SoVote

May/9/24 1:31:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my thanks to my colleague for the unexpected praise of my former legal career, which I have left far behind at this point. I have no trouble whatsoever standing behind our leader and our position. Part of our position, which is clearly laid out in the motion, is that the extremist view on these things is what the NDP-Liberal government has put forward. We are the mainstream. We are putting forward common-sense, compassionate positions on the issue of drugs and overdose deaths that have overtaken too many communities and hurt too many families. I am very clear about where we stand on that.

107 words

Mr. Kevin Vuong (Spadina—Fort York, Ind.)

May/9/24 1:32:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as a Toronto member of Parliament, I feel obligated to say that I will be voting in support of the motion. That is because my community is home to or immediately adjacent to every single one of Toronto's nine injection sites. I am also the MP for parents who have had to learn what to do when their child is pierced by a needle. That is not normal. That is not something that any parent should have to go through. I was relieved when the B.C. government decided to do a 180, but I am concerned because the Medical Officer of Health for Toronto has doubled down, and the NDP mayor of Toronto continues to power through to decriminalization. I am curious to know what my colleague thinks about why it is that they continue to do this in spite of all of the evidence about how dangerous it has become.

155 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

May/9/24 1:33:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find it hard to believe I am actually saying these things, that I am having to explain why we should not have people smoking crack and blowing the smoke in the face of our health care workers and other patients. I find it hard to believe that I have to explain to anyone that a two-year-old's picking up a used needle on a playground could be deadly or extremely dangerous. In British Columbia, parents are locking arms and sweeping kids' playing fields before their soccer games because they are so afraid someone is going to fall on a needle or get jabbed by one. This is common sense. This is compassion.

117 words

Mr. Irek Kusmierczyk (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Official Languages, Lib.)

May/9/24 1:34:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the number of deaths in Alberta skyrocketed to record levels last year. Could the hon. member tell us why?

21 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

May/9/24 1:34:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I cannot speak for Alberta.

7 words

Ms. Lisa Marie Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith, NDP)

May/9/24 1:34:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have two very simple questions for the member after having listened to her speech. I wonder whether she could share how many more people have to die before the Conservatives start listening to health experts, step out of the way, and allow health experts to provide wraparound supports for people who need them. Also, just as important, how much more fundraising do the Conservatives have to do for it to be enough to stop raising funds off the backs of those who are tragically dying in the toxic substance crisis?

93 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

May/9/24 1:34:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I categorically reject the premise of the member's question, and I resent the implications. We are talking about human beings. We are talking about children. We are talking about mothers and fathers, sons and daughters who are at risk. We are talking about a crisis of opioid and other drug overdose deaths in this country. I am from a province where it is so out of control that the provincial government has had to come back to the federal Liberal government to say, “Put a circle around it because it is chaos.”

97 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.)

May/9/24 1:35:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure and an honour to rise in the House. Today I am going to speak to a very important topic that I know has affected many Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge. Before I get to my formal remarks, I will say that as MPs, we get to meet a lot of people in our riding, and with that, unfortunately, we attend visitations and funerals. I think that in the last two weeks, I have attended seven or eight visitations. Nonetheless, there is one experience I will never forget. A few years ago, one visitation I attended was for a 25-year-old young man who passed away from an opioid overdose. That experience has left an imprint on me. What the family went through, and what this individual went through before his passing, I do not wish upon anybody; none of us does. Our job here as legislators is to do good for our residents and to do good for all Canadians. The debate we are having today is a very serious one, because the issue is impacting families and has impacted lives. Before I turn to my formal remarks, I will say that I will be splitting my time with my friend and colleague, the member from Vancouver Granville. I rise to talk about an issue that is very important for Canadians, and particularly for our most vulnerable friends and family members in this country. Canada is in the throes of an overdose crisis that causes an average of 22 deaths per day. This crisis is affecting individuals, families and communities across the country. The Government of Canada's approach to the crisis is guided by the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, which promotes both public health and public safety. This strategy is based on the principles of compassion, equity and collaboration. It promotes a holistic approach to the crisis, recognizing that different people need different tools and supports to cope with substance use. Our government's approach is to disrupt and dismantle the illegal drug supply while supporting a full range of integrated initiatives to lower risks and help people access the services they need, when and where they need them. This means significant investments to support provinces, territories and communities. We know that substance use is a health issue, first and foremost. It is important to reduce stigma and remove barriers to accessing care in order to reduce the risk of overdose and other harm. Harm reduction programs and services are a critical and necessary step in the continuum of care for providing immediate and life-saving measures in the face of a toxic and illegal drug supply. The growing toxicity of the illegal drug supply means that this supply is tainted with powerful opioids such as fentanyl and other drugs, including benzodiazepines and animal tranquillizers. This means that people who use drugs are more exposed to the risk of overdose and harm than they were just a few years ago. It has been proven that risk reduction measures save lives. They are a lifeline for supporting people, including those who are dealing with stigmatization, housing insecurity or homelessness, or delays and other obstacles in accessing treatment. What is more, some risk reduction services, such as supervised consumption sites, help drug users make connections with other health care services and other social services, including treatment and rehabilitation. Our government is supporting a wide range of risk reduction measures, including naloxone programs, drug-checking services, supervised consumption sites and clean supplies. Naloxone can save lives by temporarily reversing the effects of an opioid overdose. That is why we are trying so hard to make naloxone more available to Canadians. For example, we invested $26 million in Health Canada’s substance use and addictions program, or SUAP, to enhance opioid overdose awareness training and to improve access to this live-saving drug. In December 2023, this investment funded training for two million people on how to respond to an overdose. It also made it possible to distribute more than 92,000 nasal naloxone kits across the country. Given the increasing toxicity of the drug supply, users do not always know what they are taking. Drug checking can play a key role by providing individuals with crucial information so they can make informed choices that can reduce the risk of overdose. In April 2024, Health Canada authorized drug checking services at 29 supervised consumption sites and six dedicated drug checking sites. Since 2018, SUAP has also financed 10 drug checking projects to help prove the effectiveness of this harm reduction measure and provide local communities with invaluable drug checking services. Supervised consumption sites offer a safe place to use drugs with clean paraphernalia and access to care without judgment. Many of these sites offer access to drug checking and peer support services for people who want to get treatment and access other forms of support. These sites reduce the spread of infectious disease and relieve pressure on emergency rooms. Supervised consumption sites have recorded over 4.4 million visits. More than 53,000 overdoses have been treated, and more than 424,000 people have been referred to health services and social services. These referrals support individuals on the road to healing and wellness. Everyone deserves to feel safe in their community. That is why we are working with our partners and stakeholders to ensure the safety of communities while providing these essential services. The crisis is constantly evolving, forcing us to develop and implement innovative harm reduction measures to counter the supply of toxic illicit drugs. That is why we are funding so many innovative and evidence-informed projects through SUAP. This program has provided over $600 million in funding for more than 400 pilot projects since 2017. With investments of $144 million from the 2023 budget, SUAP will be able to continue to support not-for-profit and indigenous community organizations, as well as municipalities, provinces and territories, to meet Canadians' needs across the continuum of care, from prevention to treatment, including recovery and harm reduction. Finally, the debate we are having today is very serious. This is not about quick and easy solutions or slogans. It is about the lives of the most vulnerable Canadians. It is about people who may have issues with mental health and, of course, addiction. It is about getting them the harm reduction strategies and treatment that need to be in place, as well as the care and affection they need to overcome the obstacles they currently face in their lives. I look forward to questions and comments from my colleagues, and I hope the questions are of substance.

1125 words

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

May/9/24 1:45:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member should be happy; this is of substance. This has been tried before. Portland, Oregon, did safe supply decriminalization. B.C. tried it. Their overdoses skyrocketed. This is not a new phenomenon. I know the NDP members are very upset because the NDP policies are failing Canadians, and people are dying—

55 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/9/24 1:45:56 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.

15 words

Mr. Peter Julian

May/9/24 1:46:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member is knowingly misleading the House. The figures are—

13 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/9/24 1:46:08 p.m.
Watch

That is a matter for debate. I will let the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan complete his question.

19 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

May/9/24 1:46:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the NDP members are getting very upset because they failed Canadians. This has been tried. It has failed. There are examples of this failing. Why are the Liberals fighting so hard to continue down a path where more Canadians are going to die from safe supply? Let us do something better for Canadians.

55 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/9/24 1:46:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member and I care about our residents. We want to make sure they live their lives to the fullest capacity. Any strategy with regard to the treatment of addiction needs to have the four pillars of prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement. We need to have a holistic approach. Unfortunately, the hon. member and their colleagues are actually ignoring the former adviser to the former prime minister, who said that the plan put forward by the official opposition is not actually a plan. It is a plan for failure, and that is not the approach to take to such a serious issue and politicize it, much as the opposition party is doing.

116 words

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

May/9/24 1:47:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, families and communities are continuing to suffer because of the toxic drug crisis. I have spoken to many mothers, fathers and friends who have lost loved ones. The Conservative rhetoric around this is not just harmful, but it will actually cost people their lives. To pretend that we have to choose between harm reduction and treatment when we are facing a national emergency is unconscionable. Given that we are facing this national emergency, why has the Liberal Party not declared a national public health emergency on the toxic drug crisis and created a pan-Canadian response?

98 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/9/24 1:48:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Victoria is absolutely correct. The Conservatives are trying to create this false choice, much as they are trying to do with the economy and the environment, when we know the two go hand in hand. On the issue we are debating today, we need harm reduction and treatment. They need to go hand in hand, and those are the policies we have been working on. We are working with the provinces. The province of B.C. had a request, and it did not work for it. We have looked at that. We have responded to the province of British Columbia in this case, and we will continue to do that. We will work collaboratively with all jurisdictions, with law enforcement and with individual organizations dealing with treatment and prevention. That is the Canadian way of doing things, and that is the smart and right way of doing it. That is how we will get results.

161 words

Victoria

Mr. Gérard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC)

May/9/24 1:49:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech a few moments ago and congratulate him on the quality of his French. The member asked for a question with substance, and I will easily ask a question with substance. The government waited more than 10 days before saying yes to the request of the provincial jurisdiction. Why wait so long?

63 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/9/24 1:49:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his very important question. I fully understand the substance of his question. When a request is made by any level of government or by any government in Canada, whether it is the province of Quebec or the province of British Columbia, that request should be acted upon expeditiously and a response given. There was a turnaround time. I am not one to be at that table to make that turnaround time, but I am glad to see a decision was made by our government in terms of the request that was made by the province of British Columbia and Premier David Eby.

112 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.)

May/9/24 1:50:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is important for me, as a member of Parliament from British Columbia, to rise to speak to this issue. I want to start by talking about the victims of the opioid crisis, and particularly those who have lost their lives to tainted drugs. They are the children of Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats, Greens and people with no party affiliation. They are family members, pillars of society, people who have had challenges in their lives, people who are struggling and people who are not struggling. They are everyday Canadians who lost their lives, or lost their loved ones, as a result of tainted drugs on the streets of our cities. From Calgary to Vancouver, Toronto and Halifax, this is a problem that plagues our communities from coast to coast to coast. Anytime a jurisdiction wants to find a way to save lives, our government has been there, and will be there, to work with it to try to do that. In the case of the Province of British Columbia, as my friend from Vaughan—Woodbridge noted, an application was brought forward by the province. In it, there were four pillars. There were expectations around how everything would work. It did not go as well as British Columbia wanted. It came back to us and said it would like to make amendments to the application. It formalized that request on Friday of last week; by Monday, the request was granted. It is important for anyone who is watching, and members in the House, to understand that, when the formalities of the application were completed on Friday, it took the weekend to get to the answer. That is an important distinction, because it is important that we not mislead Canadians as to what happened. It was not 11 days. That is the first thing. The second thing that is important to note is that, when we talk about this issue, it is very easy to try to politicize it, as members opposite have chosen to do. However, let us look at the facts. In British Columbia, there was a pilot program that sought to try to save lives. Alberta and Saskatchewan had no such pilot program and, by extension, would not have met any of the criteria of concern that the Leader of the Opposition had. By that logic, they would not have had any kind of a problem at all. In fact, Alberta has seen a 25% increase, with four people a day dying. In Saskatchewan, it is a record year for people dying. These are not records to be proud of in provinces that have been run by Conservatives, so we need to stop talking about this as an NDP problem, a Liberal problem or a Conservative problem; it as a public health challenge. This is a public health crisis. This is not about criminalizing people with addictions. What the opposition has sought to do and continues to do is play politics with the most vulnerable in our society, knowing that they may not be able to defend themselves. We will make sure, on this side of the House, that we work hard and tirelessly to use a public health approach and a science-based approach. We will work with jurisdictions to ensure that the best possible means by which to address this crisis is there. Not every solution is going to be perfect, as the Government of British Columbia came to understand. However, it was not looking for perfection. I do not think anybody was. People are looking to save lives. I know for a fact that there are Conservatives who believe very strongly that we need to think about how we address safe supply. There are Conservatives who believe we should be taking a public health-based approach to deal with addictions and this crisis. Ben Perrin, who advised Stephen Harper for many years, is one of the strongest advocates for taking a materially different approach to what the Conservative leader would like to do. It is important for us to listen to people from all walks of life in this conversation, to hear the stories of those who have perished and of the families who are grieving. It is impossible to put someone in treatment if they are dead. I have spoken to parents in my riding whose children have been lost to tainted drugs. They wish there had been a way for their kids to access a safe supply so they could go to treatment. Sadly, those children, young people, university students, firefighters, doctors and nurses will not be able to get that treatment. It is important for us to recognize the very difference between this fanciful notion the opposition would like to believe, that somehow there are drugs being given out willy-nilly, versus a science-based, medically administered process in helping people stay alive so that they can get treatment they need. If we believe, as Canadians, that our job and our obligation is to stand by our fellow citizens, to help them in their times of difficulty and to be innovative and creative in finding the solutions needed to address public health issues, then we have an obligation to work with jurisdictions. We have an obligation to work with provinces, territories and municipalities to find solutions. I want people to remember that this application was first brought forth with the support of law enforcement, the Vancouver Police Department, the City of Vancouver and the Province of British Columbia. This was not something that was cooked up by one level of government. This was something that came about as a result of detailed discussion, hard work, thoughtful consideration and a sincere desire to save lives. The fact that it has been pulled back does not negate those principles. The fact that it is pulled back does not diminish the fact that provinces and jurisdictions that did not have this pilot have seen unprecedented numbers deaths from the opioid crisis. If we are going to have a serious discussion in the House, then we should be talking about ways to work together across politics to ask the questions. What are medical professionals telling us and what is law enforcement is looking for? How do we make sure public safety is indeed part of the conversation? Are we also doing everything necessary to be thoughtful and to be mindful of the people whose lives are at risk? If we are serious about this conversation, then the opposition should not be saying that it is going to do this and do that in absolute terms because that is not how public policy works. That is not how serious people operate. Serious people look at the complexity of serious issues and accept that there are going to be things that work and that sometimes they do not. However, when they do not, the question should be about how we analyze it to make it better. On this side of the House, we are always going to trust science, work with law enforcement, work with medical professionals, talk to victims to hear their points of view and their perspectives, and come together on public policy solutions that are grounded in fact not fancy. In British Columbia, as in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Nova Scotia and across this country from coast to coast to coast, people are grieving loved ones as a result of tainted drugs. People are looking for governments to work together to address this crisis. When opposition parties or anyone chooses to use as a political football the grief and the death of others, we need to stand up as Canadians and say that it is not okay. We should be doing the hard work of finding solutions, not pretending that slogans are going to save lives. Anywhere in the world that we look, a slogan has not saved a life. However, what has worked is people looking seriously at public health issues to actually work together to find solutions. I am proud of the fact that I belong to a government that is serious about this issue, serious about getting people into treatment, getting people the help they need, and that is serious about doing it in a way that recognizes the reality on the ground and the reality in communities that are desperate for leaders in this country to work together on this important solution. There are members opposite, from the New Democratic Party, who have put in time, effort and energy on this issue, and I salute them and commend them. We will continue to do that on our side. However, if we are going to solve this crisis, it is going to be done with all of us pulling together, not by playing politics with the lives of victims of a health crisis.

1472 words

Mr. Wilson Miao (Richmond Centre, Lib.)

May/9/24 2:00:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to the Jean Ip Foundation, a non-profit organization in Richmond, a source of hope and support for underprivileged students. The Jean Ip Foundation's scholarship program seeks to assist in removing educational barriers and providing scholarships to help students pursue post-secondary education in Canada, achieving their academic goals without financial stress. The foundation began awarding annual scholarships through local school districts to students in British Columbia. Today, the Jean Ip Foundation has expanded its mission with a scholarship program that reaches across Canada, offering up to $10,000 to financially disadvantaged students. With this expansion, the Jean Ip Foundation reinforces its commitment to making higher education more accessible and affordable. I encourage all young Canadians to seize this opportunity and apply for the Jean Ip Foundation scholarship program before May 31, the end of the month, and help ease the financial burden of higher education and open doors to new possibilities. I thank the Jean Ip Foundation for all its dedication—

173 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 312