important that we have this moment to do this. I also think it is important for us to take a moment to think about health care workers and teachers. Remember what we asked our teachers, educators and the staff at our schools to do, and what we asked nurses, paramedics, firefighters and doctors to do. Remember the danger we asked them to put themselves and their families in. I cannot help but think this is a wonderful opportunity for us to remember those sacrifices and what those people did to keep us safe. It was not just those people. We also have to remember that in Alberta there were folks who put their lives on the line and lost their lives because we were not good enough at taking care of them. I do not know if members remember that at Cargill, the meat-packing plant in southern Alberta, workers lost their lives because they were not protected and we did not do enough to protect those workers. That brings me to the next comment I want to make. The bill is an opportunity for us to remember all those whom we have lost and an opportunity for us to celebrate the heroes who helped us get through the worst days of COVID-19. It is also vitally important for us to learn so that, when we see a future pandemic, we do not make the same mistakes or do the same things wrong. I am worried that we have not learned some of those lessons. I look at long-term care. The privatization of long-term care resulted in our loved ones, our cherished seniors in our communities, living in unbelievable conditions and dying because we have a system in place that privileges profit over the care of our loved ones. We saw what happened across the country in long-term care. None of that seems to have changed. We have not fixed those systems. If we had a pandemic tomorrow, I am not sure that anything would be different. That is very disappointing, and it is something we need to think about. We need to think about how we provided support for people within our communities. I think the CERB was a lifeline. I remember people phoning my office desperate, and being able to provide that support was perfect. It was a lifeline for so many people. It was not perfect, but we were trying to do what we could very quickly to get support out. We were pushing the government, and the government was trying to do things. However, as we look back on this, we have to think about the ways that it did not work for certain people. We have to think about the ways that we privileged certain groups. Corporations were able to get money very fast, within days, but for people living with disabilities, it took much longer to get support. The House of Commons unanimously supported students not having to pay back their student loans during that time. That was a unanimous motion that I brought forward, which every member of the House supported, but the government never implemented it. The other piece that is a worry for me is how we worked as part of a global community. I stood in this place many times and talked about vaccine equity and how we have a moral obligation to protect people around the world to ensure they have access to the same level of care as people in Canada did. It was not just a moral obligation because, of course, every single time we refused to share our vaccines with other populations, with other people in the rest of the world, variants developed. I do think that is an issue that we have. We have not fixed the systems like the TRIPS waiver. We have not fixed things like Canada's Access to Medicines Regime. These are things that are still broken. Given another pandemic, I do not believe that the government has learned the lessons to make sure that we do not make the same mistakes. As we go forward, a national day for pandemic observance should not only be a time to remember and honour, but also a time to plan and an opportunity to learn, because if we do not learn, if we do not take this opportunity, we are doing a disservice to the memory of those who lost their lives.
1212 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to speak on Bill S‑209, an act respecting pandemic observance day. This bill officially designates a day that has been recognized as a national day of observance since 2021. Indeed, the World Health Organization declared March 31, 2021, as a national day of observance. March 11 was designated by proclamation as a national day of observance in 2021. The Quebec government chose to organize a national day of observance in 2021 and 2022. This is an important subject, and it goes beyond any form of partisanship. We were all hit by the pandemic, regardless of where we lived or who we were. The Bloc Québécois will support this bill since the goal is observance, which allows us to highlight and remember the solidarity, the generosity, the sense of duty and the resilience of all those who worked to get us out of the pandemic. Additionally, it is an opportunity to never forget those who were affected in any way, shape or form by the pandemic, as well as all those taken by this disease. I want to take this opportunity to extend my deepest condolences to all of the families who were left in mourning by COVID‑19 and its disastrous consequences. Over 16,000 people died in Quebec, 45,000 in Canada and 6.5 million around the world. In our societies, when we institute a day of remembrance, a day of commemoration, it is usually to mark the end of a socially harmful event. To build the future, we need to remember the past. That is why Quebec wisely chose “Je me souviens” or “I remember” as its motto. Fortunately, it is human nature to try to turn a bad situation into something good, something ugly into something beautiful and something negative into something positive. That is a survival mechanism that has allowed us to be, to exist and to move forward again and again, hardship after hardship, and grow stronger. Humanity always emerges stronger from tragedy. We always find a way to do so. When I was young, I read history books that talked about the epidemics and pandemics that ravaged humanity as though they were novels. Sometimes my grandparents would tell me about when they were young and about how they saw a staggering number of people dead in the streets from the Spanish flu. I would listen, shivering in horror, and tell myself that, thanks to modern medicine, that sort of thing would never happen in our time. Like many other people, I was fooling myself. When the epidemic was declared in mainland China, who would have thought that it would transform into a global pandemic and that we would experience such tragedy and horror? Who would have believed it? Beyond the armchair quarterbacks who always know better than anyone else, after the fact of course, what should have been done, beyond all the shortcomings, blunders, the actions that did or did not succeed, which we are assessing because we must always learn from our mistakes, beyond all that, we need to simply celebrate the memory of those who passed away. We must celebrate the courage and humanity of those who suffered, celebrate those who fought in their own way to get us through the pandemic and to let hope and light emerge from the bleak times in which we were living. We must remember all that. It is during these pivotal moments in history, which are so brief but so intense at the time, that we see the beauty and the strength of our societies. We also have a duty to note and highlight everyone's invaluable contributions to the fight against this pandemic. That is why I immediately think of all the health care workers who, also struck by an unknown and devastating virus, stepped up to hold failing health care systems together with the sole purpose of saving lives, saving our loved ones, our friends, our neighbours, our spouses and partners. Health care workers are the ones who never stopped making a difference. Doctors, nurses, orderlies, ambulance attendants, cleaning staff, support staff, and so on. They have all been on the front lines, one battle at a time. We can never do enough to say “thank you”. It is also important to acknowledge the work and dedication of our guardian angels, the asylum seekers who provided patient care at the height of the COVID‑19 pandemic and to whom our governments have committed to regularize their status. We owe them a great deal, and we must not forget them now. Where would we have been without them, but also without the many other essential service workers, those without whom we would not have made it through this pandemic? They proudly held down the fort and ensured that our basic needs such as electricity, food and medicine were met, despite their own worries and fatigue. Let us not forget to acknowledge the incredible resiliency of our young people and their extraordinary ability to adapt when they were asked to go against their very nature to protect the rest of our society. Even though we did not want to, we had to make them put their life on hold and they will never get back those moments that they missed. These young people suffered, but they have recovered and they now have even more lust for life than they did before. Despite it all, they remained strong and ready to fight. These young people are our future, a beautiful future. I am talking about young people, but I also want to talk about our seniors, who suffered so much and who were the most hard hit by COVID‑19. We asked a lot of our young people, but what can we say about the sacrifices that our seniors had to make? They, who were already vulnerable, were the main victims of this pandemic. They experienced social isolation, sickness and heartbreak. Today, when I see them recovering from the effects of the pandemic, when I see them smile with their resiliency that will become legendary, I am proud. I applaud them, and this day of commemoration will make it possible to honour them for their outstanding courage and endurance. In closing, it is also vital to talk about everyone's resiliency. I am talking about those who had to give up their activities and stop living life to the fullest, those who lost their jobs, those who lost their business, those who had to watch their business go under or their loved ones die, suffering and alone. These are all the sacrifices, great and small, that we need to remember on this day of commemoration. We often say it, but this time we proved it to be true: If you want to go fast, go alone, but if you want to go far, go together.
1166 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for the motion. The text of this bill claims: it is fitting that March 11 of each year be officially designated as “Pandemic Observance Day” in order to give the Canadian public an opportunity to commemorate the efforts to get through the pandemic, to remember its effects and to reflect on ways to prepare for any future pandemics. Certainly, it is fitting that we take time to remember the effects COVID-19 had on our lives. More than 55,000 Canadians died COVID-related deaths. That is a sobering statistic. This number is more than die each year of heart disease and about four times the number of people who die accidentally each year. We do not remember statistics though. We remember husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, and grandparents whose lives were shortened by the disease. Each one was an individual. Each one was loved. Behind each death, there is an intensely personal story. Their loved ones remember them every day. They do not need the government to set aside a designated day for that purpose. Do we need a pandemic observance day to give the Canadian public an opportunity to commemorate the efforts to get through the pandemic? Communities came together in innovative ways to deal with a situation no one had prepared for. It can be inspiring to think of the ways individual Canadians reached out to others for the benefit of all. It can be said that Canadians showed their resilience in the way they supported each other through that very trying period. The COVID-19 pandemic brought the Canadian people together. It was a shared experience that brought out the best in people. It also brought out the worst of the government's performance. The most memorable stories of the COVID-19 pandemic are not those of individuals coming together but of a government out of control, out of touch with reality and showing itself to be incompetent, corrupt or maybe both. As the pandemic was unfolding, the government sent 16 tonnes of badly needed personal protective equipment to another country: 50,118 face shields, 1,101 masks, 1,820 pairs of goggles, 36,425 medical coveralls, 200,000 nitrile gloves and 3,000 aprons. In doing so, it left our country without sufficient supplies for our own medical personnel. Canada was unprepared for the pandemic. The government failed in its duty to protect the Canadian people. It apparently believed the virus was not going to come here. It kept that attitude despite the fact that it had been warned. In 2004, the National Advisory Committee on SARS and Public Health presented its recommendations to the government. Canada was unprepared for the SARS outbreak, it said, “because too many earlier lessons were ignored.” SARS made hundreds of Canadians sick and killed 44. It paralyzed a major segment of Ontario's health care system for weeks, and thousands were placed in quarantine. Overworked health care workers felt mental and emotional stress. Does that not sound just like the COVID-19 pandemic? It was sadly obvious that the Liberals were unprepared for COVID-19. If they had paid attention to the SARS report, they would not have been giving away the very materials our health care system needed. Given the Liberal track record, Canadians have no reason to believe the government will, as this bill suggests, spend any time reflecting on ways to prepare for any future pandemics, unless it is reflecting on finding ways to enrich its friends during a time of crisis. This will happen at the taxpayers’ expense, of course. As unprepared as they were, the Liberals did see some opportunities as COVID-19 cases mounted in Canada. This is something all Canadians should remember. We can think back to March 2020, as the first COVID cases were being reported in Canada. After giving away the PPE equipment our health care workers needed to fight the pandemic, the Liberals decided that they needed sweeping new powers to tax and spend without parliamentary scrutiny. When that did not work, they shut down Parliament to avoid being held accountable. Faced with a global health emergency, their first response was an attack on democracy. They did not want Canadians to be informed of what was going on. They did not want to have to answer questions in Parliament. They hoped no one would notice when an organization with financial ties to the Prime Minister’s and finance minister’s families were chosen to receive millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money through sole-sourced contracts. The public service has considerable expertise and experience in administering government programs. Instead, the Liberals tried to funnel the money to their friends. When the wrongdoing by the former minister of finance was discovered, at least he was honourable enough to resign, unlike the Prime Minister, who has apparently never done anything wrong in his life. Apparently, the Prime Minister has not even read the Ethics Commissioner’s reports, which is perhaps not surprising. The pandemic has shown that the Liberals are, at best, ethically challenged. They do not understand the rules, even simple ones, such as that we do not give government contracts to our friends. After the Ethics Commissioner found that the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development had broken the rules, she apologized. However, she has not offered to repay the money that she had her department give to her friend. There was also the former Liberal MP whose medical supply company was awarded a $237-million contract for 8,000 ventilators, at $10,000 more each than what is paid in the U.S.A. Once again, a contract was awarded without competitive bidding, this time to a company that had never made ventilators before. The government spent $1.1 billion for 40,000 ventilators. Most of them were not needed because COVID was not as bad as forecasted, and now they are just gathering dust in warehouses. When Canadians remember the pandemic, they will remember the Liberals investing $130 million of taxpayers' money in a vaccine that was being developed by a Canadian firm partially owned by a tobacco company. Was there no one smart enough to ask whether such a vaccine would be acceptable to the World Health Organization? Apparently there was not. It was no surprise to anyone, except perhaps the Liberal government, when the WHO failed to approve the vaccine because of the tobacco company involvement. Canadians do not need a special pandemic observance day to remember the most out-of-control government spending. There was billions of dollars in handouts, no accountability and no determination as to whether the funds were really needed. Canadians will have no choice but to remember the biggest government spending spree in our history because they will be paying off the debt for decades. My unborn grandchildren will be paying off the Liberals' debt. They will wish they had nothing to remember. Canadians remember the incompetence of the government as the pandemic became endemic. As travel became possible once more, those lucky enough to get a passport endured chaos at the airports. The Liberal government could not even figure out how to make the system work. Inflation rose to record levels, and the government responded by tripling its carbon tax instead of providing relief for Canadians struggling to make ends meet. Canadians will remember that every day; no special day is required. Canadians do not need a pandemic observance day to remember their loved ones, nor do they need this legislation to remember just how incompetent and corrupt the Liberal government was in its response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
1298 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)
I can look for unanimous consent, but I want to remind members that they need to stand to be recognized. If they do not stand, then I do not know that they want to speak and I cannot recognize them. Is there unanimous consent for the hon. member for Edmonton Manning to do his speech first? Some hon. members: Agreed.
60 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Mr. Mark Gerretsen
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Clearly, this was just an oversight by the member. I believe, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to return to the individual who was supposed to speak, the member for Edmonton Manning, so he can continue.
48 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border