SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 200 - May/18/23

Hon. Carolyn Bennett (Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health, Lib.)

May/18/23 10:24:42 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have been wanting to ask the Leader of the Opposition this question: Seeing that 46,000 overdoses have been reversed in the safe consumption sites, what would the Leader of the Opposition do in defunding them? How would he speak to those who have lost a loved one because their overdose was not reversed?

57 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

May/18/23 10:25:12 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what I would say to anybody who has lost a loved one, including a daughter or a son, to drug overdose is that our heart goes out to them and that we are going to fix the problem the government caused, which led to that overdose in the first place. The minister is quite right when she heckles that these people have died. They have died under her watch. They have died under the Prime Minister's watch, as he has flooded the streets with powerful heroin-like drugs, which have been paid for with tax dollars, have funded a black market for fentanyl, and have killed so many people. It is not enough for us just to point out that the Prime Minister's policies have led to these deaths. Conservatives are going to turn the hurt that he has caused into the hope Canadians need. My message to those parents is that their child did not die in vain. We will make sure that other people's children get the recovery that would have saved lives if that recovery, treatment and rehabilitation had been in place. Hope is possible and hope is on the way.

199 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

May/18/23 10:26:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader of the official opposition for his contribution to the debate. However, I think things have gone a little too far. I am hearing terms that smack of demagoguery, unfortunately. The very wording of this motion signals a very aggressive, very warlike approach. Maybe we could look at how other places address this issue and see what is working. The United States is one country known for adopting a warlike, combative approach instead of treating this like a social and public health problem. What has the outcome been there? Opioid deaths rose from about 50,000 in 2015 to nearly 100,000 in 2021. Why not take a social and public health approach to the issue instead of such an aggressive one?

127 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

May/18/23 10:27:12 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this government's approach actually does come from the United States, from Seattle, San Francisco and Portland. That is why people are dying in the United States: because those jurisdictions have the same woke policies as this government. The number of deaths in those big cities is a tragedy we should strive not to duplicate. We should avoid that approach here in Canada. We should follow the example set by other countries around the world that invest in rehabilitation and treatment, instead of supplying drugs that kill people.

90 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

May/18/23 10:28:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we have lost thousands of lives to an unregulated toxic drug supply. What do the Conservatives do? They bring forward this motion, play politics with people's lives and oversimplify a really important health issue. Health Canada created an expert task force on substance use. It included members from public health, indigenous health, communities, business, unions, universities, social service agencies, law enforcement and public policy thinkers. They said that we need a safer supply of substances, that we need to stop criminalizing people who use drugs, which causes more harm, and, yes, that we need treatment-on-demand, recovery, education and prevention. The Leader of the Opposition calls them activists. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Moms Stop the Harm, the chief coroner of British Columbia and the chief medical health officer of British Columbia all support a safer supply. Will the leader of the Conservative Party allow his colleagues and members to go back into their communities next week and meet with their chief medical health officers, their chief coroners and law enforcement? Will he allow a free vote on this motion, or is he going to continue to do more harm?

196 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

May/18/23 10:29:13 a.m.
Watch

Yes, there will be a free vote, Mr. Speaker. More than just going back to my own riding and community, I have been to the member's community. When I got off the plane on Vancouver Island, I found that the people in his riding and across the island are disgusted with the member's policies and with the policies that he has embraced, both provincially and federally. I got off the plane and, first thing, the pilot told me that he had two addicts in his backyard the night before, rummaging around and trying to steal so that they could pay for their drugs. Then, I saw the front page of the local Nanaimo newspaper, saying there are record overdoses. Then, one of the people who were going to be at my rallies was in the hospital because he was attacked by some members of the local tent city. We have seen a massive overdose crisis because of the policies that the member has embraced, both provincially with the NDP and federally with the current Liberal government. We, as Conservatives, are the only ones who would fix it by going away from legal and free drugs towards recovery to bring our loved ones home, drug-free.

207 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis (Cumberland—Colchester, CPC)

May/18/23 10:30:28 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in my mind, today represents a seminal moment in Canadian history. On one side, we have a Liberal government that wants to flood our country with drugs; on this side of the House, we have a compassionate program for treatment to reduce the hurt and turn it into hope. How can we do that? What is “safe supply”, which we hear so often touted in this House of Commons? It is actually a term that was coined by Purdue Pharma. I am sure every Canadian out there knows what Purdue Pharma is. They would say, “Let us just put some safe opioids out there; it would be better for everybody. These are safe substances.” However, we all know what happened; everybody in this House knows what happened. That was the beginning of the opioid crisis. Even the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions knows that this happened. We fast-forward to a program that was created as a policy in British Columbia in the early days of COVID-19, in 12 days, to create this “safe supply”. This means that now, the Liberal Canadian government is purchasing drugs for people to use. If we think about it, if I wanted to take illegal substances and someone was going to buy them for me, does it make sense that I would take less or that I would take more? I think the common sense of the common people out there would realize that this would compound the problem. This program is beyond the comprehension of a common-sense person. The other important thing to understand is what the metrics are to measure whether it is working. Quite sadly, there are none. There are no outcome measures. There are no metrics. There is nothing to say that this is or is not working. This is a sad but grand social experiment, and it hurts me to say that. I have personal experience in this; I worked in a chronic pain clinic as a physician adviser alongside a psychologist, an occupational therapist and a physiotherapist one day a week for 15 years, which is a long time. A lot of people there were using opioids. One of the things we know very clearly is that when people are suffering, if they do not have connectedness, hope, identity, meaning in their lives and empowerment, they do not do well. They suffer, and shame on the Liberal government for wanting this to continue. One thing we know very clearly is that, in the program, somebody who wants to participate can access 24 eight-milligram tablets of hydromorphone. We look at that and say that 24 tablets are not that much. However, let us put that in perspective: One eight-milligram tablet of hydromorphone is the equivalent of 10 Tylenol #3 tablets. I use that as an example, because people often have their wisdom teeth out or they have a significant injury, and they might have received Tylenol #3 tablets. I would challenge them to take 10 of them. No, I would not. Let us not challenge them, because they could die from it. That is why we do not challenge them. I had my wisdom teeth out, and I took two of them. I slept half the day. This is inappropriate. Let us look at what these 24 eight-milligram tablets look like. That is 192 milligrams a day, which is 960 morphine milligram equivalents. That means the equivalent of 246 tablets of Tylenol #3 a day. Who needs that much? I realize that chronic pain, which is my expertise, and drug addiction are two very different things. I understand that clearly, but we are talking about an equivalency of 246 tablets of Tylenol #3. Let us be clear. When the Liberal minister appeared in committee, we talked about fentanyl. The treatment dose in the emergency room, if someone perhaps dislocates their shoulder, is 100 micrograms or maybe 200 micrograms of fentanyl. When we were doing emergency room procedures, we always had a respiratory therapist there to ensure that, if the person stopped breathing, we could support their breathing. What is this decriminalization experiment excited about? It is 2.5 grams of fentanyl. How many people could be killed with that? The minister went on to say that it is always cut with something. Let us say that 2.5 grams could kill 25,000 people. If we cut it in half again and again, there is enough on one's person to kill 1,000 people. It is beyond comprehension. There is no common sense here. The market is being flooded with opioids. We heard the great Leader of the Opposition speak about the reduction in price. Prices of eight milligrams of hydromorphone have now gone down from historical averages to 25¢. What do we see then? We see that those drugs are being bought for 25¢ from people who have gotten them for free, and they are being distributed around the rest of the country for five dollars a pill. They are also now being sold across the border into the United States. This is absolutely insane. It makes no sense. Then, those people are taking that money and trading up to fentanyl. It is illicit fentanyl, yes, but that is what they want. They want the high from fentanyl. That is what they are doing, and that is how they are getting it. Let us be clear. The Liberal government is giving them hydromorphone for free, and they are selling it to buy fentanyl. If they are not doing that, then they are taking that hydromorphone, crushing it and injecting it. These are facts. We see this. We know that when people show up in emergency rooms with heart valves that are infected, it is because of the injections. There are spinal cord abscesses that a person gets almost only with intravenous drug use. This is what is happening with this “safe supply”. Let us be honest. It is not safe; there is nothing safe about this. The other very sad thing that we understand clearly is that palliative care for these drug addicts is where the Liberal government is starting. It is not offering other treatment. The government is saying that they are beyond reach, and all they are going to get is medication, because the government wants to perpetuate their state of existence. We are not offering them housing. We are not offering them social supports. The government is not offering them anything except more drugs to perpetuate their zombie-like state. This is unacceptable in Canada. This approach is not working, and we know that very clearly. We know that this is not the standard of care anywhere else in the world. We know that people, Canadians, do not want to exist in this state. If we want to talk about an outcome measure, we know that this is not reducing deaths; it is increasing them. Six hundred people died in British Columbia in the first three months of 2023. This is a 9% increase from last year. How can we say that we should continue this insane experiment? As I said previously, this is a seminal moment. Most important, what we need to understand, and what Canadians need to understand, is whether this make sense. Is there science behind it? Clearly, we know that the answer is no. People like to talk about the Portugal model. When the funding was reduced in Portugal for things like social supports, housing supports and medical supports, we know what happened. The rates went back up again, and the deaths went back up again. We cannot go down that same road. We know very clearly that what we need to do is care for Canadians; we need to care for them deeply. We need to not treat them with a simplistic palliative care approach that says, “Take all the medications you want. They're safe.” From the Purdue Pharma experiment and the Canadian experiment in British Columbia, we know that they are not safe. Deaths are increasing, and we need to have this experiment stopped now; it is not working. I have said this before: Canadians need to be connected; they need to have hope. They need to have an identity and meaning in their life, and they need to be empowered to get better. Our program will enable Canadians to do that.

1415 words

Hon. Carolyn Bennett (Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health, Lib.)

May/18/23 10:40:35 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member opposite that people need hope and connection. The way they get that quite often is at a safe consumption site or with a safe supply prescriber. That is where they get the connection to get the hope and to get on a path to a better life. Does the member remember when people objected to methadone, suboxone and sublocade? It is about people who have a dependance and who are not able to tolerate being dope-sick. I want to know why the member rejects these opportunities for people to finally have someone they trust and help them on a path to recovery.

110 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

May/18/23 10:41:30 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there were a few things in the member's question to talk about. The first one is with respect to the 600 people who died in B.C. in the first three months of this year. They do not have an opportunity to get better. The second one is that the member opposite, who is also a physician, quoted a study from London that talked about a study that lost people to follow up on, so we do not know how many of them died. They also gave those people social support, housing support and medical support. That is not what the Liberal government is doing. Those folks received a program. They received prescription medications. The member opposite misled the House and carelessly used facts in that particular case to suggest that the program was the same as what safe supply is and what the vending machines, which the Liberal government spent $4.5 million in Vancouver and Victoria, are giving out on a daily basis. That is a different case and that is wrong.

177 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

May/18/23 10:42:39 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' approach seems very dogmatic to me. Is my colleague aware that this is more about a public health problem than it is about crime? We are talking about people who are struggling with severe addictions. I do not want to judge anyone. It is difficult to judge what these people are experiencing from the outside. We would need to have talked to people who once struggled with alcoholism, for example, who struggled with severe addictions to perhaps begin to see how harmful that can be for a person and how it can impair their judgment. Basically, the approach we need to take is to support people as they try to overcome their addictions. If we are no longer doing that, then how does my colleague think that we can show compassion and try to help these people out of the dark place they are in?

149 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

May/18/23 10:43:35 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there are not many things that can really get my ire up in the House, but right now I have to say that this is one of those things. The member of Bloc says we have a dogmatic approach. We are talking about creating consecutiveness and hope, giving people meaning in their lives, giving them identity and empowering them to have a better life. To say that it is a dogmatic and inappropriate approach, that it is somehow politicized, does not take into consideration the fact that the Liberal government has created an environment for social chaos and rampant violent crime. This is an approach that will actually give people a chance to recover, have new lives and rediscover their lives again. Shame on that member.

128 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

May/18/23 10:44:37 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is worried about vending machines selling safe supply. He should be worried about the unregulated toxic drugs that are being distributed, manufactured and marketed by organized crime on almost every downtown street corner across the country. It can be found on the dark web. It is not safe supply that is killing people; it is fentanyl. The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs put out a statement. In its report, it endorses access to users of a safe supply of pharmaceutical-grade opioids to combat the uncertain composition of illegal street drugs, which is the cause of many overdoses. It further has made a recommendation in favour of supervised consumption sites, where people can use drugs in a clean, safe environment under the supervision of health professionals trained in emergency intervention. For my colleague who is a member of a party that says it is the “law-and-order party”, will that party listen to the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs?

166 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

May/18/23 10:45:44 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, while that member is up at night cruising around the dark web, we on this side of the House are understanding that there is a crisis in crime, that there is a crisis in the fact that the Liberal government supplied hydromorphone, which is being sold to buy illicit fentanyl, because that is what addicts are wanting right now. We know that this is an untenable position and we know, on this side of the House, that we want Canadians to have a home: Our home, their home, bring it home.

93 words

Hon. Carolyn Bennett (Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health, Lib.)

May/18/23 10:46:21 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Sherbrooke. Before I begin my speech, I want to acknowledge that I am rising today in Ottawa, which is on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people, who have lived on this land since time immemorial. It is important that we take the time today to address this national public health crisis, but first, however, I want to talk about the wording of the motion we are debating today. The opposition is calling on us to reverse deadly policies, yet the BC Coroners Service has repeatedly said that there is no indication that the prescribed safe supply is contributing to the drug deaths from the illicit drug supply. It seems that the Conservative Party wants to take us back to the failed ideology of the Harper-era drug policies. Assez, c'est assez. Why can the opposition members not understand the harm that their narrative is causing. The member talks about zombies and talks about crazy policies. This is stigmatizing, and that is all they know how to do. Do they not hear the public outcry from people who actually have lived and living experiences with substance use, the people who have overdosed two and three times and have been revived at a safe consumption site and are now part of helping people get well? Groups like Moms Stop the Harm, who have are the loved ones of people who have lost lives to overdoses and toxic drug supply, have asked the Leader of the Opposition to meet with them in early June. Will he meet with them and hear their story? It changes people's lives and their opinions. This fight against evidence-based programs that are actually saving lives just has to stop. People are dying but not for the reasons they are giving. Canada is facing a twofold epidemic: a toxic and illegal drug supply and an overdose crisis. Every day, countless lives are shattered by the devastating consequences of the crisis and over 30,000 people have died. We must recognize that substance use and addiction are two complex problems that we cannot resolve by simply ignoring them or using outdated approaches. Families mourn the loss of their loved ones. Communities bear witness to the tragedy of addiction, and the individuals suffer often in silence because they are being stigmatized, as the opposition is doing today. It does not have to be this way. Substance use disorder, opiate use disorder, is a recognized, chronic medical condition that deserves the same respect and evidence-based care as any other illness. By implementing safer drug supply initiatives, we can save lives and provide individuals with the opportunity to break free from the cycles of addiction, because there is no recovery for people who are dead. We have to be there. When the person using drugs asks “where is the suboxone lady”, we need that absolutely real-time approach. It is by implementing safer supply that we minimize the risks of people using drugs. We can ensure that those who use drugs have access to pharmaceutical-grade substances that are tested for potency, purity and prominence. It is the poisoned drug supply that is killing people. The opposition needs to understand that this is the problem we are dealing with, this toxic drug supply. We can prevent accidental overdoses caused by drugs with unpredictable potency, contaminated substances or adulterants. We can save lives; we must save lives. However, our approach goes beyond saving lives. It is about creating the path to recovery and rebuilding shattered lives and families. When individuals have access to safer drugs, they engage with the health care professionals. They are able to seek support, healing and rehabilitation. It is like moving from Insite to Onsite in Vancouver. It provides an opportunity for connection, trust and the delivery of comprehensive care. I want to be clear that this is not about encouraging drug use or turning a blind eye to the consequences. It is about acknowledging the reality that people will continue to use drugs and that by providing a safer alternative, we can minimize the harm and pave the way toward recovery and rehabilitation. Illegal drugs being sold illegally is still illegal. Diversion is illegal. We need to recognize that, behind the statistics and the headlines, there are real people who have dreams but are struggling. They deserve our empathy, our understanding and our support. Stigmatizing people who are battling a substance use problem and criticizing the care they receive will not help them seek treatment. What is more, Canadian drug policy and international drug policy are aligned. Prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement make up the four internationally recognized pillars of drug policy. We lived through 10 years of that Conservative government taking harm reduction out with its deadly war on drugs, and that has been proven to be ineffective, costly and deadly. These policies have also had a profound negative effect on Canada's most vulnerable, including indigenous people, children, young people, people living with disability, and immigrants and refugees. While the Conservatives continue to try to take us back to the days when substance users were told that their lives did not matter, our government is using every tool at its disposal to put an end to this national public health crisis. I would like to quote from the public safety and justice adviser to former prime minister Stephen Harper, Ben Perrin, who said, “Safer supply has been tested and found to be beneficial for people who have been unable to have treatment for whatever reason, and are long-term substance-abuse users. We’re talking about essentially substituting a contaminated street drug with a drug that has known contents and potency to help people stay alive, first of all, and also to be able to stabilize.” Here is what some other important experts have said. Both the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario have made statements acknowledging safer supply is a harm reduction tool to support people with opioid use disorder. I encourage the member to reread the CMAJ article from last September and see that on safe supply, the community health centre is providing the suite of health and social services reports. That is exactly what we do. It is exactly how we get them in the door so they can find a way to a better life. As I continue to say, since 2017, safe consumption sites in Canada have received more than 4.1 million visits, reversed 46,000 overdoses and made 236,000 referrals to health and social services, which the Conservatives have vowed to defund. What do we say to the families of those who would have died if this approach had not been offered to people who use drugs? If only I could say that this is the first time the Conservatives have not followed public health advice. Unfortunately, this is the pattern for the official opposition. Despite overwhelming support and effectiveness of vaccines and despite the fact that 11% of maternal deaths are from unsafe abortions, that party continues to prefer ideology over evidence. We, as a country, must and can do better. I prefer the Canadian Medical Association Journal to the National Post. More important, this is how we will save lives.

1238 words

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

May/18/23 10:55:24 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I represent Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, which is in the Fraser Health region. In British Columbia, the most deaths from opioids took place in the Fraser Health region. In 2022, 680 people died in the Fraser Health region. Since the implementation of the decriminalization policy of the Liberal government, those deaths have only increased. I have a very specific question today for the minister. Part of the agreement, when the government decided to decriminalize hard drugs in British Columbia, was that there would be enforcement for schools and places where children frequent and that the policies of decriminalizations would not apply. A week after the government decriminalized, my son's day care had to be shut down because people were injecting illicit substances and leaving things behind. I could not take my son to day care that day. He goes to a school in downtown Abbotsford. What policies have been put in place to enforce areas where children frequent to ensure they are not exposed to illicit drugs? We are normalizing illicit drugs in our country and I want to know what the minister is going to do to stop that.

195 words

Hon. Carolyn Bennett

May/18/23 10:56:46 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the member recognized that, in the agreement for the section 56 exemption, it is still not okay to use drugs in playgrounds or schools. Many municipalities are looking at expanding that with their bylaws, but at the moment that is still illegal. What we are also saying to the member is that a lot of the deaths in the Fraser Canyon and all over the country are not of the people who have been using drugs for a long time. I was with the carpenters' union in Victoria, where they are handing out naloxone because they are losing loved ones on the work site due to the poison drug supply. I want the member to understand that people are using alone and dying alone. We have to have policies that will prevent those deaths.

140 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

May/18/23 10:58:01 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciated the approach my colleague used in her speech. It is true that this is a complex issue, a human issue. Behind the statistics and the numbers there are some very serious realities. It is a really important issue. I have experience with this problem in my family. It is hard to talk about without getting emotional. I think that we agree with my colleague on the fact that it is a public health problem and that the Conservatives' approach to this crisis is a bit dogmatic. Public health is health. Recently there were negotiations with Quebec on the matter of health transfers. Unfortunately, Quebec and the provinces, who were asking for $6 billion, barely got $1 billion. If we really want to help people, in this case addicts, on the ground, there needs to be an increase in health transfers. When will the government increase the transfers?

154 words

Hon. Carolyn Bennett

May/18/23 10:58:58 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my condolences and my sympathies to the member for the truly sad situation in his family. Part of the transfers to the provinces and territories, $25 million to be precise, is for mental health and substance use. I think that the action plan will help respond to this tragic situation in the provinces and territories.

57 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

May/18/23 10:59:59 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first we heard the Conservative from Fraser Valley rail against harm reduction when, in fact, they support harm reduction and they support treatment and recovery. There is no war between harm reduction and treatment and recovery. We need them both. Today, I am seeing the Conservatives spreading misinformation, which is costly in a health crisis. However, we also see the Liberals taking an incremental approach, which costs lives. I asked the minister repeatedly to scale up efforts. This is a national health crisis. The government is spending less than 1% of what it spent on the COVID-19 crisis and the response to that. We have lost almost as many lives. We look at the money the government spent on the AIDS crisis, on SARS and on other health crises. It goes beyond being pale in comparison. When is the government going to scale up on safe supply? When is it going to get involved in the recovery and treatment on demand? We need the government to get involved. It cannot keep downloading this to the provinces. That is where Portugal stepped up. We need the federal government to scale up with rapid investments so that, when people need help, they get it and we meet them where they are at.

213 words

Hon. Carolyn Bennett

May/18/23 11:01:16 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the really important distinction, as the polarization of harm reduction versus treatment is extraordinarily unhelpful. We know people need access to treatment at the moment they are ready. However, we also know they need adequate aftercare so they do not fall back into the environment that made them sick in the first place. As we move forward, as the member well knows, over $100 million has been designated for safe supply in this last budget. We received another $144 million for the substance use and addiction programs, as well as $25 billion going to the provinces and territories, where one of the four pillars is mental health and substance use. We hope that the provinces will be able to use that on the issues of complex care, treatment beds and aftercare. I look forward to working with the member as we tackle the flawed ideology of the other side.

156 words