Connected Care for Canadians Act

Bill S-5, Connected Care for Canadians Act · Second reading · now at second reading in the House Where it stands

What Bill S-5 would do

The bill would require health information technology licensed, sold, or provided as a service by vendors to be interoperable. It would also prohibit these vendors from blocking data. The published material gives no further detail.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

115 statements

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

Liberal
“Sharing health data between doctors and hospitals will save lives. I want to know if the member supports this bill enough to vote to send it to committee.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to recognize that health information technology is all about the patient. For many years, we talked about information from patients and how it contributes to the betterment of health conditions. This legislation would actually save lives. It would improve the conditions. I am wondering if the member can provide her thoughts on the principle of the legislation. I understand there are some concerns with it, but does she support the principle of the legislation to the degree that she would vote in favour of it going to committee?

Tamara Kronis, Nanaimo—Ladysmith

Conservative
“I support this bill. People in my area must travel to get health care, and they need their medical records to follow them. The government took too long to do this. A committee must study the details carefully so this software project does not become a costly mess.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think I explained in some detail in my speech why I do support the objectives of this legislation and why it is particularly important in communities like ours, where the federal government has not provided enough health care infrastructure and health care support to be able to have access to those records when we have to travel between cities to receive care. On the principle side of things, I wonder what took the government so long. In terms of the operation, it is really important that, in committee, we make sure to get the provisions right so we do not have another Liberal health software boondoggle on our hands.

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

Liberal
“Doctors, hospitals, and pharmacists all keep records, but some provinces have better health record systems than others. This bill helps patients everywhere in Canada. I want to know what the member thinks about this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, again, I am going to recognize that what we are talking about is doctors, hospitals, institutions and pharmacists, all of which have records. Some provinces are much further advanced than other provinces. I think of the province of Ontario or of Quebec compared to my home province. Having legislation of this nature is ultimately in the best interest of all patients in all regions of the country. I would like to get the member’s thoughts on that issue.

Tamara Kronis, Nanaimo—Ladysmith

Conservative
“The government is slow to listen to people in British Columbia. I want health records to be easily shared because doing this right will save lives.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 8 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Clarity 40 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think we all know that sound travels more slowly than light, so sometimes it takes Ottawa longer to hear the needs of British Columbians. We are looking forward to seeing a time when those records are portable. I cannot say it more clearly than that. Let us get this right, though. Let us get it right, because it would save lives.

Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Edmonton Southeast

Conservative
“I support the idea behind this bill. Different health record systems should be able to share patient files easily, and companies should not be allowed to block data. Poor communication hurts patients and wastes doctors' time on paperwork. But this bill will not create more doctors or fix long wait times on its own. The government needs to talk to frontline workers, set strong security rules to protect patient privacy, and explain how the new rules will actually work.”
  • A repeated line

    “While provinces and territories are responsible for delivering health care.”

    Said 5 times by 4 members since September 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise on behalf of the great people of Edmonton Southeast to discuss Bill S-5, the connected care for Canadians act. No Canadian needs reminding of the challenges facing our health care system. On this side of the House, we believe Canadians deserve timely, world-class health care when they need it, regardless of their financial circumstances, yet too many Canadians are waiting for a family doctor, a specialist appointment or a procedure that would allow them to return to work and live without pain. Canadians need better care. In many cases, their lives depend on it. While provinces and territories are responsible for delivering health care, the federal government has a responsibility to work constructively with them to improve access and support better outcomes. Bill S-5 presents an opportunity to address one part of this challenge, the difficulty of sharing health information between the professionals responsible for a patient’s care. The principle of this legislation is common sense. However, much more work is needed to ensure that this bill would deliver meaningful improvements for patients. In Alberta, we know that a gap in communication can have serious consequences. In 2012, Greg Price died at just 31 years of age. A subsequent inquiry found that poor communication between providers and breaks in the continuity of care contributed to his death. His family has since worked to ensure that others learn from their tragic experience. More recently, tragedy struck closer to home. Last December, Prashant Sreekumar, a 44-year-old father of three, died at Grey Nuns Community Hospital in Edmonton Southeast after he waited nearly eight hours to see a doctor for chest pain. These cases involved different circumstances, and we should be careful not to suggest that one piece of legislation could have prevented everything that went wrong, but these stories demonstrate why this issue is important. When patients are referred to specialists, they should know whether their referral has been received and who is responsible for following up. When important test results become available, those results must reach the right professionals and therefore be acted upon. A patient dealing with a serious illness should not have to chase records and coordinate communication between medical offices. That responsibility should not fall on a family already worried about the health of someone they love. Bill S-5 would require health information technology vendors to ensure their systems can communicate with one another. It would also prohibit data blocking, subject to regulations. Put simply, a patient’s information should be able to follow them securely through their care. A commercial interest in keeping customers tied to one software system should not prevent the appropriate sharing of information needed to treat a patient. It is a practical goal that Conservatives support. According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, in 2024, only 68% of hip replacement and 61% of knee replacements were completed within the recommended six-month benchmark. Median waits for MRI scans were also 15 days longer than they were in 2019. These delays have consequences. For a person waiting for knee replacement, it may mean months of difficulty in walking, working or caring for their family. For someone waiting for a scan, it can mean prolonged uncertainty about a potentially serious condition. Better information sharing can help prevent unnecessary repeat tests and the delay caused by missing records, but connecting computer systems will not on its own add more doctors or create additional surgical capacity. Canadians need a broader effort to improve access. The government must explain how this legislation will contribute to that work and how its results will be measured. We must also consider the people delivering care. Doctors enter medicine to help patients, yet too much of their working time is consumed by unnecessary administrative tasks. A joint survey by the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business estimated that physicians in Canada spend nearly 20 million hours each year on unnecessary administrative work. Disconnected records are only one part of that burden, but that is a part we should address. When clinic staff repeatedly request the same records or a physician must enter information already held in another system, valuable time is lost. That time could be used to see patients. The question is whether Bill S-5 would make that work easier. Would referrals become simpler to track? Would doctors spend less time searching for results? Would small clinics receive the training and support needed to adopt new systems? We cannot promise less paperwork while creating another complicated process for doctors to manage. Frontline professionals must be involved in developing these requirements. Furthermore, Canadians must have confidence that their personal health information is protected. Health records contains some of the most sensitive details of a person’s life, including their mental health history, prescriptions and diagnoses. Patients share that information because they trust their health care providers. That trust must be maintained. Protecting confidential information must not be confused with improperly withholding it for commercial reasons. During the Senate committee review, stakeholders recommended baseline security requirements for vendors, including encryption, strong authentication and records of who accesses information. These recommendations deserve serious consideration. Doctors should not be expected to become cybersecurity experts to determine whether a vendor’s product is adequately protected. Vendors must have clear responsibilities for maintaining safeguards, and patients need clear answers about how their information can be used and what happens if it is compromised. Finally, much of this legislation would depend on regulations developed after it were passed. These regulations would address standards, enforcement and the legislation’s application within provinces and territories, which may also require careful examination. Provinces, health care professionals and patients deserve clarity about what would be required, what it would cost and who would be accountable. Conservatives believe in health care that delivers for its patients, but ultimately what Canadians need are shorter wait times, reliable follow-ups, seamless information transfers, and doctors who have more time to practise medicine rather than working on endless paperwork.

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal

Linked statement

“This bill would help modernize Canada's health care system, where doctors still use outdated tools like fax machines. It helps medical computer systems share data, stops companies from blocking health records, and supports online care. I want to ask the member which parts of this bill would help the people in his riding the most.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this important bill would be a big step forward for the medical system throughout Canada. It seems that doctors still send faxes, which is basically the equivalent of stapling a piece of paper to the back of a dinosaur. It is kind of crazy how backward the health system can be in Canada. Among the IT interoperability, prohibiting data blocking, protecting access to health information and supporting virtual care, I wonder if there are any specific provisions in the bill that the member opposite sees as being the most helpful for the constituents in his riding.

Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Edmonton Southeast

Conservative
“I want this bill sent to committee. It is short, but it still has loopholes. The committee needs to make it clearer, cut paperwork, and make the process simpler.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, one thing I appreciate about the bill is that it is not too lengthy, but that does not mean it answers all the questions. We want to send it to committee for review so additional loopholes can be looked at. As recommended by the Senate review committee, more work can be done on it so clarity can be found, the paperwork can be reduced and the process can be streamlined.

Harb Gill, Windsor West

Conservative
“The government wasted 300 million dollars on a past digital health project. Does my colleague really think this new bill will give taxpayers their money's worth?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of Windsor West. Given boondoggles such as the $300-million PrescribeIT scandal that we have faced, how much confidence does my colleague have that this legislation would be able to deliver anything of value to the Canadian taxpayer?

Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Edmonton Southeast

Conservative
“The government has failed to deliver results for 11 years. But we should still look at the good parts of this bill. We must fix communication in health care so people do not die from mistakes. The government should welcome good ideas to make this bill work.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 33 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is a really serious question. Given the track record of the government over the last 11 years, a lot of boondoggles have happened that failed to deliver any results needed or promised by the government. However, that does not mean we should not look at the positive side of this bill. The death of Greg Price is a reminder for the government that, after 14 years, we are still figuring out how we can streamline the process so miscommunication cannot happen and tragedies like his cannot happen again, or can be controlled. I believe we still need to look at the bill from a positive angle, and all the positive suggestions should also be welcomed by the government.

Eric St-Pierre, Honoré-Mercier

Liberal
“Too much time is wasted on paperwork in our health system. I want to know how many hours this bill will save.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member for Edmonton Southeast mentioned in his great speech that the Canadian Medical Association estimates that some 20 million hours are spent on administrative work. I agree with the member that excessive administrative time is often wasted and should probably be spent in other ways. I am curious as to whether the member can comment on how many of those 20 million hours could potentially be reduced through Bill S-5.

Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Edmonton Southeast

Conservative
“We will only have those numbers after this bill passes into law. Before we pass it, we still need to review it and make it simpler and faster.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is a more technical question that more statistical data could answer if the bill is adopted and royal assent is provided. However, before it gets to that stage, we still need to review how we could make this bill better so all these delays and the jargon could be avoided and streamlining could be established.

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

Liberal
“This bill will save lives and improve people's health. I want the member to talk more about how it helps people's health.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am really encouraged by a number of the words the member has put on the record. I want to pick up on the point about saving lives. The legislation would do more than just save lives. It would also improve many people’s current health conditions. Could the member expand on that point too?

Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Edmonton Southeast

Conservative
“This bill is one step toward fixing a bigger problem. Letting all medical workers see patient records will make care faster and cut delays.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is part of the bigger challenge. It is one step towards it. All the professionals’ having access to a patient’s records is the right step towards streamlining the medical process and the delays that are in the process.

Brendan Hanley, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs

Liberal
“I want the House to pass this bill. It makes health care systems use common data rules so doctors and patients can share medical records safely across Canada. Right now, doctors cannot easily see their patients' full records, which causes delays, medical mistakes, and burnout.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Québec Centre. I am pleased to speak today to Bill S-5, the connected care for Canadians act, and its role in supporting a more connected health system. Bill S-5 may seem rather technical, and indeed it is. However, I cannot emphasize enough how important this bill is for patients, physicians and indeed all cadres of health care professionals, for caregivers and for the people responsible for the planning and administering of our health care systems. What is the bill about? Well, Bill S-5 would advance connected care by mandating the adoption of common data standards for health information technologies used across Canada. It would also prohibit data blocking, the practice of restricting access to health information for authorized users such as providers and patients, when privacy laws would otherwise permit it. In other words, Bill S-5 will allow for the secure sharing of health information between patients and their health care professionals at the time and place that it is needed. Data that is reliable, accurate and accessible saves lives, and the standards established by this bill would help make that possible. Research shows that patients who have access to their health information are better able to participate in treatment decisions, identify potential errors and manage chronic conditions more effectively. Improved access to health information would also support the more than four million Canadians who serve as informal caregivers in Canada. Today these individuals often devote countless hours to tracking down test results, coordinating records and repeating medical histories on behalf of their loved ones, often while balancing their own work, family and responsibilities. When patients and their caregivers do not have access to their complete medical records, they finds ways to compensate. They rely on memory, keep physical records, take screen shots and repeat their medical history to every health care provider that they see. Canadians do this because the system does not do it for them. These are creative and ingenious solutions, but they are also time-consuming and stressful and they can lead to misdiagnosis, delays in care or worse. Thirteen per cent of Canadians say their care was negatively affected due to poor information sharing between providers. The consequences can be profound, even tragic. Indeed, according to a recent physician survey conducted by the Canadian Medical Association, 92% of physicians reported that disconnected health systems, such as the inability to share patient records, test results and clinical notes, affected their ability to provide care. Two-thirds of those physicians say this happens often, highlighting the extent to which the lack of interoperability shapes day-to-day clinical practice. When providers do not have access to a patient’s complete health history, they are forced to make decisions without the full clinical picture. This increases the risk of delayed care, misdiagnosis, adverse drug interactions and unsafe treatments. Bill S-5 would enable a seamless and secure exchange of patient health information to support better collaboration among health care providers. For example, a family physician could securely share a patient summary with a specialist, helping support more timely assessments and better continuity of care. The bill would also strengthen team-based primary care, where timely information sharing is foundational to the way care is delivered. Similarly, for Canadians living with complex or chronic conditions and seeing multiple providers across multiple points of care, connected systems are a necessity. This is indeed true for Yukoners, who in many cases are in touch with providers across different jurisdictions. Harms resulting from disconnected care are especially high for people travelling in Canada, whether from northern, rural and remote communities, across provincial and territorial borders for treatment, or simply for work or vacation. For example, an elderly individual became ill while visiting family in another province. Although antiviral treatment was recommended, it could not be provided, because the lab result required to confirm eligibility for treatment was trapped in the patient’s provincial digital health system. One service provider explained that, at a hospital in a border region, patients admitted from a neighbouring province are often seriously ill. However, because the provincial health systems are not connected, patients typically arrive with photocopied and incomplete medical records. When systems cannot communicate, the result can be duplicated tests, delays in care, unnecessary costs, and frustration for patients and families. Bill S-5 would help bridge these gaps by mandating the standards that enable information sharing across the health care system. Importantly, disconnected data puts health care providers in the position of having to make clinical decisions with incomplete information. Bill S-5 would help to address this by enabling health care providers to access their patients’ complete health care information in order to provide safe, high-quality care. The purpose of the bill is to improve patient safety. However, patients are not the only ones who stand to benefit. Bill S‑5 also offers significant benefits to our valued health care professionals. Interoperable health systems can help reduce administrative burden associated with charting, forms, sick notes and tracking down test results. Today, valuable time is spent manually entering data and copying information from one system to another, instead of spending time with patients. Artificial intelligence is already supporting providers by reducing repetitive administrative tasks and improving access to information, and its use will only expand. However, these tools depend on reliable and connected data systems. Bill S-5 would help establish the secure data foundation needed to support that progress. For example, studies have found that physicians spend an average of 86 minutes a day searching for patient data due to a lack of interoperability. Now, 20 million physician hours are wasted annually on unnecessary administrative tasks. This unsustainable level of administrative work can lead to burnout, fatigue and low job satisfaction. Results from the CMA’s 2025 national physician health survey showed that 46% of physicians and residents report high-level burnout. Providers also mentioned the personal distress associated with the fear of making clinical decisions based on incomplete information. This affects their mental health, self-confidence, and ability to provide safe care. Dr. Ewan Affleck, a physician who has spent most of his career in the north and is a leading Canadian expert in digital health information, likens running a health system without connected data to flying blind, which, in his own experience, has cost patients their lives. To address this crisis, we must transition to working with digital health information within systems that can connect with one another. This will ensure consistent data transfer and reduce errors, which will help health care professionals provide high-quality care and, ultimately, improve patient safety. Bill S-5 would also support the broader use of digital tools that help patients connect with their providers, including secure platforms for booking appointments, requesting prescription refills and communicating with their care team. Transformation of any system requires investment. Whatever the cost it takes, the cost of inaction is likely to be far greater than the cost to do this work. As it is, we are already paying a staggering price for disconnected health data, estimated up to $9.4 billion annually. Beyond the financial cost, the consequences I have talked about today can hardly be measured in dollars but in patient safety, quality of care and the well-being of the health care providers who support them. Bill S-5 is a technical bill but its purpose is straightforward: to connect data to prevent patient harm. Canadians turn to the health care system seeking care and relief. I would encourage my fellow members to join me in supporting the bill so that all Canadians can receive safe health care that is informed by accurate data and is accessible wherever and whenever decisions are made.

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“Sharing health data will help keep people safe, but I want to know how the government will protect this information. How does this bill make sure Canadian health data stays safe and under our control?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that data sharing is going to prevent harm. I am curious about the data sovereignty aspect of this. What has the government proposed to ensure that Canadians’ health care data remains sovereign and protected through the legislation?

Brendan Hanley, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs

Liberal
“This bill connects health data systems while keeping our privacy rules in place. It only shares information when the law already allows it.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this is really all about supporting data sovereignty and interconnectivity at the same time that we support existing privacy protection. Authorized access remains governed by applicable privacy legislation. The bill is really about making information available when it is legally permitted to be shared and not expanding access beyond existing privacy rules. It is really helping to get that balance right, which is really all about data sovereignty.

Luc Thériault, Montcalm

Bloc Québécois
“This bill gives the minister too much power over health data. Quebec wants to control its own health care system. I am asking the member to support a change to the bill that says Quebec stays in charge of its own health policies.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague’s speech clearly reflected the concerns of an excellent physician from Yukon. We had the opportunity to serve together on the Standing Committee on Health. The bill gives the minister the discretion to impose her intentions by order in council. When the pan-Canadian interoperability road map was announced, Quebec indicated that it would not be moving in that direction, while remaining open to the possibility of sharing information. In keeping with what the Minister of Health said this morning about being determined to respect Quebec’s jurisdiction, would my colleague be open to adding a preamble specifying that Quebec remains in control of its health policies?

Brendan Hanley, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs

Liberal
“I support this bill. The provinces and territories will still run health care. This bill only sets shared rules so their computer systems can talk to each other, which helps health workers get the patient information they need.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, and I acknowledge the work we have previously done together on the Standing Committee on Health. It is important to recognize that the territories and provinces remain responsible for delivering health care. Bill S-5 does not change anything. It sets common standards enabling different systems to communicate with one another. The goal is not to impose federal control, but rather to ensure that health care professionals have access to the information they need to safely care for patients.

Eric St-Pierre, Honoré-Mercier

Liberal
“I hear about health data concerns in my city riding. How would this bill affect people living in rural and remote communities in the Yukon?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have the benefit of being a member of Parliament in an urban riding, where I do hear about concerns around health data. Could the member talk a bit more about the Yukon, which represents a lot of rural and more disconnected communities? What kind of impact would Bill S-5 have for members of his community in the Yukon?

Brendan Hanley, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs

Liberal
“I want this bill to pass. Northern and remote patients often have to travel to different towns or provinces for health care. Patient care suffers when doctors cannot easily share medical records.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned throughout my speech, Bill S-5 is particularly relevant for more remote and northern rural settings, because so much of the health care depends on the interconnectivity of communities to referral centres. For example, Whitehorse hospital is the referral centre for the territory. It receives a lot of patients and a lot of calls from around the communities, but we also access care in British Columbia, in Alberta and sometimes in other jurisdictions. I cannot tell the House how many times I hear, either personally through my former career or from colleagues, about how the lack of interchangeability of data has affected patient care. I am really looking forward to the implementation of this bill and the subsequent actual interoperability of health systems.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 163

  1. Government Orders Connected Care for Canadians Act 115 statements
  2. Oral Questions Taxation 2 statements
  3. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 5 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 3 statements
  5. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  6. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 3 statements
  7. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Foreign Affairs 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 17 statements
  13. Oral Questions Major Projects Office 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Major Projects Office 4 statements
  16. Oral Questions Regional Economic Development 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  20. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Connected Care for Canadians Act 26 statements
  22. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  23. Oral Questions Finance 15 statements
  24. Government Orders The Budget 38 statements
  25. Oral Questions Labour 2 statements
  26. Oral Questions Finance 4 statements
  27. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements