HANSARD
NOVA SCOTIA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
STANDING COMMITTEE
ON
HEALTH
Tuesday, February 11, 2025
COMMITTEE ROOM
Organizational and Agenda-Setting
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
HEALTH COMMITTEE
John A. MacDonald (Chair)
Adegoke Fadare (Vice Chair)
Hon. Susan Corkum-Greek
Ryan Robicheau
Nick Hilton
Lisa Lachance
Rod Wilson
Hon. Iain Rankin
Hon. Derek Mombourquette
In Attendance:
Tamer Nusseibeh
Legislative Committee Clerk
Gordon Hebb
Chief Legislative Counsel
HALIFAX, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2025
STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
3:00 P.M.
CHAIR
John A. MacDonald
VICE CHAIR
Adegoke Fadare
THE CHAIR: Good afternoon. I call the meeting to order. This is the Standing Committee on Health. I'm John A. MacDonald, the MLA for Hants East and the Chair of the committee. According to the mandate, the Health Committee is established for the purpose of considering “matters of access to and delivery of health care services.”
Today's meeting is an organizational to set some general meeting practices. We'll also hold an agenda-setting to choose topics and witnesses for the next six meetings or so. Please set your phones to silent. During the meeting, please wait for me to say your name and the red light on your microphone to come on, then you can speak.
I will ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves for the record by stating their name, their constituency, and how they'd like to be recognized. We'll go around the table. I'm a little different, as most people realize, so I will start with MLA Lachance.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
THE CHAIR: What I'd like to start by going through on consensus is that this committee has normally met the second Tuesday of the month from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Is it agreeable that we continue with that? That's agreeable.
During the Estimates, sometimes it's harder to get witnesses and, as we know, Health is a very busy part of Estimates. Is there a desire - only for Estimates - for the Health Committee not to meet? Is there any concern with that? MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: I think we'd like the Health Committee to keep meeting. Health is the biggest focus of this government; we fought an election on it. We have more than enough important topics that we should be getting through. I know that this is probably a pared-down list, that everyone has other key topics. I don't think that we should slow down our work as committee during the Estimates process.
I know it's tiring, but I think we should continue. Estimates and this committee are very different processes and very different mandates. I think the committee should continue.
THE CHAIR: MLA Mombourquette.
HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: We also agree that the committee should keep meeting. During our time in government, we created this committee with the importance of health care across the province and how it's always evolving, and the importance that all governments place on it. We would also support our colleagues with the NDP in the committee continuing to meet.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion? Oh, I'm sorry. I just realized I didn't even introduce the two people to my right and left. I went right into that. MLA Wilson.
ROD WILSON: Having worked in Nova Scotia for the last 30 years in health care and seen a dramatic change in seven years and having been told in a recent campaign that it was a Number 1 issue and knowing that there are so many crises in health care, I think we have a responsibility to meet every two weeks, if not more often.
THE CHAIR: MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: I realize we ran on health as being a significant - the major part of our election platform, but due to the complexity of trying to get people here, witnesses here, I actually agree with withholding committee meetings during that time. I will make that a motion.
THE CHAIR: So, your motion is to . . .
NICK HILTON: To move the Standing Committee on Health no longer meet during budget Estimates.
THE CHAIR: That's a motion. Any discussion on the motion? MLA Mombourquette, (interruption) oh, I got it - MLA Lachance, MLA Mombourquette has said you can go first. MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: I just want to clarify: We're really talking about two different mandates, two different functions, and two different witnesses. If I look down the list to your first topic on Integrative Youth Services, we're not calling Big Brothers Big Sisters from New Glasgow. We're not calling the YMCA to Estimates. Estimates is the minister. These are people working in government, people who, for us, we don't have access to on a daily basis. Folks on the government side do. We think it's really important to hear these voices, even during Estimates.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: I would have gone first and said the same thing. Essentially, I don't see the rationale, because as my colleague said, in Estimates, we're asking questions to the department, we're asking questions to the deputy minister and their staff members who are available with the minister to answer those questions. In Health Committee, we're bringing in multiple witnesses from across the province who bring a lot of perspective into health care that don't come to Estimates. I would encourage that my colleague and I are more than prepared to continue with Health Committee as we go through Estimates. They are two totally different things for me.
ROD WILSON: With over 100,000 people on a wait-list - and in Canso, the emerg closed for the entire month of February - having worked in Canso, that's a big deal - how can we justify not meeting to discuss urgent issues?
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion? Ready for the question?
All those in favour?
I think I heard it just before I started that - recorded vote. Before we do that, I neglected - to my left is Gordon Hebb, Legislative Counsel of the committee, and to my right Tamer - I'm going to butcher your last name - Nusseibeh, the committee clerk. Recorded vote.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Sorry, what is the question again? (Interruptions)
THE CHAIR: The motion is to - Mr. Hilton, could you repeat the motion?
NICK HILTON: I move the Standing Committee on Health no longer meet during budget Estimates.
THE CHAIR: The clerk will conduct a recorded vote.
[The clerk calls the roll.]
[3:07 p.m.]
YEAS NAYS
Adegoke Fadare Hon. Derek Mombourquette
Hon. Susan Corkum-Greek Hon. Iain Rankin
Ryan Robicheau Rod Wilson
Nick Hilton Lisa Lachance
John A. MacDonald
THE CLERK: For, 5. Against, 4.
THE CHAIR: The motion is carried.
To get back, the other thing is - I just want to check - the standing rule for this committee has always been 20-20-20; I assume the committee agrees to keep it that way. There's a note on March Break but based on the past motion it's not an issue, because we won't be meeting in March. We'd normally have to reschedule. The agenda-setting, which will happen later - MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: Just to clarify, we won't be meeting in the Legislature during the school break. I know traditionally that's been a Legislature break, but I would say that there's the possibility of a meeting in March after that. I think we should still tentatively schedule a late March meeting.
THE CHAIR: Okay. To go back to MLA Lachance's point, we can't meet in March Break. It would be either the second Tuesday of March, the 11th, or the fourth . . . (interruption).
The common practice of this committee is that - the Legislative Counsel has corrected me that the green book affects the House, not the committees. Practice is the committees do not meet at March Break. Which Tuesday in March? Assuming that it's not in Estimates . . . I'm just bringing up my calendar. If there aren't Estimates in March, when would you like to meet?
LISA LACHANCE: Just practically speaking to get back on the right track for the next second Tuesday, it looks like March 25th, because then there'd be two weeks and then it would be April 8th.
THE CHAIR: You're proposing that we meet on the last Tuesday, which would be March 25th? Okay. So, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. that day there is already a committee meeting - Natural Resources and Economic Development - which I just found out. MLA Lachance, what time were you thinking? Because it can't be 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
LISA LACHANCE: I'd love to hear from other people on their opinion on this, but I'm happy to meet in the morning.
THE CHAIR: All right, any discussion on that? MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: I agree, getting started is a good idea. I'd prefer after 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., like we're doing today. Travel from the outside districts is hard.
LISA LACHANCE: I don't know this for certain, but I think Legislative Television usually needs a few minutes to get organized, so we can't go right at 3:00 p.m.
THE CHAIR: That's true. There is some time in between. The issue is we need to figure out, if we're going to meet in March, we need to figure out a date and a time so that the date picked doesn't conflict. Is the only date that anyone in the committee wants March 25th? I'm asking that question because March Break is obviously the 10th to the 15th.
LISA LACHANCE: March 18th is a possibility as well. It's another Tuesday.
THE CHAIR: I'll just confirm. The Veterans Affairs Committee meeting is 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. If we're doing that, it would have to be a morning, because I don't see any buffer in that one with the thing. Does March 18th work in the morning instead? MLA Lachance, just because you're doing - and I don't like to be running this. MLA Lachance, which time: 9:00 a.m. or 10:00 a.m.?
LISA LACHANCE: Let's do 10:00 a.m. Give us some time.
THE CHAIR: The date proposed is March 18th at 10:00 a.m. to noon. Sorry, I keep forgetting you have to tell the end time even though we know it. Is that agreeable?
Did you have a question? MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: I think we're okay with that: 10:00 to 12:00.
THE CHAIR: That's in agreement. The clerk will make notice. I didn't miss anybody this time? Okay. We're going to wind up dealing with our topics in a minute. In the past, this committee has chosen six topics: three from the government, two from the Opposition, and one from the other party, and the clerk will schedule. I'm guessing the committee agrees to continue with that process? Okay.
MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: Can you clarify the number of topics? You had two-two-two, but now it's three-two-one?
THE CHAIR: No, it's three-two-one. It's three for the government, two for the Opposition, one for the other party.
This is a note for me to read that the website currently says if an organization or group wishes to appear before our committee, it should submit a written request to the Legislative Committees Office addressed to the Chair of the committee. After the request is received, it will be discussed at a future committee meeting. The clerk always acknowledges receipt, then it shows up on agenda items in the future.
MLA Wilson.
[3:15 p.m.]
ROD WILSON: As the newbie, why three-two-one? How has that been arrived at?
THE CHAIR: As only three years-plus more than you, it was what it was before. I'm not sure which one of the two would be the most - who would be the most. Government has been three, the Opposition's been two, and it's been one. I've been here for three and a half years, and it's been the makeup, I think, pretty well of every committee that we've been on.
ROD WILSON: Other than tradition, why three-two-one?
THE CHAIR: My guess would be because the government would be running the government, so they'd have three. The next one would be two to get to a total of six, but I'm making assumptions. I wasn't here when it was first done. Just a second ago, I asked if everybody was fine. I'm assuming you have a concern with that.
ROD WILSON: I'm just curious as to how that format was arrived at.
THE CHAIR: Do you have anything to add to what I've said? Legislative Counsel.
GORDON HEBB: It would be a guess on my part. I'm just assuming because the government represents half, but I have no knowledge as to what the rationale was.
ROD WILSON: Is that something we could come up with a better revisit for a rationale for?
THE CHAIR: If the Opposition or any member wanted to suggest it, I'm sure they can suggest it. It would be debated here. It just would not be in - we'd need a motion to make the change to it at this point. We had mostly agreement that it would be three-two-one, and I believe that motion could happen at any time, not just the beginning. Would you agree? Yes. It's not something that has to be done at this meeting. At any meeting, it could subsequently do it.
ROD WILSON: Are you suggesting we should put up a motion before we continue? I'm really asking for some transparency as to how it came to three-two-one. So far, I'm hearing it's tradition, but I'm not - would the motion be to have someone report back or declare why we arrived at three-two-one?
THE CHAIR: I would say that with the Legislative Counsel to my left and the clerk to my right, given the same answer is they're not sure other than that would be their assumption, I don't know whether having them do a report to find that would be good use. I believe MLA Mombourquette's got something - sorry, I just meant for him, not for you on this. I thought you wanted to say something else.
MLA Wilson, anything else?
ROD WILSON: No.
THE CHAIR: Okay, thank you. As a habit, what will happen is when I start talking, they'll shut off everybody's microphones. MLA Lachance will tell you that I've talked many times with the microphone off without realizing it, so it'll happen. They always acknowledge it, and then it comes onto an agenda that we would need to document.
The clerk emails correspondence to the committee as it comes in. This is just a process of when they come in. Until it's discussed here, it's still confidential, so we could get a document to talk about something. Until it's actually discussed at this, it's considered confidential, and it can't be discussed. The agendas are emailed; the clerk doesn't print them out.
The next item is agenda-setting. The members have submitted their things that are somewhere on here for me. There we go. Thank you. Perfect. Who wants to go?
MLA Corkum-Greek.
HON. SUSAN CORKUM-GREEK: I move that the first topic for the PC caucus be Continuing Care of Seniors and Long-term Care Workforce Initiatives with the following witnesses: representatives from the Department of Seniors and Long-term Care, the Nova Scotia Community College, Victoria Haven Nursing Home, and Northwood.
THE CHAIR: Any discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Second. MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: I move the second topic for the PC caucus be the Expansion of Multidisciplinary Care Teams, with the following witnesses: representatives from the Department of Health and Wellness and the Nova Scotia Health Authority.
THE CHAIR: Any discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Excellent. MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: I move the third topic for the PC caucus be Integrated Youth Services, with the following witnesses: Maureen Brennan, clinical director, Mental Health and Addictions, IWK Health; Daphne Hutt-MacLeod, director of Integrated Youth Services, IWK Health; representatives from the Integrated Youth Services New Glasgow, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Pictou County; and Integrated Youth Services Halifax, YMCA of Greater Halifax/Dartmouth.
THE CHAIR: Any discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Who's next? MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: I would like to put forward - this was a topic that had been agreed upon and I think almost scheduled prior to the election, so I'd like to bring it back again: Barrier-Free Access to Contraception and Sexual Health Services, Including PrEP for Nova Scotians. The list of witnesses prior to the election that had been approved was Access Now Nova Scotia, the North End Community Health Centre, Wellness Within, the ROSE Clinic, and the Halifax Sexual Health Centre. I'm also recommending adding Dr. Kyle Wilby, who's the director of the College of Pharmacy at Dalhousie University and has been leading a pilot project in pharmacies around PrEP prescriptions. He'd be able to speak to that.
THE CHAIR: Any discussion? MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: We'd like to suggest that we add the Department of Health and Wellness to the witness list as well.
THE CHAIR: Is that a motion?
NICK HILTON: I move that the topic of Barrier-Free Access to Contraception and Sexual Health Services, Including PrEP for Nova Scotians witness list be amended to include representatives from the Department of Health and Wellness.
THE CHAIR: That's an amendment to the motion. Any discussion on the amendment? MLA Wilson.
ROD WILSON: Your addition, would that include Public Health? Dr. Robert Strang?
NICK HILTON: Whoever we deem from the Department of Health and Wellness who might add some context to the subject.
ROD WILSON: Dr. Rob Strang of Public Health could certainly add a lot to the epidemiology and the success of any type of program like that, so I think he would be an important witness.
LISA LACHANCE: Can we amend the amendment?
THE CHAIR: My colleague to my left has told me that's called a sub-amendment. You're allowed one only. As you know, I love the point that it's a sub-amendment. Yes.
LISA LACHANCE: I would like to make a sub-amendment to the amendment that the DHW representative be Dr. Rob Strang.
THE CHAIR: I'm going to ask a question.
NICK HILTON: Do you want to finish . . .
THE CHAIR: MLA Lachance is finished. She knew I was making sure I was right with something, and I was.
NICK HILTON: We're trying to keep the idea that we can bring any representative from the Department of Health and Wellness. We don't want to make it finite to one person. For that reason, I'll be voting against the sub-amendment to the motion.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion on the sub-amendment?
ROD WILSON: We're not suggesting one. You could bring a dozen. I'd love that. It's not just Rob Strang.
THE CHAIR: MLA Hilton on the sub-amendment.
NICK HILTON: The wording used in the sub-amendment was to make it exactly him. So it actually does make it finite to just that one person. The original amendment actually - if Public Health falls under Department of Health and Wellness, it would have included him anyway.
LISA LACHANCE: As we're working together for the first time and setting agendas, I do think often we do identify who we want. For instance, under the Integrated Youth Services, specifically from IWK Health - we don't just say “IWK Health.” A number of people could come in, like LeeAnn Larocque, like others. But we specifically have said Maureen Brennan and Daphne Hutt-MacLeod. We do often identify specific people because we know they're the people with the information we want to hear.
THE CHAIR: MLA Mombourquette.
HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Just a question through you to the member for Yarmouth. My colleague made a specific suggestion around Dr. Robert Strang, who as we all know, has a wealth of knowledge on the subject. I guess through you, my question is why would the member not want Robert Strang here?
THE CHAIR: Just one second. I just wanted to confirm before I went on to the next that the sub-amendment, as the clerk has got it listed - the sub-amendment was that Dr. Strang should appear, not to be the only person.
I did want to get that clear so that at least the discussion can deal with what the sub-amendment was. Any discussion on the sub-amendment at this point?
MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: We're not suggesting that Dr. Strang can't come. We're asking for flexibility. That's why we've added the Department of Health and Wellness to that list. That list was originally not created or added by the Opposition. That's our suggestion. That's because we feel like it's important for us to have context. We recognize that at any time during the conversations that are going to ensue, we want to have the best person who is able to answer those questions. That's why we need to be as flexible as possible. We're not trying to preclude Dr. Strang from this. We're just trying to make sure it's as broad as possible.
NICK HILTON: I worked in Public Health for a number of years. I worked with Dr. Strang. There's no question that the man is extremely talented and intelligent. When I heard the original motion, it was to make the Department of Health and Wellness representative Dr. Strang.
To my colleague's point, it's just about flexibility to be able to add anyone who might be able to add to the conversation.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion?
NICK HILTON: Just for clarity, what does the amended motion do to the original motion?
THE CHAIR: The sub-amendment, from what the clerk says - the intent of the sub-amendment - unless the sub-amendment person tells me I'm incorrect - is to still allow the department to come. I'll let MLA Lachance answer it, then. That's probably better.
LISA LACHANCE: I mean, I think that came out in further conversation, but I had meant Rob Strang. I had specifically meant that . . .
THE CHAIR: The rec was to be?
LISA LACHANCE: Yes. I mean, we can have another sub-amendment and we can amend - not right now. (Laughter) Later. I'm just conscious, too, that it's a lengthy list of witnesses. Having multiple people from DHW is probably not an effective use of everybody's time.
But just to clarify, I meant Rob Strang.
THE CHAIR: Okay. Dr. Rob Strang. You got that?
Any more discussion on this?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The sub-amendment is carried.
Now to go back to the amended motion. Am I right? Oh, the amendment. Okay, just a second. They just changed it. I'm bringing it back . . .
[3:30 p.m.]
GORDON HEBB: We're now back to . . .
THE CHAIR: Okay. We're voting on the amendment as amended. This is why I don't like sub-amendments. Just saying. It's okay. They're valid. I don't have to like things that are valid. Any discussion on the amended motion?
GORDON HEBB: No, the amended amendment.
THE CHAIR: The amended amendment. MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: Can you please read the amended amendment as transcribed because I feel like it's confused now.
THE CHAIR: I'm going to have the clerk do it. All yours, bud.
TAMER NUSSEIBEH: The sub-amendment was to add Dr. Strang specifically from the Department of Health and Wellness, and the amendment was to add the Department of Health and Wellness.
THE CHAIR: No, the mover of the sub-amendment was very clear that the witness was going to be Dr. Robert Strang, so that's it. There's nobody else from the department if the amendment passes - the amendment of the amendment, right?
GORDON HEBB: So the amendment is to now . . .
THE CHAIR: What they're asking me now is: What's the actual amendment because of what happened? MLA Lachance, you said yours was to make - that is who the person was going to be. We are just going to be reiterating that it's those witnesses plus Dr. Robert Strang. That's what I'm trying to make sure. That's what it is. That's who the representative is.
The amendment - okay, I'm going to call it what I want which is the amendment - is that it's the witnesses proposed by MLA Lachance plus Dr. Robert Strang. That's the amendment.
GORDON HEBB: Still have to vote on the main motion.
THE CHAIR: I've got to vote on this one, then I get to the main, right? We have two more votes. That's the vote on this. Any discussion on that?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Sorry, the amendment has carried. Now we get back to the actual amended motion.
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
We now have one for the Opposition. MLA Wilson.
ROD WILSON: The second item we would like to add is the Primary Health Care Attachment including the physician wait-list. Witnesses we'd like to include would be the Nova Scotia Health Authority, the Nova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness, Nova Scotia College of Family Physicians, and Doctors Nova Scotia.
THE CHAIR: Any discussion? (Interruption) Yes. The motion is for it to be Primary Health Care Attachment and the witnesses as in the report. MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: I would like to suggest that the Department of Health and Wellness choose representatives to send rather than a deputy minister.
THE CHAIR: The motion as read did not include the deputy minister, so it's actually anyone.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Am I to move a motion, then?
THE CHAIR: No, the motion as read did not list the deputy minister, so it's everyone. The department will let us know who.
ROD WILSON: Given the importance, we would like to speak with the deputy minister.
THE CHAIR: MLA Wilson, you're wanting to make an amendment to your motion? Can you amend your own motion? I don't think so. (Interruption)
I'd be a lot happier if somebody other than the mover makes an amendment to the motion. MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: I'd like to move that the Department of Health and Wellness representative be the deputy minister.
THE CHAIR: The amendment is that the witness for the Department of Health and Wellness be the deputy minister. Any discussion on that? MLA Hilton.
NICK HILTON: It sounds like we're going to move an amendment to leave it, but actually, I'm going to vote to leave it the way it is because we want the same flexibility we had with the last one. I'll be voting no to the amendment.
THE CHAIR: Just to be clear, that's the only vote. You can't amend it to reverse it. MLA Mombourquette.
HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Again, it's a similar question that I had before, through you to the government party. We have an amendment that it be the deputy minister, who is overall responsible for the Department of Health and Wellness and the policies and directives of the government when it comes to health care on this specific topic. Of course, we would support any deputy minister who wants to come to this committee. They're tasked to do that as deputy ministers, as the senior bureaucrats. I'm just looking for rationale why the government would not want the deputy minister to come and talk about that topic.
NICK HILTON: The motion read as is leaves the opportunity for the deputy minister to come and chat, if that's the person who would be qualified to answer the issue of the day.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: I get the sense that the government side of the committee does not want the deputy minister here. Specifically, the amendment calls for the deputy minister to come. I think that's important, if we can get the deputy minister there. We would want the deputy minister of any department. We see in other committees where the Deputy Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development has come and talked to various committees. It's normal practice for the deputy ministers to come to these committees. This is an important topic, one that the government has focused on and has campaigned on. I think it's important that the deputy minister come. I would hope that the government side of caucus would see the validity of the amendment to the motion to specifically have the deputy minister here, which is standard practice in all committees.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion?
ADEGOKE FADARE: We're not saying that a deputy minister will not come. What we are saying is that we want to have flexibility for the best person to come at that point in time. We don't want a full-course conversation, and we don't want a situation where you know somebody will come and we have to go back to get the answers. It's better for us to have the best person who would be able to answer the question. If that also means the deputy minister, the deputy minister will be it. We're not hiding anybody.
ROD WILSON: Having worked with the Department of Health and Wellness in the past and knowing the role of the deputy minister, and with over 100,000 people on a wait-list, I think the deputy minister probably should be the most informed person on this and would be very valuable to be here.
THE CHAIR: MLA Mombourquette, to the amendment.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Just my final comment, Chair. I appreciate the comments from my colleague. If there's no issue with it, and they're talking about flexibility, then as indicated in the comments that it could be the deputy minister, then why not just support the amendment and have the deputy minister come?
THE CHAIR: Any discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The amendment is defeated.
We're back to the original motion. MLA Wilson.
ROD WILSON: I heard four and four.
THE CHAIR: No, you heard four and five. Trust me; I vote. That's why, MLA Wilson, you would have heard when I vote, I will say it after. That's why you'll hear me say two of either yea or nay. Anything else, MLA Wilson, on that? Any questions or debate or that now?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
MLA Rankin.
HON. IAIN RANKIN: For the N.S. Liberal topic, I'd like to propose Gender-Based Violence, with the following witnesses: I'd like to see the Department of Justice, deputy minister. Also, I'd really like to see the representatives from Nova Scotians who have lived experience with the matter. Specifically, I'm putting forward Lynn Gallant Blackburn. She's the sister of Paula Gallant, a victim of intimate partner violence nearly 20 years ago in Timberlea and the recent author of a book telling her story and her advocacy with the government, as well as Lucy Bowser, who was suggested by Lynn. She is a survivor from her estranged husband. They can speak to lived experiences. As well, having representatives from the Transition House Association of Nova Scotia; a representative from Willow House in Cape Breton, to ensure some regional inclusion with the matter; and representatives from Adsum for Women and Children; and a representative from Bryony House.
I'd like to move that motion today.
THE CHAIR: MLA Rankin, just to be - I don't know if it's Lynn Gallant and a last name, or if it's just Lynn Gallant. I just want to make sure we have the names correct. If you could slowly make sure we've got those names correct - I wrote as quickly as I could, but I want them on the record.
IAIN RANKIN: Right. It's Lynn Gallant Blackburn. Her maiden name is Gallant.
THE CHAIR: And Lucy Bowser?
IAIN RANKIN: Correct.
THE CHAIR: Okay. Transition House Association of Nova Scotia, Will House . . .
IAIN RANKIN: Willow House.
THE CHAIR: Willow. Thank you.
IAIN RANKIN: Adsum for Women and Children and Bryony House.
THE CHAIR: Just because the list that came in showed - I'm assuming that you're not moving the one for the Status of Women.
IAIN RANKIN: We can add the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women. I just wanted to make sure that we had witnesses from people with lived experiences, but we can include that as well.
THE CHAIR: It's just that when a party gives me a list and then they miss one - a whole list of it, I'm normally going, like, “Did you really mean to?”
IAIN RANKIN: We can add the . . .
THE CHAIR: We can leave it off. It's up to you.
IAIN RANKIN: No, we'll add the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
THE CHAIR: Does the clerk have all that? Okay. Discussion? MLA Lachance.
LISA LACHANCE: Just to say that we support this. We're obviously in an epidemic of gender-based violence. We need to have a multidisciplinary approach to addressing the issue.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Just for scheduling: The clerk will do their best to get them scheduled. It's based on availability, so if for some reason two parties happen back-to-back, it's scheduling. It's got nothing to do with us. We've done that.
MLA Rankin.
HON. IAIN RANKIN: Relative to the scheduling, I'd like to move a motion to give prioritization to the topic I just suggested and that passed under gender-based violence, given the urgency of the matter, which was underscored by my colleague from the NDP and the no less than seven instances of gender-based violence since October - since the Legislature last sat.
I'd like to move a motion that gender-based intimate partner violence be given priority as the first topic for the Standing Committee on Health at the soonest convenience for the next topic.
THE CHAIR: Okay, so the motion is in order, but those motions I'd like emailed to the clerk for them to send out to everybody. This might have been the first time you've sat where I'm here, so that's - other MLAs - is that something you have in writing that could be emailed to the clerk quickly? We're way ahead of schedule. I just want to make sure they see it, because the normal - from my understanding, it would be government, then the Opposition, government, and then the other party. I just want to make sure that what everybody's voting on realizes - if it's moved, how it's going to happen.
IAIN RANKIN: Thank you, Chair. I recognize that often motions are given in advance. However, this is the third committee that I've sat on so far - Human Resources and Community Services - and the government side proposed motions without giving any notice at all to committee members. I figured that was now a normal practice, given that is how government is conducting business.
I would like to see a vote on this. I can provide the motion to see if committee members agree that this is indeed an epidemic and we should prioritize when it is scheduled.
THE CHAIR: Okay. It's been sent to the clerk. What we're going to do is take just a three-minute recess. I will submit, and my colleagues will admit, that if I'm chairing, that comes through. We're just - it's there. The clerk's going to send it. We're just going to take three minutes for people to get it and read it, and then we'll deal with your motion. Is that fine, MLA Rankin?
[3:45 p.m.]
IAIN RANKIN: Yes.
THE CHAIR: Cool. We're in recess.
[3:45 p.m. The committee recessed.]
[3:48 p.m. The committee reconvened.]
THE CHAIR: Order. The committee is back. Everybody has received the motion.
MLA Corkum-Greek.
HON. SUSAN CORKUM-GREEK: I just wanted to speak briefly to this. We will support making this a priority topic. It is a priority issue in our province, and sadly in our country, and there is much work to do. The loss of Elaine Mosher, who was a resident of Mahone Bay, within my constituency, brought this issue very close to home. But I don't think at the same time we were fooled to think that it was not present. We do have to see the faces of this issue, and as government writ large, we have to be faces that sit across and discuss and find the way forward. So we will be supporting this motion.
THE CHAIR: Any other discussion?
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
One thing, MLA Wilson: The clerk did find the rationale for three-two-one, and it's been emailed to all the members. We have six items. The next thing on the agenda is the next meeting, which we have already dealt with through a previous meeting.
This meeting is adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 3:50 p.m.]
