Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 316 - 326 of 326
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
I don't control, as you know, the priority of legislation. That is, obviously, something that's worked out with the House leader and the government.
I will say that I am open to taking any measures that actually reduce advertising to children. I'm looking forward to exploring those with former senator Greene Raine, and there is also the work that we're doing on our healthy eating strategy, including front-of-pack labelling and potentially banning the advertising of unhealthy foods to children. This is all important work, and I think it's work that's overdue.
View Majid Jowhari Profile
Lib. (ON)
Glenn Purves
View Glenn Purves Profile
Glenn Purves
2020-02-27 9:58
It provides a wide range of health, social and education services in support of first nations children who qualify under Jordan's principle. This again is above and beyond the funding that has already been provided for Jordan's principle.
Just to give you a sense, when we tabled the main estimates, budget 2019, as part of budget implementation, voted an approved $404 million to continue implementing Jordan's principle. This is above and beyond existing funding that the department has in its reference levels. This funding was included in main estimates under vote 20 of Indigenous Services.
This is above and beyond. This is in order to address additional volume, demands and services to maintain that standard as defined under Jordan's principle currently.
View Lenore Zann Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you very much for being here and for your presentation. I'd just like start by telling you something, and then I want to ask you about it.
Maurina Beadle was a Mi'kmaq mother and a friend of mine from Pictou Landing First Nation in Nova Scotia. She's the woman who took Canada to court over Jordan's principle, and she won, in an effort to help her disabled son, Jeremy. Sadly, she died recently, but not before she made a huge impact on this country.
When Canada told her to place her young son Jeremy, who needed round-the-clock care, in an institution because of his high special needs while she recovered from a stroke, Maurina famously said, “No way!” Instead, she tried to get services through Jordan's principle, and her case landed in Federal Court, where a federal judge agreed that Canada had a duty to help pay for medical care for Jeremy at home.
The legal precedent foreshadowed the finding by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that sparked the delivery of over a quarter million in Jordan's principle services, and that was in 2016. She received the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012 in recognition of all of her work. I really miss her. She was an amazing woman.
I want to ask you about Jordan's principle. Minister Miller's mandate letter includes a commitment to continue to fully implement Jordan's principle, and it was determined that we need a renewed approach. In 2016, the Government of Canada was told that the way it was looking after services for first nations children was discriminatory.
Can you tell the committee more about what the government is now doing to ensure the continued proper implementation of Jordan's principle?
Jean-François Tremblay
View Jean-François Tremblay Profile
Jean-François Tremblay
2020-02-25 12:00
We have put in place everything needed to make sure that we are able to respond quickly to any demands. As you know, in many cases we have 48 hours, for example, to respond. This means that the number of demands is skyrocketing, which is good. This proves there's a gap, and the gap needs to be addressed. We are probably now at more than $500 million this year on Jordan's principle. I suspect it's going to continue to grow.
I think that, for us, what is needed now is a discussion with first nations on how to do it in a sustainable way. I'm not talking about funding. I'm talking more about the way we do that, because at the moment we respond to demands. We don't anticipate the demand. If you have, for example, a problem at school, and kids need breakfast in the morning, it's not about program for providing breakfast, but a list of names for whom I have a decision to make to provide breakfast.
When we see those gaps now, more and more, I think that phase two would be engaging with first nations on a sustainable way of doing it and making sure that we're not just responding to the gaps, but actually addressing the gaps in terms of services. For me, that will be the most important thing with Jordan's principle over the next few years.
I would say that we're discovering it as we go, not because we didn't know when we saw it ramping up, but it continues to ramp up, and I think, like all partners, we'll discover at the end what exactly should be the way to address it.
Most of the demands now are community demands. They're group demands. They're not necessarily individual. We still have significant numbers of individuals, which is quite demanding, but more and more, what you see are communities or groups coming and saying that they need funding for mental health to address the needs of so many kids.
View Mumilaaq Qaqqaq Profile
NDP (NU)
View Mumilaaq Qaqqaq Profile
2020-02-25 12:18
To clarify Jordan's principle, is it something that applies right now to first nations?
You mentioned there would be a more specific Inuit one. Is there also one for the Métis? Will there be three different types or forms of Jordan's principle for our indigenous groups?
Jean-François Tremblay
View Jean-François Tremblay Profile
Jean-François Tremblay
2020-02-25 12:18
Jordan's principle was first developed for first nations on-reserve, and the reason the federal government was asked to jump in was that we were seen as the responsible jurisdiction.
Normally, Jordan's principle applies to all jurisdictions. Jordan's principle says that whoever you are, when you get the call, you should act, and not question whether you have or don't have the jurisdiction. So it also applies to the provinces. You may want to remind them.
For Inuit, we're working with ITK on the child first initiative in the north. We're working with them on ways to address the needs of the Inuit kids in the north. It is not necessarily Jordan's principle, which is the way we apply it with first nations. It is an initiative that is more dedicated to the Inuit.
In some ways, Jordan's principle gives back authorities to the federal government, which I'm not sure is necessarily where we want to go in the long-term, because it implies that people should call the federal government when a decision has to be made. It's not necessarily totally aligned with self-government, so we need to make sure that when we implement Jordan's principle, we respect the fact that first nations, Inuit, and Métis want to make those decisions for themselves. That, for me, is the next step for Jordan's principle. It includes the Inuit, because they have, as you know, an agreement.
Helena Sonea
View Helena Sonea Profile
Helena Sonea
2020-02-06 17:32
Our second recommendation is to ask that the government follow through on the Minister of Health's mandate commitment and make new investments in pediatric cancer research.
Two decades ago, about 71% of Canadian children diagnosed with cancer survived for at least five years after their diagnosis. Thanks to research, today, about 84% will survive five or more years. We must continue this trajectory through research that will lead to new and more effective treatments for childhood cancers and increases in the number of children who survive into adulthood.
The Canadian Cancer Society recommends that the government follow through on their mandate commitment and make new investments in pediatric cancer research and that this investment be directed to the largest charitable funder of cancer research in Canada, the Canadian Cancer Society. We fund over $40 million in cancer research each year, including $20 million in pediatric cancer research over the last five years.
Our final recommendation is that the federal government implement an annual cost-recovery fee on the tobacco industry to provide full reimbursement for the $66-million annual cost of the federal tobacco control strategy. Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease and death in Canada, killing 45,000 Canadians annually including 30% of all those who die of cancer. While significant progress has been made, there are still five million Canadians who smoke. An enormous amount of work needs to be done to achieve the federal government's objective of under 5% of Canadians using tobacco by 2035.
We propose that companies pay a fee, based on market share, similar to the federal cannabis annual regulatory fee, so that the government can recover $112 million annually by 2021. The U.S. has had a tobacco fee in place since 2009, which accounts for U.S. $712 million recovered annually. If there can be a federal cost-recovery fee on the cannabis industry, we believe that a cost-recovery fee on the tobacco industry is also feasible. A cost-recovery fee would generate $66 million in incremental annual government revenue, which could be used for government priorities. In conjunction, we recommend an increase in the federal tobacco tax, which has proven to be the most effective strategy to reduce smoking among youth.
Further, the federal government should implement a tax on e-cigarette products to decrease youth vaping as many states and Canadian provinces have done or are planning to do. These taxes would represent a win for all, increasing government revenue and benefiting public health.
Together these actions will help stop cancers before they start, provide much needed support to people who have cancer and their families, and establish a practical foundation to better manage the long-term impact of cancer on our communities.
Thank you for your time today.
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Like all members, I wish that we had more time here.
I want to ask Ms. Masotti and Ms. Sonea a question. In the Minister of Health's mandate letter, as I'm sure you know because you brought up pediatric cancer research today, it says, “make new investments in pediatric cancer research and develop a long-term plan to ensure sustainable funding”. There is no dollar figure assigned at this time.
Is there a dollar figure that you would suggest to the committee? I know if you put that question to organizations, sometimes they might ask for the maximum, but what works in your mind? It does talk about the need for sustainable funding. We have a real issue across the country. This has not been earmarked before by a federal government as a spending priority. There is a family in London in particular that has advocated very strongly on this. It is one of the reasons, among many others, that it did find its way into a mandate letter.
Do you have any thoughts on a dollar figure and what could work?
Kelly Masotti
View Kelly Masotti Profile
Kelly Masotti
2020-02-06 18:37
Maybe I'll start and then Helena can add.
We were pleased to see the Liberal government commit $30 million for pediatric cancer research, not only in your party's platform but in the ministerial mandate letter as well. That is certainly the figure our organization is quite keen to work with you on. We were happy to see that, but we can certainly always see an increase in investments for pediatric cancer research in this country. We need to see an increase for clinical trials, as a start, but the $30 million was nice to see.
Helena Sonea
View Helena Sonea Profile
Helena Sonea
2020-02-06 18:38
As well, the Cancer Research Alliance produced a report demonstrating the trends of pediatric cancer research funding over the past number of years. We've seen that plateau. We'd be pleased to provide that report.
Results: 316 - 326 of 326 | Page: 22 of 22

|<
<
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data