Kelly DeRidder

“Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak to Bill S-5 today. If we take a look at information nowadays, it has never been easier to access. It has become critically important that when we take a look at our health care system, we look at ways in which we can improve upon it. I want to reflect on some of the days, going as far back as when I was the health care critic in the province of Manitoba, when I was meeting with patients and stakeholders. Even back then, they were talking about information gathered on behalf of clients or patients and how that information is retained and ultimately shared. I remember that when I had to change my family doctor, as my first one made the decision to retire, I was given a yellow envelope to bring to my new doctor. A year ago or so, when I was with my family doctor inside the checkup room, he was sitting at a computer, which I could watch. It was truly amazing how he was able to connect my health care needs through the computer. I did not have to get a prescription issued from the doctor or a piece of paper. Rather, he told me that I could go to X place and that my prescription would be ready. When I take a look at what Bill S-5 is all about, it is all about patients, whether directly or indirectly. That is why I would like to think that all members of the House will see the value of supporting the legislation. I have listened to members opposite all morning talk about the concerns they have, and I am not going to marginalize their concerns. I suspect that all members have some concerns as we move into this area. It is a very challenging area; there is no doubt about it. Someone mentioned that while we could bring in legislation, it would not guarantee that the system is going to work and the patient is going to benefit. There are jurisdictional issues. To individuals who are genuinely concerned about the issue of which level of government is responsible for what, I will say that instead of that being the primary concern, the primary concern should be the patient. If we view this through that lens, I believe we will see more co-operation taking place among institutions, private companies, non-profit companies and the different levels of government, if we are prepared to do what the minister has made very clear. In her statement, she talked about working with provincial and territorial jurisdictions and indigenous communities. At the end of the day, information does matter. What takes place in our doctors’ offices, our hospitals, our care facilities and our pharmacies really does matter, as does a person’s ability to go into a facility, whatever type of facility it might be, and have a sense that a health care provider has access to the information that is so very important for that patient. If that were to be done right, where we get collaboration and get all systems onside moving in one direction, with the priority being the patient, we would see less duplication. People would understand the differences in medications that might be being taken at one end versus at the other end. Some testing may not have to take place, or in some cases testing would take place, such as an x-ray, a lab test or whatever it might be. The different types of medications an individual takes throughout the year would be known. These are all important pieces of information. In working collaboratively with other jurisdictions, I would argue, as I said at the outset, and putting the lens on the patient, it is the patient who would benefit with the passage of Bill S-5. I had the opportunity to ask members opposite some questions regarding the principle of the legislation. I am encouraged by the Minister of Health and the government’s agenda to get this legislation through with fantastic support from the Senate of Canada. I am pleased with the general approach of the opposition, as the principle of the legislation appears to have been accepted. That being said, I suspect there might be a number of issues, based on what I have heard, that would come up at the committee stage. I am sure there would be representation at the committee stage about issues related to things such as data blocking, which has been talked about a great deal. Data blocking is done far too often. Because of a vested interest, information is being retained by one vendor for reasons I will not go into today, but much of it would be driven by the dollar. Data blocking would be directly dealt with in this legislation, which is a very good thing. Then there are interoperable issues. For example, in the province of Manitoba, there might be a care facility using a different technology system from what is being used at the Health Sciences Centre. Because of that, it is the patient who loses the most. That is one of the reasons the compatibility of technologies is so important in the legislation. The data would be able to be transferred. We hear a great deal about data, records and so forth, and it is important for us to recognize that with regard to data and technology, the government is very concerned with ensuring that privacy is respected. As we know, Canadians are very concerned about the issue of privacy, and understandably so. Some provinces are further advanced than others, and I recognize that, but as we roll this out, what would end up happening is that the quality of health care services would improve for all Canadians. The health care worker, be it a nurse or a doctor, would have better opportunity to provide bedside care or to provide consultation, as a direct result of moving forward with Bill S-5. That is not to mention, as some have already pointed out, that it would also save lives. Someone asked why it is taking us as long as it is. I think it is important to recognize that we have a very substantial legislative agenda. In the last 18 months, we have been pushing forward on a series of legislative initiatives. This bill is an important piece to it, because our health care matters in Canada. Canadians want us—”