Skip to content
SOCI - Standing Committee

Social Affairs, Science and Technology

 

THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AFFAIRS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

EVIDENCE


OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 23, 2024

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 4:15 p.m. [ET] to examine Bill C-232, An Act respecting Arab Heritage Month; and Bill C-284, An Act to establish a national strategy for eye care.

Senator Ratna Omidvar (Chair) in the chair.

The Chair: Senators, good evening.

[Translation]

My name is Ratna Omidvar and I’m a senator from Ontario.

[English]

I am the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.

Today, colleagues, we begin our study of Bill C-232, An Act respecting Arab Heritage Month. Before we begin, I ask my colleagues to introduce themselves to our witnesses and the public, starting with the deputy chair.

Senator Cordy: My name is Jane Cordy, and I am a senator from Nova Scotia.

Senator Moodie: Rosemary Moodie, Ontario.

Senator Osler: Flordeliz “Gigi” Osler, Manitoba.

[Translation]

Senator Dagenais: Jean-Guy Dagenais, Quebec.

Senator Cormier: René Cormier, New Brunswick.

[English]

Senator Bernard: Wanda Thomas Bernard from Nova Scotia, which is Mi’kmaq territory.

[Translation]

Senator Petitclerc: Chantal Petitclerc, Quebec.

Senator Forest: Good afternoon. Éric Forest, Gulf senatorial division, Quebec.

Senator Seidman: Good afternoon. Judith Seidman, Quebec.

Senator Mégie: Good afternoon. Marie-Françoise Mégie, Quebec.

[English]

Senator Dasko: Donna Dasko, senator from Ontario. Hi.

The Chair: Joining us for our first panel, we welcome in person the Honourable David McGuinty, P.C., M.P., sponsor of the bill.

Thank you for joining us today. We begin with opening remarks. Mr. McGuinty, you will have five minutes for your opening statement followed by questions from my colleagues. The floor is yours.

The Honourable David McGuinty, P.C., M.P., sponsor of the bill: Thank you very much, Madam Chair and members of the committee. It is a privilege and an honour to be here with you this afternoon to speak to my private member’s bill, Bill C-232, An Act respecting Arab Heritage Month, which passed the House of Commons with unanimous support.

The bill would establish the month of April in Canada as Arab Heritage Month and would recognize and celebrate the historic mark Arab-Canadians have made and continue to make in building Canadian society. This would also align with Arab American Heritage Month celebrated in April in the United States of America.

In Canada, diversity has always been one of our greatest strengths, and celebrating our diversity is key to building a strong and more inclusive country for all. Arab Heritage Month in Canada will be an important opportunity for Arab-Canadians to be recognized for their contributions to this beautiful country.

The first persons of Arab origin arrived in Canada in 1882, in the early years after Confederation some 142 years ago. Since then, the population of Arab-Canadians has grown to well over 1 million and continues to flourish. Arab Heritage Month in Canada will provide us an opportunity to show our appreciation for their invaluable contributions to build a stronger and more inclusive Canada. The population of Arab-Canadians has now grown to well over 1 million, with dynamic Arab-Canadian communities thriving from coast to coast to coast.

In my own riding of Ottawa South, which I have been serving for over 20 years, we have the second-largest Arabic-speaking population of all the electoral districts in Canada. I have many friends in the National Capital Region Arab community and well beyond. I am extremely proud of their outstanding achievements, and it is a privilege to be their representative.

[Translation]

Canadians of Arab origin from all walks of life have made important contributions to Canada’s social, economic and political life, as well as to the country’s cultural fabric, through literature, music, food and fashion, among other things. These are just some of the many ways Arab Canadians share their culture with the wider Canadian community, and we thank them for it.

Although Arab Canadians come from different countries of origin and different religious backgrounds, what they have in common is leadership, entrepreneurship and a strong work ethic. We will be able to recognize and pay tribute to the countless Arab Canadian entrepreneurs and small business owners across Canada who are doing so much to support their communities.

[English]

On a personal note, in my own family, my Syrian-Canadian godfather was a man of great intelligence, kindness and integrity.

His origins were humble. In fact, they were steeped in poverty. His values instilled in me a deep appreciation for hard work and giving back, particularly through public service. More recently, many of my nieces and nephews have married Lebanese spouses. We have welcomed them with open arms into our large family, and they have welcomed us into theirs.

The enactment of Arab Heritage Month in Canada would ensure that the contributions of Arab-Canadians are recognized, shared and finally celebrated across this great country, not just every April but every day. I hope, through my remarks, to have made supporting this bill a self-evident truth. We are always stronger when we stick together. To illustrate, I will close with words from my incredibly wise mother, who used to say to her 10 children at the dinner table:

Understand, kids, you have a choice to make. If you pull apart, you will feel like 5, but if you pull together, you will feel like 20.

I believe that this Arab Heritage Month proposal is about pulling together and recognizing and reflecting the unbelievable contributions that our Arab-Canadian neighbours and citizens continue to make. Thank you very much for your attention.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. McGuinty. We will now go to questions from my colleagues. I suggest four minutes for a question and an answer. If I may, let me ask the first question.

You mentioned alignment with the U.S.’s Arab heritage month, and that kind of makes sense that the continent, the North American people, should celebrate together, but is there a significance to April?

Mr. McGuinty: It was the most beautiful month in Canada and a month of renewal.

The Chair: All right. On that note, Senator Cordy?

Senator Cordy: Always a politician. Thank you for that and for bringing forward this bill. I read in a speech you made previously in the House that Ottawa South has the second-largest Arab-speaking population. What area has the largest? What is number one?

Second, you also spoke — though not today — about 42% of the population being under the age of 24. That was interesting. Maybe you could comment on that. Were they born here? Did they emigrate as young children?

I was really struck by another comment that you made. Sometimes people will say that, since this is Canada, why do we have an Arab Heritage Month or a Lebanese Heritage Month, the latter of which I sponsored a few years ago?

You commented in your previous speech that we should celebrate Canadian and Arabic identities and that they are not mutually exclusive. Could you talk about that? That was a very important comment that you made in the House of Commons. It was very relevant. Maybe you could talk about that, as well as the young population and the largest population in Canada.

Mr. McGuinty: The largest population is somewhere in Edmonton, if I recall, but I can fact-check that for you and get back to you.

The question, too, of the young and dynamic youth population in Canada is what it is. It is a phenomenally ambitious, hard-working, entrepreneurial, risk-taking population. When we began looking at the Canadian-Arab population as a whole, it is just remarkable the number of influential individuals, from Leon’s Furniture to elite athletes to heart surgeons to very senior public servants, academics, writers, thinkers and HVAC entrepreneurs. There are folks from every walk of life who are highly accomplished and very self-reliant. It struck me, again, as I began looking at the overall age and the dynamic population from which Canada will benefit as time goes on.

On the question of celebrating our diversity, it is interesting. I just came from Geneva, where I led a delegation for Canada to the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s global assembly. There were 1,550 parliamentarians there from 140 different countries, and the world is struggling. In that microcosmic assembly hall, I could tell that the world continues to struggle with celebrating each other. This is one way that Canada can shine.

I have always believed, in my 20 years of elected public service and my 10 years as a deputy minister at the Privy Council Office previously, that Canada has a special responsibility to showcase our ability to come together and celebrate each other.

This is very much about celebrating our Arab-Canadian neighbours. It fits well with the heritage months of the Tamil, the Black, the Irish, the Sikh, the Asian, the Jewish-Canadian, the Polish, the national Indigenous, the Italian, the Filipino, the Portuguese, the German, the Islamic-Canadian, the Latin American, the women, the Hindu and the Lebanese.

Frankly, it is smart of Canadians to indicate to the world that we are open to the world. We are not asking people to leave themselves behind when they join us and when they bring their families here. We are very much hoping that they can continue to reflect all those wonderful qualities that different cultures bring to our mosaic.

Senator Cordy: Thank you very much for that, but you forgot Scottish. I am from Cape Breton.

Mr. McGuinty: Sorry. Yes, we forgive the Scottish.

Senator Seidman: Thank you for being here. I was going to ask you the question, “Why April?” but it’s already been asked, and you gave such a warm response.

We’ve talked about how we celebrate diversity with these types of heritage months. My question for you would be this: Do you envisage certain ways of raising visibility and educating the population, including Arab-Canadians, I suppose, but also all Canadians? What would you envisage?

Mr. McGuinty: These events are reminiscent of what other heritage months are already reflecting and celebrating — cultural events, dinners, picnics, community events, dance and music events and evenings and coming together.

A lot of the Arab-Canadian population with whom I have worked and many of the groups — in fact, almost all the groups that represent Arab groups in Canada — have lined up behind this. They are very supportive. It also allows them to put themselves in a position to seek some support from different orders of government to do just this while contributing themselves, as well.

The Arab-Canadian community is waiting for this to come through, so that they can really celebrate it by this April, we hope. We were hoping for last April, but events have overtaken us a bit. Many, many different factors and different kinds of opportunities will give it shape. Of course, the Arab world is not simply one country. It’s not simply one religion. It’s not simply one dance, music, food or dress type or language. It’s a combination of those.

Again, I have just come from a fairly divisive meeting where people were agonizing over what is happening in the Arabian Peninsula. A lot of divisions exist between Arab countries, much less between other actors. I kept reflecting on the need for Canada to do this, again, to act as a bit of — “demonstration project” is the wrong term — maybe an example for folks to look to us worldwide and say, “That country has got it — not perfect but better.”

Senator Seidman: Thank you.

Senator Osler: Thank you very much for being here. I have a two-part question. First, for those of us who are not from the Arab-Canadian community, how could we use this bill to heal divisions and reduce bigotry, hatred and divisiveness? Second, could there be any potential unintended effects of designating April as Arab Heritage Month? How can those of us not from the community use Bill C-232, again, to heal divisions, build bridges and reduce hate?

Mr. McGuinty: Those are two really good and difficult questions.

All of us who are parliamentarians to begin with, but way beyond parliamentarians, can maybe — I’m not going to use the word “resurrect” but I will use the word “enhance” — our efforts to remind each other of the unbelievable wealth that we possess in this country.

I will go into two Grade 5 classrooms, and there may be 80 kids there. In today’s world, probably 40 to 50 countries of origin are represented. I tell the children all the time that they are wealthy beyond belief, and they start fumbling through their pockets looking for money. Then I tell them it’s not about money. It’s about the wealth that each one of them represents. We will have to reclaim that. More than just a narrative, we will have to reclaim that value as a country.

I am a person who has spent decades working abroad, and I still do a lot of work abroad. I see that Canada has a very special responsibility to help show the rest of the world that there is another way. By surfacing the celebration of each other, we can help undermine bigotry and divisiveness and hateful rhetoric, which can rear its head, especially in these times when we seem to have moved from anger to hate.

Maybe it’s a post-COVID issue. I’ve talked about post-COVID stress disorder in the past. I don’t know whether that’s what is at play here, but there seems to be a harder edge. For all of us here, as parliamentarians, we are on the receiving end of a lot of that.

In terms of unintended consequences, I hope there are none. There might be, but if we want to make this country work, we must work at it. We must speak openly. We must defend each other. We have to call out bigotry and divisive rhetoric. It is a big problem. Particularly as the person who oversees the National Security and Intelligence Committee, I can tell you that foreign interference is not something that’s going away. Certainly, I expect to see it in our next elections, just as I know it is in play right now in the United States.

We will have to work very hard to surface all the goodness that Canadians reflect, all that they can muster, to remind each other that we’re hurtling through space on a very finite planet. There is no alternative; there’s just the one of them, and we are going to have to make do.

[Translation]

Senator Mégie: I can attest to the fact that heritage months are really very important. I experience it during Black History Month in February and during Latin American Heritage Month. It’s a time when people in the community can take a moment to reflect on origins and can teach the younger people coming up, who are sometimes taken over by American culture.

If you based it on April coming from the United States, is there a difference in the Arab community — because in the United States, the culture is really different? Here, I see it in other communities, but is there also a big difference in the Arab community? Do you think that using the same dates is going to bring them closer together?

Mr. McGuinty: That’s an excellent question. We hope that it will bring the Canadian and American Arab communities closer together.

I’ve just returned from a meeting in Kentucky attended by 2,500 lawmakers from all 50 states. I told a group of Arab American lawmakers about the bill and they were flabbergasted. They had learned that it wasn’t the U.S. Congress that legislated the same dates in the United States; it was President Biden who introduced it by executive order and passed it himself as president. I think it was because he knew there might be a problem in the U.S. Congress, it being so divided.

American lawmakers were flabbergasted, because for them, it was more about leaving their culture at the door when they arrived in the United States.

I explained that, on the contrary, in Canada it’s more a question of celebrating that culture and each individual bringing it with them. I don’t know if that’s going to hamper things. I believe Canada’s impact or influence could help the situation in the United States, where I see more and more that the two groups, their constituents and the two parties can’t seem to talk to each other at all. What I found very interesting about the meeting in Kentucky was that several sessions were organized to simply teach and show the lawmakers of both parties how to have discussions.

So, if what we’re doing here can help the situation for the month of April in the United States, so much the better.

We wanted this to coincide with National Arab American Heritage Month, which is in April, because the Canadian groups also said it would be good to do things on both sides of the border.

Senator Mégie: Thank you.

Senator Cormier: Welcome and thank you very much for this bill, which has led me to reflect on cultural diversity in Canada. The Arab community as a whole shares this identity, but obviously, Canada has very strong cultural diversity.

It also led me to think about something again, namely which artists are of Arab origin — since I come from the arts — because sometimes we forget where people came from.

The great Wajdi Mouawad, an extraordinary man of the theatre, is of Lebanese origin, as are René Angélil and Bashar Shbib, an important filmmaker.

We often forget where some of our compatriots or fellow Canadians come from.

How do you imagine this day will enable the various Arab cultural communities to come together, get closer and live together? Are there any challenges to bringing together the different Arab communities in Canada? Will this day bring the communities closer together?

Mr. McGuinty: That’s an excellent question and we hope so. It’s one reason why all Arab groups in Canada support this bill. It’s becoming an instrument to bring communities together. So many pressures divide us these days, so many forces divide us, and I think this kind of celebration can bring people together. I believe it could be organized with the municipalities, with the provinces and especially with the federal government, which would have funding to help organize the celebrations.

Senator Cormier: That was my second question. No funding is earmarked for this bill, and that’s often the challenge. How do you see the various levels of government supporting this bill?

Mr. McGuinty: When this bill becomes Canadian law and the month is established, that will give Arab communities permission to apply for funding from the federal government.

The federal government always sets aside money for all the heritage months and celebrations in Canada. So I think this funding will help a lot, but I assure you, with the support we’ve already received from the outset, the Arab community is looking forward to it. I don’t think it would be a financial issue, because they really want to launch celebrations.

Senator Cormier: Thank you very much.

[English]

Senator Al Zaibak: Thank you, Mr. McGuinty, for being here. As a Syrian-born Arab-Canadian, I want to express my gratitude to you and your colleagues in the House of Commons for bringing forward this bill and to thank Senator Cordy for sponsoring it in the Senate.

Your hard work and friendship have been recognized by members of the Arab-Canadian community, throughout the country and beyond. I don’t have a question to ask beyond asking you this: What else do you think that Canada can do to strengthen the relationship between Canada and the Arab world in general?

Thank you once again to you and your family for your friendship, hard work and for your public service. Thank you.

Mr. McGuinty: Thank you. I really appreciate that; it’s really lovely. I also want to thank Senator Cordy for her stick handling of this through the Senate at a busy time.

I’ve been asked many times why an Irish-French Catholic Canadian would be bringing an Arab Heritage Month proposal to the Canadian Parliament, and my answer is my mother’s: We’re always stronger together. This is an opportunity for me to showcase what I’ve witnessed for many decades in Canada emanating from our Arab-Canadian population: They are quiet, disciplined, heavy-lifting entrepreneurs, professionals, academics, artists and musicians — you name it. I’ve found most of my Arab-Canadian friends and colleagues are not boastful but very quiet. They just sort of do the work, whether they’re driving cabs or operating on brains.

For me, this is also important for Canada in the world. The Arab world is growing quickly — not just in the West, but also Arab countries are growing quickly. This gives Canada, I think, a leg up in the relationship, in trading, in exchanges, in capacity and in bringing in expertise. I don’t know how many Arab medical professionals I’ve helped bring into the country to work at the children’s hospital or the Ottawa Hospital in my riding. The Ottawa Hospital is the largest hospital by patient care in Canada.

Many Arab professionals have come in and are helping us with all kinds of different disciplines, including a lot of research. To me, this is just good hockey. It’s just Canada and the world showcasing that we can come together from every walk of life.

There are 85 languages in my district and some 116 countries of origin. These are the United Nations of Ottawa South, and I have a large contingent of Arab-Canadians who are outstanding neighbours. This is a great honour.

[Translation]

Senator Forest: Thank you for letting me ask a question, Madam Chair.

I think that if this bill passes — and I hope it will, in the current context — it will be an excellent opportunity for the Arab Canadian community to highlight and showcase this culture.

The Canadian community must also take advantage of the opportunity to work on developing the values of inclusion and respect in the current context.

Over and above passing the bill, it will be easier to convey the message to the Arab Canadian community than the message we have to send out to Canadian community. We also have a responsibility to tell the Canadian community that they need to work on developing these values of respect and inclusion. Have you given any thought to how we could meaningfully address this major challenge?

Mr. McGuinty: I’m going to answer in English with an expression I use all the time.

[English]

People often say to me that it’s important to tolerate each other. And I say to them that I don’t like the word “tolerate” at all. I’m not interested in tolerating anybody. I’m interested in celebrating everyone. I think that is the hallmark of an advanced 21st-century society today.

As I mentioned earlier, the planet is hurtling at breakneck speed through space, and we’re facing a lot of problems. As an environmental lawyer who just came back from working on the sustainable environment goals for the Secretary General of the UN, I keep trying to implement them in 180-plus parliaments.

I am absolutely convinced that we are going to be compelled very soon, as a planet, to decide whether we’re going to cooperate or not, and it will not be predicated on just humanity but almost entirely on caring capacity and whether the planet can carry the population with what we’re seeing: scarcity, loss of DNA and energy, water and freshwater problems.

We’ve made a lot of progress. We’ve eliminated half the global poverty in the last 50 years — huge progress. But given some of the things we’ll be seeing under the rubric of climate change, this kind of Canadian approach of coming together will be absolutely essential.

We’re seeing all kinds of stressors. I’ve been called in to help resolve the dispute between Ethiopian and neighbouring countries over the abstraction of water. I used to do this for a living in another world in another time. But that’s a flare-up of so much more to come.

If Canada is in a position to show that we live together, celebrate each other and realize we are all in this together and all share our common humanity — that’s just full stop — that places us in a very credible position around the world. A lot of people are very entrenched, fearful, mistrustful and insular, and that’s okay. That’s where the planet is, in my view. But I think this kind of measure, along with the other heritage months, puts us in a unique position. I hope that answers your question.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: I have a question about language.

Mr. McGuinty: Yes.

Senator Cormier: Obviously, Arabic is a very diverse language, and I have no command of it.

If I may, I’m going to make a comment that’s not very appropriate, but the Arabic language is often associated with a certain type of violence in our world. I say this presenting all the nuances. I’m aware that sometimes, hearing Arabic strikes fear in people’s hearts for all sorts of reasons, be they founded or unfounded. It’s an extraordinary language. How can Arab Heritage Month be an opportunity to celebrate this language and make sure that people fully grasp its musicality? Even if people don’t speak the language, what can they do to make it their own?

Mr. McGuinty: Canada in the world. The first time I ran for office, there was a candidates’ debate in my riding. People asked me where I stood on official bilingualism in Canada. My answer was, and still is, that it’s a good start; that young people coming out of high school in the Netherlands have to speak at least four languages, and in Germany it’s at least three. The idea that we don’t promote speaking as many languages as possible in a world that’s getting smaller and smaller is a missed opportunity, in my opinion.

If the bill encourages people to learn Arabic, that’s excellent. There are more and more Arabs in the world. Canada does business around the globe; why wouldn’t we want to have Canadians doing business who can express themselves in the language of Saudi Arabia?

I hope this helps, just as I hope Portuguese Heritage Month helps the Portuguese language or Italian.

[English]

— with perceptions, but we have to overcome the perceptions because they’re just that: perceptions. The Arab-speaking people all over the world are beautiful, warm, loving, caring, accomplished and hard-working.

Senator Cormier: I agree.

Mr. McGuinty: We’re lucky to have so many Arab-Canadians helping us build this country going forward. I see it, again, as an opportunity for this country to reach out in the world and engage. If you can engage in someone’s first language, it puts you in a good, competitive position.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: You introduced a bill. Why didn’t you simply introduce a motion? Why a bill instead of a motion?

Mr. McGuinty: Because a motion would not yield the same result. I really wanted to have a month devoted to the Arab community. I’ve introduced several motions in the House over the past 20 years, but I wanted it to start as soon as possible so that people could organize festivals, picnics and gatherings everywhere.

I also respected the fact that we already had a lot of other heritage months, and I believe those ones were established as a result of passing bills, not motions.

Senator Cormier: Thank you very much.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. McGuinty, celebration is one thing. Addressing deeply rooted, systemic, institutional racism is another. The Senate Human Rights Committee put out a report on Islamophobia in which we noted the presence of racism in institutions here in Ottawa: the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA; the Canada Border Services Agency, or CBSA; and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC. Do you think this will build a bridge — and if so, how?

Mr. McGuinty: I hope it might help. In my other day job, 30 hours a week heading up the National Security and Intelligence Committee, we performed the first-ever diversity and inclusion analysis of all the security and intelligence organizations. We did so because we knew we needed a baseline. We can talk until the cows come home, but we need baselines. We need metrics and baselines. You can’t manage what you can’t measure.

We set out, tracked and are now following up with the work that we did. The first thing we did was validate the notion that the best security and intelligence organizations worldwide are the most diverse. We don’t say that, the FBI does, and they looked at it worldwide. If you want good security and intelligence, you need good people. If you want good people, you need diversity and serious inclusion. That’s why we put a baseline analysis in place, so we can measure every three to five years to see if we are making progress.

I don’t know whether this speaks directly to the important findings of that particular report, but let’s start by starting. If we can start by celebrating the best in our Arab-Canadian neighbours, citizens and the folks who have joined us most recently, that’s probably a good way to begin.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. McGuinty. This is likely the friendliest committee you have come across.

Mr. McGuinty: Can I come back?

The Chair: Colleagues, we will now proceed to clause by clause. Mr. McGuinty, you are welcome to stay or leave. You may choose.

Mr. McGuinty: Thank you, Madam Chair and to all of you.

The Chair: Thank you. Is it agreed that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-232, An Act respecting Arab Heritage Month?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall the preamble stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, stand postponed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall the preamble carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall the title carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Shall the bill carry?

Hon. Senators: Carried.

The Chair: Congratulations, Mr. McGuinty. We will report it out to the Senate.

Mr. McGuinty: Thank you so much.

The Chair: Well done. Is it agreed that I report this bill to the Senate in both official languages?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Thank you, colleagues.

We will now turn to our next panel. We will proceed to our study of Bill C-284, An Act to establish a national strategy for eye care. We welcome the Honourable Judy Sgro, sponsor of the bill. Thank you for joining us today. We will begin with opening remarks from you followed by questions from committee members. It is likely best to stay within your five minutes so we have a lot of time to ask you questions.

The Honourable Judy A. Sgro, P.C., M.P., sponsor of the bill: Thank you to the committee for bringing Bill C-284 to the forefront so that it can proceed, which is something we all very much want to see happen.

Bill C-284 calls for a national eye care strategy to be developed to safeguard the vision health of millions of Canadians, focusing on reducing preventable blindness and improving overall eye health, which directly impacts an individual’s quality of life, productivity and well-being. Bill C-284 highlights a multi-faceted approach toward comprehensive eye care services.

First, accessibility is key. The strategy would aim to ensure that people in both urban and rural areas have access to essential eye care services. This includes establishing more community-based care centres and making treatments affordable for everyone, regardless of their socio-economic status.

Second, public awareness and education will play an important role. Many eye conditions are preventable if detected early. Public health campaigns can educate communities about the importance of regular eye checkups and early intervention, especially for common issues like cataracts, glaucoma and refractive errors.

Third, capacity building is essential for the successful implementation of this strategy. This includes training more optometrists, ophthalmologists and other health care professionals and ensuring that they have the resources to provide first-class care.

Finally, the integration of technology is emphasized in Bill C-284. From telemedicine to advanced diagnostic tools, leveraging technology can make eye care services more efficient and accessible, especially in remote areas.

More than 8 million Canadians currently face the risk of serious vision loss due to common eye diseases; this statistic is quite alarming. A national strategy for eye care is essential, providing a unified direction for governments and stakeholders to collaboratively tackle this growing crisis. Bill C-284 calls for a strategy that would establish a coordinated approach to eye care across jurisdictions, reducing duplication and maximizing efforts to prevent and manage eye diseases nationwide. It would also give Indigenous peoples a voice in creating a distinction-based approach, ensuring that their unique needs are addressed.

To raise awareness, the government will also designate February as Age-Related Macular Degeneration Month. Education about eye health and the risks of eye disease is crucial. We must ensure that Canadians have the information needed to preserve their long-term vision. Vision loss is not just a health issue. It can lead to several physical and psychological consequences, including financial hardship, loss of independence and social isolation, and, of course, these often result in depression.

Consider these striking facts: In 2019, vision loss cost the Canadian economy an astounding $32.9 billion. Approximately 1.2 million Canadians are blind or partially sighted and over 8 million are at significant risk of blindness. Disturbingly, 1,292 deaths were associated with vision loss in 2019. The good news is that 75% of blindness cases can be prevented with early diagnosis and treatment.

This is why Bill C-284, which aims to establish a national eye care strategy, is so important. The bill seeks to raise awareness of the impacts of vision loss, to improve eye health care and to support and foster innovative research for new therapies. For years, optometrists, ophthalmologists, researchers and patient advocates have called for federal leadership in eye care. This bill is long overdue and critical for millions of Canadians. Key stakeholders like the Canadian Association of Optometrists and the Canadian Ophthalmological Society have been champions for a national strategy, and organizations such as the Canadian Council of the Blind and Fighting Blindness Canada have publicly supported Bill C-284.

Fighting Blindness Canada reports that the number of Canadians living with vision loss is on the rise, with one in five Canadians currently affected by eye disease. An integral part of the strategy, of course, is increased investment in eye health research, particularly in preventive and restorative treatments. We must advocate for more financial support for genetic treatments, pharmaceutical therapies, surgical and nonsurgical devices and diagnostic initiatives to ensure these advancements are accessible to Canadians.

Bill C-284 has passed unanimously in the House, receiving support from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, from the leader of the official opposition and from the NDP and Green caucuses. By focusing on accessibility, education, capacity building and technology, Bill C-284 aims to significantly reduce visual impairment and improve eye health outcomes across Canada. This initiative underscores the government’s commitment to protecting one of our most valuable senses: our sight.

Chair, thank you very much for the opportunity to be here. It’s my first time appearing before a Senate committee, and it is very exciting to meet you. Some of you I know, and the others, of course, I will know after today. Thank you very much.

The Chair: You are most welcome. We are a friendly committee. I think you will experience it as such.

We will go now to questions. Colleagues, you have four minutes for your question and your answer. We will start with Senator Cordy.

Senator Cordy: Thank you very much, Ms. Sgro, for the work you have done on this. It is an extremely important health-related issue, and perhaps we have not been paying enough attention to it, other than maybe going for new glasses or some such thing.

You spoke about early diagnosis being key and the amount of money, $32.9 billion in 2019, for vision-related issues. It sort of blew me away how much better that money could be used if we were to look at early diagnosis and prevention and communication about it. Could you expand a little on the importance of early diagnosis and the best way forward in order to have early diagnoses for eye issues?

Ms. Sgro: Thank you, Senator Cordy, for your interest and your question. Certainly, if we look at that period of time in the pandemic, a lot of people were not going to doctors, period, whether ophthalmologists or others, even though many doctors were working at the same time. By the time an eye disease is recognized, it is quite often too late.

I’m hosting a forum with the University of Waterloo on November 2 for children aged 5 to 18 years old. The university students will test a lot of young people who have never had their eyes tested for various reasons. Trying to detect an eye disease early on is by far the best way. I guess it is that way for all diseases, but the eye disease and vision loss area has not had the same attention, in spite of the fact that we’ve made commitments since 2003 to have a national eye care strategy. The strategy has been promised to the community many times, but somehow we never quite got to the issue.

I am pleased that I was able to bring it forward and, with your help, to move it forward to actually make it the law of the land. Then we will start to get the kind of attention on vision loss that we need.

Senator Cordy: Back in the day, for health-related issues, well-baby clinics would be held where parents would bring their babies. The babies would be weighed and checked and everything. In the school system, there used to be eye tests, and public health nurses would come into the school. It’s been a while since I have been in the school system, but there just wasn’t the funding to have nurses and other people coming into the school system for — what you spoke about earlier — early intervention and early diagnosis or flagging that the parents should take the child to a doctor.

Is there a way to use community resources, including schools, to do some of the things that you talk about in the bill?

Ms. Sgro: As you said, there was a day in our schools — I can only speak to Ontario in particular — once a year, when the optometrist would come to the school and do preliminary examinations for the children. I think that was stopped a long time ago.

Because of that, when I did some investigating around young people between 5 and 18 years old, I was quite shocked to find many of them had never had an eye exam. Why would they? There was no reason. They could still see, so they didn’t realize the importance of getting that checked. We are hoping, through the forum that I’m hosting on November 2, to educate these young people on the importance of their eyesight and how they must look after it. The team will also have a way of looking at that grouping of probably 200 young people to see how many are in need of care at the end of the day. Were all 200 fine? Were half of them recognized as having an eye problem?

Getting the stats and the numbers may turn things around so they can go back into schools and get things done. Parents are busy today, and they don’t have time. If there is no reason to take their child in for an eye test, they don’t bother. That’s something we need to be looking at.

Senator Cordy: Thank you.

Senator Seidman: Thank you, Ms. Sgro. There’s no question that eye health is critically important. There are risk factors for some diseases and sort of precursors for others, indications of certain diseases. But, as we always say about health, jurisdictional issues do exist. Have you already had some consultations with the provincial professional associations and governments?

I noticed that paragraph 2(2)(c) of the bill has a statement about promoting:

. . . information and knowledge sharing between the federal and provincial governments in relation to eye disease prevention and treatment and to vision rehabilitation . . .

Also, paragraph 2(2)(a) refers to identifying “. . . the needs of health care professionals and other professionals in relation to training and guidance . . .”

How can one approach the very delicate issues of provincial jurisdictions and come up with something that is successful?

Ms. Sgro: As we move forward on health care, it’s a partnership. No matter which part of the health care system, it’s all delivered through a partnership with the provinces. I’ve had discussions with Ontario on this issue at the very beginning. We’re not looking to get into any jurisdictional issues. This is an issue of eye care, the same way as we do other things, in partnership with the provinces.

Together, we will move forward on developing a strategy and a way to reach out to many of the others who are there. It’s always meant to be “in consultation and partnership with” as we move forward.

Senator Seidman: But the request for the content of the consultation says it may include measures to “. . . identify the needs of health care professionals and other professionals in relation to training and guidance . . .” and to “. . . promote information and knowledge sharing between the federal and provincial governments . . .” How do you see that happening?

Ms. Sgro: It will happen in the same way that we create many of these things that are happening today — through cooperation and in partnerships together.

Senator Seidman: Did you say you had consultations with the provincial professional associations?

Ms. Sgro: Many of the associations have been very supportive of the bill. Putting the bill together was done in consultation on jurisdictional issues as well as with ophthalmologists, optometrists and the Council for the Blind. I have been in consultation with all of them. They were all part of putting this together in the proper language and the proper direction to ensure respect for other jurisdictions. I have been profiling the many people who have been working on this file for a long time. I was just fortunate that I came up for a private member’s bill. I have an interest in blindness because of a grandmother and an aunt and my mentor. It was a perfect opportunity for me to work with them in putting it all together to ensure that we had everything worded right to satisfy all of the concerns as we went forward.

Senator Seidman: I have just one curiosity. Clause 5 of the bill feels like an add-on, in a way. Age-Related Macular Degeneration Awareness Month will be designated each year. I am wondering about that. The clause doesn’t feel integrated into the bill. It feels like it’s an add-on at the very end of the bill. What is the significance? Why would that be the designation?

By the way, when I look at the Government of Canada calendar of health promotion days, there are a lot of them — World Glaucoma Week, Vision Health Month, Cataract Awareness Month, Children’s Vision Month. So what is the meaning of this? What is being attempted here?

Ms. Sgro: I certainly learned a lot about the issue of macular degeneration and how it will affect so many of us sitting around this table. There is a lack of awareness around it. New technologies are coming forward for different eye diseases and so on. We didn’t have a macular degeneration month, as we have for many other eye conditions. Given the prevalence, the month would give us all a chance to raise awareness because, again, with this disease, the earlier it is detected, the better the opportunity to not lose one’s vision because of it. It is an opportunity.

With all of those months and days that we recognize, they are there to bring awareness. This is another way to bring awareness to a specific disease.

Senator Seidman: I only ask because it is interesting that the strategy and the awareness day are combined. The strategy, as we discussed, includes babies, children and the whole spectrum of age, whereas macular degeneration is a condition of the aged.

Ms. Sgro: Yes.

Senator Seidman: It is an interesting juxtaposition, and I wondered if there were some rationale for it.

Ms. Sgro: It’s a bit of an add-on given the fact that it is affecting lot of people. My aunt, who died a few months ago, suffered from macular degeneration. She lost her sight entirely at the end. She would say to me:

Judy, don’t ever want to be old because if you end up with macular degeneration, you can’t see anything in the room. You can’t see the people whom you love.

It brings it all home when you think about just what happens when you lose your sight. They talk about social isolation and depression. Just imagine what that must be like. I would talk to my aunt probably every other day. She had such frustration in those last months with no sight left. She had to be relocated to another facility. She didn’t know where anything was. It was really sad. Whenever I talk about it, I think of her and how important it is for us to ensure we all know about this disease and what it is. We need to put some focus on it.

Senator Seidman: Thank you.

Senator Osler: Thank you very much for being here. My question will follow up a little bit on some of the questioning from my colleagues. My question is regarding children with vision loss. Some sources say up to 10% of preschool children have vision deficiencies.

While the bill does not explicitly exclude children from the national eye care strategy, it does reference eye diseases of adults, such as macular degeneration, cataracts, glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy. It designates February as Age-Related Macular Degeneration Awareness Month. It talks about vision rehabilitation. If you lose your sight, then rehabilitation is to restore skills and activities, versus habilitation. If you are born without sight, habilitation is what you need to help you adapt. The Canadian National Institute for the Blind, or CNIB, has found that too many children who are blind or have low vision lack community supports, access to assistive technology devices, classroom materials and accommodations.

With that preamble and the wording in the bill, do you envision the national strategy for eye care to include children who are blind or have low vision so that no child is left behind?

Ms. Sgro: Certainly, from my end, absolutely. It starts from zero to whatever numbers there are now — 102 is the last person I heard of who was getting older.

It’s raising awareness. People take their eyesight for granted, whether you are a child, an adult or a senior. We all take it for granted that it will be there and will function. It is critically important that the awareness happens because it will include everybody from zero to 100 to get talking. We never talk about our eyesight, because we just take it for granted until we have a problem with it. So raising awareness, being able to talk about it in different forums and getting people to be aware that they should have their eyes checked on a periodic basis and ensure they are doing the things they need to be doing as they move forward. Yes, it would be very inclusive.

Senator Osler: I am hearing that screening of children and babies would be included.

What would success look like for a national eye care strategy? Do you envision certain metrics of success built into the strategy?

Ms. Sgro: Success would be people going to get their eyes checked and taking care of their eyes as they should be. We tend to take care of a lot of other parts of our body when they hurt, but our eyes don’t usually hurt until it is probably too late or we have some other disease happening. Awareness is key. We use awareness as a vehicle for many other diseases, and it must be talked about and be there as well.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: Welcome. Thank you for your presentation.

In your opening remarks, you covered various subjects: affordability, raising awareness, building training capacity and integrating technology, especially when it comes to telemedicine and particularly in remote areas.

I have two questions about building capacity and integrating technology.

Section 2(2)(a) of the bill says that health care professionals’ training and guidance needs will be taken into account in the strategy. In the field of new remote technologies, the professionals’ training needs are clearly expressed, but the patients themselves will often need to use certain devices. Will this strategy take into account the training and guidance needs of the patients who would have to use telemedicine in remote areas?

[English]

Ms. Sgro: I would imagine that that would be a natural part of it. If they needed specific training as to how they would be using different things that their ophthalmologist or optometrist would have recommended that they needed to use, certainly the training would be there.

One of the areas that I was quite surprised to find out about was in the rural Northern parts of our provinces, in the Indigenous communities, they have to fly miles and miles to try to find somebody to get eye care. Naturally, very few of them access eye care at all unless they have a serious problem where they have to fly somewhere.

It is an area where I know there are portable buses and vans occasionally that will go into the Northern parts. Ophthalmologists and optometrists are donating their time, but it is an area where, because they don’t get the services they require, they’re often neglected. When I mention the issue of the Indigenous communities, it is to make sure that they have access. It should be a nationalized strategy for everybody in Canada, not just those who live in urban centres.

It would help to put focus on those Indigenous and rural communities that have very limited access to health care.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: On another committee, we’re currently doing a study on health care for official language minority communities. What we’re learning from this study is that there are major service delivery capacity issues in the minority language. There’s nothing in your national strategy about the Minister of Health’s obligations under the Official Languages Act. In the strategy, how will the needs of minority language communities be taken into account, whether it’s anglophone communities in Quebec or Francophone communities outside Quebec, who do need to be served in their own language? Above all, we’ve recently come to understand that when there is language concordance between doctor and patient, that results in better quality of care and patient health. I don’t see anything in the bill that addresses that factor.

[English]

Ms. Sgro: It would certainly be expected. As you outlined, senator, when you put the two partners together, both speaking the same language, very often, things are better understood.

I imagine, in our country, we have many ophthalmologists and optometrists who are quite fluent in French and possibly many other languages. With the government finally putting the focus on having a national eye strategy, there are many people who are going through the process of becoming optometrists and ophthalmologists. I have seen them at the university. The university is at capacity with respect to people who want to get into vision care as a profession. I would certainly expect and hope that there would be plenty. You have several witnesses coming on another day who can probably speak to the numbers of optometrists or ophthalmologists who are available in Canada who speak more than one language.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: I was mainly talking about the minister’s obligations under the Official Languages Act. Thank you.

[English]

Senator Moodie: Thank you for bringing forward this bill, Ms. Sgro. I wanted to return to the question of access to care and some of the more troubling issues for people who live in the Far North and in the more rural areas, as you mentioned before.

We talked a little bit about there being no question that if you are in urban Toronto, your FSA works; you get eye checks, and children get eye checks in school. It is still routine and occurs.

But if you are located somewhere more rural, this is a much bigger problem. And there are new technologies that can do macular testing that are accessible if they can reach the folks in these more rural and geographically challenging areas.

In your consultations, did you speak to folks in the territories? Did you speak to leaders in the Far North to understand some of the issues they’re facing with regard to access to care and access to new technologies? How do you see the strategy particularly helping inform these issues, and were their responses to your inquiries positive? Do they see this as potentially helpful?

Ms. Sgro: The issues of the Far North and the restrictions around people trying to get eye examinations are similar to other health issues. They welcome the idea of being able to have access. There is an eye van that twice a year travels into northern Ontario as an example. They are doing eye exams for people, but it needs to be much more than that. It is going to fall on the government to ensure that everybody has access and is aware of the fact that under a national eye strategy, it’s there to let you know that you should be going and getting tested, similar to my testing those 5 to 18 years old with the University of Waterloo.

Those are limited areas, and we need more people in those areas to do the eye testing and to follow up. Talking with my colleagues and some of the others who have come and testified at committee, which I believe you will hear from your own witnesses coming forward, it’s very much a necessity, and if it’s adopted as an eye strategy, it is the obligation of the government to ensure that people have access to the kind of care they need.

Senator Moodie: The question I’m specifically asking to follow up with Senator Seidman’s question is this: Is this going to be welcome? Have you spoken to and consulted with people?

Ms. Sgro: I believe so, yes. People were very appreciative of the fact. They were hoping that it would get through. Private member’s bills are not — as you know, because I think you deal with a lot of them — always easy to pass. It took two years to get it through the House, and ultimately it was with the full support of everybody. It was a total of 334 people who voted on this; nobody voted against it. They were all part of the consultation as well, in order to make sure that it was reflective of and would be there to service the needs of many different communities throughout Canada.

Senator Bernard: Thank you very much for being here and for your responses to the questions from my colleagues. My question is a follow-up to some that have already been asked. I’ve been thinking about the whole idea of risk factors, and diabetes is one of the risk factors for eye disease. This committee also studied the pharmacare bill that was just passed. I wonder what connections you see. I’m thinking about the issue of accessibility. It’s not just about geography; it’s also about affordability. There is bringing awareness, ensuring that people are receiving eye care and having assessments done, but what about the actual interventions? The cost for treatment of eye disease is very expensive. Even with private plans, they’re not likely to cover the full cost. The cost of corrective glasses can also be very expensive. How is that taken up in this bill, or is it? What connections do you see with the pharmacare bill?

Ms. Sgro: Thank you for the passing the pharmacare bill, by the way. I should have started with that. It’s very much appreciated by many Canadians, I believe, as we move forward. The goal of the eye strategy is putting focus on it, getting governments — whether they are federal, provincial or municipal — to be paying attention to something that is critically important and making sure that people have access. It all starts with awareness. If people are unaware of that they have anything wrong with their eyes because they never had them tested, by the time they get tested, it becomes very expensive. Awareness is the key to where we’re going with this. As you have the awareness, there will be other avenues that will involve figuring out how they will afford some of these things. It is very expensive, I think, even some of these different recommendations. But there are organizations out there, as well as governments, that are going to have to answer some of those questions.

We need to get a strategy and a focus put on this finally, once and for all, that educates people as to what they need to be doing to protect their sight. There will be a multitude of answers required. How do we help people who get to a point where it’s going to cost hundreds of dollars when they don’t have those facilities or the ability to do that? I think they will end up being covered in another program that will have to be brought forward.

The beginning is getting people aware of their eyesight and how important it is, and we will move from there.

Senator Bernard: Has that conversation been happening as part of your consultations around this bill?

Ms. Sgro: No, not the financial implications. Remember, on a private member’s bill, you must be very careful how these things are crafted because if they are going to be a specific dollar amount, then the bill cannot go forward from the House. It must have an intention of what you want and then left to go through the process. So it had to be specifically tailored in a way that commits the government to a strategy and an awareness program and then to move from there.

Senator Bernard: Thank you.

Senator Dasko: Welcome to the Senate. After all your years at Parliament, it is your first time here.

Ms. Sgro: Thank you. It took me this long to get here.

Senator Dasko: That’s right. It’s terrific. I have a couple of questions. I think they’re all related to each other. We’re talking about a national strategy for the prevention and treatment of eye disease. I’m not a medical person, but I do know treatment. It’s the prevention side of this particular issue that I don’t quite understand. I would like to understand that a little better.

With respect to the prevention of other diseases, we know about lowering risk factors, diet, exercise and so on. What are the key prevention activities when it comes to this initiative? That’s my first question.

My second regards that you have mentioned many times awareness. That’s a different activity; that’s health promotion. But any time that governments or organizations take on awareness activities, they’re always targeted. You can’t just throw out messages willy-nilly into the environment and expect they will land in the right place. Awareness campaigns are structured and targeted toward particular audiences. I’m interested in awareness of what, and who are the target markets? Who are the messages targeted at? Is it the medical community? Is it segments of the population? I’m trying to understand this a little more, and that will help me understand what the issues are — so back to prevention and then on to promotion.

Ms. Sgro: There are a variety of things out there now that they are promoting that will prevent macular degeneration and so on. Some of that has just come out in the last few years. Is it successful? I have no idea. But I think what you will hear from the other witnesses, who are from the medical side, is that there are various things that can be done on the prevention side. Awareness is just the beginning. But just what do they do? Those are answers you will get from the medical professionals when you have your next meeting with them.

Government will be part of the strategy if the bill passes. It will be with respect to prevention, as they do a lot, and is done in cooperation with all the medical people and professionals who know the particular age groups that need to be targeted for different things. We know that loss of vision is happening a lot more now. Whether it’s tied into continually looking at our iPhones or computers, I think the data that will be provided will show where they need to be targeting specifically, through whatever attention and awareness campaign comes out. That will be all done, of course, with the professionals in the business.

Senator Dasko: With respect to prevention activities, is getting tested the main prevention activity? Is there something else that people should be doing? I am trying to figure it out.

Ms. Sgro: I’m trying to answer that. Looking at ourselves and how much time we spend in front of the computer and our iPads or whatever vehicle we are using, the number of hours that we all spend cannot necessarily be the best thing in the world. One of the things I notice on my iPhone, if I’m holding it too close, it will come up and tell me that I’m holding it too close. But there are a variety of techniques that are going to have to be working regarding prevention so that we’re educating people.

We just take it all for granted and think nothing will happen until it happens. We think about it regarding a lot of different health care issues, but specifically on your eyes, until you start to have difficulty, you think everything is fine.

Senator Dasko: Returning to raising awareness, obviously, you have a great deal of knowledge in this field. Would you feel that family physicians should be targeted for the key messages or should it be pediatricians or the schools? Who are the people and key segments who should be informed when it comes to an awareness campaign?

Ms. Sgro: If you have a general awareness campaign or structure that’s out there, it becomes part of everything else that is out there being promoted and people are being made aware of. Our optometrists are highly skilled. They know if they have an opportunity to test somebody. However, again, parents are busy, and I don’t think they’re running off to have their kids’ eyes tested unless there is a reason.

Senator Dasko: Correct.

Ms. Sgro: If there is an ad in the bus shelter that catches my attention, asking, “Have you had your vision tested? Is your vision 20/20?” Those questions get people to say, “Well, maybe I better go and get my eyes tested.” Sometimes by the time they start feeling symptoms, it’s far too late to be able to do it when it comes to some of the more senior things.

Senator Dasko: Who would run those campaigns?

Ms. Sgro: It will become part of an everyday campaign that the government runs on a variety of things. I have learned a huge amount as a result of Bill C-284, the same way everyone else learns and becomes aware of things. We learn something every day about issues we didn’t know anything about before. Hopefully, you become aware of it, and not because you have macular degeneration or glaucoma or some of these things. You learn about it from someone else. As far as awareness and a campaign, it could be very effective in educating people.

[Translation]

Senator Mégie: I’m glad to see you here, Madam Minister. I know that the more things we put into the strategy, the less likely we are to get the bill passed. I think it’s really great. Here’s my question: Would you prefer to let the provinces choose the age groups? You say that the strategy is fine in general, but are the provinces going to determine the age groups, the compulsory school age up to 18, for example, and people aged 65 and over, because that’s another vulnerable period for macular degeneration and other problems? Would you rather leave that up to the provinces and not impose any age group guidelines?

[English]

Ms. Sgro: I think the entire success of Bill C-284 is through cooperation with the provinces, and I see no reason that we would not have that cooperation based on the discussions that I have had with provincial leadership. People recognize there is room for improvement when it comes to vision loss. Look at the $39 billion that was recognized as loss contribution. The provinces will be very much a partner in establishing priorities as to what groups should have more access than another.

At the end of the day, we want to make sure people have an awareness of how serious and important your eyes are. Don’t wait until you’ve lost your eyesight to say, “Well, I wish I had known this” and so on.

I grew up with my grandmother, who lost her sight in one eye and had a glass eye. I remember her taking that out and having to clean it at night and her walking with her white cane. It was a very sad seeing that, and she was in her early 50s. I remember being terrified as a child that she would take her eye out. I wonder what they would do today with whatever disease she had at the time. Would people still substitute an eye? I don’t know. I remember being really frightened of it. I think that was the first time I ever became aware of the fact that you can lose your eyesight or have an accident or get an eye disease and then have to carry that with you. We have a lot of partners who will cooperate and work with us on this campaign.

Senator Osler: I have a question specifically regarding paragraph 2(2)(d), about the strategy’s content. That’s the paragraph that says to:

. . . ensure that the Minister is able to rapidly examine, in accordance with the Food and Drugs Act, certain applications and submissions . . .

You can read the rest.

My question is this: Is the minister currently unable to rapidly examine those applications and submissions? Is there data from Health Canada saying those submissions are being protractedly delayed, and does that paragraph mean it would somehow bump up those applications and submissions ahead of others?

Ms. Sgro: One thing that was raised was the length of time. We know when it comes to Health Canada and the variety of drugs that are out there, the process takes a long time. This is a complaint that I certainly, as an elected official, hear a lot, especially when we’re talking about people’s eyes and vision. So it was a little clogged when trying to get things to move along.

There are people who — again, I will go back to the macular degeneration issue — are losing their eyesight, and there are new technologies out there, some that Health Canada has approved, that people are waiting for. The issue is if there is a good idea, don’t have Health Canada sit on it. Would you try to move things along? There are people losing their eyesight and struggling every day, and there are possibly some new technologies or drugs that could help prevent that. It’s really just wrenching. Don’t prolong these things. Our eyesight is critically important, and people need to preserve and protect it.

Senator Osler: Do you know if there are scientific guidelines or timelines in terms of how long these application times should be? Are the current application and processing times exceeding those?

Ms. Sgro: I cannot answer that question. There are certainly timelines, and there are goals that they try to achieve, but they often run into other issues. They’re not necessarily able to meet those deadlines all the time. There certainly are deadlines, and I believe officials attempt to meet those guidelines, but it’s not always possible.

Senator Osler: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. I think we are done with our questions. Thank you so much, Ms. Sgro, for appearing as a witness for us.

Colleagues, we will proceed with the study of this bill tomorrow. Again, we thank you very much for being with us and answering all our questions. We certainly hope to proceed very speedily on the study of this bill.

Ms. Sgro: Thank you so much. I know you have a lot of work on your plate, and I really appreciate you bringing this forward. I mentioned 2003, and the community have been waiting forever and a day for Canada to actually have a national eye strategy. They have monitored this very carefully through these last two and a half years, and it would be a tremendous sadness for them if we got this far and, because of ongoing issues in the House, didn’t get a chance to get it finished. The disappointment for them would be enormous, so I thank you for your consideration and the time and effort that you’re putting into it. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

(The committee adjourned.)

Back to top