- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Mirabel
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $114,073.56
- Government Page
- May/30/24 7:15:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my best regards to the minister. I thank her for her very good question.
I will use the same wording to answer. Does she not know that Quebec is asking for health transfers? Does she not know that Quebec needs unconditional transfers? Does she not know about the health care funding deficit? Does she not know that if Ottawa stopped saying no to health transfers, we might not be where we are today?
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/28/23 1:54:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the hon. member for Humber River—Black Creek, for introducing this bill.
Let me begin by saying that vision health is important. Obviously, it is a component of overall health, but one that is often underestimated. My Conservative colleague has given some personal examples to show that quality of care can change lives and change people's quality of life. I thank the member who introduced this bill.
There are several important elements in the bill, one of which involves raising awareness. It seeks to designate February as age-related macular degeneration awareness month. Obviously, this is important. In my opinion, we should never miss an opportunity to remind people of the importance of issues that affect us all. We all have daily obligations that keep us very busy, and these issues must always be brought to the forefront.
The bill provides for the development of a national strategy. Many national strategies have been proposed lately, including for autism, cancer and diabetes. I am skeptical about the effectiveness of these national strategies, because they generally lead to the tabling of a report that is ignored by the government most of the time. I hope that will not happen in this case if this bill is adopted. However, it needs to be said that national strategies often face the same fate as Labatt 50, in that they get shelved.
Although we agree in principle, let us be careful not to encroach on Quebec's jurisdiction. This bill seeks to raise public awareness, but it affects health, which is a provincial jurisdiction.
That being said, the issue is truly important. I think we know the data. Data from 2019 shows that 1.2 million Canadians suffer from diseases that could lead to vision loss, and 4.1% of those people could become blind. We know that eight million Canadians suffer from an eye disease that may lead to blindness. For some of these diseases, blindness is preventable.
We know that the direct annual health care costs related to these diseases leading to vision loss can reach up to $9.5 billion. Of course, there are human costs, but there are also social costs, such as lost productivity because of these diseases, and those costs can reach $4.3 billion per year.
I mentioned age-related macular degeneration earlier. With the growth and aging of the population, the costs related to those diseases could increase substantially. These are issues of critical importance.
Let us not forget that health is a provincial and Quebec jurisdiction. Quebec already has a number of programs in place to address various ocular conditions. Vision care services are covered by the government in Quebec for people under 18 years of age and people aged 65 and over. Last month, reimbursements for ocular prostheses were increased. It had been 30 years since those amounts had been increased, so that is progress.
This also serves to show that Quebec and the provinces need funding, transfers and money to be able to cover these programs. Developing a national strategy is all well and good, but the levels of government that are responsible for providing this care on the ground must be properly funded.
The RAMQ's visual devices program helps people obtain assistive devices like video magnifiers, ocular prostheses, night-vision goggles and Braille typewriters. These programs seek to improve the quality of life of persons with visual impairments, but they are expensive.
I will say it again. As the population ages, these diseases will become increasingly common. We will need to be in a position to improve the quality of life and productivity of the people who live with them.
There is talk of having a national macular degeneration awareness day, but I have to say that I would have liked this bill to include a national degeneration of health transfers awareness day. I offer that as a suggestion. For two years or more, the provinces and Quebec have been calling for $28 billion a year in extra transfers for health; that way, the federal government's contribution to provincial spending on health would reach 35%.
I know that this cause is important to my colleague and that she is well-meaning, but inside these envelopes there could be money for eye care. A national strategy and a report identify a number of things, but do not provide care to those who need it, care that could change their daily lives. The government is obviously short-sighted about the needs of Quebec and that is rather sad.
As I said, the aging population is going to increase the cost of health care and these transfers are necessary. In response to the aging population, more should be done in research and development and to expand our programs, including support programs for those who have vision problems.
There is also a shortage of workers, which means that we will be trying to keep older people in the labour market. We know that vision problems are bad for productivity and for the economy. They are also bad for those who want to keep working.
Statistics Canada's most recent report states, and I quote, “the percentage of people with self-reported good vision without correction decreased with age.” That is a bit like the Liberal government's vision regarding health transfers. It has been diminishing with age. The government's vision has been diminishing for eight years now.
For almost two years, we have been calling for a summit to be held with the provincial premiers and the current Prime Minister to discuss these issues. Instead, what the government did was to impose conditions on the provinces, which means that they are currently unable to enhance their existing programs or design new programs that would provide people with better eye care.
It seems as though the Liberals might need some Bloc Québécois glasses to better understand the needs of Quebec. I would like to offer them mine. Practically speaking, that would help them to provide care to those who need it, which could make all the difference in people's self-esteem, how they function in society, and their work and family life. This is a human issue. We are all equal when faced with the various health problems we may experience throughout our lives, and we should all have access to care.
Although I am clearly making some jokes, I hope my colleague realizes that I welcome her initiative. I know that she has been holding consultations and reaching out to various groups. Her intentions are excellent and, as I said, we agree in principle. We will be proposing amendments, but I understand that this is an important issue for my colleague, and I acknowledge that.
I will close by saying that the statistics clearly demonstrate that the issue of degenerative vision affects women in particular. I do not fully understand what causes this, and I will not presume to be a doctor or biologist, but I do know that there are also gender equality issues. Helping people become more aware of an issue, more aware that care is needed and that this affects women more than men—there is a fundamental equity aspect to that.
As I mentioned, we will support it in principle, study it in committee and act in good faith. We are skeptical about the outcome of these major strategies, but our colleague is certainly making it possible to discuss this important issue, raise public awareness and reflect on the issue of vision care. I thank her for that.
1278 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/29/23 5:33:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is no need to get angry.
My colleague started by telling me that the government is good at administering programs, and he spoke about employment insurance. I hope that the government will not dip into the dental care fund as it did with the EI fund, because it is not doing a good job of administering that.
Health care is a provincial jurisdiction and an area where the federal government often shows its incompetence. We know that from experience. What the Government of Quebec is saying is that health is important to us and that existing programs must be improved.
What Quebec is saying is that birthing rooms remain closed, there is a lack of palliative care, cancers are going undiagnosed, emergency rooms in the regions are struggling to stay open, and mental health services are unavailable. We are not saying that dental care is not important, but rather that the NDP is using this issue for electoral purposes. We see that clearly. That said, as public decision-makers, we must set our priorities. The NDP is making the next election its priority.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member just proved that British Columbia is quite far from Quebec.
We know that Quebec instituted a dental insurance program back in the 1970s. We are leaders on this. Today, that program covers children 10 and under and people on social assistance. It can be improved. The program used to cover people 18 and under.
Do my colleagues know why we had to scale back this program? It is because of the budget cuts to health transfers, including by the Liberals in the 1990s.
Before hurling blame and telling us we are against dental insurance, my colleagues should sit down, do their homework and look at history. Perhaps then they would be less inclined to support a government that is responsible for undermining the very program they claim to want to bring in.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/22 7:06:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's answer shows us just how important it is to speak about the experiences of different public health authorities so we can improve our response to the pandemic. That is why it is important for Taiwan to be a member of the WHO.
At present, China is exploiting public health risks for political gain. It is using public health risks for political gain. I am wondering what my colleague thinks of these politicians, political parties and governments that exploit public health and the misery of people for political gain.
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to make an observation. Until last spring, only one party in the House was concerned about inflation: the Bloc Québécois.
For years now, inflation in health care costs has been running at 6%. Year after year, the Bloc Québécois has fought for what the provinces and Quebec want, specifically increases in health transfers, because this inflation prevents us from providing care to our people. It has existed for years in the health care system.
I would like to ask my colleague why he is not prepared to support increasing health transfers up to 35% of the cost of the system. That must be the top priority for anyone who cares about inflation and about people.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 4:05:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I currently serve on the Standing Committee on Health. Two or three weeks ago, the committee heard from public health officials, including Dr. Tam. We asked her whether she thought that Canada was in the endemic phase of the pandemic, and she told us that she did not think so.
My colleague says that he wants to follow the science, but I think public health officials have a lot more expertise than he does in that area. I would therefore like to ask him whether he no longer has any trust in public health experts.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/4/22 4:52:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, people are important to me, and that is why I started by talking about all the stakeholders in the health networks who today asked for an unconditional increase in health transfers.
I also spoke about the Minister of Health, who turned a deaf ear. I do not know why I would turn to the Conservatives today when it is the Liberal government that is preparing the budget.
I would like my colleague to tell me why the federal government's desire for control takes over when the Minister of Health talks to us about his refusal to give us the transfers.
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 1:08:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, given the rough week that the member for Winnipeg North has had, I can understand why he is so energetic and impassioned here today.
We are calling for a plan and for more predictability with respect to health measures. This will help maintain social cohesion.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the idea of a flexible plan that would enable us to look forward and provide some predictability surrounding the measures.
77 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/23/22 4:40:38 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Mr. Speaker, the agreement between the Liberals and the NDP is not the only agreement that was negotiated in the dead of night. The 1982 Constitution, which was negotiated in the middle of the night to the detriment of Quebec, clearly states that health is a responsibility of Quebec.
Can my colleague tell me why the NDP is always ready to help everyone? It is even prepared to help the Liberals have a majority.
However, it is never there when it comes to respecting Quebec's jurisdictions or getting the Prime Minister to sit down with the premiers of Quebec and the nine other provinces to arrange health transfers with no strings attached.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/4/22 1:29:33 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that more health care funding is needed. I think that the government needs to unconditionally increase health transfers to cover 35% of system costs.
I do want to make a small correction. I am very concerned about the federal government interfering in provincial jurisdictions and, in many respects, I do not agree with the NDP's proposed funding method, which would involve even more interference in Quebec's jurisdictions.
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his bill.
It is important that we take a health-based approach. That is obviously the Quebec government's approach. However, we know very well that this approach cannot be funded through good intentions alone.
I would like to know exactly which section of the bill proposes to increase unconditional health transfers to the provinces so that the Canada health transfer covers 35% of provincial system costs.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
