- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Cumberland—Colchester
- Nova Scotia
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $134,737.37
- Government Page
- May/22/24 7:56:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition spoke to the media nine or 10 months ago. The answer to that question is that we want to uphold the existing transfers. I think that is very important. We also need to think of other ways to improve the health care system here in Canada, while respecting the provinces.
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 4:38:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, oddly enough, there was disorder and chaos at the Standing Committee on Health today, much as there is on the streets in many parts of Canada because of the careless NDP-Liberal drug policies. Certainly, the NDP-Liberal coalition decided it wanted to be disruptive, and that is not the type of committee my colleagues and I wish to participate in. Of course, that is not the kind of room the Speaker wishes to run here either.
Again, on this side of the House, we believe the problem with substance use disorder is a medical problem. We will continue to put forth important and meaningful solutions based in science to help all Canadian citizens.
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/16/24 11:42:00 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what this member says is categorically untrue. What we have pointed out with the eloquent speech that I just gave is that 6.5 million Canadians do not have access to health care. We know that the wait times are the longest that they have ever been in the history of this country. With the booing and guffawing behind me, they know it is all true that the difficulty that exists inside the current health care program is the inability of Canadians to access the program.
Why would we continue to put lipstick on a pig when the Liberals' inaction has allowed the system to deteriorate to the point where many Canadians say that the system is failing them, as indeed it is? When 17,000 to 30,000 men and women a year in this country are dying on a waiting list, that is a failing system.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 12:51:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, today, it is interesting to follow the member across the aisle when we are speaking about a matter of grave importance. I find it absolutely fascinating, in a very strange sense, that the member opposite would suggest that somehow MAID has saved lives, when, indeed, 13,200 Canadians have died because of MAID. On top of that, we know that is a 30% increase year over year. We also know that in California, which has a similar population, if I have my statistics correct, about 450 people died because of MAID.
MAID for mental illness presents a serious difficulty for all Canadians, and thankfully, Conservatives on this side of the House are ready to stand up for those who have mental illness and who have suffered with it for a very long time. We know clearly, from the DSM-5, that there are many conditions that, if Canadians were aware were classified as a mental illness, they would find this legislation even more appalling than they do now. We know that over half of Canadians reject this terrible idea of MAID for mental illness. When Canadians think of mental illness, they think of things such as depression, schizophrenia and bipolar illness, all of which are chronic medical conditions with available treatment.
However, we also know the reckless government and this reckless expansion of MAID is causing some of the major difficulties. In the DSM-5, what would also be classified as a mental illness would be things such as substance use disorder and autism, both of which are chronic illnesses. I believe Canadians specifically would find it appalling for the reckless government and its reckless agenda to suggest that Canadians who are suffering from a substance use disorder or Canadians with autism are never going to get better, and that they should be subjected to the MAID regime.
When we begin to look at and understand the difficulties associated with the reckless, costly coalition's expansion of MAID, we also know that the 17 chairs of the departments of psychiatry from Canada's universities have spoken out specifically against this expansion of MAID.
There are two things that are very important. Let us start with, perhaps, suicidality, which the member across did mention. I guess the question then remains how an experienced, or even inexperienced, primary care physician or nurse practitioner would be able to determine the difference between suicidality and a demand for MAID. The member across is right. I did practise as a family physician for more than 25 years. Practising in an emergency-room setting on a Saturday night when somebody comes in and is suicidal is probably one of the most stressful things someone can possibly deal with. I think every one of my physician colleagues across this country would admit to that.
We are incredibly well trained, and we have incredible protocols for dealing with trauma, strokes and heart attacks, but when somebody comes in with suicidal ideation, it is incredibly personal. It is situational. It is related to medication. It is related to family. It is related to every single difficult relationship they have in their lives. If there is a physician out there who suggests that, when they go home after a shift Saturday night that ends Sunday morning where they told someone who was suicidal that they are okay to go home, and they know that person is fine, but they do not worry about that decision, I would challenge them on that.
That, for me personally as a physician, was something that created significant distress and angst, and it should. What we are talking about is somebody's life and their decision to end it or not. We have a regime put forward by the reckless and costly coalition to have people with mental illness receive medical assistance in dying, to be put to death by the state.
That is the suicide part of it, which, again, can be with respect to an acute or a more chronic condition. However, it is the irremediable aspect of the mental illness that creates significant difficulties for the reckless and radical expansion of the MAID regime. What does the word “irremediable” mean? It means, in basic terms, that the condition cannot be fixed, that the treatment that has been rendered is all the treatment available and that the condition is going to either continue the way it is or get worse in the future. Who is going to decide that?
There is a Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers. The group is staffed by family physicians and nurse practitioners, despite the opposite thought of many Canadians who would think it would be psychiatrists who would be determining whether a condition is not fixable and chronic and that all of the possible treatment out there has been rendered. That is not the truth; at the current time, the decision would be rendered by two different care providers who are either primary care providers or nurse practitioners. That is incredibly important because we know that even the diagnosis of a mental illness is based on probabilities: Has someone had a particular set of symptoms for a certain amount of time over a certain amount period of time?
It is not like high blood pressure, which a doctor can check and then have a concrete, objective answer. It is not like diabetes, where a person's blood work is done and they have a concrete answer that, yes, the numbers are elevated and the person does have diabetes and can be told what will be done to help them with it. Mental illness is very, very different, and Canadians need to know that; if they do already know it, they need to remember it.
The other important thing is the terrible job that the costly NDP-Liberal coalition has done with respect to access to health care in general but more specifically to mental health care. We know that across this country, half of Canadians are extremely unhappy with their ability to access mental health care, and we also know that the waiting time for adults to access a psychiatrist in most parts of this country is about a year. This means very clearly that primary care physicians and nurse practitioners are providing the majority of mental health care for Canadians, deciding which treatments are working and which are not, when to increase medications, when to add on, etc.
Very sadly, it is clear that for Canadians under 18, the wait time for mental health care access to a psychiatrist in Canada is more than two and a half years. The system is atrocious. The Prime Minister stood up and promised 7,500 doctors, nurses and nurse practitioners to Canadians. How many have we seen? I dare say it has been almost zero. The terrible situation with respect to access to care is most acute when people are seeking mental health care.
Of course, from this side of the House, we do not want the legislation to proceed, but we see a government in panic mode that has no plan and no clear idea of what it is going to do, wants to do, or should do on behalf of Canadians. Here we are. Multiple times at the 11th hour, senior elected government officials across the aisle have said, “We have to rush this through; we have to get it done on behalf of Canadians.”
What they fail to remind Canadians of is that it is the government's fault that we have arrived at this situation in the first place. The government members did not appeal the right decisions, allowed decisions to be added on in the Senate, and did not make a decision when they should have, on behalf of Canadians. Therefore, I would implore the House to understand clearly that MAID for mental illness is not the correct path to go down.
1325 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/23 11:41:19 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are two things I need to point out. I have spoken at length about the $4.5-billion Canada mental health transfer, which has not happened. The other thing we need to talk about is the Liberal Prime Minister, who talks about privatizing Canadian health care and claims it is innovation. Everybody has heard that in the media. I think it is a travesty.
There are two points, as I said. We have a Liberal Prime Minister who is talking about private care as innovative, and we have a Liberal Prime Minister who refuses to transfer $4.5 billion to those who need it the most with mental health issues.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/23 11:10:07 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I note that in my colleague's words there is a lot of talk, but where is the action?
My colleague mentioned that mental health is health. We have heard that a lot from the Liberal government in the House of Commons. We also know there is $4.5 billion of commitment in the Canada mental health transfer, which has not been sent, and we know there is a mental health crisis.
When is the government going to get down to business and do something about the mental health crisis that exists in this country?
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for that great question.
We know, very clearly, there are multiple ways to fix the health care system. Certainly those would be rolled out, as we come closer to election time, in the platform of the Conservative Party. What we also know is that people who want to immigrate to this country to be a part of the health care system are being disrespected in terms of how their credentials may or may not be recognized in this country.
As everybody in the chamber knows, if we were going to create another psychiatrist from inception, at the time of going to university, there is a four-year undergraduate degree, four years of medical school and at least four years of residency. We cannot wait for that.
On this side of the House, when the Conservatives form the government, we would be very respectful of immigrants and the talents they bring to this country, and how they could help the ailing health care system.
169 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/8/23 3:01:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the Liberal government has added more to the national debt than every other government combined. Wait times for health care are the longest they have been in three decades. Canadians cannot buy medicines for their sick children. Canadians do not have a family doctor. I bet many Canadians watching this today are in that group. Canadians are tragically dying in emergency rooms around this country. The cupboard has been spent bare.
When will the Prime Minister take responsibility for the broken health care system and step aside so that we can fix what he broke?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I think the important thing we need to understand here, of course, is that the government has so many flaws that it is really beyond fixing. We know that it is not catching tax cheats. We see that. It is not doing those things. It is not funding mental health care. It is not funding health care. However, it wants to fund another program. That seems to be nonsensical.
I will reiterate this to my colleague. I know I said this previously, but I think it bears repeating. This is not a question of the importance of oral health. That is not what this is about. It is a question of responsible government, fiscal responsibility, partnerships with the provinces, insane federal oversight and a failed federal administration. That is what this is about.
135 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I really believe we need an answer on this side of the House to understand the atrocious management that we have seen, the heavy hearts we have that the Canada mental health transfer has not been realized. Now we see another government program.
How does the government propose to manage things when we know clearly from its track record that it cannot really, as my dad would say, manage a marble game?
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/22 2:46:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, recent studies suggest that one in five Canadians does not have access to primary care. In Nova Scotia, there are 95,000 people without primary care. The president of the Canadian Medical Association has stated that what is clearly coming is the collapse of the current health care system.
The Prime Minister continues to talk about 7,500 health care providers. None have materialized. When is the government of inaction going to give Canadians the health care system they so deserve?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/7/22 2:56:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the other thing we hear from the government is lots of statistics with respect to health care: We hear that 6,000 people die every month from heart disease, 3,500 die from diabetes, 7,000 die monthly from cancer and 600 people die every month from overdoses, which is four times the prepandemic number.
Clearly, these numbers are meant simply for context. These diseases are a reality in our lives, but Canadians do not live in fear. It is time for us to learn to live with COVID also. These mandates are clearly political science and not medical science. Is that not right?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/18/22 2:56:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister talks about science. Let us talk about what the truth is.
Let us imagine that we are living in a country that singles out 15% of its population for special treatment. That means mocking their personal decisions, calling them names and telling them they are taking up space. Let us further imagine that their freedom to move around this very large country is also taken away.
Why are they being singled out? It is because they made a personal health decision.
Should other world leaders call out the Prime Minister for this vindictive behaviour? They certainly should. This behaviour is petty and petulant, and it must stop. On which day will Canada return to normal?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 2:52:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, at the health committee, Dr. Isaac Bogoch stated that this complicated science the Minister of Health keeps referring to with respect to mandates could be summarized in one page. We also heard again that there is going to be a regular review of these mandates. Where is it?
When is the Prime Minister going to be transparent and make us all aware of the scientific benchmarks and government reviews, and release Canadians who have disagreed with him from these vindictive and overly punitive mandates?
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 1:08:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are a few things there. We do know that health care is very important. It is very clear that the government does not believe that. They did not increase the Canada health transfers at all, which, as I mentioned, was unanimously agreed upon by all the provincial premiers. That is a sad state of affairs.
In terms of other care, Nova Scotia does have a dental program, and I think, when we look at the details of the dental program and the pharmacare program, these are very wasteful programs. They really do not know how to administer things on the other side of the House. When one begins to understand the costs associated with them, there are probably better ways to do it. As I said previously, we would be more than happy to take that burden away from the country and take over as the governing party whenever we need to.
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/24/22 4:02:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is no doubt.
Interestingly enough, at the Standing Committee on Health, we had some psychologists there this week. When asked very pointedly if they thought that bullying and name-calling was a great way to get people to change their minds, they reminded all of us very clearly that is an absolutely unacceptable way to go about any type of business, and certainly well within those confines of coercion I spoke about.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite mentioned a lot of numbers and a lot of supports about all these tests that have been done and all these interesting organizations. It is interesting. Just because something is numerous and noisy does not make it right, and I think that is an important thing we should all consider.
That being said, I need to make something clear. In asymptomatic people who use rapid antigen tests, the sensitivity is about 44% in some studies, which would mean massive numbers of people actually have COVID who are told they do not. The math is simple: 44% of people would say they have COVID, but there would be a whole bunch of people who we would have missed.
Again, if these things are as important as the science these Liberals keep talking about, would it not make sense to simply send this bill to the health committee to be studied before we pass it?
158 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
