Evidence of meeting #24 for Health in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was alcohol.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
It would be helpful to actually take a good look at that and find out whether it's because of accident or injury because of an impaired state.
9:25 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
Yes, we can provide that.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Anyway, that is an interesting statistic.
I'll follow up on impairment, and young people with a developing brain, according to the remarks from experts...and I guess we'll learn more from the experts. But I understand there was a round table recently and perhaps you have some comment on the effects of impairment, and young people and the developing brain. Certainly, the person who is impaired is the last one to recognize it, which is one of the challenges. They think they're fine, cool, but their performance is down.
The effect of impairment on judgment, on driving, for example, is a big concern to me. I've seen people actually on 4/20 walking down the street right here in Ottawa as impaired as anybody who is inebriated on alcohol. So just on the impairment, can you comment on what we know about marijuana in terms of impairment?
9:25 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
There were indeed some interesting statistics that the experts provided yesterday at the ministerial round table on impairment. If the committee doesn't get enough information from the experts, we'll be happy to follow up and provide it. But there were some alarming statistics about recent studies that show the number of automobile fatalities where, in fact, the individual was not alcohol impaired but marijuana impaired, not just among youth but high levels among youth—and again growing rates.
There's also a move, as the committee may know, to be better able to give law enforcement the tools to allow them to be better able to determine impairment.
A big issue, from our point of view, and I alluded to it in terms of our education with youth, is how do we make youth aware of that? From a Health Canada point of view, that is where we are focusing our efforts, to educate youth about that, and again to denormalize it. It's sort of like tobacco, where kids understand that smoking cigarettes is a pretty stupid thing to do. They also understand that driving under the influence of alcohol is a pretty stupid thing to do, but not so much, the case studies show, with marijuana.
9:25 a.m.
Director General, Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
If I may just add on the same topic of drug-affected driving, a recent report issued by the International Narcotics Control Board, in 2013, cites that cannabis is the most prevalent illicit drug detected in drivers in Canada, the United States, and Europe. The same report also cites that habitual cannabis use actually links to a 9.5-fold increase in driving accidents.
Even international reports are also obviously citing the cognitive impairments and the significant increase in the risk of death due to vehicle accidents with cannabis use.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
So this would carry over for workers operating heavy equipment on the job site . There are a lot of occupations where you're working...farmers even. There are lots of members of Parliament missing fingers and so on from working with heavy equipment on farms. So if you're impaired anywhere around heavy equipment, you're at much greater risk of having an industrial accident, I would think.
On the issue of genetic predisposition, I'd just like to comment on that. Genes are modified by the things we're exposed to, so you're getting a genetic response from cells all the time to external threats. I would think anybody who has been using a substance or been exposed to a substance is going to fairly quickly begin to develop a genetic response to that modification. So just saying that the genes are perhaps different from somebody who hasn't been exposed to this would probably be a valid observation, but it doesn't mean they started with genes that were that way. They've been modified by external experiences. That would be an observation, I would say.
Also, I want to ask you this, then, on the same line. On maternal smoking of marijuana and expressions with the fetus, and with the young child who has a mother who's been smoking marijuana, I've seen some evidence raised that this is a particular concern. I'm just wondering if that's something that's on your radar. Can you comment on that?
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ben Lobb
A brief response...we're just coming up to seven minutes. Thank you.
9:30 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
We are providing funding to the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse on that issue, but I do have a Health Canada...Dr. Abramovici, who could speak a little bit more to that, if time allows.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Hanan Abramovici Senior Scientific Information Officer, Office of Research and Surveillance, Department of Health
Your question was with regard to maternal cannabis use and if there are effects on the fetus. There have been a few limited studies, longitudinal studies, that have looked at that, and they found some subtle long-term effects on children born to mothers who had used cannabis during pregnancy. What those long-term effects were, the actual impact in everyday life, I'm not sure they were clearly demonstrated, but in terms of laboratory measures of cognition and other neurocognitive faculties, they found subtle impairments in certain aspects of memory among children who were born to mothers who had used cannabis during pregnancy.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ben Lobb
Just for the purpose of the committee, if there's interest, maybe the analyst and so forth could follow up with those studies for you.
Ms. Ashton, welcome. You have five minutes, or around there.
May 1st, 2014 / 9:30 a.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill, MB
Thank you very much. I'm very pleased to be here. I guess I benefit from the vantage point of not being on this committee regularly and getting to see what's going on here.
I was really excited to be asked to be on the health committee at today's meeting. When you ask my constituents, one of the major concerns that they have is around health: health care, wellness. I represent an area where there are immense health challenges, and that's a real priority. Then I saw the title of this study, and I have to say that my first thought was, what century do we live in? If we're going to have a discussion, and a scientific discussion on marijuana, the title, first of all, seems pretty skewed. I am a social scientist myself. When you take on a study, you look at the good, the bad, the risks, the benefits, and it's pretty alarming that here in a parliamentary committee where we're expecting Canadians to tune in and take an interest in what we're doing, we're looking at a study that is, right off the bat, skewed.
We heard a presentation, and with all respect to the officials—you're certainly working with the guidance of the motion that's been presented at this committee—I don't feel like we got a full understanding. In fact, the presentation that we heard today makes me wonder why we have a medical marijuana program the way that marijuana is spoken of.
Actually, in my riding, for many years, growing medical marijuana was a source of economic development. Flin Flon did have a medical marijuana operation, which has now moved on to another part of the country, and people were okay with it because they knew that this was something that people needed. They knew that this was something that created jobs, that it was done safely, that the RCMP regulated it, and that this was something that was important to the wellness of many people who were in a very difficult spot.
Then, years later, I have a chance to hear what we're looking at today, and I'm concerned about the way in which we're approaching critical studies, and about the disconnect between where the mindset of Canadians is at, and the understanding that medical marijuana, or marijuana can have positive uses. That is something that is certainly not reflected both in the motion of this study or the presentation we heard today.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Mr. Chair, the member is a guest at the committee today. The committee has taken a decision on a course of study with reasons that were debated amongst the committee.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Frankly, I think that badgering the witnesses about the scope of the study is probably not appropriate.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ben Lobb
For the record, Mr. Lunney's point of order wasn't a point of order, but you have a point of order on—
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
It's about Ms. Ashton's time.
Basically she can ask what she wants, talk about what she wants. It's her seven minutes.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ben Lobb
Fair enough. I'm assuming that she was doing some preamble there.
Again, this isn't going against your time.
I was assuming that she was going to do some preamble and then ask a question, which I think is pretty fair.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill, MB
Sure.
I mean, I've watched government members take up their entire time doing preamble, and I'm perfectly familiar with the rules.
Thank you very much, Mr. Lunney, for the warm welcome to this committee.
What I did want to raise is whether you could share with us what studies, what research, could give us accurate background on the need and the benefits of marijuana, including medical marijuana?
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
On a point of order, Ms. Ashton has obviously not seen the scope of the study or taken it seriously. It's looking at the health risks related to marijuana.
It's off topic. We're not here to discuss—