Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 46 of 46
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Yes, that answers my question. Thank you very much.
My next question is more general in nature.
What is your government's position on health care funding from Ottawa? In your opinion, is the federal government doing enough right now and is the current budget sufficient?
Jamie Fox
View Jamie Fox Profile
Hon. Jamie Fox
2021-05-21 11:41
Thank you very much, Gabriel.
I wouldn't really be prepared to speak on that today. I think that would be best put forth to the health minister for the province. He would be the best person to deal with that. It wouldn't be fair for me to answer on behalf of the province or the premier's office on that matter today.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Okay.
From what I understand, there is a consensus among all the provincial governments to ask Ottawa to fund 35% instead of 22% of health care costs. The Prime Minister stated that he is open to the idea of talking to his counterparts, but only after the pandemic. From our perspective, the sooner the better, given that we are currently in a health crisis.
Thank you for your response. Would you like to add a comment?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will leave it to you to introduce the officials later on, but let me say thank you very much to the officials for being with us.
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to speak to you today about Bill C-30, Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1.
After more than 14 months of uncertainty and challenges, Canadians are continuing to fight COVID-19, but we know there is light at the end of the tunnel. As we fight the third wave, more and more Canadians are getting vaccinated.
Bill C-30 is an essential piece of legislation that, once enacted, will allow us to implement our plan to finish the fight against COVID, create jobs and a swift recovery from the COVID recession and lay a foundation for robust, inclusive, green, long-term economic growth.
This budget is about helping middle-class Canadians, helping workers and helping more Canadians to join the middle class. It is about embracing this moment of global transformation to a greener, cleaner economy. It is a plan that will help Canadians and Canadian businesses heal the wounds of COVID and come roaring back.
First, we need to finish the fight against this virus. This bill includes a one-time payment of $4 billion to the provinces and territories to support their health care systems, support that is so essential as we fight the third wave. This is in addition to the $1 billion to support the provinces and territories as they ramp up their vaccine campaigns.
We are making progress in our vaccination efforts, and I know that team Canada can vaccinate even more Canadians even more quickly, and we will. I was vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine at a Toronto pharmacy 15 days ago, and I encourage all Canadians to get vaccinated as soon as it is their turn.
The pandemic has caused a recession, so we need to start by rolling out a comprehensive plan for jobs and growth, to address the disproportionate impact the recession has had on women, young people, racialized Canadians, low-wage workers and small business.
A cornerstone of our plan is a historic investment of $30 billion over five years, reaching $9.2 billion annually, in permanent investments to provide high-quality, affordable and accessible early learning and child care across Canada. Our goal is that within five years, families everywhere in Canada should have access to high-quality child care for an average of $10 a day. Dear colleagues from all political parties, let's make a commitment together today to all Canadians. Let's get this done.
I want to take a moment to recognize Quebec's leadership, especially that of feminist Quebeckers, who have led the way for the rest of Canada.
While we know better days are ahead, many families are still struggling. Around a million Canadians either remain out of work or are working significantly fewer hours than they were pre-pandemic. We must support hard-hit Canadians and businesses across the country so they can recover as soon as possible.
Bill C-30 includes emergency supports for Canadian workers, businesses and families.
The legislation extends the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the Canada emergency rent subsidy, and lockdown support through to September 25, 2021 which will help protect millions of jobs.
With this legislation, we are providing a bridge for people who are unable to work because of COVID by extending income supports, maintaining flexible access to EI benefits, and extending the EI sickness benefit from 15 to 26 weeks.
Bill C-30 also introduces a $15 an hour federal minimum wage. It expands the Canada workers benefit, extending income top-ups to about a million more low wage workers, and lifting nearly 100,000 Canadians out of poverty. These are measurable concrete steps to help Canadians who need help.
We must also help small business, the backbone of our economy and every main street in the country. To do that, we need to improve access to capital and help businesses hire more workers, in particular, through the new Canada recovery hiring program.
Young Canadians have made tremendous sacrifices this past year to protect their elders, and now, they need our collective support.
Through Bill C-30, we will make college and university more accessible and affordable by extending the waiver of interest accrual on federal student loans until March 2023. This will mean savings for more than 1.5 million Canadians repaying student loans. We will not let young Canadians become a lost generation.
Mr. Chair, I have spoken today about just a few of the measures included in Bill C-30, measures which will make a tangible positive difference in the lives of millions of Canadians.
This is a plan for jobs, growth and the middle class. It is a plan built around helping Canadians recover, succeed and thrive.
I recognize the critical role parliamentary committees play in scrutinizing government legislation, and I'm grateful to all of you for your hard work.
Bill C-30 is a historic first step towards recovery and new economic growth for future generations of Canadians.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you have as you study this critically important piece of legislation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-05-03 11:45
Dr. Perrault said that recurring investments in health care are absolutely necessary. Do you agree with that?
Marc Ruel
View Marc Ruel Profile
Marc Ruel
2021-05-03 11:45
We must continue to address both threats simultaneously, the threat of COVID-19 and the threat of other diseases, including cardiovascular disease, which unfortunately cannot be treated in a timely manner because of COVID-19.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 13:28
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome to our witnesses.
Madam Minister, I'm sure you have no doubt about the topic I am going to discuss with you. I am going to ask a little question about what you said in your speech.
You said that you are keen on investing in research. However, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research have seen a reduction of 22.6%, whereas we know very well that messenger RNA vaccines are the result of decades of basic research on RNA.
How do you justify that reduction, when we should be doing completely the opposite to make sure that we retain our best minds and continue to be leaders in research?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, MP Thériault.
Mr. Chair, I'll just say that they are incorrect assumptions. Budget 2021 investments include $500 million for the Canada Foundation for Innovation; $250 million to create a new tri-council biomedical research fund; $92 million for adMare to support company creation, scale-up, and training activities in the life sciences sector; $59.2 million for the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization to help develop its vaccine candidates—
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 13:30
In 2020-2021, the figure was $1,619,967,785. The funding is now $1,253,906,530. That is a reduction of 22.6%. If you want to champion basic research, you should at least make provision for the same budget and not repeat the errors of the past.
We could go on arguing for ever but I don't want to waste time. The figures have been published and come from the analysts of the House and the Library of Parliament. The figures are good.
Officials from the Federation of Medical Specialists of Quebec and the Canadian Medical Association, cardiovascular surgeons, hematologists, oncologists, gastroenterologists and radiologists have all come to tell us that dark clouds are gathering on the horizon.
You have provided money to deal with the pandemic. You often talk about an amount of $19 billion for COVID-19 patients. However, non-COVID-19 patients are going to end up in a precarious situation.
All those doctors came to tell us that, in the next 10 years, we will see the results of the offloading and the lack of diagnostic tests, and that the mortality rate will increase by 10% per year. From a medical point of view, they are talking about the two most frequent causes of death in Canada, cancer and cardiovascular disease.
From an economic point of view, costs are going to explode. If recurring investments are not made starting immediately, which is the very reason for the health transfers, we are going to be paying a lot more tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, not to mention the human drama that will ensue.
What are you waiting for to do your share? The provinces are investing $200 billion and the federal government is investing $42 billion. What we are asking from you is an additional amount of $28 billion.
You spent $340 billion last year. This year, you anticipate spending $154 billion. Are you not tempted to transfer those $28 billion as a matter of urgency, so that we can immediately start dealing with the patients who do not have COVID-19?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
If I have a moment, I'll first of all pick up on the last part of the conversation and indicate that not only is it direct research that's being funded, but that through the biomanufacturing sector there are also investments of $1 billion over seven years for the strategic innovation fund so that we can fund research in domestic life sciences and biomanufacturing firms, $250 million over three years to increase clinical research capacity—
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
—and $50 million on a cash basis over five years to create a life sciences stream.
Mr. Chair, I'll say that our commitment remains strong to support research through a number of different arms of the government and in a number of different ways with different partners.
On provincial transfers, as the member opposite knows, the Prime Minister has been very clear that he is committed to having conversations about increases to transfers, but first we stay focused on getting the country through COVID-19.
We have not hesitated to be there with money—
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 13:34
Madam Minister, this is not the time for conversations. This is what people have come to tell us. There are impacts on people's lives and on the quality of their lives.
A colonoscopy costs $1,000. Early detection of cancer is critical. In Québec alone, 155,000 patients are on waiting lists. If nothing is done, 200,000 patients will be waiting by the end of the year.
If recurring investments are not made now, lives will be lost and the costs of the system will explode. It's not logical from a medical point of view, an economic point of view, or a budgetary point of view.
Michael Strong
View Michael Strong Profile
Michael Strong
2021-04-30 13:35
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm pleased to respond to that question.
Michael Strong
View Michael Strong Profile
Michael Strong
2021-04-30 13:36
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
In fact, the numbers that the member was referring to actually include what are called statutory dollars as well, within the $2.6 million component. Those are the dollars that were invested by this government directly into the COVID-19 response, the whole-of-government research component of it. They are dollars that were rapidly brought into play and led to more than 20 different research programs to address the pandemic response.
They are, however, one-time dollars. The core budget of the CIHR has in fact grown between those two years and will continue to support the types of really valuable research that is non-COVID-directed and that you have asked about. The numbers to look at are in fact the comparators of 2019-20 with those for the current fiscal year, and not last year's, because of the extraordinary investments that were made.
Thank you very much.
View Tony Van Bynen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for taking the time to meet with us again.
All of you have been very busy leading us through the pandemic. I wanted to let you know that your time is valued and appreciated.
Leading us through this pandemic has required using science-based evidence from the start. Dealing with this new virus meant that as we learned more about it, our approach and our response changed and adapted accordingly. That is science and that is what using science-based evidence requires.
Canada is home to world-class scientists and public health experts, some of whom are with us today. Their research has played, and continues to play, a vital role in building and evolving our understanding of COVID-19. There's no doubt that we need to continue to support and invest in our scientific community.
Minister, could you tell us about the work that the federal government is doing to support COVID-19 research and our scientific community here in Canada?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much.
I'll just say that one of the world-leading experts on infectious disease that we are so fortunate to have is Dr. Theresa Tam. Thank you, Dr. Tam, for your hard work over the last many months and indeed for your expertise.
You're absolutely right, MP Van Bynen. I'll just say that this government firmly believes that science and research investment—not just in the context of a pandemic, by the way, but certainly accelerated by it—is incredibly important to the health and safety of Canadians. In particular, health research helps unlock many mysteries, reduces suffering and helps Canadians have healthier lives now and into the future.
That's why we've made historic investments of over $10 billion since 2015. We had a long ways to catch up after the previous government and the ongoing attacks on science, both from a financial perspective and from a destruction of evidence perspective, if you can believe it, Mr. Chair.
We're been working with provinces and territories. We've been leveraging the expertise of virologists, immunologists and other experts all around the country who have stepped up—many times in voluntary ways—to help the Government of Canada and the provincial governments have the best possible response to COVID-19. We led a rapid and unprecedented response to COVID-19 through the CIHR. I'll never forget that early announcement in February of 2020 in Montreal with some of my colleagues. That was within weeks of COVID-19 appearing on the world stage. Obviously, it took just several weeks to get in order.
Of course, budget 2021, if passed, would provide a further $2.2 billion to grow our domestic life sciences sector.
It is really about an ongoing and sustained investment, Mr. Chair, in research, science, the science community and in generating that next crop of researchers and scientists. The many investments we've made through my colleague Minister Qualtrough's department, ESDC, focus on ensuring that Canadians have access to post-secondary and integrated learning opportunities that will foster the next crop of researchers.
Thank you very much.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 14:08
Dr. Strong, let us agree on the figures.
The proposed budget for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research has been reduced by 22.6% compared to last year. It is true that that reflects an increase of 4.3% compared to 2019. However, why not maintain the budget at the 2020-2021 level, a little more than $1.6 billion, knowing that we have to support research, because it is critical for the years to come?
Michael Strong
View Michael Strong Profile
Michael Strong
2021-04-30 14:08
I can give a further clarification on that question.
There are really two issues at hand here. The budget for research, in and of itself, for the CIHR to support all—
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 14:09
I understood that, Dr. Strong, I am going to let you answer but I do not have a lot of time.
I am well aware that you have reduced certain expenses. I am not asking you which ones or to explain to me how things work. I am actually asking you why, given the situation that we are experiencing, you did not keep the budget at the same level by injecting that difference into basic research, which is so important for the years to come. That's my question.
Michael Strong
View Michael Strong Profile
Michael Strong
2021-04-30 14:09
First, there have been no cuts to the budget of CIHR. The dollars that you are specifically asking about were one-time investments for an immediate response to the pandemic, such as the measures that the minister referred to within weeks of the declaration. These were one-time investments, not a cut to the budget in and of itself.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 14:10
You are actually giving me a civil service answer, and I have no problem with that.
What I know is that the government decided to spend $1.6 billion last year, but this year it's only going to spend $1.2 billion, in round numbers. You are telling me that additional expenditures were targeted to respond to the pandemic. However, we are still in the middle of the pandemic and basic research has always been the poor cousin in terms of investments. We have lost a lot of good minds over the years, and we must not repeat the errors of the past.
I was not trying to find out how the budget is broken down, but why there is no recommendation or inclination in favour of basic research. Why not have maintained that budget at its previous level, especially since we are still in the middle of the pandemic?
I suspect you will give me a civil service answer and I have no need for it.
Michael Strong
View Michael Strong Profile
Michael Strong
2021-04-30 14:11
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
The budget mains that the members are looking at do not include the substantive investments that have just been made by the government in ongoing research, including clinical trials and research networks to support biomanufacturing. These numbers will look considerably different as those investments are included, and they are multi-year.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 15:05
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Minister, before the first wave, healthcare networks were already fragile and under a lot of pressure because of chronic underfunding. With the passage of time, the pandemic will have harmful, long-term, collateral effects on patients who do not have COVID-19. According to representatives of various associations, 94,000 patients in Quebec are being seen beyond the required timeframe. In oncology, we know that a delay of three or four weeks increases the mortality rate by 8% to 10%.
You have reached agreements and you have showed us the breakdown of the $19 billion you have allocated for patients with COVID-19. However, why did you not make the political choice to immediately inject money into the networks so that they can not only look after patients with conditions other than COVID-19, but also fill the breach and stop the bleeding caused by the exodus of employees, our human resources, because they are sick or they decide to change careers?
Soon, we will be losing trained people who have gained expertise in their areas. People are going to die. All because you made the wrong political choice. All the experts are saying that this is not justified either medically or economically.
Why did you make that choice?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Chair, I think it's misinformation.
We have injected millions of dollars into Quebec, and indeed into all provinces and territories. We'll continue to be there for the provinces and territories including Quebec and—
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-30 15:06
I did not say that you have not injected money, Madam Minister. I said that the money you have injected through agreements with the provinces is strictly for the fight against COVID-19. You have added nothing in terms of health transfers. The misinformation at the moment is coming from you, not from me.
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll just repeat myself.
We've been there for provinces and territories with billions of dollars for specialized streams of health care and, indeed, generally for COVID-19. As the Prime Minister has said, we'll continue to be there for Quebec and Quebeckers. Right now, we stay solely focused on getting Canadians through COVID-19. That's what we'll do with all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-26 11:42
In addition, we have not yet addressed the waiting lists in orthopedics, which also have an impact on people's cardiovascular health in the medium term. The longer the wait for patients who have difficulty moving, walking or being active, the more likely their need to see you.
Dr. Perrault, the government is currently telling us, in the midst of a pandemic, that it will take care of COVID-19 patients first. It is telling us that it is injecting money on an ad hoc basis and that it will inject substantial, predictable, recurrent and long-term funding into health transfers only after the pandemic.
Do you see this as a medically defensible decision?
Louis Perrault
View Louis Perrault Profile
Louis Perrault
2021-04-26 11:43
I think it's risky and misses the point. We already know what the consequences will be for patients who do not have COVID-19 if we do nothing for this majority. I hope I have described them well in my statement.
There are many COVID-19 patients, but they are still a minority compared to all the other patients who suffer from cancers and cardiovascular diseases, among others. We are putting all the money in one place. Although there is a need to invest for COVID-19 patients, this strategy lacks vision.
I don't think we can wait. We can't predict exactly when the pandemic situation will be resolved. Every day that goes by without investments for patients who don't have COVID-19 is a missed opportunity, thereby leading to the long-term consequences that we can easily predict.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-26 12:57
My question is for Dr. Legault.
Dr. Perreault, Dr. Bélanger, Dr. Champagne and Dr. Shabah told us that COVID-19 would have an impact on patients other than those affected by COVID-19 and, more importantly, that the costs to deal with the situation would skyrocket over the next 10 years.
I imagine you agree with them. If we don't invest in the health care system now, it will cost us a lot more later.
Serge Legault
View Serge Legault Profile
Serge Legault
2021-04-26 12:58
A screening colonoscopy showing a polyp costs about $1,000, including care. If that same polyp is found only two years later and has turned into colon cancer, the costs can go up to $20,000. I'm talking about a public system where the patient will have to receive radiation or chemotherapy and be absent from work for a long time.
Economically, the costs are absolutely different. Investing immediately saves us money. In terms of the social cost, it is quite obvious that if we have to do a day procedure—
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-19 12:43
Currently, Quebec and the provinces believe that the chronic underfunding in health is, among other things, related to the fact that for the past 30 years, the federal government has not contributed enough to health transfer payments. Quebec and the provinces are asking for an increase, not of $0.22 but of $0.35 per dollar, which is equivalent to a 35% increase. The shortfall is therefore $28 billion. We're also asking for a 6% indexation, because we're at 3% right now. The system costs are at 5%.
During the first wave, the Prime Minister often said he would address the situation after the pandemic. Now we are experiencing a third wave. Do you think it's visionary to say that there is a before and after and that we need to invest in health care now to give the system some breathing room and care for people?
Martin Champagne
View Martin Champagne Profile
Martin Champagne
2021-04-19 12:44
I practise medicine, not politics, but we can certainly imagine right now that without major additional investments, the health care system will not survive the financial burden imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-19 12:44
Have you evaluated the costs that will result from the lack of resources? For example, let's compare the cost of a $1,000 colonoscopy to the cost of the surgery and chemotherapy needed to treat colon cancer. How much would the costs be in the latter case?
Martin Champagne
View Martin Champagne Profile
Martin Champagne
2021-04-19 12:45
In more advanced stages of cancer, each episode of care delivered over a trajectory of a few years costs several tens of thousands of dollars per year. For example, immunotherapy for lung cancer currently costs $35,000 to $50,000 per episode of care. Thus, the costs absorbed by the health care system to treat advanced lung cancer are very significant.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2021-04-12 12:42
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for their opening statements.
I would like to begin with Dr. Soulez and Dr. Barry.
Thank you for agreeing to take part in this meeting on the collateral effects of the pandemic, in general, including on non-COVID-19 patients. The pandemic has created two categories of patients: those with COVID-19 and those without COVID-19.
There can be no medicine without diagnosis, and your specialty is hugely important in diagnosing patients. You said the government needed to invest roughly $1.5 billion in equipment. Tell me, if you would, whether your requirements would be met if the government were to make a massive investment in health transfers, sooner rather than later.
Gilles Soulez
View Gilles Soulez Profile
Gilles Soulez
2021-04-12 12:45
That's an excellent question. As Dr. Barry clearly explained, Canada was already behind in capital equipment investment before the COVID-19 pandemic. Investments were already needed pre-pandemic, with our equipment assets significantly below the average among countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
At the height of the crisis, the rate of imaging and screening dropped drastically, and we have yet to return to pre-pandemic levels. At best, we are at 90% to 95% of where we were pre-pandemic, and in most cases, that figure is 80%. We are digging ourselves into a deeper and deeper hole.
The $1.5-billion ask covers not just the purchase of equipment, but also things like human resources—which matter a lot. Different provinces have different needs. Some are in desperate need of equipment, such as the Atlantic provinces and Alberta. Other provinces are more in need of human resources. We have to maximize the use of all equipment, even running machines overnight where possible. That means finding ways to train the technologists who run the machines and to keep the technologists in those communities, something that isn't always easy.
Investing in information technology is also essential. Right now, most provinces don't even have a central inventory for wait lists, so patients can't be referred to appropriate IT platforms. There's no way to find out in real time how serious cases are or determine which ones are truly urgent, meaning, the ones that can't wait. That information is extremely important.
I want to draw your attention to one last thing regarding IT investment. Making sure we choose the right tests for patients is crucial. IT systems are now available to support clinical decision-making, helping to guide front-line workers, such as family physicians. The technology provides assurance that the test fits the needs of the patient, thereby ensuring testing is 100% useful.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you for your response. It's much appreciated. Indeed, let's hope, with respect, Madam Minister, that it's a budget for all Canadians and not only a budget designed for an election campaign.
In the fall economic statement and in your opening address, you pointed out that 80% of extraordinary spending tied to COVID-19 came from the federal government rather than the provinces and municipalities. I would nevertheless like to remind you that it's a pandemic, a health crisis, and that health spending is covered to the tune of almost 80% by the provinces. In my view, the federal government is not pulling its weight. Since the last election, and even beforehand, the Bloc Québécois has been speaking out on behalf of the Quebec consensus, and now on behalf of the other provinces, to increase the federal share of health financing to 35%.
Is this a measure you are envisaging?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for your question, Mr. Ste-Marie.
With respect to support for families, individuals and businesses, the federal government has been there for Quebecers and all Canadians. We were happy for Canada to be in a financial position that made it possible to do so.
I would also like to point out that in the summer, we gave an additional $19 billion directly to the provinces and territories under the Safe Restart Agreement and an additional $2 billion for reopening schools. The safe restart funding was in large measure for health spending by the provinces and territories to combat COVID-19.
As I mentioned in my opening address, Bill C-14 will provide more funding to the provinces. There will also be measures to help support residential and long-term care centres, or CHSLDs, because we understand just how important they are.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Last Friday, I had a discussion with the provincial and territorial ministers of finance, including Mr. Girard, Quebec's minister of finance. I was very happy, moreover, to be able to thank him publicly for his sincere and frank collaboration. He's an excellent colleague. We discussed what else the federal government might be able to do to help the provinces and territories, particularly with respect to combatting COVID-19. I told the ministers of finance…
View Jean-Yves Duclos Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would first like to thank the committee for inviting me back to speak this time to the supplementary estimates (B) 2020-21, which were tabled last October.
With me today, I have the pleasure of introduce to you Glenn Purves, assistant secretary, expenditure management sector; Karen Cahill, assistant secretary and chief financial officer; Sandra Hassan, assistant deputy minister, employment conditions and labour relations; and finally Kathleen Owens, assistant comptroller general, acquired services and assets.
These supplementary estimates (B) are the second of three supplementary estimates planned for fiscal year 2020-21. They outline new and updated spending needs for programs and services that were not sufficiently developed in time for inclusion in the 2020-21 main estimates.
The government needs to make sure that it gives Canadians the support they need during the COVID-19 pandemic, while at the same time promoting our country's economic recovery and prosperity .
We do this by investing in critical health care and supporting the safe restart of our economy. Our spending plans, the ones you have in front of you, will help Canada thrive, and remain strong and united.
The government continues to invest in Canadians and the economy, particularly in efforts to respond to the public health threats of the COVID-19 virus and to minimize its health, economic and social impacts.
These supplementary estimates (B) present a total of $79.2 billion in incremental budgetary spending. This includes $20.9 billion to be voted by Parliament and $58.3 billion in forecast statutory expenditures.
As you know, vote expenditures require annual approval from Parliament through an appropriation bill. These types of expenditures include operating, capital, and grants and contributions.
Statutory spending does not require annual approval from Parliament because that type of spending is already authorized by Parliament through separate legislation, such as the federal-provincial transfers that are pursuant to the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act.
In these supplementary estimates (B), most of the $20.9 billion in new voted spending is for emergency responses to the COVID 19 pandemic, including medical research, vaccine development and purchases of personal protective gear, and medical equipment and supplies. They also cover economic responses to the pandemic, including support for small- and medium-sized businesses, salary top-ups for essential workers, and funding for provinces and territories to safely restart their economies, and bring students back to school.
Overall, funding requirements for the top 10 organizations account for approximately 85% of the voted spending sought through these estimates. Of those 10 organizations, eight are each seeking more than $500 million to support their priorities. For example, in my department, the Treasury Board Secretariat is asking for $646.6 million.
In addition, the $58.3 billion in planned statutory spending included in these estimates reflects the government's key response measures and emergency supports, including $28.5 billion for the Canada emergency response benefit, $12.3 billion for payments to provinces and territories for the safe restart agreement, $3.8 billion for medical research and vaccine development and $3.3 billion for the acquisition of protective gear and medical equipment.
These supplementary estimates (B) also include $1.3 billion in non-budgetary measures related primarily to student loans.
To conclude, my officials and I are very appreciative of the time the committee spends studying the government's spending on behalf of Canadians.
We would be pleased to take any questions you may have.
Thank you.
Shannon McDonald
View Shannon McDonald Profile
Shannon McDonald
2020-11-24 11:14
Thank you very much. I'm honoured to be asked to present to you.
I come to you today from Tsawout First Nation, where I live as a guest. I'm originally from Manitoba, am Métis and Anishinabe, and work for the First Nations Health Authority, which means that I work for the nations of B.C.
First nations look at COVID-19 in many ways through the historic lens of previous pandemics and the impacts on the population. Considering the existing health inequities that are inevitable, it seems that the funding we have received is often stated as not being proportionate to the needs, especially in the context of not only the COVID public health emergency but, in B.C. especially, the opioid public health emergency, where we have had significant losses and disproportionate impacts on our population.
At the same time, first nations, recognizing their self-determination and their ability to make decisions about their own people and their own community, have taken part in tripartite relationships, and I want to recognize the support and partnership of our federal and provincial colleagues through this. But as we move through and beyond COVID, we need to ensure that the actions and responses remain rooted in tripartite agreements, governance recognition and the relationships that have been built. We have to find ways to build from health innovation and leadership demonstrated by B.C. first nations and continue that on to battle systemic barriers and reduce those health inequities.
As of yesterday in B.C., there were over 27,000 positive tests for COVID. Among those are 956 first nations individuals, 75% of whom live off reserve.
Our funding is focused primarily on the on-reserve population. That's the way the envelopes are based. Only 44 of those active cases right now are near a community, but over the weekend, we had an additional 58 cases among first nations people. We've suffered 13 deaths thus far, which is not significant when you look at the numbers in the world, but it is certainly significant for the communities and the families who have been impacted.
In the context of the opioid emergency, we're looking at the unintended consequences of some of the public health actions that have gone forward. Lockdowns are dangerous for individuals with opioid substance use disorders, who are being told to stay home and stay alone. Programs and services that could support them in other times are shut down or less accessible during the COVID emergency. It has been extremely challenging to support people who are using alone in their homes.
The FNHA has played an active role in the development of regional plans to implement a partnership with the province. The rural, remote and indigenous community COVID-19 collaborative response framework—it doesn't fit in an invitation—is a collaboration with regional health authorities, provincial officials and health agencies.
In addition to that work and the collective response, we have also developed lines of communication about those reciprocal accountabilities, where we constantly need to be speaking to communities. We hold regular webinars with health directors, with leadership and with community members. There never seems to be enough communication. That's probably one of our biggest challenges. Mr. Alsop spoke to the issues of connectivity. For some of our communities, participating in those communications is increasingly challenging.
We recognized, for example, that there were challenges in accessing primary care during the COVID emergency, as doctors who would normally travel to communities stopped doing that.
We have set up a virtual doctor of the day program allowing for telehealth to provide those services to communities. We've also included a virtual substance use in psychiatry service as part of that, and it's been very important.
Knowing my time limitation, I can't help but recognize the work that's being done right now in the context of the racism investigation that is front and centre in B.C. working very hard to overcome those issues in health care service delivery. There is a report, of course. Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond's report is expected any time, and there will be a significant resource challenge to respond to that.
One of the things we're really concerned about right now is burnout, burnout of our front-line workers, burnout of our leadership and burnout of our FNHA staff. I think we need to look at that in context and understand. For example, in a meeting yesterday, an elder said to me, “I don't want to take the prioritized immunization.” I was saying we're going to prioritize first nations among the immunization programs, and he said, “No, they're just going to make us guinea pigs. We're not priorities. They're going to use this new vaccine on first nations people to see what happens and then use it on everybody else.”
We really need to understand the context we're working within, the fears that people have and be able to respond to those.
Thank you.
View Andréanne Larouche Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you.
I made this request during the election campaign, and we reiterated it as soon as we arrived in Ottawa. We actually made it a condition of our support for the budget. We hammered away at that request. I went to Ottawa three times to ask for help. Finally it came. Let's hope that it will not be only temporary and that something else will be set up after the crisis.
Seniors are also very concerned about the state of our health care system. There was the whole issue of the CHSLDs in Quebec, seniors' residences and the care they receive. The crisis clearly shows that it is high time and extremely urgent to increase health care transfers. We are asking that this assistance be recurrent and that the transfers be increased to 6%. This is essential and crucial, because after the crisis, health care needs will remain.
Is the minister also aware that the government will have to deal with the desperately urgent issue of transferring health care funds to the provinces, including Quebec?
View Deb Schulte Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much for the question. I want to assure the member that this issue is one that my colleague the Minister of Health would probably be best to address, so the committee should probably invite her to come and join you.
We have been very supportive of the provinces during this pandemic to help address the increased costs. We gave over half a billion dollars to provinces and territories, at the very beginning of this, to assist them with the health care costs and to help them get ready to address the rising costs and the changes they would need to do in order to get the health care system ready for the pandemic. As I mentioned before, we put $2 billion on the table for protective equipment for essential workers, including those on the front lines in health care. We also provided $3 billion to the provinces and territories to help them with wage subsidies for those front-line workers, especially long-term care workers who needed to be properly compensated for working in the environment they're working in.
We've been putting a tremendous amount of money on the table to support the provinces and territories in the health sector. We'll continue to be there for the provinces and territories. You heard the Prime Minister. We're there with our military, actually going in and supporting 25 long-term care centres with people—
View Mario Simard Profile
BQ (QC)
View Mario Simard Profile
2020-05-06 16:12
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm glad you're back. I almost missed you. I'm happy to see you again today.
I will start by commending the work of the essential services workers in my riding, who do a fantastic job and who have to go to work, sometimes even despite the incentives to stay home, such as the CERB. I think they are very brave people who have their priorities straight.
Before I start my speech I would like to make a brief aside.
Several people in my riding have called my office for information on the CERB. One of them was a gentleman who was working under the table. He thought it was totally unfair that people who do not declare their income do not have access to the CERB. I lectured him a bit by telling him that when he goes to the hospital and uses public services, our taxes pay for those services.
I find it rather ironic that earlier, in response to some questions, I heard members opposite say that we were going to allow companies registered in tax havens to benefit from the measures the government is implementing. Let's just say that this is a tad inconsistent with the lecture I gave this citizen who works illegally. I would even say that this encourages people to work under the table. In any event, there is someone better placed than me, my colleague from Joliette, who will be able to explain it to you later.
This time last year, if I had told anyone that we were about to have one of the worst health crises in Canada, probably no one would have believed me. That's what a crisis is like. As long as it is just a possibility, we pay no attention to it. We are living through this actual, real crisis, which some people predicted by talking about a possible SARS pandemic. They had already given us an indication of how this could develop.
I am thinking of what we did a little earlier when we marked the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands. When we're in a crisis or a war, sometimes we tell ourselves, “never again”. We want to make sure it never happens again.
I will use this as a starting point to discuss what role science might play in this crisis. I am my party's critic for science and innovation.
Let's just say that we, as public policy-makers, have a moral obligation. We must ensure that the current crisis never happens again. The direct consequences of this crisis are very problematic. We only have to think of our seniors who, as my colleague said earlier, are being left to cope on their own because we need to implement health measures. How are we going to resolve this situation? Health care funding will certainly be part of the solution. I will come back to that.
I would like to come back to the approach my party has taken since the beginning of this Parliament.
The Bloc Québécois has committed to co-operate with the government. This has earned us some successes, especially in the aluminum file. However, I feel that we need to revitalize this approach of co-operation. To help solve this crisis, our party could make a contribution, as it did for the implementation of the CERB, by putting forward its ideas.
I would like to brainstorm with you and share a few points with the government about a strategy to recover from the crisis.
A crisis occurs in two waves. During this first wave we are experiencing, the government acted in reactive mode, in other words, it responded by putting out fires. That is what it did in part by introducing the CERB and the Emergency Wage Subsidy. It had to deal with the most urgent situations. In the second wave of the crisis—and this is where things will get interesting for us—we will instead rely on an analytical or prospective mode, to use big words. In short, we will try to “understand”, “prevent” and “anticipate”, and we will propose concrete, feasible solutions.
To that end, we cannot avoid engaging in a serious reflection on research, since it is effectively through research that we can manage to control something like the current pandemic.
I therefore see two major approaches to overcoming the crisis. We will have to develop mechanisms that will help us control infectious diseases, but there is also another interesting approach that goes hand in hand with economic recovery. What will we learn from the crisis? Maybe something as abstract as climate change can become more real to us. As part of the economic recovery, we will have to use our scientific resources to find ways to prevent future uncontrollable crises, such as global warming.
There are then these two major aspects, but I am still a bit concerned because, earlier, our friends in the Conservative Party talked about the public debt as a way out of the crisis. I am well aware that public debt rises in times of crisis, but the federal government should not go back to its old ways of cutting transfers to the provinces. That is what led to the fiscal imbalance, which has resulted in chronic underfunding of health care. We are now suffering the consequences of this in Quebec. This underfunding has led to inadequate services in some seniors' centres. We will have to pay particular attention to this. It is true that we do not have unlimited resources and that we must ensure that public finances are sound, but we must not go back to a fiscal imbalance and the underfunding of health care.
There is another important issue to consider as we work to exit from the crisis. I fear that the government will decide to invest massively, as it has already done to some degree, in oil and gas. The oil sands are no longer a profitable source of energy. It would therefore be an obvious mistake, in my opinion, to want to save the oil sands as a way out of the crisis, when there are other very attractive economic sectors. I am thinking in particular of the forestry industry, which is very promising. It would be a good strategy to invest in the forestry industry as we emerge from the crisis. We should think about wood construction and forest biomass utilization. These are very promising sectors that are not unique to Quebec. They can also stimulate the economy in British Columbia. There is a whole area of research focusing on the forestry industry to help make the energy transition a little smoother. If the government decides to go in that direction, we will certainly work with it. There is then that possibility for bringing the economy out of the crisis.
I have one minute left and I haven't gotten to the main point of my presentation yet. We also have an opportunity when it comes to health care. Today, I told the Minister of Health about a Quebec initiative involving a biobank that would work in the sequencing of the COVID-19 virus. I hope that the government is also prepared to support this initiative, which is already backed by the Government of Quebec.
In closing, I would like to reiterate that we are prepared to work with the federal government if it commits to harmonizing the recovery from the crisis with the fight against climate change, which is not consistent with cuts to health care. If that is the case, the Bloc Québécois will be there to help.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, many emergency economic measures have been adopted to date, but more needs to be done. Think about our seniors, lobster fishers, researchers and workers in the tourism, cultural, media, agricultural and forestry industries.
The Bloc Québécois expects the government to present an economic update before the summer. We are not talking about the budget, which we expect in the fall with a vision for the economic recovery. We want an update now because we want to get an overall idea of the situation, of the current circumstances and of all the emergency measures that have been adopted piecemeal.
We also expect the government to tell us its intentions for the summer. Will it extend the emergency measures? Will it extend them for specific sectors, such as tourism? Since the Minister of Finance has certain powers, we are asking him to share his intentions with the House.
In that regard, we are in the early stages of an economic recovery, but it may be slow going. Some restaurants will continue to make take-out meals and may soon open their dining rooms but only on Saturdays and Sundays. They will begin to hire their employees back, but only part time. It will be the same thing for hotel operators, who will also be hiring staff back part time. The same goes for SMEs and the manufacturing sector.
We can therefore expect a timid recovery with part-time workers. On one hand, that is encouraging because it marks the beginning of a return to a new normal. On the other hand, it creates new concerns because part-time workers may not earn enough to pay their bills but may earn too much to continue to receive the Canada emergency response benefit. I am therefore asking the government to adapt its emergency programs to take into account the part-time nature of the recovery. The health of our economy depends on it.
That is why we are asking the government to provide an economic update before the summer.
The time for the economic recovery will be in the fall. Hopefully the worst of the crisis will be over by then. It will be the beginning of a new normal. That is why the Bloc Québécois expects the government to table a budget when we return to the House in the fall to present its vision for that recovery. An economic recovery is an opportunity to lay the foundation for the economy of tomorrow. It is time to imagine the future we want. It is time to look forward.
Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter spoke of creative destruction. Economists use this expression to explain how economic crises are an opportunity to lay a new foundation for the economy of tomorrow.
Without in any way diminishing all of the problems this crisis has created, this pandemic also represents an opportunity to develop a vision for the economy of tomorrow, which should not cling to industries of the last century that are destined to disappear, with or without a pipeline. Tomorrow's economy involves embracing the clean energy transition and encouraging our businesses in that sector, which can shine on the international stage. Earth must make that change to respond to the environmental crisis. Quebec has everything it takes to succeed in that regard.
Tomorrow's economy involves supporting emerging technology companies and the innovation and research sector. It also means stepping up to help Canada's aerospace industry, which produces the cleanest aircraft in the world. Once again, Quebec has everything it takes to embrace this change. We will see whether the neighbouring government is up to the task.
The economic recovery also involves ensuring sustainable local agriculture and strong regional economies. That can be achieved through universal access to high-speed Internet. It is time high-speed Internet was considered an essential service, just as electricity was in the past.
The economic recovery involves supporting our culture and our artists. It also involves recognizing the role of our local and regional media outlets. In a time of fake news and conspiracy theories, reliable information must also be considered an essential service.
We also need to rethink our tax system. The report of the expert panel on sustainable finance provides food for thought in that regard. We need to think about that.
The current crisis brought to light the underfunding of the health care system. Ottawa originally committed to covering half the costs of the health care system. Today, it contributes only about 20% of the total cost and that contribution continues to drop every year. It is time for that to change. We need to be ready to deal with the next health crisis and, to do that, we need to strengthen our health care system.
The current crisis also reminds us just how unfair the tax system is. Everyone is paying his or her share except Toronto's big banks and the multinationals, which use tax havens. Now, in a time of crisis, they are asking the government for help, but the rest of the time, they are nowhere to be found. That needs to change.
We will have a $250-billion deficit. That means everyone needs to contribute and it will not longer be acceptable to use tax havens to avoid paying one's fair share of taxes.
In an interview with Gérald Fillion, tax expert André Lareau, who specializes in tax havens, indicated that $350 billion Canadian is sheltered in only 12 tax havens. Businesses use tax havens for activities related to financing operations and intellectual property.
Mr. Lareau also indicated that the government is aware of all the Canadian money that is being sheltered in tax havens but that it is not taking any action. He added that, given the current deficit, it is high time the government made a major change. He believes that, if we do not take this opportunity to change things, we will never change them. It is high time the government made things that are immoral illegal.
After the 2008 crisis, OECD countries created a working group to crack down on tax havens, or BEPS. We hope that the current crisis will be the time when the government makes the use of tax havens illegal. France, Denmark and Poland will not provide aid to companies that use tax havens. Belgium, Italy, the United Kingdom and the European Union are currently considering the issue. Here, nothing is being done.
As I said earlier, the Journal de Montréal reported that businesses using tax havens will finally be able to benefit from federal assistance. After suggesting that the government would be placing restrictions on that, the Prime Minister changed his mind. That is unacceptable.
Canada is lagging behind other OECD countries in the fight against tax havens, and even when it comes to the illegal use of tax havens.
The Minister of National Revenue can boast all she likes about how her agency is doing more, but the numbers do not add up. For example, the $1 billion announced to crack down on tax cheats includes the salary of the person who was hired to replace someone who was retiring. That is ridiculous. This is not new money. It is nothing like what is being done in the United States or Europe.
The government also has a lax approach when it comes to credit card companies. They are doing what they want and getting off scot-free. In Canada, interchange fees are 10 times higher than they are in Europe and Australia. The government needs to act as quickly as possible. Visa and MasterCard are taking too much of our businesses' profits. Use of these credit cards is widespread in this time of crisis. Action is urgently needed.
Even today, my nation must rely on Ottawa's goodwill. The room to manoeuvre is here. In times of crisis, a central government is in the best position to implement emergency and recovery measures. The Bloc Québécois is satisfied with the various measures taken to date. The Bloc is also proud that it was able to contribute, in its own way, in order to better meet the needs of Quebeckers. However, that does not change the fact that the administration of my nation depends on the goodwill of its neighbour.
We have to accept decisions that we find unsatisfactory. Take for example the underfunding of our health care system. Ottawa is pulling out at the expense of our seniors and our sick. High-speed Internet is another example. Since Ottawa is giving Bell and Rogers carte blanche, our regions are paying the price and are not developing their full potential. Finally, let us also think of our farmers, our artists, our seniors and our media outlets.
I spoke about the government's lax approach to credit cards and the legal use of tax havens. In 2020, we are still not masters in our own house.
That being said, I would like to recap. We are asking the government to present an economic update by this summer so that we will know what direction it is going in and we can get an overall idea of the situation. With regard to the vision for the recovery, we expect the government to present a budget when the House comes back in the fall.
Results: 1 - 46 of 46

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data