44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 29, 2024 02:00PM
Mr. Speaker, I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion, which would see the bill voted on at third reading by Wednesday, June 12, at end of day.
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-70, an act respecting countering foreign interference, shall be disposed of as follows:
(a) at the expiry of the time provided for government orders later today, the bill would be deemed adopted at second reading and referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security;
(b) during the consideration of the bill by the committee: (1) the committee shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for committee meetings; (2) the committee shall meet for extended hours on Monday, June 3; Tuesday, June 4; Wednesday, June 5; and Thursday, June 6, to gather evidence from witnesses; (3) the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, the officials from the RCMP and CSIS, the national security and intelligence adviser to the Prime Minister, the officials from the Department of Public Safety and other expert witnesses deemed relevant by the committee be invited to appear; (4) all amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee by 9 a.m. on Monday, June 10; (5) amendments filed by independent members shall be deemed to have been proposed during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; (6) the committee shall meet at 3.30 p.m. on Monday, June 10—
256 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, this is the motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-70, an act respecting countering foreign interference, shall be disposed of as follows:
(a) at the expiry of the time provided for government orders later today, the bill be deemed adopted at second reading and referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security;
(b) during the consideration of the bill by the committee: (1) the committee shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for committee meetings; (2) the committee shall meet for extended hours on Monday, June 3; Tuesday, June 4; Wednesday, June 5; and Thursday, June 6, 2024, to gather evidence from witnesses; (3) the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, the officials from the RCMP and CSIS, the national security adviser to the Prime Minister, the officials from the Department of Public Safety and other expert witnesses deemed relevant by the committee be invited to appear; (4) all amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee by 9 a.m. on Monday, June 10, 2024; and (5) amendments filed by independent members shall be deemed to have been proposed during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.
This was drafted by the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. I hope it will receive unanimous consent.
230 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 6:20:32 p.m.
- Watch
Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:39:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have immense respect for the parliamentary secretary as a person, but citing the amount of money being thrown at the problem is not enough because we see the efficacy of this government's efforts. What it is doing is not good enough, and unfortunately, what it is doing is not working.
The safety and security of Canadians are first and foremost a responsibility of the Canadian government, yet one need only look at campuses across this country or speak to anyone from the Jewish community and, increasingly, non-Jewish Canadians to know that safety is top of mind for everyone, alongside the challenges of affordability and the cost of living. What this government is doing and continuing to propagate by sharing the same talking points is not going to make us any safer.
Is anyone investigating what is happening at these encampments and will the government take action? What will it take?
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 8:06:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have passed legislation to ensure workplace safety, including for hospitals, that is regulated by the province. We have ensured there is legislation for health workers to be safe.
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 8:07:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member well knows that health services are under the purview of provincial jurisdiction for safety and enforcement.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 8:08:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the request by B.C. for the subsection 56(1) exemption had a clear mandate of public safety and public health. That is how we work collaboratively with the B.C. government.
34 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 8:09:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the B.C. exemption, which was requested by the province, has been amended, as per its request, to ensure that public safety is a top priority as well as ensuring public health services.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 9:50:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, we are committed to a compassionate approach to this public health crisis that is clearly anchored in public safety as well, but we need to understand that those who use drugs need to be directed to health care. Families and communities have a right to be safe wherever they are, parks—
54 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 9:51:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, we are moving through this public health crisis with a strict lens on public safety and public health, and we will work with jurisdictions.
26 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 9:53:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, we are working closely with public safety and criminal justice partners to ensure that diversion is mitigated.
19 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 9:58:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the amendment entailed direction for public health and public safety in terms of public spaces.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:23:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I did some time ago, but as the member would well know, my colleague, the Minister of Health, is addressing workforce safety.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:23:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, that would be under provincial jurisdiction, as the member well knows, but we are all encouraging safety in all workplaces.
22 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:28:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, as a father of three, I empathize with many parents who worry about drugs. For instance, the Abbotsford Soccer Association decried, in an open letter, several safety issues related to drug paraphernalia, overdoses, vandalism and even rape at public fields.
Does the minister agree it is unacceptable for parents and coaches to have to sweep soccer fields for drug paraphernalia before the start of every game and practice?
70 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:28:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, as a parent myself, I will say we are always concerned about public health and public safety for our children, our families and our communities, but we have committed to a public health approach that is compassionate with a firm lens on public safety as well. This is the work that we do comprehensively with all jurisdictions across the country.
62 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:31:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, B.C. requested an amendment to its exemption and we worked with B.C., as we always have done and will continue to do, to ensure that there is a balance between public health and public safety in all spaces.
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 10:41:15 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Madam Chair, on the other side of the House, they roll out slogans that are literally written on the back of a napkin, rather than talking to experts or speaking to families and communities about what truly needs to be done to address this crisis. Their solution is criminalizing their loved ones. To that, I say that we cannot arrest our way out of a health crisis, and we are in a health crisis. People are dying and families are losing loved ones. We have to open the door for those loved ones who are struggling with addiction. They cannot just snap their fingers and get there. We need to give them a pathway to safety, one that is compassionate and based on evidence.
We know that safe consumption sites save lives. Over 55,000 overdoses have been overturned at safe consumption sites. That is 55,000 lives saved and over 471,000 referrals from safe consumption sites to treatment options. Those 471,000 lives were given a pathway to make better choices for themselves, to get help with their addiction. We cannot look away. Safe consumption sites in communities that are well managed and well resourced mean that we are meeting people where they are. We are not judging them, not stigmatizing them, not telling them to go to a back alley to shoot up and die. Rather, we would say, “Come on inside. Let me help you. Let's talk about it. I see you in your struggle.”
On that side of the House, they pit harm reduction against treatment. This is not an either-or debate. This is about saving lives. We have all lost someone. I have lost a dear friend to an overdose, someone who I knew all my life. Every resource was made available to him, and he died alone, leaving two beautiful children and a wife behind.
I am a mother. I worry about my kids. We all worry about our young people. That is why prevention is so important. That is why we have the no opioids program and the ease the burden program for our tradespeople. We are doing the work with jurisdictions in every community that we can. If anyone wants help in this country, we are there for them. That is why we have the ETF of $150 million in budget 2024. That is $150 million over the next three years for communities, indigenous communities and municipalities that need our help. On top of that, there is $200 billion in bilateral agreements, where over 30% on average is for mental health and substance use. This is on top of the health transfers because there is not one silver bullet to this.
Treatment is not the only answer. We have to get people to treatment. We cannot treat someone if they are dead. We cannot treat someone if they are dying at home alone, in a back alley, or on the streets of many communities in this country. We are losing people because there is a toxic, poisoned drug supply. That is where enforcement comes in with our pillars, and that is why we work with law enforcement. However, law enforcement is asking us to stand up in our communities to work with evidence, to work with experts, to work with peer support workers, outreach workers and health care workers to save lives.
It is uncomfortable to see someone struggle with addiction. Seeing someone in their most vulnerable and worst moment is painful, but on this side of the House, a comprehensive approach says that even if it is hard, even if it is uncomfortable, even if it is difficult, we do not look away. We meet the moment. We meet the challenge. We have spent a billion dollars since 2017, as opposed to the two-third cuts that were put in place under the previous government.
We know that it is not just about throwing money at this. It is about building the systems that we need with provincial partners who are responsible for health because this is a public health crisis. This is not a criminal one. That is why we put into place bills such as Bill C-5, to ensure that we are moving people out of the criminal justice system into health care and into supportive environments. Why is that? It is because we care.
Governments are meant to invest in their people. That is what we do on this side of the House: We invest in people. We do not cut. We do not look away. We say we are going to find the tools so that people can live one more day, and we can show them a pathway forward and a way to get the health care they need. Someone will address that wound. Someone will lead them to the supports that they need, but we have to invest in them.
Harm reduction is a key part of that process. To pit harm reduction against treatment is to say it is either-or, it is all or nothing, it is black or white, and it just takes treatment. It means that they are not seeing the person in front of them and the health and services they need. On this side of the House, for every single one of us who has lost a loved one to this opioid crisis and who wants communities and young people to be safe, we need to invest in a strategy that we know works. That is prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery and, yes, enforcement too. Public safety and public health go hand in hand.
We will not look away. I will not look away from the people who know we can save their lives, whether it is with naloxone kits, drug checking or safe consumption sites. We know that, when we close safe consumption sites, overdose deaths go up because people go back into the shadows. We want to bring people into the light. We want them to know that they are going to see another day and that we are investing in them because they matter.
That is the work we are doing. That is what I invite every member of the House to stand up for and support. The Nimbyism, the slogans, the fear and the stigma we are seeing on the other side will just put people back in the shadows. I want us to see the light.
1078 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 11:29:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, that would be a question to the Minister of Public Safety. However, we are in conversation.
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/24 12:02:22 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, agreeing is not good enough. Safe consumption sites are frozen in Ontario. The government is not delivering them in those places in Alberta that I talked about.
Is the minister aware that in 2008, all nine judges of the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the federal Conservative health minister's attempt to close Insite went against the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms by threatening the safety and lives of the people who needed to use it?
What has changed for the minister? I want to know. Do we need to do this again? Is this what needs to happen, given that the minister is saying that she cannot do anything as it is outside her jurisdiction?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
