National Strategy for Eye Care Act
Date: 2023_04_28
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Jean-Denis Garon: I thank my colleague, the hon. member for Humber River--Black Creek , for introducing this bill. Let me begin by saying that vision health is important. Obviously, it is a component of overall health, but one that is often underestimated. My Conservative colleague has given some personal examples to show that quality of care can change lives and change people's quality of life. I thank the member who introduced this bill. There are several important elements in the bill, one of which involves raising awareness. It seeks to designate February as age-related macular degeneration awareness month. Obviously, this is important. In my opinion, we should never miss an opportunity to remind people of the importance of issues that affect us all. We all have daily obligations that keep us very busy, and these issues must always be brought to the forefront. The bill provides for the development of a national strategy. Many national strategies have been proposed lately, including for autism, cancer and diabetes. I am skeptical about the effectiveness of these national strategies, because they generally lead to the tabling of a report that is ignored by the government most of the time. I hope that will not happen in this case if this bill is adopted. However, it needs to be said that national strategies often face the same fate as Labatt 50, in that they get shelved. Although we agree in principle, let us be careful not to encroach on Quebec's jurisdiction. This bill seeks to raise public awareness, but it affects health, which is a provincial jurisdiction. That being said, the issue is truly important. I think we know the data. Data from 2019 shows that 1.2 million Canadians suffer from diseases that could lead to vision loss, and 4.1% of those people could become blind. We know that eight million Canadians suffer from an eye disease that may lead to blindness. For some of these diseases, blindness is preventable. We know that the direct annual health care costs related to these diseases leading to vision loss can reach up to $9.5 billion. Of course, there are human costs, but there are also social costs, such as lost productivity because of these diseases, and those costs can reach $4.3 billion per year. I mentioned age-related macular degeneration earlier. With the growth and aging of the population, the costs related to those diseases could increase substantially. These are issues of critical importance. Let us not forget that health is a provincial and Quebec jurisdiction. Quebec already has a number of programs in place to address various ocular conditions. Vision care services are covered by the government in Quebec for people under 18 years of age and people aged 65 and over. Last month, reimbursements for ocular prostheses were increased. It had been 30 years since those amounts had been increased, so that is progress. This also serves to show that Quebec and the provinces need funding, transfers and money to be able to cover these programs. Developing a national strategy is all well and good, but the levels of government that are responsible for providing this care on the ground must be properly funded. The RAMQ's visual devices program helps people obtain assistive devices like video magnifiers, ocular prostheses, night-vision goggles and Braille typewriters. These programs seek to improve the quality of life of persons with visual impairments, but they are expensive. I will say it again. As the population ages, these diseases will become increasingly common. We will need to be in a position to improve the quality of life and productivity of the people who live with them. There is talk of having a national macular degeneration awareness day, but I have to say that I would have liked this bill to include a national degeneration of health transfers awareness day. I offer that as a suggestion. For two years or more, the provinces and Quebec have been calling for $28 billion a year in extra transfers for health; that way, the federal government's contribution to provincial spending on health would reach 35%. I know that this cause is important to my colleague and that she is well-meaning, but inside these envelopes there could be money for eye care. A national strategy and a report identify a number of things, but do not provide care to those who need it, care that could change their daily lives. The government is obviously short-sighted about the needs of Quebec and that is rather sad. As I said, the aging population is going to increase the cost of health care and these transfers are necessary. In response to the aging population, more should be done in research and development and to expand our programs, including support programs for those who have vision problems. There is also a shortage of workers, which means that we will be trying to keep older people in the labour market. We know that vision problems are bad for productivity and for the economy. They are also bad for those who want to keep working. Statistics Canada's most recent report states, and I quote, "the percentage of people with self-reported good vision without correction decreased with age." That is a bit like the Liberal government's vision regarding health transfers. It has been diminishing with age. The government's vision has been diminishing for eight years now. For almost two years, we have been calling for a summit to be held with the provincial premiers and the current Prime Minister to discuss these issues. Instead, what the government did was to impose conditions on the provinces, which means that they are currently unable to enhance their existing programs or design new programs that would provide people with better eye care. It seems as though the Liberals might need some Bloc Quebecois glasses to better understand the needs of Quebec. I would like to offer them mine. Practically speaking, that would help them to provide care to those who need it, which could make all the difference in people's self-esteem, how they function in society, and their work and family life. This is a human issue. We are all equal when faced with the various health problems we may experience throughout our lives, and we should all have access to care. Although I am clearly making some jokes, I hope my colleague realizes that I welcome her initiative. I know that she has been holding consultations and reaching out to various groups. Her intentions are excellent and, as I said, we agree in principle. We will be proposing amendments, but I understand that this is an important issue for my colleague, and I acknowledge that. I will close by saying that the statistics clearly demonstrate that the issue of degenerative vision affects women in particular. I do not fully understand what causes this, and I will not presume to be a doctor or biologist, but I do know that there are also gender equality issues. Helping people become more aware of an issue, more aware that care is needed and that this affects women more than men--there is a fundamental equity aspect to that. As I mentioned, we will support it in principle, study it in committee and act in good faith. We are skeptical about the outcome of these major strategies, but our colleague is certainly making it possible to discuss this important issue, raise public awareness and reflect on the issue of vision care. I thank her for that.