Robert Joseph OGLE

OGLE, Robert Joseph, O.C., S.O.M., B.A., D.Cn.L, LL.D., J.C.D.

Personal Data

Party
New Democratic Party
Constituency
Saskatoon East (Saskatchewan)
Birth Date
December 24, 1928
Deceased Date
April 1, 1998
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Ogle
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=45e90540-93ee-4744-a312-0b927d261bda&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
missionary, priest

Parliamentary Career

May 22, 1979 - December 14, 1979
NDP
  Saskatoon East (Saskatchewan)
February 18, 1980 - July 9, 1984
NDP
  Saskatoon East (Saskatchewan)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 73 of 74)


October 15, 1979

Mr. Ogle:

Another thing that Mr. Douglas said, and which I feel is a very good point, is that if a doctor wants to opt out, then he should be allowed to do so, but he should opt right out and not use the scheme to get part of what he wants and something else to get some more of what he wants. The vast majority of doctors will remain with the scheme and receive an adequate income for their services, but if they opt out, then, I suggest, they should do without the public services which they frequently use under the medical care plan. That is a very serious point and one which I hope this government will take to heart. I hope that the government will ensure that that practice stops under the present legislation.

There are certain areas of health care which I think deserve special attention. I will pass over them quickly. I feel that health care in the whole area of industry is a point to which this government will have to pay special attention. In the area of health care, psychiatric care in the penitentiary system, special notice will have to be taken by the government. Odyssey, a group of inmates at Millhaven working for constructive, non-violent change, produced a working paper in August of this year alleging that medical and psychiatric neglect and abuse are rampant in Canadian penitentiaries. That should be dealt with immediately by the government.

Then there is the whole problem of the Indian native population. A serious injustice is being done to these people because of the appallingly inferior level of health care being provided to the native communities. The average life expectancy is 10 to 20 years less for a native; health and mortality is two to three times as high as the national average; their caloric intake is well below the national average; the number of doctors and nurses caring for them is well below the national average.

In the new charter which Mr. Hall produced the following is stated:

There is clearly an overriding national interest in the health of Canadians wherever they reside. We are a mobile people and illness knows no provincial boundaries nor other differences... What the commission recommends is that... as a nation we now take the necessary legislative, organizational, and

October 15, 1979

financial decisions to make all the fruits of the health sciences available to all our residents without hindrance of any kind. All our recommendations are directed toward this objective.

That paper is 15 years old but it is still extremely relevant.

As 1 only have a few moments left, may I recount a story in summing up and leave with the House something on which to reflect. The story has to do with neighbourliness and who is our neighbour. 1 will tell it as it is oulined in the Gospel according to Saint Luke.

The question of who is my neighbour and how must I care for him is an old one. According to the Gospel, a lawyer asked Jesus one day, in an attempt to justify himself, "And who is my neighbour?". Jesus replied that a man was once on his way down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell into the hands of thieves. They took all he had, beat him and then made off, leaving him half dead. Now, a priest happened to be travelling down the same road, but when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. In the same way, a Levite who came to the place saw him and passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan traveller who came upon him was moved with compassion when he saw him. He went up and bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. He then lifted him on his own mount, carried him to the inn and looked after him. Next day, he took out two denarii and handed them to the innkeeper. "Look after him," he said, "and on my way back I will make good any extra expense you have." Which of these three do you think proved himself a neighbour to the man who fell into the thieves' hands? The lawyer answered, "The one who took pity on him." Jesus said to him, "Go, and do the same yourself."

It is an old story, a new story, the same story about three groups of people involved. The first group consisted of the thieves who came upon this person. Their principle of life was: What is yours is mine. So they took all he had.

An hon. Mlember: That is the NDP all right.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Full View Permalink

October 15, 1979

Mr. Ogle:

From that beginning in Saskatchewan in 1962 the notion of a medicare scheme spread to other provinces. However, that came after. Because there was a problem of magnitude-medicare would affect everybody-a former prime minister, now deceased, the Right Hon. John Diefenbaker, made an historic decision and appointed in 1961 Mr. Justice Emmett Hall to study the health needs of Canadians. I believe the resulting report should seriously be looked at again by all Canadians because that document outlines the basics of medicare.

Some of the recommendations in that report have been put into effect, but many have never yet been attempted. There are visions in that document which have not really come to light anywhere as yet, but I invite one and all to look again at that document. In the document there were four basic principles which were necessary to have a medicare scheme function. The first was that there should be comprehensive coverage; everyone should be in the scheme. The second principle was that there should be universal availability; that it would be possible for everybody to receive health care. The third was that there should be portable benefits; one could travel from one place to another and still be taken care of. Finally, it should be administered by a central, non-profit administration. That has worked, more or less, in different places and in different ways, but in the last year or so I feel that obvious cracks have begun to appear in the system. Doctors are now opting out, which has a different wording in different places. There is double billing or something else, which is to say that the system is not being followed. Premiums are now going to be charged in Newfoundland, for instance, which again goes against the very basic nature of the medicare idea.

When things like this begin to happen, we have a dangerous situation on our hands. To draw an analogy, the four principles to which 1 referred could be regarded as something like the legs of a chair. If one leg of a chair was shorter than the others, the chair would be wobbly and a very uncomfortable place to sit. If one began to cut the legs so that a balance could be obtained by giving up a part of one of the legs, the chair really would not become balanced. A more critical situation would develop, finally causing the person sitting on the chair- and I do not know what words I can use in the House-to fall to the floor. That is what will happen with the medicare scheme and plan unless something of a drastic nature is done to stop the erosion that is taking place.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Full View Permalink

October 15, 1979

Mr. Bob Ogle (Saskatoon East):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. I should first like to congratulate the minister on his new role in government, and I would not want him to feel that we are neglecting him.

In view of the fact that the government of Newfoundland is now considering deterrent fees in financing medicare in the province, would the minister indicate to this House what specific action he plans to take under the Medical Care Act to

ensure that Newfoundlanders have universal access to medical services in their province?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   HEALTH AND WELFARE
Full View Permalink

October 15, 1979

Mr. Bob Ogle (Saskatoon East):

Mr. Speaker, this is an historical moment in my life, naturally. It is the first time I have had the privilege to speak in this chamber. In a way I feel partly at home because of the general ecclesiastical look of the place and from the fact that the traditional place of holding Parliament was an old abbey. I have not seen anyone beginning to say their brevaries here but the feeling of being in an abbey is part of this place. I have noticed that a few things are not carried through in the traditional ecclesiastical way, though; one is that the choir, which I would say is above you, Mr. Speaker, gets very little chance to sing, and another is that the congregation in general is not as well behaved as in most churches I have attended.

Historically again, I would like to say that I am the first person from my family, which emigrated from Ireland some 150 years ago, who has had this privilege to stand here. It is also historical in the sense that I am the first representative to speak from the new riding of Saskatoon East, which is cut off from the old riding of Saskatoon-Humboldt. That riding and its former member have both disappeared into history.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Full View Permalink

October 15, 1979

Mr. Ogle:

The second group of people consisted of the priest and the Levite, officially good people going down to the temple to pray. They saw the man, but he had a problem, he was half dead and this might make them unclean so that they could not pray, the law would not let them pray. Their principle of life was: What is mine is mine. But the poor Samaritan did not know all those rules; all he knew was that there was a person in distress, a person in need. So he stopped, and not knowing it all, picked him up, put him on his animal and looked after him. The last person's principle of life was: What is mine is ours. That is what I believe.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Full View Permalink