Adjournment Proceedings

An adjournment debate on federal funding for Canada Health Infoway, a agency that develops digital health records and e-prescribing technology. Matt Strauss of the Conservatives said Infoway spent $300 million on its PrescribeIT e-prescribing project without tangible results and asked why the government is providing it another $50 million this year, arguing the money would be better returned to taxpayers or spent on hospitals and nurses. Liberal Kevin Lamoureux responded that the government is investing in modern technology, including digital health tools and AI, and that the federal government has a leadership role even where provinces have not joined federal plans; he also cited a $5-billion fund to help provinces build and improve hospitals.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

2 statements

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our government is trying to improve health care by using modern technology like computers and AI. Even if the provinces do not always join our plans right away, the federal government still has a duty to lead on this.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 94 of 100

    Of this reply, 95% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I hope the member is not disappointed that I am providing an answer or a perspective on a very important issue. There is a big difference between the Conservatives’ approach and the government’s approach in dealing with the important issue of health care. The issue the government has been attempting to deal with is something that incorporates the Internet and AI and includes many different stakeholders. The purpose of it is to see how we can deliver a better service to Canadians in the whole area of health care. I had the opportunity to visit a doctor or two over the last six months, and I found it quite intriguing to see a doctor pull up information on his computer, make a prescription request and see the medications I have received. When people go from one doctor’s office to another doctor’s office and then to a pharmacy, I suspect they are all getting very similar information, information that is advantageous to the consumer or client, the individual receiving it. I say that because I think it is important for us to recognize that as we advance through technology, there is a role for a national government to look at ways it could potentially complement or, in many ways, lead the reforms or manage the changes that are necessary in order to deliver the quality of health care that Canadians expect and deserve. That means, at times, that when we take that leadership role, if there is no take-up on it from other jurisdictions, provinces in particular, at some point in time, we need to recognize that we might have to change what the initial objectives might have been. It does not take away from the fact that the government does have a responsibility in delivering, as much as possible, and contributing to the best health care system we can have. What I see in this whole program is something a little different from what the member is putting on the table. I see a government that has recognized that the federal government does have an obligation to provide, where it can, some leadership on important files. I am sure if the member were to consult with his constituents, he would find that his constituents, like mine, want a national government to show where there are opportunities for technology. Even though it might not have developed to the degree we would have liked to see in terms of the buy-in, I believe that at the end of the day, we will have a stronger health care system because there will be other entities, whether territories or provinces, that will be able to reflect on what Ottawa was attempting to do and learn from it in different ways. I would suggest that there are many different stakeholders in our health care system, whether they are pharmacists, clients or doctors, and at the end of the day we all have a way to contribute in managing the changes that are necessary to ensure that we have first-quality health care. At times, there might—

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“We have a $5-billion fund to help provinces build and improve hospitals. Both federal and provincial governments must change and modernize our health-care system so Canadians get the quality care they need.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 42 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there are many different things the federal government does in terms of improving the quality of health care for Canadians. The member said to build hospitals. We actually have a capital fund of $5 billion that is going to be out there to assist provinces in doing just what the member is suggesting. For example, I have talked about the Seven Oaks General Hospital and the Victoria Hospital re-establishing emergency services. I compliment the member for providing medical services to his constituents and beyond. I think we need to start thinking of ways, as I am sure the member would acknowledge, for us to reform, make changes and demonstrate leadership in our health care area. If we are not prepared to manage the changes that are needed into the future, we will not be able to deliver the type of quality health care Canadians want to see. I am sure he would recognize that fact. It does not mean that every area is going to be laid out in a perfect form. I just believe that, at the end of the day, it is important, whether it is the federal government or provincial government, that we look at ways to incorporate technology and use the technology—

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 128

  1. Oral Questions The Economy 11 statements
  2. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  3. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  4. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Persons with Disabilities 2 statements
  6. Oral Questions International Trade 14 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  8. Oral Questions Infrastructure 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Health 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  14. Government Orders Government Orders 50 statements
  15. Private Members' Business Old Age Security Act 12 statements
  16. Adjournment Proceedings Steel and Aluminum Industry 4 statements
  17. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  18. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements