Skip navigation

Tories announce national cancer strategy

Canadian Press and Globe and Mail Update

PM says new agency will be a ‘clearing house' for latest information on cancer care ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. German Shepard from toronto, Canada writes: The Tories just keep on keeping on. The Liberal leadership convention has focused on Ignatief and his 'mis steps'. What do the Liberal's have to talk about going into their convention....??? Nothing that I can think of. Quebecois as a nation is off the table. Are they going to up the ante on the Conservatives. Better Healthcare, even lower taxes, stiffer sentences on criminals, the environment. The Liberals failed miserably over the last 13 years on all of those files. And who would believe them if they did start to promise these things. The GST ghost and Adscam will haunt them until the next Century.

    Harper controlled the agenda over the election, and he is controlling it now. Genious. God bless Canada
  2. maurizio arani from woodbridge, Canada writes: What a shame here the PM is anouncing something more important in my view than that silly war and some clowns think that this is a time of protest. All the help that this governement can give in finding a cure to cancer is a welcome and should be praised. There are other opropriate times for protest. Shame on those individuals
  3. B. H. from Canada writes: Stand up for Canada indeed.....Mr. Harper, you sir are a great leader and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

    This issue is more important that the party people choose to support....this is not a political issue and shame on anyone who chooses to make it one.

    Many will ask, how is the government going to pay for it? I don't really care....they'll figure it out. All I care about is saving lives of my fellow canadians.

    Many will also say that the Liberals are responsible for the current problem and have no business critisizing a new government for their incompetence.....but again, I don't really care. Action is being taken and that is all that matters.

    Bravo Mr. have made me extremely proud to be a Canadian.
  4. David Griffith from Nova Scotia, writes: Excellent news, and anotherr example of a government finally spending my tax dollar on something prudent and meaningful. Way to go, Prime Minister! Now lets see how many posts we'll get here suggesting that spending money to fight cancer is just another 'neo-con' (do they even know what the term means?) conspiracy!
  5. Stephen Morris from Calgary, writes: I hope they take a hard look at eastern medicine.
  6. Bart Tooms from Canada writes: Don't expect much focus on prevention here. Most of the attention and resources will be given to treatment followed by detection because that's where the money is. Let's face it. Cancer is big business, and don't expect your government to be on your side. If you want to realistically increase your chances of staying out of the cancer loop I have the following suggestions for starters:
    (1) Eat only organically produced foods
    (2) Go vegetarian or at least drastically cut down on meats especially red meats
    (3) Never eat at a fast food restaurant
    (4) Use drugs only when absolutely necessary for short term emergencies - find alternative treatments as much as possible
    (5) Don't use chemical fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides on your garden or lawn
    (6) Don't smoke
    At least you still have some choice now. Cancer is a modern disease. How many times have you read about people having cancer in writings before the industrial revolution? Think about it.
  7. A Fraser from Canada writes: MORE VOTE BUYING and FLIPFLOPPING and DITHERING by Harper and this neocon government. Of course the neocon SHEEP will be out in droves supporting this. What an absolute and immoral disgrace and outrage!!
  8. David Gehring from Ottawa, Ontario, Canada writes: The new organization, or 'clearing-house', is just more bureaucracy added to what already exists from Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, provincial health organizations, cancer research centres, hospital administration and all of the other paper-pushing organizations out there. Our governments appear to be collectively spend more money on planning and reporting than actually implementing the programs that research and treat cancer. It's no wonder there's a constant shortage of doctors and nurses everywhere, they've all been hired to work in cubicle jobs.
  9. Gravol Insomnia from Gatineau, Canada writes: Bravo! This is a step towards the right direction.

    And on a side note, regardless if you're pro-tory, anti-tory, pro-liberal, anti-liberal, pro-ndp, anti-ndp, you have to admit that Harper is working hard on our behalf. You can see it, he is aging rapidly right in front of us. See how much grey hair he has? Being the PM of this country is a tough job!
  10. TERRI ROBSON from Kimberley,, Canada writes: A back door start for privatization of our Health Care System. There will not be that many patients who recieve quicker help as one can be rest assured it will mostly go to research.
  11. Jonathan Kilius from mississauga, Canada writes: Harper is showing great leadership once again. It is great to see a true leader with real ideas, unlike the liberal leadership race where there only policy is 'who can beat Harper'.
  12. Dave Medich from Windsor, Canada writes: I watched the announcement and the press conference that followed. Firstly, the cancer strategy was received very well. A lot of experts and patients were consulted and it seemed like much thought was given to the strategy. Secondly, at the press conference, the PM received several rounds of applause when the question about Quebec was raised. Thirdly, the protesters were a few punks with too much time on their hands.
  13. Dat Guy from edmonton, Canada writes: Harper continues to deal with issues that make sense and were part of elelction promises last Jan. Many of the smaller promises have happened and it shows that the government is not spinning its wheels. Too bad the Liberal hopefuls have not come up with any useful policies or even good ideas that make them a possible choice in an election. It looks like Harper is now the protecter of canadian values.
  14. D S from Victoria, Canada writes: Great job, Mr. Harper! This government is definately taking many steps in the right direction.
  15. Mike Z from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Kudo's to our fine Prime Minister on this move. Any further support for the fight against cancer is welcome news.
  16. Tor Sandberg from Toronto, Canada writes: I just can't understand how blind the above conservatives are; great, an agency with a measly amount of money is being set up, but what about properly funding the health care system, and what about properly tackling environmental pollutants that cause cancer (check out the other story about environmental pollutants and green house gases on the rise in Canada)? I'm becoming more and more disillusioned with the gullibility of my fellow Canadians these days, not to mention the media. I have a journalism degree -- a balanced news-report should have multiple perspectives, it's the first thing you are taught in J-school.
  17. Paul S from Niagara Region, Canada writes: I now believe that Harper has intentionally saved all his good stuff until now on purpose. He has made the Liberals look like fools going into their leadership convention. He passed the Quebecois motion with their unanimous support, and he stood side-by-side with McGuinty and Miller with their support on new crime legislation. Furthermore, the new economic plan looks promising.

    What do the Libs have left now? The enviroment? You're fooling yourself if you think the average voter is going to vote strictly based on enviromental policy.

    Harper has been giving the impression that he is incompetant just to pull the rug out from under the opposition right when it counts. This man is a genious, and he is showing us the leadership he has in store for Canada.

    I look forward to Harper's majority terms.
  18. The Philosopher King from True North, Canada writes: Wow you neocon lovers are really out to lunch. It's like you never paid any attention to what the government does until your political masters came to power. This announcement is just like a dozen others the previous Liberal government announced when they were in power, only now you think it's great instead of a waste. What a bunch of hypocrits, seriously. You cheerleaders need to drop the pom poms and wake up to reality. Government isn't just the few nancy boys at the top who seem capable of nothing other than grandstanding, politiking and vote buying. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the civil service and NGOs doing this work. Harper is merely following their advice just like every other government throughout the history of Canada.
  19. Dick Kazynia from Canada writes: Wow... fantastic news! Too many lives are affected by this disease; and if they start sharing information and a united front, maybe we can start getting someplace. As for the turds that usually chime in like JD Boner... err Wood; 'this is just an immoral outrage! That vote buying Harpercrite is just buying votes and rarrr, outrageous!'
  20. Mail Man from Toronto, Canada writes: My Goodness!!!!, these guys never stop. Only ten months in office and the announcements keep coming. Mr. Martin, please pay close attention on this 'textbook' lesson on how to lead and govern. It would appear that these Conservatives were fine tuning their plans even while they were in opposition - now that's strategy!!
    My only problem with the Liberal contenders in their abstract plans for Canada. Like 'we will work together to make this a better place' - okay, or 'We are the natural governing party' - okay, or 'we will hold hands together and sing, while we despise those mean spirited guys', okay.............tell me another one. Oh yeh, here's another one, 'we represent ALL Canadians', alrighty then. As long as Steve keep DOING and they keep TALKING.
  21. Ray D Eight from a niche in hyperspace, Canada writes: It should be pointed out--lest the very nature of politics be forgotten during elated and somewhat blinding moments of promises & posturing--that yes, the Torys APPEAR to be doing a phenomenal job planning & scheming to ahm err.. dissolve the country's net-debt before any real subtantive plans are rolled out to meet Kyoto, finding any means to appease a begruntled business sector with taxing income trusts, calming Quebec with a 'nation' clause that could make any Santa blush, and now gee, guess what.. they have a national strategy fight cancer, too! The Torys are a strong political machine not because they really mean to enact anyu of these promises, but rather because they think they know how to undermine real hardline issues plaguing Canadians today, like our il-equipped and dying troops in Afghanistan and the appauling excuse of a policy they call The Clean Air Act -- give us a bloody break! Harper and his government cannot and should not be trusted.
  22. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Harper is the best! He stays focussed on doing the right thing, and taking action where some good can be accomplished ....

    Keep up the good work !
  23. Green Jerry from Canada writes: This will save many more lives than any of that misguided Kyoto crap. Nice move Mr. Prime Minister.
  24. Paul S from Niagara Region, Canada writes: #6 Bart Tooms,

    If that's what I truly have to do to avoid cancer, then I'll just kill myself now.

    There are so many cases of vegetarians/non-smokers/etc getting cancer that the only one I've come to actually believe is the smoking link. There is still much we don't know about this unpredictable disease.

    Know the signs of cancer and if you suspect something, go see a doctor!
  25. Poco Guy from Canada writes: Bart Tooms (#6) is right. Cancer is HUGE business. The suffering of others makes a ton of cash for the pharmaceutical companies, researchers, charities and anyone else involved in it. The cure is simple - quit eating / breathing / or whatever the things that are known to cause cancer. Cancer is never going to go away because it makes too much money for too many people. Cancer has had BILLIONS of dolalrs thrown at it and there is still no cure. I have lost family and friends to the disease and will probably lose more because the simple fact is that cancer is big business.
  26. kd john from Toronto, Canada writes: 260 million. does everyone realize how much 260 million is? ITS NOTHING - everyone seems to be jumping on harper bandwagon when he is making so many changes to the tax system the health care and EVERYTHING in the long run will be messed up. Please read between the lines 260 million is the budget for couple of years for the university I attend.
  27. A Canuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: #7 A Fraser from Canada writes: MORE VOTE BUYING and FLIPFLOPPING and DITHERING by Harper and this neocon government...YOU GOTTA be proves 1 thing, you and so many others like you, are just interested in getting your Liberals back in power so they can continue the destruction of Canada...Mr PM Harper, you and your government are making us proud, please continue.
  28. Green Jerry from Montreal, Canada writes: #26. Only in your asinine world would you consider 260 million 'nothing'. This trancends politics. Everyone knows someone who has or had cancer. This new agency may even save some of you foolish Liberals.
  29. neil DeVries from Beamsville, Canada writes: A Fraser, you're way out dude... 'disgrace'?? Okay whatever.
  30. Michael Crowell from Halifax, Canada writes: You have to admit Harper is a very insightful strategist. He is miles ahead of anyone in the Liberal Party. As far as the NDP, he is light years ahead of them. It is just so refreshing to be a proud Canadian again. It has been a long time coming. Well done PM!
  31. Paul N. from Canada writes: Looks like Bart # 6 has read and internalized Mr. Trudeau's 'Secrets They Don't Want You To Hear' book that is sold at 1am on infomercials!
  32. K C from Canada writes: I thought I was the only one thinking the same thing but 'kd john from Toronto' beat me to it. 260 million dollars is not much for such complex and unpredictable disease, especially spanning 5 years expenditure. Maybe bringing the troops home might enable more money for cancer research? Nevertheless, 260 million dollars is still better than a big fat nothing...considering we have to start spending more tax dollars on wars and all other agendas the new government has that does not benefit canadians in the long run. It's a 'lets show we supposedly care by spending a bit of money here and there in our own country and hope people don't realise that this is to divert our unpopularity from the spending and lost lives from war participation that we imposed abroad'
  33. Patrick Bramwell from Canada writes: A little sanity, please.

    (1) Cancer rates are rising because we are living longer---thanks in large part to modern research-based medicine. The cancer rate rises are almost entirely in those above middle-age. And despite what Wendy Mesley and other doom-sayers believe, there're only a few specific cancers that can be attributed to environmental factors (smoking and asbestos are prime examples). As other posters have noted, 'carcinogenic' is a very elastic term and is largely dose-size related.

    (2) Thanks to research and developments in treatment, breast cancer is becoming a manageable chronic disease---not entirely, but movng that way. There are many kinds of breast cancer, and not all can be treated with today's techniques though. Genetic screening is helping several hundred high-risk women to make informed decisions before cancer develops.

    (3) $260 million may not seem like much, but intelligently applied it will do amazing things. Simply spreading best practises across the country will be a big gain. Clearing up the stultifying red-tape of drug approval and clinical trial approval will free up researchers time and resources considerably. Common payment and common treatment guidelines would dramatically alter the cancer picture in Canada.

    (4) Before attacking the pharamaceutical companies (with whom I have NO connecetion whatsoever, by the way) reflect on the costs of research, particularly clinical trials. The approvals bureaucracy adds millions to their costs and years to the time-line. Consumer pressure for 'drug safety' has bogged everything down with rules and regulations far beyond what is actually necessary. It is estimated that to bring one anticancer drug to market costs over $100 million and takes 10 years. With literally two to three hundred different types of cancer consider that overall cost burden. Even the Big Five cancers can take several forms, each responding to a different compound.
  34. Randal Oulton from Toronto, Canada writes: A. Fraser, I have a game for you. You will probably win a lot at it. Here are the rules: someone will suggest a word, any word. Then using that word, you have to write a diatribe against the Conservative Party. You gain extra points for using the word fascist, racist or Hitler. I'll start you off. My word is... 'carrot'. Over to you.
  35. The One and Only True PRAGMATIC PUNDIT from Canada writes: Lots of cheerleaders making lots of noise but still very little action on the field. Three cheers for the Conservatives making a bigger government especially in an area of provincial jurisdiction. Harper is an total failure.
  36. Michele K from Ottawa, Canada writes: Why is that when any other government adds bureaucracy, neo-cons scream bloody murder, but when the cons do it, it's hailed as (apparently) the greatest thing to happen in Canadian government this century? 'Trudeau was a monster - that nasty Charter, and look how he ran up the debt!' - hypocrites! Are none of you Ontario residents? Don't you remember what happened the last time the Flaherty gang was in charge? Look how well the (lying), 'we can cut debt [and start new bureaucracy] and lower taxes' worked out last time - I mean, 1 1 do not equal 3, no matter how sincerely Flaherty says so.

    Reminds me of that other stupidity exhibited by con ideolgues, the 'sure, it might be a bad decision, but at least it's a decision!' Cons, your long-term planning (and logical reasoning) clearly extend no further than the next election.
  37. Robert Schmidt from Toronto, Canada writes: The amount may not be amazingly high, but health care is a provincial responsibility. If you are unhappy about an extra $260 million, you can't be satisfied with the amounts your provincial representatives are providing. Complain to them.
  38. Guillaume Afleck from Ottawa, Canada writes: Those of you speculating on the 'cause' of cancer and suggesting that it didn't exist before industrialization. Stop. Not true. Cancer is overwhelmingly a disease of aging. (With the next biggest factor being family genetics) People get it, for the most part, because they get old. More old people equals more cancer. Get educated, start by querying this database and look at the long term rates, both incidence and mortality.

    Better cancer detection and treatment are good things, but neither will reduce the long-term really flat age-adjusted trend line for cancer incidence, although increased resources put to detection will find cancers earlier and generally increase the length of time people live post- detection, obviously. Ignore the cranks please.
  39. Ian in Ottawa from Canuckistan, Canada writes: To #26 and all the other critics of the funding amount: Would you rather be passed to gLiberal friends in brown envelopes?
  40. Ross g from Edmonton, Canada writes: There are already cures for cancer. They are not widely known because they drug companies will not profit from them so there is almost no research done to verify that they are effective. Some medical doctors know about them but doctors are only allowed to provide care that is approved by the CMA and can be sensored or have their liscence stripped for delving into what is consdiered by the CMA alternative medicine.
    The 2 treatments that come to mind are treatments with glyconutrients and treatment with massive doses of digestive enzymes. (not pancreatic) Enzymes are what power all the transformative processes in the body. Glyconutrients allow propper cellular comunication in the body and allow the body to function to it's potoential. A human body normally has cancer cells showing up in it and the immune system identifies these cells and deals with them. When the immune system is not longer able to do this then a problem (cancer) develops. Glyconutrients help the immune system to function closer to the level it is capable of and in that way heals the body. I suspect there will be some agressive flames to my posting this. Not sure why people react to something working that the medical community is not embracing.
  41. C Knox from Calgary, Canada writes: While I have no problem with funding cancer research I do have concerns about the misinformation this type of campaign perpetuates. The number on killer of Canadians, both men and women, is heart disease and stroke. Too many people think that heart disease and stroke are merely lifestyle diseases - they are no more a lifestyles disease than cancer. Many young and middle aged people are struck down by stroke or heart disease and we still don't know why. I would like to see this kind of funding dedicated to the biggest threat to Canadian's health - heart disease and stroke.
  42. B. H. from Canada writes: Oh Philosopher King.....we meet again (Post #18)....

    You say 'This announcement is just like a dozen others the previous Liberal government announced when they were in power, only now you think it's great instead of a waste.'

    Ok...I'll bite. Then why wasn't a plan like this in place already? The Liberals were in power for 13 years, most of which was in a majority government. Surely if they had intentions on implementing a system they would have done so.

    There is a difference between an announcement and a plan......just like there's a difference between Liberal and Conservative. Liberals announce and conservatives implement. As one of your mentors once stated...'the proof is in the proof'. It sounds like you've started your weekend early my friend.

    But aside from that......I do enjoy are little debates.
  43. Rick McNaulty from Calgary, Canada writes: The Liberals are outraged. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Finally Canada has a real Prime Minister not some Liberal hack from Quebec.
  44. Rick McNaulty from Calgary, Canada writes: Scott Brison must be thrilled at this annoucement. Now his nude calenders sales will really takeoff and help fund this program which is so close to heart or whatever part he choices. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
  45. German Shepard from toronto, Canada writes: RE: #26. Come again. $260 million is 'nothing'. I was doing laundry the other day, and found a few million in a pocket, I didn't even notice it was missing. There are about 700 people who work at the firm where I am employed. Of those 700, about 200 generate revenue. For this company to profit, clear, after taxes, wages and expenses, depreciation etc. It would take at least 8 years for said company to realize a $260 million dollar profit. Thats 700 people working for 8 years, if everything goes perfectly.

    Your comment is out of line, insulting and representative of how little respect some people have for hard working Canadians and the risk entreprenuers/employers make. Have a nice weekend.
  46. Apu Nahasapeemapetilon from Vancouver, Canada writes: Terri in Kimberley; we already have privatization in our health care sector. You are from BC; don't you remember all the private clinics that opened in BC under the 1991-2001 Harcourt/Clark/Miller/Dosanjh NDP reign of terror.
  47. Trillian Rand from The Great Pacific Nation, Canada writes: 'Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced Friday that a new agency called the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer will be a “clearing house” for the latest information on cancer care.'

    While one can applaud the establishment of this clearing house for information, one wonders what the government is doing to promote medical research or to provide the funding that will allow hospitals to hire more doctors to use the information they can more easily find.

    I know my own doctor works long hours and easy access to information will undoubtedly save him time from his busy schedule, but if he sends me to an oncologist who is even more busy and I have to wait a year to get treatment for a lump in my lung, how much good will a federally-funded library help me?
  48. K C from Canada writes: In response to Patrick Bramwell:

    (3) $260 million may not seem like much, but intelligently applied it will do amazing things. Simply spreading best practises across the country will be a big gain. Clearing up the stultifying red-tape of drug approval and clinical trial approval will free up researchers time and resources considerably. Common payment and common treatment guidelines would dramatically alter the cancer picture in Canada.

    I would agree with you IF such money is intelligently applied but we all know that in reality, such money is rarely spent wisely. Your argument is based on an ideal situation, not reality. Thank you.
  49. E Mang from Toronto, Canada writes: zzzzzzzzzzzzz...I'll believe it when the agency actually does something. Remember the Health Council of Canada?
  50. grealy ted from Whitby, Canada writes: Finally a Prime Minister of action and courage. Goodby you spiteful Libbies. Your corrupt days are over but we will never forget what type you really are. Go Harper Go!
  51. Steve K from Alberta, Canada writes: Wow, the CPC followed the advice of bureaucrats & others in the health field, haha... this isn't quite the ground-breaking development you Cons think it is... the public service probably had this in the works long before President Harper took to his throne. And where was the Minister of Health (Clement)? Doesn't anyone else get to speak, or is everything up to the Dictator, errr, the PM? ***The big health story is: Why are Harper/Clement silent on 2-tier activities such as in BC (False Creek Surgical Centre opening all-private emergency clinic)? What's the point in sharing cancer treatment information if, in the end, you can't even afford to pay for the treatment?? Give the CPC 2 straight majorities and this is what you would be faced with: if you have the $$ you have a chance of survival; if you don't too bad soooo sad.
  52. Toby Maloney from Canada writes: People actually involved in chronic disease prevention and management have gradually come to the realization over the last 20 years that a series of common risk factors -- inactivity, smoking, poor diet, obesity -- are at the root of heart disease, type 2 diabetes, cancer and other chronic disease.

    Unfortunately the big disease groups have turf to defend and benefit materially from the federal government's separate heart, diabetes and cancer strategies which are focussed on the disease rather than the causes. Meanwhile the other determinants of good health, interrelated with those individual risk factors, include income, housing, education, built environment and occupation, and none of those are mentioned.

    In that context, I don't see how this strategy is going to do anything other than prop up the cancer cure industry. I don't blame the Harper Conservatives, they're just following the same course we've been on all along, and once again the prevention is being lost in the politics.
  53. The Philosopher King from True North, Canada writes: #42 BH Cretien may have been a wiley politician, but that is the full extent of my ability to compliment him. I have little or no respect for any politician, though I did like Joe Clark and Ed Broadbent as people, and Paul Martin was a passable finance minister, though a disaster in the PM's chair. Don't even get me started on Trudeau. Prima donna comes to mind.

    My point BH is that politicians often take credit for all manner of things with which they had little or no input. Clearly the Liberals were always as guilty of this as the Conservatives are today. This feel good announcement on their cancer 'plan' is the result of good work by the civil service, not Conservative ingenuity. Believe me, my wife works at Health Canada and this was not Harper's idea. Period. But then politicians are forever laying claim to stolen ideas. Not really a shock though, is it?

    If the roles were reversed and a bunch of wide-eyed adoring partisans were oohhing and ahhing over a Liberal Prime Minister, I would cut them down with equal fervour. I simply cannot abide calling a politician anything but a servant you have to watch like a hawk so he doesn't steal the silverware.

    I am a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. The day that a real centrist party of this nature arises, they will have my vote. Until then, I will continue with protest votes for the greens.

    Oh by the way, thanks for the laugh. I'd forgotten about Cretien's 'a proof is a proof is a proof.' How'd he win four elections again?
  54. jack sprat from calgary, Canada writes: So this plan will save lives but harper had no idea how the number was calculated. The place has no authority or role other than to advise on best practices, they can't enforce implementation. They get about 5% of the money that we spend on Afghanistan. This role is already with Health canada but it is merely being privatized. So what? And people say harper is a great leader. I must say, you fully paid conservative bloggers have nerve.
  55. B. H. from Canada writes: Philosopher King.....I totally's seems are political ideologies might be closer than I thought. Maybe we should form said centrist party......

    As far as Cretien winning four elections.....all I can say is that must be have been the first snowball hell has ever seen.

    Have a safe weekend.......
  56. FLUVIAL SEDIMENT from Port Alberni, BC, Canada writes: Just what we need - another expensive bureaucracy conducting endless meetings, consultations, and producing reams and reams of reports that no one will pay any attention to, taking out full-page ads in the Globe and Mail telling us how much the government cares about us while we die waiting for care. I'd so much rather be paying for this than for more doctors, nurses, equipment and drugs, wouldn't you. Yeah, Harper!
  57. Molly Scott from Mississauga, Canada writes: Mr.Harper, this stuck in my throat. As a cancer patient, I'm more than familiar with the way the 'route' goes. All those $$$$ for an information clearing house?????
    How about distributing the $$ to provinces so that they can all provide the same life saving drugs to cancer patients. Perhaps a colon cancer patient in Ontario can get the same drugs paid for as a colon cancer patient in Newfoundland. There is tons of readily available INFORMATION, you moron, how about the drugs and technologiy to help us. There are already several layers of informational bureaus in provinces. How about putting the $$$ into getting us some of the live-saving drugs available in the US? China has several Gamma Knife machines, Canada has none. Who is going to staff your additional level of information bureau!! Any of your buddies??? I'm truly not impressed. If anyone is impressed, they haven't truly experienced cancer in Canada. I wish you my life....having the disease eat away at you. I have all the information I need, I'm dying. I need the technologly available elsewhere in the world. If I had the strength, I'd move.
  58. True North from Canada writes: Steve Harper wants to fight cancer with more beauracracy??
  59. James Clost from chaozhou, guangdong, china, China writes: #27 A Canuck, dont worry, you should by now that when #7 A Fraser disagrees with something it has to be a good idea.

    $260 milliion isnt a lot, but its a start and if used relatively wisely (not easy for bureacrats to do i admit) it can do a lot of good. lets just see what happens.
  60. David Summers from Ottawa, Canada writes: All the bleeding heart liberals above are absolutely disgraceful. Your comments are actually amusing. You even go so low as to try and say cancer research is bad, that may not of been your exact words, but by critisizing the governments plans, thats exactly what your doing. Good God!! Look at yourself in the mirror. This government for once has Canada in a direction, and a good direction at that. Next thing you know is you will be critisizing the governments reverse onus on gun crime. Apparently bleeding heart liberals like and think gun crime is good for the country. WOW!! All I can say is wow. Liberals now have to look for absolutely far fetched excuses to critisize the Conservatives, when they are doing great things for our country, without any bias involved. Stephen Harper has done an amazing job in Canada, and let's hope he continues it!
  61. A Fraser from Canada writes: Ahh the neocons are out in full force. Shrub announces something and they fawn all over him like puppies in heat. And whats up with that allegation that the PMO is directing bloggers to 'take down' opponents of the Harper regime? Are they spending tax dollars to this end? And why do people on the right feel they have to imitate people on the left? How childish, but imitation is the best form of flattery. Keep it up! I'm outraged!
  62. will reader from down east, Canada writes: Another pr bliztz that's mainly smoke and mirrors on the part of Steve and his silent followers. Figure out how far that $260 million over 5 years is going to go at a rate of 170,000 cancer pacients per yesr. It amounts to about $300. per patient over the entire life of the program. No much medical help for that.

    But you can depend we'll hear the Steve Reform Harpies
    claim this is a cure for cancer and anyone opposing it is either a calous liberal or doesn't support the troop. His usual childish responses.
  63. Karin Pasnak from North Vancouver, Canada writes: Not a Harper supporter in the last election, but this is a good move.
    Every Canadian Cancer patient deserves to get the same care and treatment and I fully support Mr. Harper and I am proud of him today.
  64. G D from Toronto, Canada writes: The neocon cheerleading squad is out in force. Reading the G&M has become a daily ritual for me. However, the only time I have an opportunity to read it in detail, and possibly send a comment, is late at night. There are only 3 ways the usual neocon suspects can be here all day, commenting on every story, everyday, day after day:

    1) You're all retired and have nothing better to do.
    2) You're all unemployed and have nothing better to do.
    3) You all work for the Ministry of Misinformation and it's your job to spew the same
    nonsense day after day, on every story, all day.

    I'm sure the usual conservative hacks will save their emails. In true CONservative form, they will announce this as 'new' spending at least 3 more times before any election is called.

    It's too bad the G&M doesn't monitor this blog more carefully. There are some intelligent people here with great debating skills (left, middle and right wing). The Harper disciples have lost their entertainment value long ago. Now, you're just allowing them to destroy one of the best things your newspaper has going by allowing them to hijack intelligent debate with partisan garbage. Don't let the Cons destroy your blog, the way they're destroying the country.

    If I wanted to hear propaganda about Harper, I'll read the Toronto Sun or The National Post.
  65. True North from Canada writes: Hang on, so Steve Harper can estimate how many lives this initiative might save on his press conference so where is the promised AIDS program then?? Steve Harper picks and chooses whom to condemn and whom to try to save.
  66. B Johnson from Halifax, Canada writes: Ottawa has dedicated $260-million over five years to the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer ?!? Do the math. That's 5.4 million annually and it's a pathetic joke. That will barely cover the salaries of the adiministrative offices and will probably force it's closure within 2 yrs. due to lack of funding. We can't get these abismal clowns out of Ottawa fast enough.
  67. Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: Well we are all interested in defeating cancer in any of it's insidious forms but if the Pm thinks 400 thousand or so will be saved by his actions adding yet another bureaucratic level to the effort then I would like to know their names. Accuse me of being facetious but this is just another level of officials at high paying jobs and another pic-opp for little stevie, the little president that could. What's next, the cranberry industry in downtown Toronto ?
  68. K. Jean Cottam from Ottawa, Canada writes: By banning toxic products, such as lawn pesticides, toxic household cleaners, detergents, fabric softeners, air fresheners, toxic children's toys, coated frying pans, toxic building materials, flame retardants and cosmetics we would eliminate a vast number of toxins in our environment. This is the way to go, rather than creating another layer of bureaucracy. Health Canada and Environment Canada must have the authority to request data from manufacturers on all chemicals as planned for the new EU agency REACH. Currently, we have a 'Catch 22' situation. Government ministries must have evidence of toxicity before requesting product information under CEPA (Canadian Environmental Products Act). However, how can they determine a product is toxic without the pertinent initial data?
  69. J. Smith from Canada writes: If only the Liberals had put 2 billion dollars into cancer research instead of the gun registry.
  70. Udom Thongpai from Victoria, Canada writes: With only 260 million Harper is curing cancer. Who would have guessed that creating a new agency was the answer? Of course, they also announced Billions in spending for new and better ways to kill Afghans. Maybe they plan to use Predator drones to target cancer cells.
  71. Jason Roy from Nova Scotia, Canada writes: POST #64 (G D); excuse us other party supporters for forgetting what an enlightened bunch the Liberal Party and its supporters are. Read you own post and then take a long, hard look at yourself and the supporters of the Libs. Just remember, BLINDER REMOVAL IS REQUIRED. The Liberal Party, ah yes; a billion here, a billion there, all allocated over 10 years (or longer) here, ten years (or longer) there. Then, when the next election rolls around, run a platform based on money already spent as you rehash the same promises over and over, It's all perfectly acceptable to you and the others as it's all in the name of social progress, national unity and sound financial management. Anyone else and it's vote buying and photo-ops. Even funnier; you all support a party that has memebers who share the same opinions (SSM, Afghanistan, Kyoto's a joke) as those you so regularly slam others for. Even better; your next leader will be a gentleman who has pretty much the same views as you jump all over Harper for; yet you'll all be in lockstep with him agreeing with what he says 100%. To use your own words: 'It's too bad the G&M doesn't monitor this blog more carefully. There are some intelligent people here with great debating skills (left, middle and right wing). The Liberal disciples have lost their entertainment value long ago. Now, you're just allowing them to destroy one of the best things your newspaper has going by allowing them to hijack intelligent debate with partisan garbage...' (A Fraser leading the charge). Oh, and by the way, while not retired I do work full time and own two businesses as well. If I am employed by the Ministry of Misinformation; I'll keep an eye open for your office. In the meantime, you and the other Libbie sheep just keep bleating away.
  72. M M from Calgary, Canada writes: Fantastic, Harper and the Conservatives are doing the right things for Canadians. Any libs accusing them of vote-buying are way off - I would much rather 'buy' this vote than let the libs lose and steal billions of taxpayers dollars.
  73. Gizella Oehm from Toronto, Canada writes: This does seem to add another level of bureaucracy to the existing system, and is not in fact a concrete plan to deal with cancer directly. In short, as others have implied in this forum, this seems to be an easy vote getter and pacifier. While of course $260 Million is a lot of money for the average joe, it's not so much when you consider the cost of medical research, treatment and medical staff. And the $260 M in this case is not even being directed at that, but at establishing another trough for policy makers and other government hangers-on. So... it all sounds nice, but in practical terms, I don't think it means a heck of a lot.
  74. Rick McNaulty from Calgary, Canada writes: Hello Vern McFerson from shocker-Toronto #67 - Real Canadians understand that Lefties would rather hurl insults and call people names regardless of the issues. So why don't you climb back into the sandbox Vern, the adults are running the country now and will be for a very long time.
  75. Cryin Outloud from Canada writes: I can't trust the Conservatives to get tough on industry to clean up the environment so what good will throwing money at Cancer do? Another strategy like the 'war on terror' where rather than go for the cause of the illness or threat just look at how much money can be make by selling more drugs, building more expensive machinery or selling security equipment to everyone. If corporate USA/Canada isn't going to advance Harper wouldn't be doing a thing for cancer patients or would-be patients.
  76. marcia loynd from tucson, az, United States writes: CONGRATULATIONS! I lived in Canada for 35 years with my Canadian husband. Almost 20 years ago I was diagnosed with breast cancer, treated at ST. MICHAELS (and PMH for radiation).

    I retrained in Gestalt (gestalt inst of toronto) in order to work with cancer survivors & DR.SIMON SUTCLIFFE was on the board of WELLSPRING (which he assisted in founding with Anne Armstrong Gibson) where I worked for some 8 years, first as a volunteer, and for 6 years in leading the JOURNALING GROUPS until I came to Arizona, where I was ON STAFF as survivorship coordinator at the Arizona Cancer Center here in Tucson.

    Alas, NO good coverage of people here in my home country, so I say ONLY good things about CANADA. Well-done, what you're doing about cancer now! Best wishes to Jeff Lozon and to Simon Sutcliffe!
  77. Marc Landreville from Eastern Ontario (very very far from Peterborough), Canada writes: An extra level of bureaucracy will not make any difference for 2 reasons: arrogance and rationing. First, how can you fix something that's already supposed to be perfect? (at least in the eyes of those who run it). Second, lack of funding means that patients have to wait many weeks before starting the treatment, and they often limit to only one treatment: for example, radiation OR chemo, when common practise in other countries is BOTH to enhance chances of a cure. Bureaucrats and politicians often measure results with all the fancied name organizations they can boast about, rather than on actual cancer survival rate comparisons with other countries' rates (and please, don't compare with Bangladesh!).
  78. R C from Toronto, Canada writes: #75, you have not read the article clearly. From the article, you would have noted it is about going for the causes:

    ' 'It goes way beyond cancer care,' said Barbara Whylie, CEO of the Canadian Cancer Society, which has been among those lobbying Ottawa for a national strategy for years. 'It's about the whole cancer challenge.'

    'Ultimately, it's going to mean that fewer Canadians develop cancer, it's going to mean that Canadians right across the country, wherever they live — whether it's in large centres with tertiary care or small communities — will have access to programs and services that are based on the best possible knowledge that's available out of international (medical) literature and local learning.'

    The society says 153,000 new cases of cancer are expected to be diagnosed in Canada by the end of this year, and more than 70,000 Canadians will die from the disease.

    'So from our perspective,' said Ms. Whylie, 'we visualize a Canada a couple of decades out where we have many fewer cases being diagnosed and where the cancer journey for people who are affected by it is much more tolerable and has much better outcomes than are currently the case.'
  79. Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: Sorry Mr McNulty but the amateurs from farm country have no clue. Enjoy it while it lasts because Canadians are not this stupid and do not deserve to be insulted this way. I am not a lib by the way. I am a citizen with an interest in how the country is run and this type of grandstanding by little stevie on a serious and vital issue like cancer research is unpardonable. Saving 400,000 ? Come on Mc Nulty, why was it deemed necessary to lay a number on a Con program ? Is that in keeping with their phoney accountability laments ? How do you propose to measure how many will be saved by this program ? It's just another cheap pic-op and that is all it is. If the Con mind was interested in saving cancer victims then tell the Nova Scotia Con government to pay for that lady's medication, the one we read about this week where shewas denied it on a bureaucratic technicality. Now if you will excuse me I think I will run out and see how many cancer victims I can save at $71.25 a piece.
  80. sharon charles from Vancouver, Canada writes: While any little bit will help cancer sufferers we need to make sure that important research like that featured today about promising stem cell research gets a lions share. Until we can find an alternative to cut, burn and poison the treatment and cause of cancer will be a bottomless pit both for our hopes for a cure and our pocket book. I am worried about the absence of comment about research and specifically stem cell research. Much of the conversation seems to be about improving diagnostics, mdications and better access and communication. While all those things are important, relief is going to be found in a cure and that means an investment plan in research that is stable and sustained.
  81. Jimmy K from Toronto, Canada writes: Okayyyy A Fraser, can you please explain how money for cancer can be considered an 'absolute and immoral disgrace and outrage!!'
    Anyhew, time for adult talk. While any money for cancer research is welcome, I realy think that if they changed laws and regulations they could reduce cancer rates (long term) and help us out more than this money will do in terms of finding a cure. We still allow too many chemicals in our products and toxins that are accumulating in our bodies, the effects of which haven't been studied, but if I were a betting man I'd guess that at least some of them are carcinogenic. How else can we explain the soaring rates of cancer in the developed world?
  82. FLUVIAL SEDIMENT from Port Alberni, BC, Canada writes: Yeah. One more government agency for the others not to cooperate with, all of them bleeding us to death while there's a doctor, nurse, bed and equipment shortage. I think what we need is fewer bureaucrats with their fat fingers in the pie, not more!
  83. Graham Hanlon from Brampton, Canada writes: It's clear that this government is dedicated to changing the way the system works and while this is but a small step in that direction it clearly is a well thought out one. I am curious though, who is A. Fraser post 7 & 61, why doesn't he use his full name and what's with his apparent moral outrage at neocons. This is truly a good news story and only someone who has never been touched by cancer would find something sinister in this announcement. The real story here isn't the who but rather the what and I would like to congratulate all those people who had a hand in it! As for A. Fraser, perhaps he should go to his room for a time out.
  84. Chris Notsaying from Moncton, Canada writes: I have Cancer right now, I can tell everyone a great way to help...CLEAN OUR FREAKIN ENVIRONMENT!!! DUH! But getting that idea into the heads of Conservatives is like getting a Mack truck in a mouse hole. I am getting toxic crap stuffed in my veins and feeling like crap because of all the garbage in our food and environment. Pollution is big business and so is illness. That is why we all will suffer...greed pure and simple. Pure Neo-Con-big-business greed.

    Prevention is the cure, I do not smoke and I try to avoid polluted cities and environment even. What will it take?
  85. Bam Bam from Toronto, Canada writes: I am quite amazed about the cheering that happens now. I cannot see and have not read anything more specific beside an idea in the article how this additional layer should coordinate a goal-oriented approach to fight cancer. To me the provincial jurisdiction is the first and biggest hurdle in the system. If it comes to diseases there is no difference between B.C. or N.S.

    I even get more surprised at reading that it is not a question of best treatment but pure what is the cheapest treatment. Whatever you might think about 'old' Europe and its ailing health and pension system, yet at least you get the treatment that is required to give you an option to survive.

    Think next time if you cheer another tax cut! Fighting cancer cost money and if I know it helps to pay 100$ more in the right system, I do it. Without any ifs and buts! Because I am aware there is only one health. There are only one loved-ones and close friends in your live.
  86. Canadian Eh from Canada writes: I'll believe it when I see it. When it's put into place and functioning properly then I'll give my kudos.
  87. G D from Toronto, Canada writes: In response to #71 (Jason Roy). You are correct; my post (#61) indicates I am not a fan of the current CONservative government or the party hacks that troll these posts to spread 'The Party's' talking points. But, nowhere in my note did I state I am a follower of the Liberal or any other party. From your churlish response, it's clear you are not a Liberal. You accuse all Liberals of blindly following their party without really thinking for themselves. Ironically, this is exactly what you're doing. Ultimately, this was the point of my message. Thank you for proving my point so forcefully.
  88. Steve Lee from Canada writes: One step forward two steps backward.What about the enviroment which causes many types of cancer?
  89. K M from North of GTA, Canada writes: #7 requires some therapy - Poor guy is of touch with reality.

    Finally a government that is actuall doing something. Perhaps if they had been in power 10 years ago I would still have my father and my kids would have their grandfather.
    Well done Mr. Harper.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff


Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top