Bill C-300 (Historical)

Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act

An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention

This enactment establishes a requirement for the Government of Canada to develop a federal framework for suicide prevention in consultation with relevant non-governmental organizations, the relevant entity in each province and territory, as well as with relevant federal departments.

Mental Health

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, over the past 11 years I have spent much of my time focusing on the issues of mental health and suicide prevention. Motion No. 388, targeting online predators, passed unanimously in November of 2009, and Bill C-300, calling for a federal framework for suicide prevention, received royal assent on December 14, 2012. These are two initiatives I am proud to have championed.

I was encouraged in February of this year to receive a letter from Noah Irvine, an exceptional young man from Guelph, who unfortunately knows this issue all too well. In his letter to all members of Parliament, he challenged us to champion the cause of mental health, and to stand up for Canadians suffering with mental illness. His story of personal loss, and his ongoing courage in overcoming these trials are an example to every one of us.

Noah is visiting Ottawa today. It has been my privilege to meet him, and sense his ongoing commitment to this important cause. I thank Noah for his message of hope. May he keep up the good work.

[Philip Upshall, National Executive Director, Mood Disorders Society of Canada]

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to appear before you. My associate executive director is with me.

Just at the outset, I'd like to say I've appeared before a large number of standing committee meetings over the last 40 years of my activities in Ottawa, and I am so happy to see the members taking such a terrific interest in this topic. Frequently, standing committees show up with four or five members and it's rather impromptu. It's obvious you take this seriously and I'm really happy to see that.

Mood Disorders Society of Canada is a national, not-for-profit charity managed and membered by people with lived experience in their families. We are active at the national level only, and we have been around since 2011. We are active in many areas, some of which Dave will mention. We become engaged when we think there is an opportunity to do something for the people who need help. Those are the people who live with mental illnesses, whether they're on the street, whether they're veterans, whether they're first responders—whoever we can be involved with to help.

We've focused on that primarily because you can become involved in Ottawa with an awful lot of meetings and a lot of consultations, a lot of round tables, that produce not a whole lot of effective knowledge translation that will assist the people who need help. The material is important, and if you're involved in that stuff, that's fine; it's just not our bag.

One of the things we have done in the past, and we currently do, is become involved with the research community. We became involved with them initially when CIHR came into existence and with Bill C-300. We sat on their institute advisory board for many years. We're founders of the Canadian Depression Research and Intervention Network. The reason we did that is because there is a lot of research out there that I'm sure you've found is not translated into helping people who need help. We try to motivate the researchers and the community generally to pick up what we know will work and get it working, and still support research.

In 2004, we worked to help people with mental illness improve their quality of life. In 2011, we hosted a round table at the War Museum on PTSD. It was called Out of Sight, Not Out of Mind. The entire proceedings are on our website. It involved 75 people from all walks of life, including the Minister of Veterans Affairs, the military chief of staff, and a lot of people who were involved in the then-nascent discussion that PTSD is important.

Out of that came a report and many suggestions for improvement of our attention to PTSD. The recommendations presented in the report included addressing stigma; enhancing the knowledge of physicians and health care providers, which we think is number one on identification and treatment of PTSD; educating PTSD sufferers and their families on available support networks and resources; and promoting ongoing collaboration and dialogue among government and leaders in the field of mental illness specializing in PTSD.

We've looked at the presentations you've had in the last few days and they're terrific. You have a lot of really good information before you and there is no sense our repeating that information for you.

From our perspective, in order to address PTSD and prevent suicide, we would suggest you might look at early diagnosis of mental illness. Early diagnosis of mental illness will help us stop the movement into PTSD and into suicidal ideation. Early diagnosis requires the attention of the medical community to the issues of mental health, which is pathetically lacking at this time.

We would recommend that you increase mental health education among health care providers for the reason I just mentioned.

We strongly believe that peer support needs to be number one on your agenda. Whoever you talk to will tell you that it's the human touch, the human element. Research tells us that peer support needs to be there for you.

I'm going to turn it over to Dave Gallson to give you a bit of an overview of some of our programs.

Canadian Human Rights Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to the government's Bill C-16.

In its current form, I cannot support this bill for a number of reasons. Let me assure all of my colleagues in this House and, indeed, all Canadians that I do not oppose this bill because of any hatred for, any fear of, nor any malice toward anyone who is dealing with questions of gender identity.

Before I outline my concerns about the potential negative outcomes of Bill C-16, allow me to say clearly that I am supportive of any initiatives that will protect persons from hate speech. I am supportive of the need to guarantee equal rights. I also agree that there can be no tolerance for bullying or violence of any kind, or for any reason.

Parliamentarians and all Canadians have a duty to prevent bullying, hate speech, violence, or any such behaviour, but I am wary of the demands of any government-imposed value systems that would change fundamental definitions and principles of society. The imposition of fundamental value system changes of this magnitude must be viewed with some degree of skepticism. Too much is at stake for us to proceed without caution, if we proceed at all.

I am supportive of equal rights for all, but in my opinion this bill goes far beyond equal rights into the territory of granting extra rights or special rights for some; and in the process of granting those extra rights for some, we automatically diminish and deny the legitimate time-honoured rights of many others.

Relating to Bill C-16, I have a number of concerns. Some of the concerns address immediate potential negative repercussions, while others relate to the potential for long-term effects and outcomes of the enactment of this bill.

My concerns lie in four areas. I am concerned that this bill would cause fear for many Canadians, fear that they would not be able to even discuss public policy issues, such as this one, on which they may disagree with the government-imposed agenda. I am concerned about the potential harm to innocent children and youth as a result of the possible invasion of their privacy. I am concerned that the terms gender identity and gender expression are very subjective terms, far too subjective to be used in the context of legal documents, particularly in the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Criminal Code of Canada.

Finally, I am concerned that, when government adopts dramatic changes to public policy as it relates to gender identity and sexuality, with minimal research or support, the results could be harmful for all members of society, but especially for those we are actually trying to help; that is, transgendered children or youth.

Let me address these points in reverse order. Would this bill inadvertently harm those whom we are trying to help? There have been many eminent scholars, medical practitioners, psychologists, psychiatrists, and professional organizations that have raised legitimate concerns about the current treatment of the transgendered person and are especially concerned about long-term negative effects of hormone treatment and reassignment surgery.

The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. They point out the biological medical dangers associated with the use of puberty-blocking hormones and the follow-up use of cross-sex hormonal medication—testosterone and estrogen—which are needed in late adolescence. These are known to be associated with dangerous health risks including, but not limited to, high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke, and cancer.

There is another sobering statistic, and that is the increased suicide rate. During my 10 years here in Parliament, possibly the one issue that has received most of my attention has been suicide prevention. Motion M-388, dealing with Internet predators, and Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention were private members' business initiatives that I tabled and worked on diligently for many years.

The research is clear that the suicide rate for adults is 20 times higher for those who have used cross-sex hormones and undergone sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden, which is among the most LGBTQ-affirming countries.

The American College of Pediatricians states that:

Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation...is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

Research reported by the American Psychiatric Association in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, clearly shows that the large majority of boys and girls who experience gender dysphoria will not experience the persistence of these feelings following adolescence.

I also urge my colleagues to listen to Dr. Ken Zucker, professor in the department of psychiatry and psychology at the University of Toronto, and to Dr. Susan Bradley, psychiatrist in chief at the Hospital for Sick Children and head of the division of child psychiatry and professor emeritus at the University of Toronto. They state:

It has been our experience that a sizable number of children and their families can achieve a great deal of change. In these cases, the gender identity disorder resolves fully, and nothing in the children's behavior or fantasy suggest that gender identity issues remain problematic.

In light of the input from these groups and experts in psychiatry and psychology, at the very least it is important that government does not legislate ideological conformity on this issue. We need to take a stand for good public policy as it relates to gender and sexuality, and to base our decisions on scientific research that will help protect against devastating lifelong negative consequences.

Another major concern for me in Bill C-16 is the issue that the terms gender identity and gender expression are very subjective terms, far too subjective to be used in the context of legal documents. Would policies protecting people on the grounds of gender identity and expression merely provide safety and protection—that is, provide a shield against against abuse—or would they be used to drive a broader agenda? As legislators, are we simply trying to protect the sexual minority from verbal and physical abuse, or are we also intending to impose a cultural shift in our very understanding of human sexuality and gender expression? What would the impact be on immigrant groups and faith groups, the majority of which are at odds with gender fluidity concepts? Would they have the freedom to teach their children and practise their beliefs without being accused of hate speech or a human rights violation?

For me and the millions of other Canadians who acknowledge the supremacy of God, as the first words of our charter affirm, there is the reality that our faith journey is the foundation of our world view. If freedom of religion is to be embraced, then it is of paramount importance that Bill C-16 not infringe upon that fundamental freedom. It is important that government clarify the nature of the protection being afforded and how it expects terms such as gender identity and gender expression to be interpreted. The implications are too unpredictable. Far too much is left to interpretation that would result in unnecessary accusation of human rights violations as well as litigation and endless court cases to further tie up our court system.

Another concern is the potential harm to innocent children. As I stated earlier, I am in total support of equal rights. Therefore the question needs to be asked: Where are the equal rights? Is it equal rights of the boys or girls and of the young men or women who expect to find only those of their same gender in their change rooms? Is it fair to have their rights trampled upon by this imposition of extra rights for some? Common sense dictates that the potential for abuse of this new freedom to self-identify with a change room of one's own choice could very well lead to bullying, harassment, and even sexualized violence in these public spaces. One of the pitfalls of Bill C-16 is its failure to recognize the potential that heterosexual predators who, while not transgendered themselves, would take advantage of the protection of this bill to hide behind their predatory pursuits.

Yes, I am concerned for the safety and well-being of young children and youth, who deserve their right to privacy.

Finally, I am concerned about the fear this bill may cause for many Canadians. I fear they will not be able to even discuss public policy issues such as this one, on which they may disagree with the government agenda. Any law that limits legitimate discussion and debate of closely held beliefs presents a danger to freedom of expression, a fundamental value held dear by people across the political spectrum. The right to disagree must be viewed as sacred in our society. It is the lifeblood of both new ideas and age-old protections.

I am simply asking that those who support this bill respect my right and the rights of millions of Canadians not to be charged with human rights violations because we make our views known or because we disagree with others' views. We can and must respect each other even in spite of holding opposing views. It is my hope that we can openly disagree without labelling each other.

An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

I have had the privilege of following, from a distance, the proceedings in the Senate over these last days. I am disappointed that a number of the options that were given to the Senate were not adopted.

Senator Plett's amendment to make it a criminal offence for anyone to compel an individual, organization, or medical practitioner to provide medical assistance in dying or to refer was rejected by the Senate.

I wish I could share the optimism of our Minister of Health when she assured me a few minutes ago that no one would be compelled to participate in this. I do not share that optimism. I am hopeful I am wrong on that. I am hopeful there will never be a case where a medical professional, a health care worker, a health care institution will be obligated to participate or to refer for this practice when they find it morally objectionable.

The other amendment Senator Plett put forward was adopted by the Senate, however, rejected by the government today in its response. That is the amendment relating to not allowing a beneficiary of a person who is seeking medical assistance in dying from assisting that person.

It seems quite clear to me that if we are to protect vulnerable people, this was one of the key points that needed to be adopted. By rejecting this amendment that was passed by Senate, we are actually increasing vulnerability. That is a sad result of rejecting this amendment.

It goes without saying that this is a very sad day, a disappointing day for me. This is a day when choices will be made that will affect generations to come, and it is without question the most important choice that I and most of my colleagues will make in our parliamentary careers.

It is disappointing on two points. First, it is disappointing to see the activism of the Supreme Court. I mentioned earlier in my comments on this topic that it was unfortunate the Supreme Court of Canada had taken it upon itself to force legislation to be written which would overturn hundreds of centuries of our understanding of the intrinsic value and dignity of every human life. The Supreme Court has done this, completely rejecting the fact that as elected members of the House, we have rejected initiatives to legalize physician-assisted suicide on at least 15 occasions since 1991, the most recent one in 2010 by a vote of 59 to 226.

The other reason this action is disappointing for me is because of the many years I have worked on the issue of suicide prevention. I have worked with people who have been left to suffer the aftermath of suicide, parents who have lost children, children who have lost parents, and more. To know there are groups across Canada today that are working very hard to prevent suicide, to save lives, and to see we are now, in a way, normalizing suicidal behaviour is disappointing.

Bill C-300 was an initiative that the House passed almost unanimously, calling on the federal government to initiate a federal framework for suicide prevention. Just a few weeks ago, the Minister of Health indicated that the bill was almost ready to be fully implemented by the Public Health of Canada.

On one hand, we are working as hard as we can to prevent suicide, which I applaud and will continue to give my efforts to. On the other hand, it appears that we have given up and we are allowing those who are losing hope to actually access assisted suicide.

Ten Canadians each day lose their life to suicide. In Canada, groups are working hard on the ground to prevent suicide. Mental health care workers, experts, are providing safe talk training so front-line workers, such as teachers and our volunteers in our minor sports programs, can observe these first signs of suicidal ideation, and intervene with the intent of restoring hope to that person who has lost hope and is now in despair. Their motivation has always been to save lives.

Now, to turn 180 degrees and begin the path towards normalization of suicide, is a tragic course, a tragic course of action for all of Canada.

Again, I want to quote from an expert in this field. Aaron Kheriaty, an associate professor of psychiatry and director of the medical ethics program at the University of California, Irvine school of medicine, states:

The debate over doctor-assisted suicide is often framed as an issue of personal autonomy and privacy. Proponents argue that assisted suicide should be legalized because it affects only those individuals who — assuming they are of sound mind — are making a rational and deliberate choice to end their lives. But presenting the issue in this way ignores the wider social consequences.

What if it turns out that the individuals who make this choice in fact are influencing the actions of those who follow?

Professor Kheriaty goes on to report that in states where physician-assisted suicide has been legalized, there has been an increase in suicides of 16.3% overall, but among those over 65 an increase of 14.5%. He further states:

[These] results should not [be surprising to] anyone familiar with the literature on the social contagion effects of suicidal behavior. You don’t discourage suicide by assisting suicide....

...Aside from publicized cases, there is evidence that suicidal behavior tends to spread person to person through social networks, up to three “degrees of separation” away. So my decision to take my own life would affect not just my friends’ risk of doing the same, but even my friends’ friends’ friends. No person is an island.

Finally, it is widely acknowledged that the law is a teacher: Laws shape the ethos of a culture by affecting cultural attitudes toward certain behaviors and influencing moral norms. Laws permitting physician-assisted suicide send a message that, under especially difficult circumstances, some lives are not worth living — and that suicide is a reasonable or appropriate way out. This is a message that will be heard not just by those with a terminal illness but also by anyone tempted to think he or she cannot go on any longer.

Debates [around] physician-assisted suicide raise broad questions about our societal attitudes toward suicide. Recent research findings on suicide rates press the question: What sort of society do we want to become? Suicide is already a public health crisis. Do we want to legalize a practice that will worsen this crisis?

I believe life is to be chosen over what some would call “death with dignity”. There is nothing dignified about deciding someone's life is not worth living. If a patient has a need, let us address it. Our goal should be to eliminate the problem, not the patient.

It is my firm belief that the House and the current government should be invoking the notwithstanding clause in order to protect Canadians. For thousands of years, all caring societies have agreed that it is not okay to kill another human being. We can try to soften that language. We can call it physician-assisted death. We can call it medical assistance in dying. We can use any euphemism we want, but the reality does not change.

Today, we are intentionally throwing away the wisdom of our faith foundations and the wisdom of centuries of civilization. My fear is that in a few short years, we, our children, and our grandchildren will live to see the folly of allowing physician-assisted suicide.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you very much to both of you for being here. The incredible grasp you have on this is very humbling for me, I'll tell you.

I had the opportunity to look through the outline of the “Resiliency Within” paper you've done. I certainly applaud many of the initiatives here. I could go through the eight chapters and list many of them. I think it's a great program.

In regard to this, has there been any consultation with the Public Health Agency of Canada in the development of the federal framework for suicide prevention, which is to be implemented sometime later this year? The Public Health Agency of Canada was charged with the responsibility of implementing Bill C-300, the federal framework. I'm wondering what kind of collaboration happened between the Government of Canada and the Government of Nunavut in terms of developing your program.

Certainly I wouldn't want to imply that the framework should supersede or even be over it. In fact, that's one of the reasons we chose the word “framework” rather than “strategy”. We wanted something that was available to be contextualized in different communities across Canada, but I think there should have been, and I'm hoping there was, some degree of consultation with the Inuit community.

Situation in Indigenous Communities

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Cariboo—Prince George.

I want to thank my colleague from Timmins—James Bay for opening up this opportunity to discuss this important issue tonight.

I rise in the House this evening to lend a voice to a topic which lies heavily on my heart and I know the hearts of all my colleagues on both sides of this chamber. This is not the time to debate what could have been done or what should have been done, but rather, we need to come together with a solution to the issue we are currently facing. There is no time to waste on partisanship when lives are at stake.

Canadians need us to lead by example by coming together and rallying around this hurting community to help them in every possible way. In that spirit, I use the word “discussion” rather than “debate” because I am convinced that the House is eager to take action on the national tragedy that suicide represents.

This is an epidemic that is larger than Attawapiskat and unfortunately, it is growing. It is not okay that the leading causes of death for first nations people under the age of 44 are suicide and self-inflicted injuries. It is not okay that first nations youth die by suicide five to six times more often than non-aboriginal youth. It is not okay that suicide rates for Inuit youth are among the highest in the whole world. This issue needs to light a fire inside all of us to do all that we can to not allow this epidemic to continue.

There are many views on how this is best done, and I share my view from some of the experiences I have accumulated over the past 10 years serving as a member of Parliament. There have been many good steps taken to address this tragic issue of suicide, but much more needs to be done.

As co-chair of the all-party Parliamentary Committee on Palliative and Compassionate Care, I, along with NDP and Liberal colleagues, conducted a study on the complex issue of suicide prevention and our findings are recorded in the report called “Not to be Forgotten”.

What became clear is that suicide is a complex phenomenon with multiple, often intertwining and overlapping causes. The complexity of suicide makes it obvious that solutions cannot be reduced to a mental health approach alone, but must take all aspects of the person into account, including physical, social, cultural, and spiritual factors.

One witness who appeared before our parliamentary committee was Dr. Antoon Leenaars, a psychologist and suicide researcher. He shared with the committee:

Suicide is multi-determined. The common psychological factors...are unbearable pain, cognitive constriction or tunnel vision, ambiguities about life and death, a mental health disorder, a weakened ego, a disturbance in a relationship or some other ideal like one's health or youth, rejection-aggression, and a desire to escape. This complexity calls for diverse suicide prevention strategies. This is necessary to not only solve what is sometimes assumed to be primarily a “medical problem”, but also to address the deep taboo and its stigma, and to address the problem with specific vulnerable groups, such as First Nations and Inuit people, armed services personnel, youth, and elderly (especially those facing end of life issues). The complexity of suicide dictates the necessity of a parallel complexity of solutions. There is never the solution. Therefore not only a mental health approach, but a public health approach, is urgently needed.

Research done by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, as recorded in our committee report, found that the culture of first nations peoples was thrown into turmoil by the policies of colonialism. In this report it was clear that the whole complex of relationships, knowledge, languages, social institutions, beliefs, values and ethical rules that bind people together and give a collection of people and its individual members a sense of who they are and where they belong plays a profound role in mental health and well-being.

Prior to the breakdown of their culture, suicide was rare among first nations people. However, as I previously stated, today, suicide among first nations youth is at epidemic proportions. The development of a sense of healthy identity is profoundly related to one's culture and its ability to reproduce itself in its members. Thus the anthropological and sociological dimensions can have a deep impact upon the psychological.

It is important to be reminded that suicide intervention really does work and many lives are saved every year. Despite this fact, Canadian response is mainly due to the efforts of individuals and private groups who strive against the tide with very few resources. We have many great examples of local groups across Canada that are doing heroic work in preventing suicide.

When I first heard the news of the 11 suicide attempts in Attawapiskat, my heart sank and I immediately remembered an incident from 2011 when I was contacted by Tana Nash of the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council. She informed me of the fact that three suicides had occurred in three different high schools in Waterloo region in one week. Help was urgently needed. At that moment, I knew that I wanted to do something to deal with issues; albeit, I knew my attempts would be less than adequate. I knew that something must be done to address the tragic loss of hope, especially among our young people. To that end, I embarked upon drafting Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention.

As a nation, we have not done enough to implement a coherent program of suicide prevention. Some provinces have begun to make great strides, especially Quebec. Yet, in general, efforts to prevent suicide are still a patchwork, depending upon the generosity of individuals, many of whom have been personally impacted by suicide.

This is why it is so urgent that the government implement the federal framework on suicide prevention as soon as possible. With its immediate implementation, we would be able to give to the groups on the ground the much needed tools and resources they so desperately need.

When fully implemented, Bill C-300, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, would provide guidelines to improve public awareness and knowledge about suicide. It would disseminate information about suicide, including information concerning its prevention. It would make publicly available existing statistics about suicide and related risk factors. This is one of the weak points that many of the groups which came to our committee pointed out: the statistics relating to suicide are so old and so out of date that there is really no way to plan forward in going ahead. The bill would promote collaboration and knowledge exchange across domains, sectors, regions, and jurisdictions. It would define best practices for the prevention of suicide. It would promote the use of research and evidence-based practices for the prevention of suicide.

The principles embodied in Bill C-300 could be contextualized and individualized to communities, depending upon their unique circumstances. I want to underline that fact. This is not a bill that would tell communities how to do it. My colleague earlier pointed out that we need to give communities the ability to contextualize within their own communities.

Furthermore, safeTALK training for all front-line service workers and volunteers on reserve would be a major investment in proactive prevention of suicide. Community members, such as teachers, doctors, nurses, coaches, pastors, club leaders, and many more, are in a unique position to recognize the early warning signs and would be able to ask the right questions that could very well lead to saving a life.

I am certain that everyone in this chamber can tell us how they, their families, or a member in their community, has been negatively impacted by suicide. Each of us knows someone whose sense of hope was overcome by despair and who ended his or her life by suicide. However, we know that suicide does not end the pain. It simply transfers it to the family, to the friends, and to the community.

This particular community that we are discussing tonight is currently in extreme pain. Now is the time to do all that we can to deliver hope.

Evidence is accumulating that when aboriginal communities design their own interventions, typically based upon traditional cultural values and practices, the efficacy of these interventions is high. Therefore, there is hope, but much more needs to be done. We need to offer hope to those who are facing this unbearable pain and who subsequently descend into a state of hopelessness and despair.

Hope is dependent upon having a sense of connection to the future, even if that future is short term. Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit. Without it, the spirit dies.

I am a person of hope. The very fact that this important discussion is happening tonight in the House of Commons in Canada is a huge step forward in providing hope.

We stand with our brothers and sisters in Attawapiskat to provide immediate practical help. We want them to know that they are in our thoughts and prayers. I pray they will know that their lives have value and meaning, that they are loved by their families, their friends, their fellow Canadians, and their Creator.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being here tonight.

I was particularly encouraged to hear you, as professionals, openly declare your concerns about some of the subjective nature of the language that is being used—“irremediable”, “intolerable”, “enduring”. I think this underscores for us as committee members the severe nature of this topic that we're dealing with and how important it is for us to deal with it seriously and to move with extreme caution.

Over the last number of years, I've devoted a fair bit of my time to dealing with mental health issues and suicide prevention. I know that since 1991, there have been no fewer than 15 initiatives in Parliament to authorize physician-assisted suicide. All of these have been defeated. Parliament, in fact, in the last couple of years, has strongly supported some suicide prevention initiatives. Currently the Public Health Agency of Canada is undertaking the job of creating a federal framework for suicide prevention, which is a result of the passage of Bill C-300. In fact, today the Bell Let's Talk initiative is all over Twitter. I don't know how many thousands or millions of tweets have gone out.

Society is concerned about continuing their concerted efforts on suicide prevention. For me, then, it's something of a paradox that we have these initiatives to prevent suicide going on in our country and our health agency, yet here we are, looking at ways to give greater access to suicide.

It's quite clear that physician-assisted suicide is an irreversible act. We know from some of the mental health studies that have been done that people go up and down and that people's minds change over time. We also know that depression is by and large a treatable condition, and you pointed out in your testimony, Dr. Gaind, that there are varying degrees of success.

One of my concerns is that in terms of giving access to people who may be suffering with mental health issues or depression, what additional safeguards should this committee be looking at to make sure we are protecting some of our most vulnerable at the most vulnerable times in their lives?

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to our witnesses for your presentations today.

Since 1991 there have been at least 15 initiatives in Parliament regarding implementing physician-assisted suicide, and in all of those cases members of Parliament have chosen to reject them. Some of the recent initiatives involved work on motion M-388 and Bill C-300, which calls on the federal government to implement a federal framework for suicide prevention, so I find it somewhat ironic that we're here talking about physician-assisted suicide at the same time that our federal government, the health department, and the Public Health Agency of Canada are actively working on implementing a federal framework for suicide prevention.

It's quite clear that physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are irreversible actions, yet studies have shown that many patients who were interested in assisted suicide or euthanasia often change their minds. Certainly one of my primary concerns in the work that I've done on suicide prevention over the last number of years has been exactly that: protecting the most vulnerable Canadians at the most vulnerable points in their lives. We all know that depression is, by and large, a treatable condition, and it's questionable whether anyone in that condition is capable of making a rational request to have his or her life ended.

I want to refer to some of the jurisdictions that currently permit some form of assisted dying. Individuals who have mental health issues that affect their decision-making capacity are treated differently. For example, in the Netherlands individuals can use an advance directive to outline their wishes while they are still competent, but all of the U.S. states that allow physician-assisted suicide do not allow that, and I understand from Mr. Ménard today that Quebec is also in that group.

Mr. Hogg, in terms of access and in terms of protecting vulnerable people, from a legal perspective, what are some of the dangers of allowing individuals who do not have decision-making capacity to access physician-assisted suicide, and what protections could be put in place? You mentioned the waiting period. That is one possible protection, but I'd like you to outline others.

Then, are advance directives an appropriate way to ensure that individuals who lack this capacity are able to access physician-assisted suicide?

[Louise Bradley, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mental Health Commission of Canada]

Thank you and have a good afternoon.

Mr. Chair and committee members, I'm delighted to be here today.

My name is Louise Bradley. I'm the president and CEO of the Mental Health Commission of Canada. I'd like to acknowledge my colleague, Jennifer Vornbrock, the vice-president of our knowledge and innovation team.

Let me begin by providing you with a brief background on the commission and its mandate. The commission was created in 2007, prompted by the work of the Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology and its study “Out of the Shadows at Last”, which called for a national commission on mental health.

The commission has a mandate to improve the mental health system and change the attitudes and behaviours of Canadians around mental illness. The commission is a coordinating agent, aligning and promoting the interests of governments, organizations, and persons with mental illness and their families. Our work brings together leaders and experts in mental health and facilitates widespread uptake on ideas, policies, and programs.

I'm pleased to report that in the 2015 federal budget, the Government of Canada indicated its intention to renew the commission's mandate for 10 more years beginning in 2017. The commission is thrilled to have the opportunity to continue its work, led by our new board chair, the Honourable Michael Wilson. Mr. Wilson has used his considerable talent and influence to champion mental health as a private citizen. Given his accomplishments to date, we can't wait to see what he's able to achieve with the full weight of the commission and our many partners behind him.

The commission's work continues to be guided by the mental health strategy for Canada, which was released in 2012. The strategy lays out actions to improve mental health care and its associated systems through six strategic directions. Since the release of the strategy, the commission has worked hard to ensure the strategy's uptake, sharing its recommendations with stakeholders across the country and around the world. I've heard from provincial and territorial governments that the strategy has become a foundational document and is used by them to develop their own mental health plans and priorities.

The reach of the strategy has been incredible, but the commission knows there are still barriers to its implementation across Canada. To assist in the implementation process, the commission initiated its own review of the strategy. After speaking with stakeholders and government officials, the commission has determined that the following actions would help drive the strategy forward: the coordination of mental health services and resources, including the integration of mental health, primary care, housing supports, and substance use services; the creation of an action plan, based on common priorities from the strategy, that demonstrates the next steps for those trying to implement it; and the improvement of mental health data, which includes better monitoring of current trends and the identification of data gaps. The commission looks forward to working with stakeholders and government to carry out these actions over the next decade.

The commission has also taken every opportunity to capitalize on the strategy as a guide for the expansion of our work. The issue of suicide prevention is of paramount importance, and we have been working on this issue for years utilizing our anti-stigma initiative called Opening Minds, workplace mental health programs, and knowledge exchange to provide tools and promote best practices.

We know that there is widespread support for this issue among parliamentarians, demonstrated by the recently passed Bill C-300, an Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, which had support from all parties. Many of you also know about the #308conversations initiative launched last year by the commission and championed by member of Parliament Harold Albrecht. The campaign called upon all 308 federal members of Parliament to host a meeting in their respective communities with a focus on suicide prevention. The goal was to get people talking and to gather information about what interventions are available in communities.

As the second phase of this initiative building on the work of our anti-stigma initiative Opening Minds, the commission is developing a community-based model for suicide prevention. This model aims to adapt and implement an existing and effective suicide prevention program in the Canadian context. The model, developed by Dr. Ulrich Hegerl, is a multi-level, community-based suicide prevention initiative that has shown to be effective in reducing suicide by more than 24% over two years in a test community. The commission is currently working with stakeholders to determine the implementation of this initiative across Canada.

The initiative will build on another key commission program, At Home/Chez Soi, a participatory research project. At Home/Chez Soi demonstrated positive, cost-effective results for the housing first approach to homelessness, which provides persons who are homeless and have chronic mental health issues with immediate access to subsidized housing. Its participants were some of the most vulnerable Canadians who are highly stigmatized and who reported feeling isolated and being at high risk for suicide. At Home/Chez Soi demonstrated that people with chronic mental illness who receive no-barrier housing are more likely to stay housed and to report an improved quality of life. It also showed that for every $10 invested in housing first services for high-needs participants, the community saved almost $22 in avoided costs.

Because of its success, the Government of Canada decided to invest $600 million in the housing first approach through its homelessness partnering strategy. Through its innovative research, the commission was able to offer tangible and cost-effective approaches to improving the lives of Canadians who are homeless and have a chronic mental illness.

As part of our leadership on mental health systems transformation, the commission has also placed an emphasis on knowledge exchange and the sharing of best practices. At the heart of this work is the commission's Knowledge Exchange Centre, KEC, which provides numerous information-sharing hubs both online and through in-person gatherings. The KEC shares information about the commission's initiatives and additional best practices, ensuring that the information gets to the right people and that they know how to use it.

The KEC is also dedicated to improving the data and resources related to mental health. Next month they will continue with their launch of a set of national indicators on mental health that will provide crucial data on self-harm rates, the prevalence of specific mental illnesses, suicide rates, and rates of access to services. This data also identifies mental health indicators for subpopulations, such as LGBTQ youth and new Canadians. This information allows us to gauge areas in which the needs of Canadians are being met and in which there's room for improvement.

As you can see, the commission is working hard, as hard as it ever has, and we are ready to start making long-term plans for the next phase of our work. The commission is currently seeking advice from the Government of Canada, Health Canada, and other key partners about our new mandate. We've also been consulting with stakeholders and provincial and territorial leaders across the country to discuss shared priorities.

These discussions will form the basis of the mental health action plan for Canada, which provides goals and priorities for the implementation of the strategy. Just as the strategy guided the last decade of work, the mental health action plan for Canada will set the tone for the next one. By following through on the action plan, the commission can address urgent mental health issues, including suicide prevention, access, mental health supports for first responders, seniors, diverse populations, children, and youth.

In closing, I commend the members of this committee for identifying future actions at the federal level. There is still a great deal of work to be done. As with the commission's renewed efforts, it is the perfect time to redouble our efforts. This new chapter marks a time of pivotal change in Canada's mental health landscape, with more energy for system transformation than ever before.

I look forward to working with all of you and all Canadians as we continue our work towards our common goal of improving the mental health of Canadians.

Merci beaucoup.

[Kimberly Elmslie, Assistant Deputy Minister, Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the opportunity to highlight the Public Health Agency of Canada's work to improve the mental well-being of Canadians. We are working closely with our partners to contribute to the implementation of the Mental Health Strategy for Canada.

An important public health role is the monitoring of mental illness and mental health among Canadians. The agency's system for surveillance of mental illness tracks a number of mental illnesses, such as mood disorders and anxiety disorders. This system includes complementary data, such as self-inflicted injuries, for example, suicidal behaviour, and child maltreatment.

These data tell us that, as you know, mental illness affects many Canadians. In fact, our most recent data indicate that at least one in three Canadians will experience mental illness during their lifetime and one in seven use health services for mental illness annually. Furthermore, approximately 4,000 Canadians die by suicide each year, and there are many more suicide attempts.

In order to prevent duplication and to leverage work that is under way across the country, the agency participates in the mental health and addictions data collaborative with our colleagues at the Mental Health Commission of Canada and other national mental health data partners.

In budget 2013 there was a reallocation of $2 million of agency funding over a three-year period for the purpose of improving our data collection and ensuring that we were reporting as comprehensively as possible on mental illness and mental health. As part of these improvements, the agency is working with the Mental Health Commission of Canada to improve specifically the data we have and can provide to Canadians on positive mental health and well-being.

We now have a set of indicators of positive mental health for Canadians that forms the foundation for monitoring changes in mental health over time and the factors that influence these changes at the individual, family, community, and societal levels. These include measuring and monitoring personal coping skills among Canadians, positive family relationships, and supportive community environments. We know that 65% of Canadians have very good or excellent self-rated mental health and 82% are satisfied with life. Canadians also have strong ties to the community: 87% of adults believe that their neighbourhood is a place where people help each other. By gathering and analyzing these data, we will be able to share more information about the factors that help us take care of our mental health and help prevent mental illness.

Another important priority for the agency is suicide prevention. The enactment of An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention in December 2012 served an important role in raising the visibility of this issue in Canada and underscored that suicide is a public health issue. The federal framework for suicide prevention will focus on improving information, collaboration, and resources for Canadians and on equipping those working to prevent suicide with the latest information on best practices.

Our discussions with our partners and stakeholders highlighted that fragmentation of information is one of the most important barriers to their work. Effective suicide prevention requires involvement from all sectors, including governments, non-governmental organizations, communities, academia, and the private sector. The framework will provide the basis for partnership on concrete activities, and we look forward to working with the Mental Health Commission of Canada in achieving the framework's objectives.

Public health also focuses on improving the mental well-being of Canadians before mental health problems or challenges begin to emerge. Another key role for the agency is leading national activities that promote positive mental health, such as the agency's programs that build resilience in individuals and communities. We invest approximately $112 million a year in community-based programs that serve families living in conditions of risk, including poverty, social isolation, substance abuse, and family violence.

These programs address factors that affect mental health, including parenting skills, early childhood development, healthy pregnancies, and mental health issues such as post-partum depression. When we create supportive environments, there is a positive impact on mental health.

Supporting innovation in mental health promotion is a priority for us. Large-scale projects are under way across Canada to promote mental health, reaching children, youth, and families across the country. These projects, still under way, have already shown us positive changes in child and youth resilience, self-esteem and self-image, as well as in coping and social skills. For example, some of our school-based interventions have reduced aggressive behaviour, relationship violence, and alcohol abuse. They've improved school environments, and have been implemented in teaching curricula.

Our work builds on our international commitments, including Canada's support of the World Health Organization's resolution in support of a comprehensive mental health action plan for 2013 to 2020. Reducing mental health risks, such as exposure to domestic violence and child abuse, is a priority. As my colleague just indicated, Minister Ambrose recently announced an investment of $100 million over 10 years specifically to address the health needs of victims of family violence. This investment includes support for community-based projects to help victims rebuild both their physical and mental health following experiences of family violence.

Our public health work in mental health and suicide prevention involves a wide range of partners who are leading initiatives to better serve mental health needs of Canadians. We are partners with the Mental Health Commission of Canada and our work aligns with the Mental Health Strategy for Canada.

Thank you.

[Krista Outhwaite]

Yes, thank you. I'd be delighted to.

As you know, the Public Health Agency of Canada is busy these days working on the implementation of bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention. This is where our relationships with colleagues such as National Defence come into play very significantly. They're working with us and developing this suicide prevention framework at the federal level, the federal framework, and being very helpful in that respect.

They are also partnering with us to look at what tools and innovative developments can be brought to bear to meet the needs of mental health promotion generally, but also specifically for military families and DND personnel. It's a very important area of work, and we are delighted that they are coming to the table in the way they are to work with us on this.

Suicide Prevention

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I thank the House for passing Bill C-300, my legislation on suicide prevention. The situation in Neskantaga only reinforces the need for a federal framework, the need to overcome the stigma that prevents conversation about suicide.

Over the past year, there have been 7 deaths by suicide and 20 attempts in this community of only 421. Our government has sent additional nursing and counselling assistance, but more needs to be done at Neskantaga and right across Canada. Suicide prevention programs must be delivered by more than just nurses and counsellors. It takes people who are able to recognize the warning signs, people brave enough to engage in conversations.

Teachers, coaches, paramedics, pastors and police officers, even members of Parliament, we all must do our part as members of a caring community. Do not be afraid to start the conversation. It will shine light and expose hidden fears that can finally be addressed. A simple conversation can bring hope, the oxygen of the human spirit.

Message from the Senate

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I have the honour to inform the House that messages have been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bills.

Bill C-50, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2013;

Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (elder abuse);

Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention;

Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures.

Suicide Prevention

[Bruce Hyer, Independent, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is with regard to suicide.

It gives me pleasure today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Thunder Bay and Ottawa on the topic of suicide in Canada. Suicide kills ten Canadians every single day. It is the second biggest killer of Canadian youth. Canada is the only industrialized country in the world without a national suicide prevention strategy, and therefore these petitioners urge Parliament to act on Bill C-297 and Bill C-300, dealing with suicide.

World Autism Awareness Day Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I have been blessed with many joys in the House. Seeing hon. members unanimously pass my motion targeting Internet predators, Motion No. 388, was an occasion where we rose above partisanship.

When an overwhelming majority of hon. members united to deliver a message of hope to vulnerable Canadians everywhere by voting to pass Bill C-300, my legislation on suicide prevention, I felt humbled to once again be part of an occasion where our normal partisan rancour was put aside.

Today, I stand as sponsor in the House of Bill S-206, a bill from the other place, calling for recognition of World Autism Awareness Day. Once again, I feel blessed because I sense unity on this issue.

Through the study at committee and through the debate at second reading, not a negative word was spoken about this effort. Instead, we have used our time to educate each other on the very real need to promote autism awareness and to share some very personal stories about how autism has touched our lives.

I mentioned the experience of my friend and colleague, the member for Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont. I thank him for his very personal sharing of his life with parliamentarians. The way the member and his family care for Jaden and bring him to the House to allow us to interact with Jaden has been one of the joys that I have personally experienced as a member of Parliament, and I think all of my colleagues would agree.

Also the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier shared some experiences from her own family. Some hon. members want more to be done, but no one has disputed that every effort to promote autism awareness is a worthwhile effort.

During study of the bill at the Standing Committee on Health, the hon. member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel asked Mr. Richard Burelle, the executive director of the Autism Society of Canada, if the passage of Bill S-206 would be helpful. Mr. Burelle's reply was:

Keeping autism in the forefront is always a good thing. As Senator Munson said, the fact that we're piggybacking on World Autism Awareness Day is great. Any kinds of forward steps we can take in order to keep autism in the forefront, to create that awareness, are steps in the right direction.

There is no controversy here. There is no federalist-sovereigntist division, no left-right divide. In truth, I do not believe there is any reason to continue debating the bill. Rather than spending our time agreeing with each other, I would ask hon. members to allow debate to collapse and to allow Bill S-206 to pass on a voice vote today.

This effort did not begin with this Parliament. Previous efforts enjoyed similar support, but never became law, due to election calls.

Families coping with autism spectrum disorders have waited long enough, since 2006, in fact, for the House to simply acknowledge an awareness day.

Given the broad level of support the bill enjoys from all quarters, I ask that we stop talking about recognizing World Autism Awareness Day and just get this done.

Suicide Prevention

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention met for its national conference and the theme was “Stepping Out of the Darkness: Awareness, Attention, Action”.

Over 600 volunteers, experts and advocates joined together to learn from new research, share experiences and best practices, including new approaches in suicide prevention, all with the end goal of providing hope and saving lives.

Many of the organizations that attended operate on shoestring budgets. Many are driven by the goodwill of volunteers and patrons. It is a sad truth that if a person is at risk of suicide and is seeking help, the quality of the help they receive will depend on that person's postal code.

Canada's youth suicide rate is the third highest in the world. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among our young people. Among aboriginal and Inuit youth, the rate is five to seven times higher.

I thank all CASP members for the work they do, particularly their support in developing Bill C-300. I ask all hon. members to join me in saluting these heroes.

Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank members of the House for the discussion we have had on this important topic.

It is never easy to talk about death, and as members have acknowledged, it is even more difficult to talk about suicide. That is why this conversation was so important. I am grateful to all hon. members who joined in.

As I have said so often, in this case the conversation is just as important as the legislation, but the legislation is important. We know that 10 Canadians die by suicide each day. We know that suicide is the second largest killer of our youth. We know there are identifiable communities which suffer from suicide rates that are grossly disproportionate to their general population.

These are broad statistics that do not lie, but while the statistics are depressing, the thousands of stories behind the statistics are tragic. Let me share one person's story.

This individual was molested at the age of seven. This person also experienced severe bullying. Today, he is openly talking about taking his own life. This individual just turned 11. It is one thing to hear numbers about youth suicide, but it is another thing entirely to be confronted by a real-life story where an 11-year-old child requires intervention.

As the father of three children and the proud grandparent of nine, I was sick when I heard this story. What to do? I am not trained in crisis intervention, but when this child's mother sought help from my office, we were able to connect her with people who possess the skills, experience, understanding and training to offer help.

It was on the recommendation of a friend who follows the deliberations of this House that the mother contacted me. The conversation has already made a difference.

Bill C-300 is only under debate. The legislation has not yet been enacted and is not in force. This conversation, though, has been ongoing for months, and without this conversation, at least one child would still be contemplating a very permanent response to some temporary and surmountable challenges, but with connections to help has now found hope.

I thank all hon. members for the quality of debate they brought to this topic. I thank members from my party and also members from the opposition parties who were willing to attach their names to this effort as joint seconders.

This conversation has already helped at least one child. Please do not let this conversation end with this debate. I ask all hon. members to keep it alive, both here in Ottawa and at home in their constituencies.

Every riding in Canada needs to engage in this dialogue. The most important type of leadership members of the House can provide is not as makers of the law, but as local leaders of critical and crucial conversations. By continuing the conversation, each one of us can help break the stigma and the silence. We can provide hope, the oxygen of the human spirit.

I ask members to allow Bill C-300 to proceed without a standing vote. I ask them to let Bill C-300 move as quickly as possible to the Senate to become law and provide hope as soon as possible. With each day's delay, 10 Canadians will fall victim to suicide.

[Manon Perreault, NDP, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-300 would require the government to establish a federal framework for suicide prevention in consultation with relevant non-governmental organizations, the relevant entity in each province and territory, as well as with relevant federal departments.

I support this bill because suicide is a major health issue in this country and it must be recognized as such, so that Canada makes it a real public policy priority. There are some 4,000 suicides in Canada every year, so this is an urgent problem and the government must take a stance. We must increase awareness and understanding of suicide across the country and make prevention a priority. This bill will open the dialogue on suicide prevention.

Suicide is a public health issue that requires proper public intervention in terms of prevention, treatment and funding. For intervention to be even more effective, the government must take some responsibility, by calling on the provinces and territories, first nations, the Métis and the Inuit to work with the federal government to develop a long-term national suicide prevention strategy.

This is what families and stakeholders have been calling for for years. We need clear measures to ensure that our commitment gives rise to tangible, concerted actions with stakeholders across the country. Any strategy must also take into account groups at risk, which we must absolutely not ignore in light of what is at stake. I am thinking in particular of young people, the first nations, persons with disabilities, veterans as well as gays and lesbians.

The only way to help them is to understand their realities and the taboos associated with the issue and stigmatization, which is common. Take, for example, persons with disabilities, whose condition is deteriorating every day, who struggle with instability and social isolation, and who have a much higher unemployment rate than the general labour force. Needless to say, these are factors that lead to situations of great despair.

We are also seeing new social groups in distress that are harder to reach, such as farmers. This group of people rarely, if ever, turns to crisis workers despite high levels of stress and intense distress. In recent years, the Canadian armed forces also reported a higher suicide rate as soldiers returned to Canada by the hundreds: 20 of them took their own lives in 2011, nearly twice as many as the year before. According to the Canadian army, 187 soldiers have committed suicide since 1996. Mental health issues and post-traumatic stress are taking a heavy toll, putting soldiers at increased risk of suicide. It is clear that there are serious, ongoing deficiencies with screening and prevention services for these soldiers.

We must also consider the aboriginal communities that the government has been neglecting. The suicide rate among young aboriginals is much higher than among non-aboriginals—four to six times higher. The situation varies from one community to the next, which points to the need for targeted initiatives that take into account the unique cultural and spiritual makeup of each community.

The riding of Montcalm is also especially affected by suicide. According to the suicide prevention centre in Lanaudière, the suicide rate in this region is above the Quebec average. Statistics Canada determined that the Quebec average in 2006 was 14.8 suicides per 100,000 inhabitants, and that of Lanaudière was 16.1 suicides per 100,000.

That said, it is very difficult to put numbers on suicide attempts, but there are 210 hospitalizations for suicide attempts in Lanaudière in an average year. Despite a gradual decline in youth suicide among Quebeckers since 2000, we should still be concerned about this excess mortality, especially among boys, whose suicide rate is much higher than that of girls.

On the other hand, the rate of attempted suicides is twice as high for girls. For each of the groups affected, we must find all the factors that may lead to suicide and we must intervene. It is absurd that a national suicide prevention strategy has not yet been established, after nearly 20 years of demands from NGOs. The impact of suicide on Canadian society is clear to everyone; nearly 4,000 people take their own lives in Canada every year. It is one of the highest rates among the industrialized nations.

Suicide is not an issue that affects only one region of the country; it affects them all. In order to meet the needs of people in distress, however, the appropriate public health resources must be in place and we must work with the communities to reflect the special factors in each cultural and community group.

Prevention initiatives must reflect these specific realities. Combatting this phenomenon is possible, but in order to do so, we need to take concerted, coherent and intensive action so that people who are in distress have access to the effective resources they need. We must be able to guarantee access to mental health and addiction services, provide adequate support to professionals and stakeholders, reduce the stigmatization and focus on research.

In terms of suicide prevention, I find Canada's poor record compared to other industrialized countries very disturbing. Our suicide rate is far too high, and yet we do not have a national strategy to address the problem. Furthermore, industrialized countries that have a national suicide prevention strategy have lower suicide rates and are doing much better than we are.

In the 1990s, both the United Nations and the World Health Organization called upon every country to establish its own national strategy. Many countries answered that call. Unfortunately, Canada was not one of them. It makes no sense. Why did Canada depart from this trend towards adopting a national strategy?

Nevertheless, I want to commend the hard work of mental health care professionals across the country. They do an outstanding job of answering calls, engaging the public and working with schools and workplaces. However, their work would have a greater reach and be more effective if their efforts were coordinated and best practices were shared nationally.

Currently, efforts are fragmented and organizations working on prevention are underfunded. The government can do something to change this situation by clearly identifying current shortcomings and disseminating best practices on prevention, research, expertise and primary care. We absolutely must have national guidelines on this.

With this government, we also have very few effective suicide prevention initiatives for our soldiers and veterans. It is inconceivable considering that modern-day veterans have a higher suicide rate than other Canadians, according to three studies released in 2011 by Veterans Affairs Canada, the Department of National Defence and Statistics Canada.

It was the first reliable statistical study of its kind, and I would like to share some of the findings. The suicide rate among veterans is 46% higher than that of other Canadians in the same age bracket, and the only cause of death that is proportionally higher.

Why is there no ongoing evaluation of initiatives and monitoring of trends? What are we waiting for to take suicide seriously?

The World Health Organization calls suicide a huge public health problem but, we should remember, it is a problem that is largely preventable. In Quebec, there has been a 34% decline in the suicide rate in the past 10 years. Research has led to significant progress in suicide prevention. Consequently, it would be unfortunate to not share these advances and new means of prevention.

I will close by saying that this bill reminds us that we must take immediate action, and it will help prevent people from committing suicide. Given the extent of the scourge we are trying to eliminate, the government must act and continue to act. Because the high rate of suicide is a concern, prevention must be a public policy priority.

Therefore, I encourage all my colleagues to support this bill and to continue our suicide prevention efforts. After all, suicide is a concern for all of us. We must ensure that this issue becomes a priority for Canada so we can help more people in distress and save as many lives as possible.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise to speak, today, to what no one can doubt to be an incredibly important and urgent issue: the need for a pan-Canadian suicide prevention strategy.

The House of Commons demonstrated its commitment to developing a national strategy in October of last year. The hon. member for Toronto Centre, the interim leader of the Liberal Party, introduced an important and powerful motion passed by this House almost unanimously when we agreed that suicide is more than a personal tragedy; it is also a serious public health issue and public policy priority. As a government and as national representatives, we must work with our counterparts in the provinces and territories and with representatives from non-governmental organizations, first nations, Inuit and Métis people, to establish and fund a comprehensive, evidence-driven national suicide prevention strategy.

I was proud to stand along with nearly every other member in this House to support that motion.

This issue with other mental health and end-of-life concerns has been forefront in my mind for more than two years, both here and as a member of the all-party parliamentary palliative and compassionate care committee, which I helped form with Bill C-300 sponsor, the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga, the hon. member for Windsor—Tecumseh, the hon. member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar and the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Louis.

What brought us together goes back to our initial reactions to a private member's bill dealing with end-of-life issues. At that time I felt, and still feel, that if people are given a reason to live, feel their lives are relevant and significant and truly do not feel that they are a burden on society and are able to live pain-free, they just might be less inclined to turn to more desperate measures as a relief from the emotional, mental or physical pain from which they suffer.

Over the course of our hearings, we travelled widely and Canadians from across the country came to Ottawa, at their own expense, to share their stories and experiences with us. These were men and women, parents, siblings and families who were directly affected by mental health issues and suicide, as well as experts who deal with mental health and suicide prevention daily.

Our committee ultimately concluded and recommended that the federal government establish a suicide prevention secretariat and that it provide the secretariat with adequate funding so that it might conduct and support research and act as a conduit between the provincial and municipal governments and community stakeholders to accomplish these goals.

The result of this federally directed collaboration would be the development and implementation of a national suicide prevention strategy, similar to the one we are discussing today. By working together, the various levels of government and stakeholders could develop and implement a program with nationally recognized and accepted standards for the training of suicide intervention personnel. By providing a nationally directed body to coordinate with other levels of government and groups, research and information could be more easily shared instead of being isolated in a series of silos across the country.

More important, it would enable the development of a national public awareness program on suicide and suicide prevention, as well as facilitate social media around reducing the stigma associated with suicide and mental health issues.

We have all heard various notable figures speak out and tell marginalized youth that it gets better; an important and valuable lesson that too many Canadians do not hear in time. However, our efforts to reach youth and others in need more effectively must be better coordinated across the country.

The facts behind suicide are staggering. Ten Canadians take their own life every day. By the time we wrap up here tonight, 10 more Canadians will have committed suicide because they are struggling with pain and hopelessness, depression and desperation. By the end of today, 10 more Canadian families will be devastated by the loss of a loved one. For every Canadian who commits suicide, there are 100 who attempt to kill or deliberately harm themselves. That is 1,000 Canadians a day, hundreds of thousands a year. Many of those Canadians will be men aged 25 to 29 or 40 to 44, or women aged 30 to 34. Suicide is the leading cause of death in those age groups. It is the second leading cause for young men and women between 10 and 24 years old. It may be one of our veterans, where the suicide rate is nearly three times higher than in the general population.

Suicide rates among gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, transsexual, intersexed and two-spirited youth is seven times the rate of heterosexual youth. The leading cause of death for aboriginal males aged 10 to 19 is suicide and the rate for Inuit youth is among the highest in the world, at 11 times higher than the national average. Yet, in the face of these staggering statistics, and for not one good reason, we remain hostage to our inability to appropriately deal with the crisis, which affects us from coast to coast to coast. We are one of two countries in the G8 without a national suicide prevention strategy.

We also know that suicide intervention works. Countless lives are saved every year through intervention. We know that so much more can be done and so many more can be saved with the appropriate public funding of research and a national direction to guide the response in each of our provinces. Many organizations have called for a national suicide prevention strategy. In October 2004, the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, known as CASP, issued the first edition of the CASP blueprint for a Canadian national suicide prevention strategy, a document that was later revised in 2009. The CASP blueprint called for an awareness and understanding of suicide, so that we might all understand this tragedy better, and so that fewer Canadian families would be needlessly victimized. It called for prevention and intervention that not only features community-based programs which address the specific needs of at-risk sections of our population, but that can be implemented more broadly. In order to adequately address these needs, the call for funding and support, as well as a more coherent approach to the gathering of information, must be answered.

A month ago, the Mental Health Commission of Canada reported on its mental health strategy for Canada, once again calling for a national suicide prevention strategy. It stated, “Despite the fact that pan-Canadian initiatives could help all jurisdictions to improve mental health outcomes, planning documents that address these matters from the perspective of the country as a whole are rare.”

The testimony is voluminous, the statistics are clear. Suicide is so much more than a personal and sudden decision made in a time of great pain, angst or isolation. It is a terrible scourge that affects nearly every family across the country.

In closing, all of us here want to see this national tragedy end, and we have yet another opportunity with this step forward. We came together in October to pass a motion calling for a national strategy for suicide prevention. We came together as members of an all-party committee to advocate a national strategy for suicide prevention, outlined in the committee's report, “Not to be Forgotten”. Now we can come together again and support Bill C-300.

[Joe Daniel, Conservative, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I stand this morning to talk about Bill C-300, the federal framework for suicide prevention act.

Suicide is a tragedy that not only affects the person who actually commits suicide but all the people around him or her, the whole community and relatives, et cetera, who are actually involved. The tragedy of suicide is that most people do not understand why.

A close friend of mine woke up one day and went into the washroom only to find his brother hanging there, having committed suicide. The effect of that on him and his family was tremendous. Years later, he remarks that he just does not understand why. Understanding why has been a quest for many people for a very long time.

This bill is very supportive in terms of trying to understand why. The framework allows some investigation and research to be undertaken and pushed forward so that we can better understand what causes these tragedies.

For example, a very famous footballer in England had a successful football career and was a coach in one of the first division leagues. He was seen the night before, partying and enjoying himself. The following day, it was discovered that he had taken his life. Nobody really understands why people feel this despair and that they have to take their own lives, ending it like that. He was a successful, wealthy man.

Suicide affects people from the entire spectrum of life, from the very rich to the poor and everybody in between. Understanding suicide in this country can help. We have had many tragedies of suicide among aboriginal people, particularly among youth, in the prime of their lives, who take their own lives. There must be some reason for that.

To understand that reason has to be a quest that we as a Parliament can undertake. The question is, “Why are these tragedies happening?” This bill puts forward a framework whereby research can be done, as well as follow-up with the victims and the communities around them, to try to understand and prevent some of these tragedies that are happening.

I ask all members on all party sides to support this bill.

The House resumed from May 14 consideration of the motion that Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, be read the third time and passed.

[Joe Daniel, Conservative, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to discuss Bill C-300, an act respecting the federal framework for suicide prevention. This bill has received overwhelming support not only in the House but throughout Canada.

What drives people to commit suicide is based on a number of complex factors, and we are always left wondering why. Why did we lose a loved one? What prompted this individual end his or her life? Could it have been prevented? Oftentimes, stigma and discrimination have prevented people from seeking the help they need. We need to help them on the sidelines to emerge out of the shadows. As was said so pointedly by Senator Kirby, there is hope in this darkness.

We must move forward on this crucial issue in a collaborative way. That is the spirit of the bill before us today. This is a very important bill, and I am pleased that so many of you have expressed your support for it. Due to recent momentum on this topic, a national conversation on suicide has resulted. I must also thank the members of the Standing Committee on Health and the witnesses who shared their experiences and expertise and the Canadians who are talking more openly about suicide in order to help prevent it.

As a government, we are listening to Canadians. We have heard many personal and family tragedies. The stories are all too familiar: a bright young person from a caring family who appears to be very happy or an adult who appears to be successfully managing his or her career but who, despite what we see, is walking an unpredictable path.

Within the areas of federal responsibility, we are making a meaningful contribution. The federal government's role in mental health and suicide prevention is multi-faceted. it includes working with researchers to better understand the causes of suicide and with children and youth to better understand the importance of their relationships. It includes supporting programs that build resiliency and develop protective factors that help ward against the potential desire to see suicide as the way out.

In addition, the federal government is providing suicide awareness and prevention workshops, as well as training staff. This includes—

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to rise today and voice my support for Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention.

I also want to congratulate my hon. colleague from the other side of the House for bringing forward an issue that I think is truly important to every MP and Canadian right across the country. No matter what colour one's tie is, this is an important issue for all of us to address.

The bill would enact and establish a requirement for the Government of Canada to develop a federal framework for suicide prevention in consultation with the relevant non-governmental organizations, the relevant entity in each province and territory as well as the relevant federal departments.

The bill is a great first step, but we believe more could have been done. We presented some amendments at committee to make the bill stronger to ensure that Canadians had a bill that encompassed everyone and included first nations, Métis and Inuit as well. However, we will move forward in good faith with the bill because, as I mentioned, we believe it is a good first step.

Suicide has a major impact on Canadians today. It is the second leading cause of death among 10 to 24 year olds and the third leading cause among 25 to 49 years olds. Furthermore, the stigma that surrounds mental health and suicide has long delayed a national dialogue about the issue and how to address it. Therefore, I am very happy that we are talking about it on the national stage.

Suicide is a tragedy for many Canadians and their families. Given the current statistics that I mentioned earlier, it is likely that most Canadians have been impacted by a death by suicide. However, suicide is entirely preventable through a combination of knowledge, care and compassion.

We in the NDP support the bill put forward by my hon. colleague. We think a national suicide prevention strategy is something that families and stakeholders have been demanding for years now.

The NDP has consistently worked on this issue in the past. In 2011, my colleague for Halifax put forward Bill C-297, An Act respecting a National Strategy for Suicide Prevention. My friend's bill already calls for the provinces, territories and representatives from first nations, Inuit and Métis people to work together to create a national strategy for suicide prevention. The bill would ensure access to mental health and substance abuse services, reduce the stigma associated with using mental health and suicide-related services, establish national guidelines for best practices in suicide prevention, work with communities to use cultural-specific knowledge to design appropriate policies and programs, coordinate professionals and organizations throughout our great country in order to share information and research and support health care professionals and others who work with individuals at risk of suicide.

I believe my colleague's bill is the template of how we should approach a national suicide prevention strategy as it would allow for best practices to be set up, particularly for at-risk communities.

These are some key facts and figures about suicide in Canada that are very disturbing: 10 people die every day by suicide; over 3,500 people die by suicide annually; and, in the past 20 years, more than 100,000 Canadians have died by suicide. In Canada the number of people affected by suicide due to the loss of a loved one, friend or co-worker is estimated at three million. I am, unfortunately, one of those three million.

Back in 1986, 26 years ago, my brother-in-law decided to take his own life. I can talk about how a family goes through that type of trauma and what the family to this day still goes through. Many times at Christmas dinner, Thanksgiving or any family gathering, we talk about what it would be like to have that individual back with us as a family.

Of course, there are always those feelings of doubt. What could we have done to make things better? What could we have done to change what has happened? There is really nothing that we could have done, at the end of the day, because my brother-in-law needed some help. What we could have done is try to find ways to get him that help. I think this national strategy is doing what we can to ensure that no other person ever has to go through this and no other family ever has to go through this, and I hope we all can understand.

If we are looking at international comparisons, both the United Nations and the World Health Organization have recognized suicide as a serious and priority public health issue. We were once a world leader on suicide prevention, but now Canada lags behind other industrialized countries.

In 1993, at the invitation of the UN Centre for Social Development and Humanitarian Affairs, Canada hosted an international experts' meeting to develop UN-supported suicide prevention guidelines.

Following the release of these guidelines, both the United Nations and the World Health Organization called upon every country to not only establish its own national strategy but also appoint and adequately fund a coordinating body responsible for suicide prevention.

Whereas Australia, New Zealand, Wales, England, Norway, Sweden, Scotland and the United States, to name a few, now all have national suicide prevention strategies that have proven to work, Canada still does not. I think with this bill we are getting one step closer. However, as I mentioned at the top, we will continue to work to try to make this bill stronger.

Let us look at our statistics in Canada. They show Canada has a higher suicide rate, for example, than the United States. It is in the top third of developed countries with the highest rate of suicide.

The Government of Canada has stated in the past that the Mental Health Commission of Canada framework already covers suicide prevention. However, its important 2009 report, “A Framework for a Mental Health Strategy for Canada”, only briefly touches upon the issue of suicide. It does not even specifically include in it any of its seven recommendations and it does not constitute a suicide prevention strategy.

All experts and stakeholders agree that its mandate does not properly cover the issue of suicide prevention. As yet, there is no sign that the MHCC is doing the necessary work that is needed on this issue. The MHCC is focused on bringing about long-term fundamental changes with respect to various mental health issues, while a national suicide prevention strategy is desperately needed, especially today, given the crisis facing many communities.

The MHCC even notes that suicide is often but not always, 95% of the time, associated with the presence of a mental illness. A suicide prevention strategy is needed because it is distinct from the issue of mental health.

Let me quote from a media article today from a Vancouver Island first nation, where it has declared a state of emergency because over the last few weeks it has seen the number of suicides in its communities dramatically increase. I believe it was four.

Leaders of a Vancouver Island First Nation have declared a state of emergency over the recent spate of suicides and attempted suicides.

According to the chief:

Unless we receive support from the feds and province, we may lose more community members to what feels like a hopeless situation, and although we have provided some resources, it is very limited and employees are over-taxed with the burden of double duty.

That is why we truly need a national strategy on suicide prevention.

I know my time is running out. With that, I will just mention again that we support the bill as it is presented, but we would definitely like to see more amendments and things brought forward to make this a stronger bill.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to join the discussion or, as my hon. friend from Kitchener—Conestoga has appropriately called it, this parliamentary show of unity on Bill C-300, the federal framework for suicide prevention act.

Having just celebrated Mother's Day, a day when we all recognize the unfailing love, support and guidance of mothers, and thinking about this discussion today, I cannot help but imagine the sheer anguish that a mother who lost her daughter or son to suicide this past year must feel on Mother's Day. It is utterly heart-wrenching to think about it.

Over 4,000 families, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles and cousins, had their lives irreversibly impacted by suicide in this past year. We do not even have a good handle on a true number, something that the bill would fix.

I had the privilege of rising in the House 19 days ago, on April 25, to make a member's statement in support of the bill. In the 19 days since then, there have likely been 190 deaths by suicide, 19,000 suicide attempts and 4,180 visits to the emergency rooms of hospitals across the country due to suicide behaviours. I say likely, because we do not have accurate suicide statistics in our country. Once again, this is very important, and Bill C-300 would correct that.

However, the real tragedy is the story behind each one of these numbers. It is a tragedy because each one of those who attempted suicide had lost hope, or, as the member for Kitchener—Conestoga has already said, the fuel of the human spirit. In doing so, their tragedy was, and is compounded, on their families, friends and the communities of our nation.

We know suicide is a very complex confluence of a number of factors. We know some groups and circumstances are more vulnerable to the threat of suicide than the general population. Veterans and aboriginal Canadians have been noted already this morning. However, we struggle to develop a suitable evidence-based response. There is no doubt this a public health issue in Canada. We have a duty in defence of the sanctity of life to act.

According to the testimony that Dr. David Goldbloom, of the Mental Health Commission of Canada, presented to the health committee, over 90% of the Canadians who died from suicide were experiencing some sort of mental health issue. By the very nature of the complexity of the problem of suicide, approaching suicide prevention is complex in and of itself.

Teachers in a position to recognize suicidal behaviours are rarely trained to do so. It is even uncommon for medical doctors and nurses to receive specific training in this area. That is where the bill would help. Many suicide prevention groups in Canada do outstanding work. They are on the front lines. They are there when people need them. They help refuel that hope, and even if it is for a short period of time, it gives them another chance.

That is why setting up a federal framework to better coordinate these efforts makes so much sense. Great work is being done by so many groups from coast to coast. I mentioned one such group 19 days ago in this chamber, called the “Jack Project”. This initiative was spawned by the tragic death by suicide of young Jack Windeler. The project's school-based outreach program is now being piloted for a full rollout next year, and I know all of my colleagues would wish them all a great success.

Let us leverage and share information and resources, share successes and ensure we can share accurate statistics as well. That is national leadership and it is a message of hope to vulnerable Canadians.

Let me reflect on two of the statements made to the health committee on this bill, which will sum it well.

One was Dr. David Goldbloom, who I referenced a couple of minutes ago, who spoke on behalf of the Mental Health Commission of Canada. He said:

The federal framework that's under consideration today will definitely advance the strategy's recommendations to mobilize leadership, to strengthen collaboration, and to strengthen the infrastructure that's required to improve mental health outcomes in Canada with a particular focus on suicide prevention.

This view from a medical professional speaks volumes, and so does the other statement I want to highlight, a view from the very front lines of suicide prevention.

Tana Nash, from the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council, which is located in a community just a few minutes up the highway from my constituency, remarked on how the federal framework could be the catalyst for a hub of resources and evidence-based information and programs which would be a godsend for organizations that were cash-strapped yet were doing so much in local communities.

She said:

I can tell you from a grassroots organization that this is essential. We are all operating on shoestring and non-existent budgets, but we imagine a hub where all of us working across Canada can access tools, brochures, and ideas, and where we can simply add our own local crisis information, instead of reinventing the wheel.

What is most encouraging was the example she gave of how a groundbreaking program, run by her organization, was unknown in my community of Hamilton, an excellent program that takes place at the grassroots level to help prevent suicides in the most practical and direct way possible, and how the federal framework proposed by this bill could help make that connection and save lives.

These are the words of Tana Nash of the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council:

One example from the Waterloo region is the Skills for Safer Living group. This is a 20-week psychosocial, psycho-educational support group, but it's specifically for folks who have had suicide attempts and are still wrestling with wanting to die. This group was developed at St. Michael's Hospital with much evidence behind it that proves its success. It teaches things like emotional and coping skills, and how to gauge your own behaviour on a sliding scale, so that you know when you're escalating and how to reach out for help.

We are fortunate that this now runs in the Waterloo region, but when I talked to the Suicide Prevention Community Council of Hamilton last week, they hadn't heard about this great program. They are hungry to have such practical training in their region as well. It's another proven practice that can be rolled out across Canada

There are a number of experts who contributed to this discussion of Bill C-300 and the federal framework for suicide prevention at the committee level. We thank them for their time and expertise. We especially thank them for all the work they do on a daily basis in communities across Canada to help prevent suicides, and the anguish and heartbreak that suicide creates.

I believe Bill C-300 serves as a useful instrument to promote dialogue, education and awareness among federal partners. I believe the development of a federal framework on suicide prevention will also carve the way for a greater federal integration of initiatives, programs and services and will assist in greater collaboration among partners, as my colleague for Kitchener—Conestoga mentioned earlier, not only federal partners but provincial, territorial and municipal partners and all of the great NGOs that do such great work.

It has been a privilege to speak to the bill. I thank the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga and all members from both sides who have advanced this discussion so fewer parents next year may suffer a Mother's Day under such excruciating circumstance of loss.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am please to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-300. It came from committee and is now at third reading in the House. I would again like to congratulate the member for bringing the bill forward.

The NDP members on the health committee have been very supportive of the bill, as we have in the House at second reading. We will support the bill when it comes to a final vote. However, I want to reflect on the nature of the bill and what more we could possibly have done.

There is another bill in the House, Bill C-297, put forward by the member for Halifax. Although both bills deal with suicide prevention, they bring forward different strategies. Bill C-300, is much more of a limiting bill. It plays down the role of the federal government in establishing suicide prevention strategy and, unfortunately, there is nothing in the bill that pertains to first nations consultation.

I recognize it is difficult to put every single group in a bill and say we should do this and that. However, the statistics show this is a very important health issue and systemic issue around inequality, cultural history and colonialism that does affect first nations in Canada, aboriginal people.

The bill of the member for Halifax speaks to the need to directly engage the federal government with provincial ministers and first nations, and support smaller communities and provinces that might not otherwise have the infrastructure to enact the strategies. She lays out a clear federal role. Bill C-297 outlines the need for first nations, Inuit and Métis groups to be involved in the construction of the strategy. This is very important.

The bill we are debating today calls for defining best practices and promotes collaboration. These are very important and we certainly concur, but it is very disappointing that it does not go beyond that.

Bill C-297 is very comprehensive. It calls for the federal government to carry out 10 different projects, including a study of effective funding, surveillance to identify at-risk groups, establishing national standards and gaining cultural-based knowledge in preventing suicide.

At committee, my colleagues, particularly the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, and I put forward a number of amendments. These were based on the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention blueprint for a Canadian national suicide prevention strategy that came out in September 2009. This organization represents the service providers and the activists on the front line helping people who are in distress, who are at risk, in dealing with suicide and suicide prevention.

We put forward about 15 amendments. They really would have strengthened the bill. For example, one of them called for a distinct national coordinating body for suicide prevention to operate within the appropriate entities in the Government of Canada. Another amendment called for assessing and adopting where appropriate the recommendations and objectives outlined in the blueprint for a national suicide prevention strategy of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.

I want to put on the record here in the House that we tried very hard at committee to bring some amendments to the bill to strengthen it so it could go beyond an issue of best practices, collaboration and information sharing and take on some more specific objectives that are desperately needed.

We did hear a number of times that we should not worry about this because the Mental Health Commission of Canada would be addressing this in its report. Of course, since dealing with the bill at committee, that report came out last week, entitled “Changing Directions, Changing Lives”.

On page 13 of the report it reads:

...establishing whole-of-government and pan-Canadian mechanisms to oversee mental health-related policies; strengthening data, research, knowledge exchange, standards and human resources related to mental health, mental illness and suicide prevention.

That is not the only reference but , that one speaks strongly to the need for all levels of government l to be involved.

While we are happy that the Mental Health Commission of Canada has included this issue in its new strategy that came out last week, it seems to me that we have missed an opportunity with this bill to look at some concrete specifics around setting up a national coordinating body, looking at better training or, more specifically, working with first nations.

We received a communication from the Assembly of First Nations after we dealt with the bill at committee. It sent some very good information that is very important for us to understand. It is really shocking. It is information that we know but when we speak about this issue it brings to mind how serious it is in the aboriginal community. The AFN points out that suicide now represents the greatest single cause of injury deaths in its population, according to a study done in 2003. It also points out that a closer examination of intentional self-harm or suicide across age groupings shows that the deaths due to suicide, as a proportion of all deaths, was the largest among first nations youth. It also points out that youth suicide is not a tragedy that is visited in equal measure in all native communities. In certain communities, the suicide rate is as much as 800 times their provincial average. These statistics cannot even begin to tell us the stories, the tragedy and the reality of what is happening in many smaller, remote communities and in urban centres.

I was disappointed and concerned that the bill did not reference the particular issues that are taking place in aboriginal communities. Amendments were put forward to include some of this important information and the need to be more specific in the bill but, surprisingly, they were turned down.

It worries me that this is becoming a pattern now. Some of the bills are fine in as far as they go but they are very informational. They are designed to create awareness. We had one just the other day on breast density, a similar kind of bill. I do not want to knock the bills in and of themselves but it is really worrying that when there is a genuine effort to put forward amendments to improve and strengthen these bills, they seem to be automatically shot down. I have to wonder why.

Parliament should be constructive, particularly on private member's business. We should try to be constructive and work together on this bill on suicide prevention because we all agree that work needs to be done on this. There is no question that we all agree. Therefore, it is very concerning that the good faith attempts to strengthen and improve the bill were shut down one hundred per cent. I read out some of the information that came before us and it was basically ignored.

We will support the bill but we will also work very hard to support my colleague's bill, Bill C-297, the member for Halifax, because it is a much broader, comprehensive and very specific strategy that would clearly involve the federal government. That is what we need to do, particularly in light of the new report that just came out from the Mental Health Commission of Canada.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the support that the NDP has shown throughout the entire process.

One of the things we tried to do in crafting Bill C-300 was to avoid naming specific groups in the fear that we would unintentionally leave out other groups. We were very generic in identifying the fact that there needs to be collaboration among these groups and consultations among territorial and provincial governments and different internal departments of the Government of Canada.

I have spoken with people who have done work on the national suicide prevention strategy, as it relates to the aboriginal national suicide prevention strategy. They were very affirmative of the steps that we are taking here. It is my hope that, as Bill C-300 asks for this collaboration to continue, it would be clear to whichever government agency is charged with this responsibility, possibly the Mental Health Commission, that this is a major component of the initiative I am working on.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, during my comments when the House discussed Bill C-300 at second reading, I thanked the many individuals and organizations who helped in its development. Today I would like to begin my comments by extending my gratitude to all of the witnesses who appeared before the Standing Committee on Health. Their expertise was invaluable.

I was not able to attend all of the hearings in person, but I have reviewed the evidence and I have learned a lot. I learned that national leadership of the type called for by Bill C-300 could reduce the number of deaths by suicide in Canada by more than 450. Professor Brian Mishara of the University of Quebec's Centre for Research and Intervention on Suicide and Euthanasia made this and many other excellent points during his testimony.

From the University of Western Ontario's Dr. Marnin Heisel I learned that the cost of suicide and self-harm in Canada is more than $2.4 billion each year and that this number will only grow as our society ages. While this is an emotional issue for me, a moral imperative based on my experiences, faith and the value I place on human life, I also learned that there is a strong economic case for the coordination of suicide prevention efforts across this great country. I learned that Canada is an exporter of knowledge and expertise in suicide prevention and that other countries are often earlier adopters of Canadian-built solutions than we are ourselves. I also learned new ways to describe the role that Bill C-300 will play in providing that coordination, a vacuum that must be filled in order to bring hope to our most vulnerable.

Dammy Damstrom-Albach, president of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, noted the significance of the federal role, saying:

It must function as both catalyst and glue to stimulate and cement the needed connections. Suicide prevention requires all levels of government to unite in support of the community groups, survivors, those with lived experience and the thousands of volunteers who have long done the lion's share of this work. The national government must step forward to do its portion.

Catalyst, glue, stimulate, cement: this is a high-level view of what I believe Bill C-300 seeks to accomplish.

Tana Nash, of the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council, provided a view from the front lines. She told the health committee that Bill C-300:

...is essential. We are all operating on shoestring and non-existent budgets, but we imagine a hub where all of us working across Canada can access tools, brochures, and ideas, and we can simply add our own local crisis information instead of reinventing the wheel.

Of course, it should be clear that it is not the intent of Bill C-300 to tell communities how to do suicide prevention. Each community will need to contextualize its own approach based on the wealth of ideas and resources that are available, but there should be no community group that needs to start from scratch ever again.

Through my work developing Bill C-300, I have enjoyed meeting many passionate individuals who are champions of mental health and suicide prevent. Scott Chisholm, of Thunder Bay, founded the collateral damage project. Scott spoke on Parliament Hill about the need to do more. He reminded parliamentarians that “Our first responders don't have the tools and skills needed to evaluate risk.... Our teachers and doctors don't have the training to recognize and react to the warning signs.... We can do better with just a bit of leadership.”

He went on to say, “I believe Parliament can save lives. Better information sharing, better statistics, better translation of research into practice, all promised by Bill C-300, will save lives.”

Mr. Chisholm has closely followed Bill C-300's progress through the House. Several times after I thanked hon. members for their willingness to speak frankly on this issue, I would find a comment from Scott on Facebook thanking me for encouraging this open dialogue. His thanks usually ended with “...because not talking about it isn't working”.

And not talking about it is not working. I have commented several times through this process that the conversation we are having is just as important as the legislation. This is reflected in the thrust of Canada's new mental health strategy, which was launched by the Mental Health Commission of Canada, another great initiative of this government, just last week.

The word “stigma” is used dozens of times throughout this strategy. It is pointed out that only one in three Canadians experiencing mental health difficulties will seek help. Stigma and the fear of being labelled prevent many people from seeking help. Bill C-300 will foster the conversations in which Canada must engage if we are to save more lives. Bill C-300 will foster hope.

I have mentioned this quotation several times, and some hon. members might actually be able to say it out loud with me, but Margaret Somerville of McGill University said it best, I believe:

Hope is dependent on having a sense of connection to the future, even if that future is very short-term.... Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit; without it our spirit dies.

Mr. Speaker, you and I both have hopes for the future, but some Canadians, whether due to distress, overwhelming circumstances or medical challenges, lose hope. Each day, on average, 1,000 Canadians lose hope so completely that they attempt that final irreversible step; each day, ten Canadians complete the attempt. Ten Canadians' lives are lost each day to suicide.

As hon. members shared during second reading, we all know someone. Some have struggled to help school-aged children cope with the suicide of a classmate. Most of us have dealt with death by suicide of friends or colleagues. Some, in fact—altogether too many—have faced the aftermath of suicide even more closely.

Any of us who have ever grieved the loss of a family member or a close friend will know the feelings of doubt and sorrow that can overwhelm even the strongest of us. Members of this House are aware of my life's journey over this past year. I lost my wife and best friend to an undiagnosed medical condition within hours of last year's election victory. Once again I thank hon. members from all sides of the House for the compassion they demonstrated and continue to show to this very day.

I will admit that after losing Betty, I felt overwhelmed. There were points were I doubted I would be able to continue my role in service to the people of Kitchener—Conestoga. In fact, there were some times when I doubted if I wanted to.

However, while I missed her, while I continue to miss her every day, I have never felt alone. My family members were there with me, and I was there with them. We had each other. My caucus colleagues, and indeed all hon. members, provided me a strong support network. Even today at events across the Waterloo region, it is not uncommon for someone to take the time to offer their condolences.

I am grateful to God for these heartfelt responses that remind me that I am not alone in my pain, and I am grateful to God for the gift of life and allowing me to continue to enjoy his gift despite my loss.

I share my personal experience because it is related to hope and to community. First, I never felt alone. I gained new appreciation for the blessings of family, friends and faith. They have kept me focused on the future and on hope. I cannot imagine standing in this House today were any of these elements lacking in my life.

While I can never picture myself falling victim to suicidal behaviours, I do understand how easy it could be for someone to temporarily lose hope and in the process take actions with permanent, fatal consequences.

Second, death always provides challenges to the survivors. The challenges I faced after Betty's death were profound. All those who walked those agonizing days with us, though—family, friends and staff—understood that there was simply nothing anyone could have done to change the outcome. Her condition was undiagnosed and inoperable.

Those left behind by suicide face everything I faced, but with the added complications of false guilt and blame that exist because of the stigma of suicide. While our family has drawn strength from open conversations about Betty with friends and strangers alike, those left behind by suicide too often feel uncomfortable sharing their story. That is part of the problem.

We simply cannot face a problem, let alone solve it, if we are afraid to talk about it. That is why Bill C-300 calls for the recognition of suicide as more than a mental health issue. Suicide is also a public health issue. The Mental Health Commission of Canada notes that the elements of Bill C-300 fit well within their overall mental health strategy.

Bill C-300 calls for knowledge exchange and the use of evidence-based practices, moving Canada toward the information hub called for by Tana Nash and the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council.

I do not stand today to claim Bill C-300 is a magic wand. More would still need to be done. However, I truly believe that Bill C-300 is the first step on that journey.

Were it in my power and ability, I would reach out, myself, to comfort each and every one of those coping with suicidal thoughts. If it were in my power, no volunteer currently making those heroic efforts would feel under-resourced or unappreciated by society. However, these actions are beyond me. They are in fact beyond any government that must balance the relative benefit of every request for funding and contemplate the opportunity costs of funding project A at the expense of project B.

I have the honour of serving the good people of Kitchener—Conestoga as their member of Parliament. My constituents and members of this House are familiar with my beliefs as they relate to the value and importance of human life. I will continue to promote a culture of life for those struggling, for those who can no longer speak for themselves, and for those who cannot yet speak for themselves. I believe that every life is precious.

Passing Bill C-300 would deliver a message of hope to those working in communities across Canada. In time, that hope would be delivered to the tens of thousands of Canadians who engage in suicidal behaviours each year. The implementation of Bill C-300 would enable Canadians to engage in the conversations that are required for understanding and healing. Those who have suffered from suicidal thoughts or suffered the death by suicide of a loved one would have a connection to the resources that could help restore hope.

Mr. Speaker, through you, I thank all hon. members for standing with vulnerable Canadians on this journey toward hope. Hope: the oxygen of the human spirit. Without it, our spirit dies.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

moved that Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, be concurred in at report stage.

(Motion agreed to)

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, as reported without amendment from the committee.

Breast Density Awareness Act

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will speak, as I have done in the past, in support of the bill at report stage, but not with the same enthusiasm that I did earlier. As my hon. colleague for Vancouver East just mentioned, the bill went to committee, and it did not implement many of the changes that would have strengthened the bill and made it far more effective. I will speak to that a little later.

The bill's intent is to ensure that women and health care providers have the best information possible regarding screening, especially regarding new technology, and an understanding about dense breast tissue so that women know about it and health care providers and technologists understand what to look for. We know that tumours can be harder to identify in women with dense breast tissue. I would like to add, though, that it does not necessarily mean that a woman with dense breast tissue is more likely to have breast cancer. It is just that it is harder to identify if she does.

Twenty-three thousand women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in Canada this year. Sadly, nearly a quarter of those women will die from that disease, so in many ways this is an important bill, in that it speaks to the issue of identifying and finding a cancer as early as possible.

The federal government has a definitive role to play in facilitating best practices and funding research related to cancer prevention and early detection as part of the Canadian partnership against cancer, which is a federal initiative with the provinces, especially, as well, since the 2004 health accord strengthened the federal leadership role in ensuring access to health care services no matter where people live in Canada.

Where I find a problem, and I find it disappointing, is in relation to the health committee's recent study this bill. We heard from many witnesses. We heard from experts, health care professionals, patients and researchers. They all agreed that the intent of the bill is a very good one. They all agreed that awareness is important and that information sharing is important. However, they all felt that the bill would fall short of achieving any really important outcomes unless some pieces were added to it.

The member who moved the bill earlier on praised the co-operation and collaboration across parties on his bill. However, it stopped short in the House of Commons and at committee stage, where witnesses made some very compelling testimony. They talked about ways to improve the bill to improve its effectiveness. This was voted down, not only by the member for Barrie, who moved the bill, but also by members of the Conservative Party.

A couple of items that I moved as recommendations to strengthen the bill came from the witnesses. One of them is about sharing best practices. Subclause 2(c) of the bill talks about the ability of the Public Health Agency of Canada to look at information and data sharing, et cetera. I consulted so that it would not add cost at all. I heard from the legislative wing of the Library of Parliament that in fact there was a way to make sure this would incur no cost. It would use the already existing infrastructure of the Public Health Agency of Canada, where they have data and information sharing, to add best practices.

The reason for this, as we heard from witnesses, is that there are provinces, such as my province of British Columbia, where the outcomes of breast cancer are, by enormous percentage points, better than anywhere else in Canada. Therefore, why do we not take a page from their book? Why are we allowing people to continue to reinvent the wheel when we know what would work? Of course, as with anything to do with health, time is of the essence. Why wait six years for someone to discover a new wheel, when other people discovered it six years ago and we could be implementing it now for the benefit of patients?

Therefore, I was really very disappointed that the member himself did not accept that amendment. In fact, he said that his concern was with the word “ensuring”. He said that the work of the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative is not controlled by the Public Health Agency of Canada and that as such it should not be “ensuring” the collection, processing and distribution of information or “ensuring” the identifying, synthesizing and distribution of best practices. However, in subclause 2(c) he himself suggests sharing information through the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative.

It seemed as if this amendment, which would have enhanced the bill, was blocked purely because it was going to change the bill in some small way, even though to improve it.

Perhaps in his final remarks today, the member could clarify why such a no-cost, important thing that we heard from witnesses over and over was rejected.

I do not for one moment impugn the intentions of the member. He did a lot of hard work. I think it is an important bill and I think he brought forward a lot of things about it, but it had no teeth. There was nothing that would really change outcomes, other than increasing awareness.

This is an example of what concerns many of us, which is that the government is not listening to the expert testimony of witnesses appearing before committee, especially on bills and especially when these witnesses enhance the bill. It is a pattern.

I would like to say that we saw the same thing with Bill C-300. Witnesses appeared before the health committee and made several suggestions to establish a truly effective framework for suicide prevention. Twenty-one amendments were brought forward, including nine by the Liberal Party, and every single one of them, none of which incurred new costs, was voted down for no really logical reason that was given.

What we are left with are toothless bills that sound good and do small things, but do not really improve very much the lot of women with dense breast tissue or a suicide prevention strategy.

I hope this is not about ideology, because most of us have been supporting these bills because the intent is good. However, we would like to see them actually make a difference to the patients.

As I said before, I support the bill, but with a great deal of disappointment and reluctance.

Suicide Prevention

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, according to Statistics Canada, the suicide rate in this country was almost double that of the death rate from car crashes in 2007, the most recent year measured. Youth suicides are particularly disconcerting. That year, 421 youth between the ages of 15 and 24 took their own life. That is 421 too many.

Thousands of family members and friends are impacted. As a parent, the anguish they have felt is unthinkable to me. That is why I will be very pleased to stand in this House next month in support of Bill C-300 from the member for Kitchener—Conestoga to establish a federal framework on suicide prevention.

I am confident that the bill will encourage the many outstanding efforts taking place across this country, such as the Jack Project at Kids Help Phone. This project is a legacy of Jack Windeler, a Queen's University student who died by suicide in March 2010. The project's school-based outreach program is now being piloted for a full rollout next school year. We wish them much success.

Suicide

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have in my hand a petition signed by a number of Canadians primarily from Alberta who want to draw to the attention of the House the fact that suicide is a major issue affecting youth across our country.

The petitioners want to draw the attention of the chamber to Bill C-297 and Bill C-300 currently before Parliament.

Health

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Health in relation to Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing line 12 on page 3 with the following:

force of this Act and every year thereafter,

I wish to say how disappointed I am to see that the Standing Committee on Health has become a farce and that the Conservatives do not clearly wish to have a strong bill. I think they just want to have a piece of paper to show their voters so that they can say that the Conservative government is committed to suicide prevention. But this is obviously not the case. They lack respect for both future victims of suicide and their families.

The saddest thing about this is that I am moving amendments and the Conservatives do not even deign to comment on them, to discuss them or say why they are not going to support them. This shows a lack of cooperation and goodwill. This is a sad day for Canadian democracy. The Conservative members of this committee reject all the amendments moved by the opposition parties. But these amendments were submitted to us by witnesses and various important organizations in Canada. It is really a sad day.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 3 with the following:

4. Within one year after coming into

From what I gather, the bill would not require the first status report on the situation to be available for four years. I feel, however, especially in politics and for people struggling with suicide or their families, this is really a very long time. I think it would not be unreasonable to ask that a report be made one year after this bill has been passed.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I move that clause 2 in Bill C-300 be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) providing suicide prevention guidelines for training, certification and accreditation for Canadians who work with Inuit, first nations, armed forces, and veterans.

These are all areas within federal jurisdiction, and for which the federal government has direct responsibility for service delivery.

Madam Chair, I move this amendment because we heard from witnesses, we have seen the data, and every piece of evidence tells us that Inuit have an eleven times greater suicide rate than any other group of Canadians; veterans and armed forces tend to come back with post-traumatic stress disorder, which results in a very high level of suicide, again higher than the normal population; and of course first nations have a seven times greater suicide rate.

These are all people who are completely within federal jurisdiction, for whom the federal government delivers services. Therefore the federal government, if it's going to establish a framework, should be establishing and providing suicide prevention guidelines for training, certification, and accreditation for people who work with these very high-risk groups.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I therefore move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) studying the funding arrangements to provide the treatment, education, professional training and other supports required to prevent suicide and assist those bereaved by a suicide.

We are talking about vulnerable populations. We are talking about a Canada-wide approach, assistance, while respecting and protecting provincial jurisdictions. I am not going to talk for much longer.

My colleague, Ms. Block, mentioned that studies on another subject had been done. I would like to ask her whether any studies have been done on this topic.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

My amendment is aimed at that.

I therefore move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) assessing and adopting, where appropriate, the recommendations and objectives outlined in the Blueprint for a National Suicide Prevention Strategy of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.

I hope that the Conservatives do not see in this amendment an intrusion into an area of provincial jurisdiction because, seriously, I do not see any such thing in this amendment.

The reason why this is being proposed is that we have to trust the experts when it comes to suicide prevention. The Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention is the right body with which we should work on suicide prevention and not regard ourselves as experts on the subject, when we are simply members of Parliament, in spite of all our goodwill. We have to work with the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention and have respect for the many years they have dedicated to suicide prevention.

I hope that our Conservative members for once will agree to improve this bill.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Madam Chair, I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) assessing access to appropriate and adequate health, wellness and recovery services, including mental health and substance abuse services, for all Canadians, as well as for families and communities.

One of the reasons for this amendment, in addition to the fact that the witnesses we consulted recommended that this be included, is that when we talk about suicide there are vulnerable populations. I will not necessarily name them.

I know that Mr. Albrecht did not want to name them in his bill, but it is very important that the committee consider access to services for vulnerable populations. Since, in the end, even with the best bill in the world, if we do not identify whether these vulnerable populations have access to services, it will be a shortcoming in our suicide prevention strategy. The amendment is designed to make up for this shortcoming.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

My amendment looks a little like that of the Liberals, LIB-4.

I therefore move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) establishing national guidelines for best practices in suicide prevention based on evidence in key areas of mental health care.

I do not think that anyone is opposed to having the best possible practices and the best national guidelines respecting best practices. So I would like to hear my Conservative colleagues' reason for not voting in favour of that.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

First I wish to say how sad it is for the victims and their families that we cannot do these studies.

I therefore move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) conducting studies on the means to reduce stigma associated with being a consumer of mental health, substance abuse, suicide prevention, intervention and bereavement services.

Yes, suicide is a taboo subject in society, especially for people who wish to admit to a member of their family or to the population in general that they have already had some dark ideas or have tried to commit suicide. Stigmatization in this regard is very important. I believe, as do many of our witnesses, that conducting studies to reduce such stigmatization would be healthier for people who have already thought about suicide or are going to think about it in the future. The problem with suicide is that people retreat into themselves. They feel alone and cannot ask for help for many reasons, including stigmatization. This is why I think, like many other witnesses, that it would be good to do some studies.

Studies do not require a royal recommendation. But I wonder whether the Conservatives are going to oppose this amendment too and, through their lack of action and proactivity within the committee, leave all those people in bereavement.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) conducting studies on the reduction of access to means and methods for persons to harm themselves.

We realize that, where suicide prevention is concerned, there are many unknowns. Unfortunately, when people commit suicide, we do not necessarily know why they killed themselves. Nor do we know what we could have done to prevent it. That is why I think it is important that studies be done, regardless of by whom, to find out more about suicide and, in this case, to reduce access to means and methods for persons to harm themselves. Thank you.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:

(vii) establishing national standards for the training of persons engaged in suicide prevention, so that, in their interaction with potentially vulnerable populations, they may better identify individuals who are at risk and direct them to the appropriate assessment and treatment services.

My colleague Colin Carrie mentioned a bit earlier that personnel training was a provincial jurisdiction. That is indeed so. When speaking of training itself. That is why I am happy that this amendment calls for the establishment of national standards. We are not telling the provinces how to do their work, but we are making recommendations that all provinces can use to provide better training for their workers in suicide prevention.

This issue is very complex. These are people who are playing with people's lives. One wrong answer or a wrong word from them might be enough for someone to carry out their idea. People must thus have as many skills as possible.

I think that we could establish national standards for the training of persons engaged in suicide prevention. That is what I had to say on this amendment.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 19 on page 2 the following:

(ii.1) disseminating information about the determinants of health, including economic status — social environment and access to health services — as risk factors for suicide,

We discussed this in the Standing Committee on Health with the representative of the Mental Health Commission of Canada. He said that there were elements that really affected people with regard to suicide. People are not born equal. If we can find out about the causes that may lead to suicide and act on them, we have a better chance of reducing risk factors and thus suicide.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 17 to 22 with the following:

(ii) supporting and enhancing information systems to disseminate information about suicide and suicide prevention, including improvements to federal-provincial surveillance systems so that current statistics about suicide and related risk factors are available to the public,

The federal government has a fine opportunity with Bill C-300 to become a leader in suicide prevention, on both the national and international levels. If the Government of Canada exercised its role as coordinator and worked with the provinces to help everyone in psychological distress, it would be a very good idea.

This amendment would therefore be one way of strengthening the bill, which is basically very good.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 2 with the following:

b) establishes a distinct national coordinating body for suicide prevention to operate within the appropriate entities in the Government of Canada and to assume re-

Although the Mental Health Commission of Canada does an excellent job, I am moving this amendment since unfortunately people also commit suicide for reasons that are not necessarily related to mental health. We might say that the Commission cannot cover all the reasons why someone might want to commit suicide. That is why there has to be a separate agency responsible for the prevention of suicide.

From the witnesses' submissions sent to us in our offices, we can see that there is a consensus for an independent agency other than the Mental Health Commission of Canada, one which would not have ties with the Commission. That is why I am moving this amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

We will begin now.

Today, pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 15, 2012, we're doing Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of the preamble and clause 1 is postponed.

(On clause 2—Framework)

We'll go to the first amendment, which is NDP-1.

Go ahead, please.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I think there has been some discussion between Madame Quach and my assistant and we would like to change it to state something a little bit more specific:

That the committee set three meetings aside after the Bill C-300 study to explain the role of government and industry in determining drug supply in this country, how the provinces and territories determine what drugs are required in their jurisdictions, and how industry responds to them, and the impact this has on stakeholders.

[Prof. Brian Mishara, Director, Centre for Research and Intervention on Suicide and Euthanasia, Université du Québec à Montréal, As an Individual]

I'm going to speak in French, if that is all right.

In 1987, the report of the National Task Force on Suicide in Canada provided in its conclusion a series of 40 specific recommendations to prevent suicide in Canada. I was part of the group of experts tasked with revising and updating that first report from the group of experts. Health Canada issued that new version in 1994. Seven years later, we could only reiterate the same 40 recommendations because nothing had been done. Since then, none of the 40 recommendations have been implemented.

Today, close to 30 countries have a national suicide prevention strategy, and the WHO recommends that all countries develop one.

I'm a researcher. Research shows that national strategies have an impact on suicide. For example, a study published in 2011 in Social Science and Medicine focused on the suicide rate in 21 countries between 1980 and 2004. In those 25 years, the suicide rate dropped each year by 1,384 out of 100,000 residents, or by 6.6% a year. According to the study, if Canada, with a population of 34 million, had a national strategy like that of other countries, the number of deaths by suicide would decrease by 476. If we consider the financial impact of health and mental health care and the psychological and emotional impact of deaths by suicide, the possibility of saving 476 lives a year may justify major investments in suicide prevention.

Bill C-300 is a good start and indicates that Canada wants to be among a growing number of countries that have invested in a national suicide prevention program. A number of Canadian provinces have already made great strides. In 1998, Quebec created the Stratégie québécoise d'action face au suicide. Between 1998 and 2008, there was a decrease in the suicide rate for all age groups. The rate for youths in Quebec dropped by half compared with 1998.

Certainly, the provinces have a responsibility when it comes to health and mental health. Suicide prevention is part of that. But significant steps at the federal level can contribute considerably to decreasing the suicide rate in Canada. Think about the medication that causes the most deaths by suicide: it's acetaminophen, Tylenol, which is available over the counter in large quantities. In England and in a number of other European countries, a simple regulation aimed at controlling the quantity of pills in a single container that a person can purchase resulted in a lower number of poisonings, whether intentional or unintentional, caused by this medication. The fact that fewer dangerous medications are available at home has reduced the risk for suicidal individuals. This kind of policy doesn't cost the government anything and offers an increased probability of saving lives.

Other examples of possible actions that can be taken at the federal level include media awareness, particularly on the impact their reports have on suicide. This impact has been very well documented through a significant body of research. Encouraging early intervention to promote mental health in young people is another example.

The spirit of Bill C-300 is commendable, but the repercussions of this kind of legislation will be determined by the resources available to implement it and how the authorities, which are called relevant entities within the Government of Canada, will invest competent resources to carry out the tasks set out in the legislation.

This bill is very different from the national suicide prevention strategies elsewhere in the world that have had a considerable impact on the suicide rate. The national strategies that have been successful have not given an existing entity the mandate of dealing with suicide prevention; instead, they have created a governmental or paragovernmental organization responsible for the strategy.

Those entities had sufficient funding to interact with the provincial, governmental and non-governmental authorities to develop a concerted action on suicide prevention. However, all the strategies that have been successful received good funding from governments for pilot projects, monitoring and various activities.

Without specific funding allocated to suicide prevention, Bill C-300 risks having the same impact as the report entitled Suicide in Canada and the updated report. It was a lot of fine words, but the federal government has taken almost no action in terms of suicide prevention.

Canada has an enormous amount of suicide prevention resources. We are exporters of knowledge in this area. Our research is often used elsewhere. We can learn from the success and experiences at the provincial and local level, but the federal government also has a role to play, as I have already mentioned. I'll repeat that the government just wasted $300,000 to draft existing documents, which have been written recently elsewhere in the world. Lack of coordination seems to be a common occurrence.

Instead of palming the mandate off on a relevant entity within the Government of Canada, I recommend that the bill be amended to create a governmental authority that would be responsible for implementing the legislation. I also recommend adding that this entity make recommendations on changes to Canada's legislation, policies and practices to encourage a decrease in suicide.

Furthermore, I find that the timeframe suggested, which provides for an initial report in four years, must be replaced and that an annual report should be requested. I know that it takes time to establish a strategy. However, other countries in the world have generally taken one or two years to create a national strategy that has involved thousands of stakeholders, given the small amount—

[Dammy Damstrom-Albach, President, Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention]

Good morning, and thank you very much for allowing me to address the committee.

As you are by now well aware, as many as 10 Canadians die each day by suicide, and these mostly preventable deaths devastate the lives of so many others. On that basis alone, our government should play a significant role in suicide prevention. However, this role and the government's response to suicide must be in keeping not only with the seriousness but also with the breadth and the complexities of this issue.

This requires an approach that is authentic, multi-faceted, and nuanced, an approach specific to suicide prevention, intervention, and “postvention”, which of necessity focuses particular attention and action beyond simple inclusion in a broader initiative. Positive outcomes demonstrating our government's true commitment to suicide prevention depend upon specific, comprehensive, and concrete action, and eventually upon appropriate funding as well. While we understand funding for suicide prevention is not part of today's discussion and cannot be tied to a private member's bill, we all appreciate that it must at some point enter in.

Bill C-300 is a first step. Because of this bill, as well as that tabled by Megan Leslie and the recent motion put forward by Bob Rae, Parliament at last has broken its silence on suicide to join in a national conversation. We are very grateful for that.

However, I believe we owe it to Canadians to figure out what it will take to do this right. We must use this bill as a compass to chart our best direction, not take half measures. We know parliamentarians of every stripe are deeply concerned, and many have been personally touched by suicide in some way, as we saw last October when so many spoke of the tragedy of suicide and the need for bold action.

We are told that for every suicide death, there are at least 10 close others whose lives are profoundly impacted. That is 100 Canadians every day. Think about what that means over a decade. Many of these survivors suffer in silence and may themselves become vulnerable to suicide, particularly without compassionate and knowledgeable care and support.

Yet suicides are for the most part preventable. There are solutions, though they are rarely quick or simple. Suicide prevention in Canada is fragmented. The work began with dedicated individuals and small organizations scattered all across the country, and this remains reflected in our current state. There is no national vision unifying our efforts and few mechanisms that allow us to learn from and build on our knowledge and experience. At times, knowledge is confined to special interest or otherwise privileged groups and not easily accessible or transferable to grassroots organizations, front-line workers, and survivors.

When it comes to suicide prevention in Canada, the right hand often does not know what the left hand is doing, even though there are investments being made and great things being done in pockets all across the country. Because of this, good investments can fail to have broad impact, and their usefulness is then diminished.

Indeed, our government has made some focused investments in suicide prevention, but there is no structure to facilitate benefits spreading to all the places where they could be useful. A case in point is the recent announcement by the federal Minister of Health regarding a $300,000 grant to research best practices. This decision was made with the very best of intentions. However, in the absence of a framework and coordinating body, the government was unaware that similar exercises had taken place in other countries and that in 2003 the Canadian Institutes of Health Research had commissioned Dr. Jennifer White to undertake a Canadian suicide research review. This report identified substantial Canadian contributions to the suicide knowledge base and identified important research gaps. Hopefully, the upcoming research will build on Dr. White's 2003 report. In fact, an update of this report, with the addition of the global picture from similar recent reviews, would likely have been more sensible, along with funds directed to addressing some of the gaps already identified.

The assumption that simply making gathered knowledge available means that it will be swiftly put into action ignores the transitional steps needed to turn evidence-based knowledge into useful, practical application. Furthermore, the rapid gathering of this information could have been done in a few weeks by a simple request to SIEC, the Suicide Information and Education Centre, and to Crise to provide the latest material compiled across the globe.

We may well be spending $300,000 to reinvent the wheel. The government cannot be faulted, because there is no structure or appointed body to inform such decisions, nor is there any such structure to ensure that stakeholders across Canada have equal access to gathered information and the capacity to translate it into policy, implement it in practice, and then evaluate the outcome and feed the results back to others who need to learn from them.

This is where the federal government comes in. It is not a small role that the government must assume. It must function as both catalyst and glue to stimulate and cement the needed connections. Suicide prevention requires all levels of government to unite in support of the community groups, survivors, those with lived experience, and the thousands of volunteers who have long done the lion's share of this work. The national government must step forward to do its portion.

The federal government can also address fragmentation by honouring the 1996 UN guidelines on suicide prevention. Surely Canada's approach must be consistent with these guidelines, which clearly state that the litmus test of a country's commitment to suicide prevention is the appointing of a national coordinating body to promote collaboration and collective action and regularly report on progress.

Let us take full advantage of the wonderful opportunity we've been given thanks to the non-partisan leadership of people like Harold Albrecht, Megan Leslie, and Bob Rae. Bill C-300 is a good beginning. However, we need to extend our reach to be sure we do all that we can do for those Canadians whose lives have been or may be touched by suicide. Bill C-300 recognizes that suicide is a public health priority; however, it places most of its emphasis on knowledge exchange.

While this is one essential element of a comprehensive approach, knowledge exchange cannot stand alone. At a minimum, we must also consider establishing a national implementation support team to advance a comprehensive federal, provincial, territorial, public, and private response to suicide prevention. We must develop policies aimed at reducing access to lethal means. We must create guidelines and action initiatives to improve public awareness, knowledge, education, and training about suicide. And we must support an enhanced information system to disseminate information about suicide and suicide prevention.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would like to welcome all of you here today.

I also want to take the opportunity to acknowledge and congratulate our colleague Mr. Albrecht for introducing Bill C-300. He has been a relentless advocate on this issue. In fact he started with motion 388 in the last Parliament.

I'm not sure, but I don't think he mentioned today that he was also a founding member and co-chair of an all-party parliamentary committee on palliative and compassionate care. It studied four different areas, one of them being suicide prevention. Last fall that group managed to introduce their report called “Not To Be Forgotten”. I encourage you to take a look at it, and specifically at the chapter on the work you're doing.

Today when Mr. Albrecht was here, he mentioned he was intentional about not identifying any one particular group in his bill. As we can see here today, we have many different groups represented. So perhaps there's an understanding that strategies can transcend age and context, while recognizing the unique challenges you face within the different areas you are representing.

I am a member of a family that has survived suicide. It was many years ago—24 years ago, in fact. I lost my youngest brother. It was his third attempt. As family, obviously there was something we did not access or that was not available to us to try to work through what might have been creating this need in him, and certainly he did end up taking his own life.

Ms. Israel, I want to focus on something you mentioned earlier in terms of framing the issue. You said, “Suicide, suicidal thoughts, and suicidal behaviours have devastating impacts on families and communities across the country.” Then you stated, “All of us—families, caregivers, levels of government, and community leaders—have a role to play in preventing suicide and in reaching out to individuals, families, friends....”

I know you are actively working on strategies to help avoid the risk factors for suicide in children, and that you have developed national guidelines for seniors. I'd like to give you an opportunity to speak to both of those.

Also, if there's anything you are working on in terms of providing assistance to families who are survivors of suicide, would you speak about that as well?

[Col Rakesh Jetly]

Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak on Bill C-300.

Lieutenant-Colonel Bailey and I represent the Canadian Forces, more specifically, Canadian Forces health services.

The CF has placed a particular emphasis on suicide prevention for many years. In the interest of time, we'll limit our discussion to current efforts.

As already discussed today, suicide is a public health problem and a major cause of death among young people in western societies. The Canadian Forces rate has remained consistently below the age-match rate within Canadian society; however, the CF position remains that even one life lost to suicide is one too many. We grieve the loss and, as an organization, ask out loud, “Could we have done more?”

In September 2009, the Canadian Forces hosted an international expert panel on suicide prevention in military populations. In addition to our own internal experts, we consulted experts from academia, and from allied military such as those of the U.K., U.S., Australia, and the Netherlands. We have brought copies of the expert panel report, in English and French, and could make PDF versions available if necessary.

The overarching recommendation of the panel was that effective suicide prevention must indeed focus upstream with the effective treatment of mental illness. The three cornerstones or pillars of an effective mental health suicide intervention program are excellence in mental health care; leadership; and an engaged and aware military population or any population that one is dealing with.

To expand on the above, we continue to strive toward a mental health treatment program that is second to none. This means timely access to multidisciplinary expert care, evidence-based treatments, no co-payments for medication, and no limits on interventions such as psychotherapy, provided they are clinically indicated.

We also continue to implement measures to enhance early identification and treatment in primary care settings of conditions that are known to contribute to suicide.

The unique role of leadership in the Canadian Forces context cannot be understated. For example, the leader-subordinate relationship in the CF is much more than employer-employee. As well, leadership is responsible for all aspects of a member's well-being, including provision of their health care.

Leaders ultimately create and fund health systems, but more importantly, they create a workplace climate conducive to judgment-free discussion about mental health issues, including suicide. Many of the barriers that may have discouraged care-seeking in the past can be overcome through effective leadership. This idea is best exemplified by the current CDS's “Be the Difference” campaign in which he has charged all CF leaders to be facilitators and partners in the mental health of soldiers. He essentially reminds us that mental health is everybody's business and responsibility.

The third cornerstone involves ensuring that the CF members themselves are provided with sufficient information to recognize when they or someone else may be struggling, and that they know when and where to seek help if required. We provide education and training throughout the career and deployment cycles, starting at the recruit level, for both Canadian Forces personnel and their families in order to give them the tangible knowledge and skills to help themselves, to seek care, and to help their peers.

Many other specific topics and recommendations are discussed in the reports including the fact that since April 2010 we have begun what we call a medical-professional-technical review of every suicide, for which we will send a senior mental health professional and a family physician to the site of the suicide, and on behalf of the Surgeon General, do a detailed review of the circumstances surrounding the event. Those include the mental health of the individual, any care that was provided, workplace circumstances, and other stressors.

This process provides us important lessons learned from every single suicide that occurs within our organization, and this new and valuable process will give us near-immediate feedback and identification of any trends that emerge.

There were 61 recommendations in the report. I'll highlight just two of them. We also have ongoing concerns regarding the responsible reporting of suicides in the media, and we take every opportunity to educate reporters and journalism students on the very real risks of contagion and imitation with regard to the reporting of suicides.

To conclude, the Canadian Forces is committed to contributing its expertise and knowledge towards the prevention of the loss of life to suicide, and to helping those impacted by it. Our efforts continue through partnerships and in collaboration with others to make a difference in the mental health of Canadians. We look forward to the outcomes of this parliamentary process.

Thank you.

[Marla Israel]

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair and honourable members, for the opportunity to discuss the important topic of suicide prevention.

In my remarks today, I will provide a brief overview of suicide prevention and the actions taken by the Public Health Agency of Canada to address suicide and mental health promotion. I will also highlight the work currently being done by Health Canada on suicide prevention in First Nations and Inuit communities, as well as the research efforts of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research in mental health promotion and suicide prevention.

I am pleased to be here with Ms. Langlois, who will answer questions later.

Of course, my federal colleagues are here as well, and we'll be happy to speak to their issues.

Suicide, suicidal thoughts, and suicidal behaviours have devastating impacts on families and communities across the country. Probably the hardest issue to confront after a child, a friend, or a parent has taken his or her own life is the feeling of disbelief that a person could feel so terribly alone with their pain and suffering that the only way out is ending their life.

Through this bill and the efforts of the Mental Health Commission of Canada, media, stakeholders, parliamentarians, etc., the issue of suicide and the importance of positive mental health at earlier ages and stages is being confronted head-on. All of us—families, caregivers, levels of government, and community leaders—have a role to play in preventing suicide and in reaching out to individuals, families, friends, and communities who are struggling with this issue.

The statistics are telling. Canada has a suicide rate of about 11 people per 100,000. Approximately 3,700 individuals take their lives each year. In general, boys and men commit suicide at a rate 3 to 4 times greater than girls and women. In addition, suicide is not just a problem for the young. Older men, for instance, have particularly troubling rates of suicide.

Further, for certain populations within Canada, rates of suicide are disproportionately high. This includes Canada's aboriginal population. While some communities, thankfully, have little experience with suicide, others struggle on a daily basis. Suicide accounts for 22% of all deaths among First Nations youth 10 to 19 years of age, and 16% among First Nations adults aged 20 to 44 years. The suicide rate in regions of Canada with a high proportion of Inuit residents is approximately 11.5%, which is 6 times higher than for the rest of Canada.

From a public health perspective, suicide prevention begins with a solid foundation of positive mental health—resilience, solid relationships, sound parents, positive self-esteem, confidence in oneself, and good supports. Initiatives that begin early in life and encompass a person's whole environment will reap solid rewards later in life, when stress is high and when anxiety and depression take shape.

I would like to take a brief moment to highlight the efforts under way in the health portfolio to address suicide prevention. Activities at the Public Health Agency employ a population health perspective to promote healthy living and to understand the issues that can lead to poor mental health, including suicide.

Our work promotes public health prevention and promotion. We work with provinces and territories and with Statistics Canada to provide surveillance information and reports such as “A Report on Mental Illnesses in Canada”. We provide grants and contributions to researchers, academics, and community organizations to better understand interventions that may serve to prevent suicide at later stages. We deliver children's programs that are heavily focused on creating a better start and being better able to confront the transition to the school setting.

Approximately $114 million is spent on the Canadian prenatal nutrition program, the community action program for children, and the aboriginal head start program in urban and northern communities. As well, $27 million goes towards the innovation strategy, which contributes to the development of protective factors for improving the health of children, youth, and families.

In an effort to promote mental health and prevent suicide among seniors, the agency funded the development of the first evidence-based national guidelines on seniors' mental health, which are used to address a number of mental health issues, including depression and suicide prevention. Also, of course, we collaborate with provinces and territories.

The First Nations and Inuit Health Branch of Health Canada works closely with its partners to support First Nations and Inuit communities, investing $245 million per year in community-based programs and services associated with the mental wellness of First Nations and Inuit. Culturally based, community-driven programming is a significant contributor to positive health outcomes among First Nations and Inuit communities, families and individuals.

In specific response to the challenge of youth suicide amongst Canada's aboriginal peoples, in 2005 the aboriginal youth suicide prevention strategy was launched with an investment of $65 million over five years.

The strategy was renewed in 2010 with an investment of $75 million over an additional five years. The strategy supports first nations and Inuit families in over 150 communities to prevent and respond to youth suicide. The national anti-drug strategy is contributing to protect youth and families against the harmful effects of illicit drug use, with $9.1 million annually to improve access to quality addiction services for first nations and Inuit.

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research is increasing our understanding of suicide, helping to build the knowledge base as well as the capacity to respond more effectively by providing resources, treatment, and supports. With over $315 million since 2006, of which $25 million has been specific to suicide prevention research, it has allowed a significant contribution to scientific knowledge.

The work of the health portfolio is not, however, the only work of the federal government in this domain. Next you will hear from colleagues at the Canadian Forces, Veterans Affairs, and Correctional Services, about the work they are doing to advance the promotion of positive mental health and to prevent suicide for the populations they serve.

Bill C-300 serves as a useful instrument to promote dialogue, education, and awareness among federal partners. The potential development of a federal framework on suicide prevention will also carve the way for greater federal integration of initiatives, programs, and services, and will assist in greater collaboration among partners.

To conclude, the health portfolio is committed to contributing its expertise and knowledge toward the prevention of the loss of life to suicide and to help those impacted by it. Our efforts continue through partnerships and in collaboration with others to make a difference in the mental health of Canadians.

We look forward to the outcomes of this parliamentary process.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I would like to resume the committee meeting, so we have sufficient time to hear all our very important testimony from our witnesses.

I want to welcome the witnesses here today to speak on Bill C-300. We're very much looking forward to your very insightful wisdom.

From Health Canada, we have Ms. Kathy Langlois. Thank you. We have from the Public Health Agency of Canada, Ms. Marla Israel. Welcome. Via video, we have Ms. Janice Burke. Ms. Burke, can you hear me clearly?

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I would just like to respond.

The very essence of Bill C-300 is to utilize the good work that's already occurring on the front lines, whether it's the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council, Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, or myriad groups across the country that are already doing good work. The real heart of what Bill C-300 is doing is trying to bring these groups together, provide resources for them, and have them share what they're already doing so that the best practices can be shared. I think you've hit at the very heart of what my bill tries to do.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for coming here this morning.

Harold, I would like to congratulate you and thank you for your initiative.

With regard to how serious the issue of suicide is, I don't think there's anybody in this room who doesn't know someone who has committed suicide. I don't have any statistics on it, but even in my experience—I don't have anybody in my immediate family, but I had cousins who committed suicide. I had a school friend who fell victim to mental illness, and before he reached the age of 30 he committed suicide. The signs were there. He was watched by the family, and eventually he found a way to end his life.

We have a lot of people around the table who have a lot of knowledge and experience in the medical field. My professional background is in engineering, but I have a lifetime of experience. Harold mentioned that 90% of suicide cases are related to mental health. Well in my view, probably 100% of the cases are related to mental state, or the state of mind at the moment a person decides to take that action and end his or her life. Whether some cases are preventable or detectable is a question we can ask. In some cases there are no signs, and therefore preventing people from committing suicide in such cases is very difficult.

My first question is to Harold.

In your comments, Harold, you acknowledge the journey to introduce Bill C-300. I notice in the first point of the preamble that you take note of the spiritual aspect of suicide prevention. You didn't touch on this in your comments. I'm curious. Can you tell us more about what you meant?

[Tana Nash, Coordinator, Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council]

Thank you. It's an honour to be here this morning.

I am here before you today as an advocate for suicide prevention and awareness, as the coordinator of the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council but also as someone who has been bereaved by suicide.

During my first year of university, I lost my grandmother to suicide, and more recently I lost my only sister and sibling, Erin, to suicide.

Like so many advocates and grassroots organizations across Canada, I channeled that grief into something helpful, something hopeful and positive, so that others might not need to endure that same loss, that same needless and unnecessary loss.

In Waterloo Region there are many partners and volunteers breaking down stigma, raising awareness, providing education, and offering prevention and intervention solutions to reduce suicidal behaviours. And we are not alone.

Across Canada these efforts are fuelled by passion and a commitment to change, but are often disjointed, insufficient, and underfunded. So today is an important hour in Canada's history. As a government we are moving toward establishing a federal framework for suicide prevention, and by moving on this bill so quickly you are embracing Canada's need for quick action.

I am going to keep my remarks brief and make six key points, on why, in my judgment, Bill C-300 is so important for Canadians.

First, stating information about suicide prevention from a national, provincial, and a regional level is paramount. One new vision is using the workplace as a tool to do this, an area that has not been tapped into as strongly as we need to.

Bill Wilkerson and the Honourable Michael Wilson, released their final report for The Global Business and Economic Roundtable for Addiction and Mental Health this past December. The title is “Brain Health + Brain Skills = Brain Capital”. In it they talk extensively about the new workplace—the new neuroeconomic workplace—as a venue for suicide prevention.

The report says that the “NEW or NeuroEconomic Workplace is the workplace of the future. This NEW Workplace – as a venue for research, prevention and education – must be designed, managed and sustained to promote and protect the mental health of working populations as a straightforward duty of asset management”.

The report goes on to talk about how 85% of all new jobs now demand cerebral—not manual—skills, and what the report refers to as the advent of a brain-based economy wherein brain-based disorders are the leading source of disability.

I was asked to write for this report. I, too, call on Canada's business community to take a leadership role by offering prevention and intervention training in the workplace. Imagine mandating mental health first aid and gatekeeper suicide-prevention training such as ASIST or safeTALK, just as we have done with first aid and CPR, and providing employees with modules on what stress looks like, what depression looks like, what resiliency tools look like, and what the warning signs for suicide are. If we educate the workplace, we are also educating parents, just as we did with first aid and CPR.

I will add that both the Honourable Michael Wilson and Bill Wilkerson have expressed their support for Bill C-300 on behalf of the business community and asked me to bring that here today.

We can take this same model for disseminating information for suicide prevention in the workplace and apply it to other areas that affect thousands of Canadians, such as our national coaching certification. Our national coaches require first aid and CPR, but wouldn't it be great it they also were required to have mental health first aid and suicide-prevention training skills? And what about our future teachers and our education system? Currently they do not receive mental health or suicide-prevention training, although they are struggling with this every day.

The second point is promoting collaboration and knowledge exchange across regions. I can tell you from a grassroots organization that this is essential. We are all operating on shoestring and non-existent budgets, but we imagine a hub where all of us working across Canada can access tools, brochures, and ideas, and where we can simply add our own local crisis information, instead of reinventing the wheel.

For example, our region just completed a brochure entitled, “How Do I Write an Obituary When My loved One Died by Suicide?” I'm currently making presentations to all funeral homes in our region about the important role that funeral directors can play in breaking down stigma, as one of the first points of contact with family members; and what kinds of crisis or counselling services are available at the funeral service, because we know there will be other folks in the room who are skating on thin ice. I've also taken this presentation to the AGM of the Ontario Funeral Service Association, but we need to roll this out to all funeral homes across Canada.

My third point is on promoting the use of research and evidence-based practices. Implementing practical practices that work is essential to reducing the numbers of suicides. One example from the Waterloo region is the Skills for Safer Living group. This is a 20-week psychosocial, psycho-educational support group, but it's specifically for folks who have had suicide attempts and are still wrestling with wanting to die. This group was developed at St. Michael's Hospital with much evidence behind it that proves its success. It teaches things like emotional and coping skills, and how to gauge your own behaviour on a sliding scale, so that you know when you're escalating and how to reach out for help.

We are fortunate that this now runs in the Waterloo region, but when I talked to the Suicide Prevention Community Council of Hamilton last week, they hadn't heard about this great program. They are hungry to have such practical training in their region as well. It's another proven practice that can be rolled out across Canada.

My fourth point is on research as an essential part of Bill C-300. As the Wilson and Wilkerson report states, finding a cure for depression will stimulate the prevention of suicide on a large scale. It is estimated that as high as 90% of all those who take their own lives suffer depression at the time. Serving this purpose means saving the lives of kids.

The fifth point is on increasing public awareness. The stigma that still surrounds suicide prevails when it comes to advertising campaigns and awareness-raising. But as the Bell Let's Talk Day has proven, people want to talk about this issue. I can tell you that inevitably, time and time again, when I reach out to the community and start a dialogue, people want to talk about suicide. They simply need a leader to lead. They simply need the door to become open, because once it's open people want to talk.

I remember the first time I was at a local talk radio show and the producer was skeptical about having me on the program. She said she hoped I had lots of information to share, because nobody was going to call in. Well, 10 minutes into the 30-minute program, the phone lines were lit up. She popped her head in the door and asked if I could stay for an hour, because they couldn't believe the response. People want to have this dialogue.

Across Canada there have been all sorts of great public awareness events, such as the public service announcements that ran in Saskatchewan as a result of MP David Batters' death, and bus banners in Vancouver. Across Canada there are posters, information, and literature, but let's pull these all together so that we can roll out these models of success from coast to coast, so that all Canadians can have access to them. We can also look to other countries for their successes, such as the television commercials that were aired in Scotland aimed at middle-aged males, which is still the number-one mortality demographic for suicide—and that is true here in Canada.

Finally, let's be bold. It is not good enough to simply say we will do the above points, such as education and sharing of information. We need to actually take a stand as a concerned body and say the goal of the campaign is to cut the annual death toll in half, or to reduce suicides by 20% within the specific timeframe, as Scotland's Choose Life program has done. Consider this: if we aimed at reducing suicides in Canada by two-thirds over the next 10 years, we would save more than 30,000 lives and prevent some 200,000 self-inflicted injuries.

Without sufficient funding none of these initiatives will materialize. However, with a well-funded coordinating body, a national game plan to save the lives of fellow Canadians is more than possible, it is doable. Better yet, let's not just follow the initiatives of other countries, let's lead the world. It might have taken us longer than other countries to get to this point of implementing a federal framework for suicide prevention, but now that we're here, let's surge forward and be a leader. Canada has the resources, and Bill C-300 provides the vessel for this to be possible.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the health committee.

Today we have a very important bill before our health committee. It's Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention. It is my honour and privilege to introduce the sponsor of this bill, MP Harold Albrecht, who has worked extensively on this particular issue.

Mr. Albrecht will be presenting first, and then we have, from the Mental Health Commission, Dr. David Goldbloom and Ms. Mary Bartram. I understand, Dr. Goldbloom, you'll be doing the presentation. We have Ms. Tana Nash from the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council. Thank you so much for joining us, Ms. Nash.

We will begin with my friend and colleague Mr. Albrecht.

Suicide Prevention

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise to thank members of this House for their strong support of Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention.

Bill C-300 enjoyed the unanimous support of my own Conservative Party, the NDP official opposition, the Liberal Party and the hon. members for Saanich—Gulf Islands and Edmonton East. I thank each and every one of them.

One week ago the House debated this bill. In that short week there have likely been 350 hospitalizations due to suicidal behaviours, 1,500 visits to emergency rooms, 7,000 attempts at suicide and, unfortunately, 70 of those likely ending in death.

Before the vote, Tana Nash of the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council expressed her hope that Parliament would continue this vital conversation.

On behalf of Tana and the many others working on the front line to save lives, I extend my heartfelt thanks to this House for supporting Bill C-300.

Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division at second reading of Bill C-300 under private members' business.

The House resumed from February 9 consideration of the motion that Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Federal Framework For Suicide Prevention Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, “Hope is dependent on having a sense of connection to the future, even if that future is very short-term. Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit; without it our spirit dies.“ These words by ethicist Margaret Somerville of McGill University capture the essence of what this Parliament would do by passing Bill C-300 into law: provide hope.

At the heart of this bill is a clear call for national leadership, a coordination of the great efforts of many community groups across Canada, suicide prevention groups already doing all they can to bring hope. As has been acknowledged many times throughout this discussion, we all have stories to tell of how we, our families and our communities have been tragically impacted by suicide. We all know someone whose sense of hope was overcome by emotional pain and despair and consequently ended his or her life by suicide. The big problem is that suicide does not end the pain. It simply transfers it to family and community.

Bill C-300 acknowledges the complex nature of suicide and suicide prevention. We need to consider the biological, psychological, social and spiritual factors. We cannot pass all of the responsibility to government. We must remain our brother's keeper even and especially at their most vulnerable points. We as a Parliament can and must do more to protect this sacred gift of human life. The impact of the tragic, premature loss of life demands our attention. Shattered families and broken communities demand our commitment to action.

Suicide is the triumph of fear and the loss of hope. Suicide is most often the result of pain, hopelessness and despair. It is almost always preventable through caring, compassion, commitment and community. However, there is too much secrecy. Too many Canadians are in the dark about this problem. That stigma keeps it in the shadows.

I am so grateful for so many who have walked this dark valley and who are willing to shine the light. David Batters, MP, a friend and former colleague of mine, tragically ended his life by suicide in 2009. His wife, Denise Batters, has done so much to openly address the issue of mental illness and suicide prevention. My thanks to her and many others who have, in spite of their deep loss, found the strength to bring hope to others. In this way the secrecy is ended and the silence is broken. It is time to break the silence about suicide.

In closing, I said last year as this debate began that I expected more discussion than debate. I thank hon. members for meeting that expectation, for demonstrating that while we may disagree on so much, there remain a number of issues on which we are able to not only agree in private but also publicly express that agreement as our commitment to Canadians. I thank all members.

The tone and content of this debate should provide hope. As I said, “Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit”. Canadians can have hope that this Parliament will act to provide leadership on suicide prevention.

Bill C-300's passage would mandate the federal government to track statistics so we could chart our progress. Information relating to best practices would be shared so that organizations starved for cash, working on the front lines, would not need to reinvent the wheel but could instead focus their efforts on saving lives.

I am encouraged by this discussion. When we return to our ridings, I am sure that like me, many members will hear the usual complaints about the tone of this House. Members should tell them about this debate. They should tell them about the moment when members from all parties stood together for vulnerable Canadians with scarcely a moment of partisanship and not a word of blame, when MPs from all parties not only agreed on problems, but also stepped forward in unity toward a solution.

The truth is that non-partisanship is always fragile. A million events or circumstances could have soured this opportunity, but hon. members rose to the occasion. Many comments made by members not only have educated me, but also have affirmed my belief that passing Bill C-300 is the right thing to do. It is not the end of the road but it is that vital first step toward hope. I believe that Canadians will note that despite all our differences, we are taking this step together.

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I much appreciate the excellent speech from the member who just spoke in the House.

I am also pleased to speak to Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention. I want to offer my personal sincere thanks to the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga for bringing this very important bill to the House and to parliamentarians.

I am also grateful for this opportunity to highlight the current efforts of the Government of Canada on this issue.

Suicide is a sensitive topic and one which Canadians have traditionally spoken about in hushed tones. Today I would like to bring this issue out of the shadows and into an open conversation. Suicide affects us all. We all have a responsibility to confront it so that those who are suffering never feel alone.

As parliamentarians, we see our responsibility to Canadians to rise above partisanship and find ways to bring attention to the subject. My hope is that through caring, compassion, listening and awareness, we will see fewer Canadians retreating to the shadows, afraid to discuss the illness or the stigma which confronts them. The hope is that one day positive mental health will be considered as important as physical health and that we will work collectively to reduce the stigma attached to mental illness. To get there, it is important that we frame the issue appropriately in collaboration with all sectors of society.

Bill C-300 asks us to develop a federal framework in consultation with all partners and represents a solid first step in the right direction. It acknowledges that the Government of Canada has a complex mandate involving many players. It seeks ways in which these players can guide themselves to work collaboratively across departmental lines to share best practices in preventing suicide. It acknowledges that departments as diverse as the Public Health Agency of Canada, Health Canada, Veterans Affairs, Canadian Forces and the RCMP can find common ground upon which better synergies can be built.

Much in keeping with the spirit of this bill, since its introduction in October, I am confident that our discussions have reflected some success in opening the dialogue on this issue. We are seeing a commitment to increase awareness and knowledge about suicide in Canada. Thousands of people have shared their thoughts and experiences with us and with their own networks. Considerable efforts have been undertaken across Canada to help meet the needs of our populations at greatest risk. However, when the goal is influencing behaviour, development and resources at every phase of life for all Canadians, it is easy to become complacent. When the goal is wholesale cultural change through reducing the debilitating stigma associated with mental illness or promoting greater self-esteem, it is easy to put the challenge on the back burner. This is why these discussions are critical.

Suicide is a shared and immediate problem. It has the potential to touch each and every one of us. Indeed, it has affected many members of this Parliament and the government. Yet we only hear about these stories when it is too late. The reality is that it is a risk at any age and crosses ethnic, social and economic boundaries.

Suicide remains one of the leading causes of death in Canada. Rates are disproportionate among different populations across our nation. For example, suicide is the second cause of death among young Canadians age 15 to 24, and is the tenth leading cause of death among Canadians overall. Of almost 800 youths and young adults who committed suicide in 2007, 76% were young men. As the Chief Public Health Officer notes in his 2011 report on the state of public health in Canada on youth and young adults, not all Canadians are healthy and flourishing:

Those who are not doing well are disproportionately represented by youth from low-income families, youth who live in remote communities, sexual and gender minority youth, and Aboriginal youth.

Compounding the problem, some estimates show that as many as 90% of suicide-related deaths are attributable to a recognizable but not necessarily diagnosed mental disorder. It is incumbent upon us as parliamentarians to help bring these matters out of the shadows, to understand the issues better, to share our knowledge and expertise and to reflect that in our policies and programs for all Canadians.

I want to highlight that the Government of Canada understands that suicide is caused by both social and environmental factors. We know it is compounded by early experiences or social influences, such as violence, bullying or social isolation. We also understand that it can be addressed through promoting greater education and awareness and using evidence-based information to guide our collaborative efforts. Activities and interventions based on promoting positive mental health, building protective factors and reducing the risk factors associated with mental health problems, and intervening early to address the stigma associated with mental illness are all important elements in helping to reduce suicide rates.

The Government of Canada's investments and initiatives to engage in mental health and suicide prevention clearly signal a commitment to addressing the issue head-on. Allow me to provide some insight into some of these activities.

The establishment of the Mental Health Commission of Canada is helping to build the partnerships needed to raise awareness and develop a mental health strategy for the country to be released this year. In fact, the commission's opening minds initiative remains the largest systemic effort to reduce the stigma of mental illness in Canadian history. Research, planning, risk detection, knowledge exchange, surveillance and partnership building are all improving under the watch of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Several federal departments are providing suicide awareness and prevention workshops and training for staff. For example, front-line staff at Veterans Affairs Canada and the Canadian Forces receive applied suicide intervention skills training and better information. The Canadian Forces has a robust mental health outreach program for the career cycle of all employees. Prevention and promotion workshops are extending to federal inmates, as well as Correctional Service staff.

However, as I have noted, change will not happen overnight.

Investing in and promoting positive mental health over the course of one's entire life has the potential to reduce risk factors contributing to suicide and mental illness. The Public Health Agency of Canada, Health Canada and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada play a key role here. These departments place a significant focus on community-based initiatives and efforts to assist the most vulnerable in all stages of life.

For early wellness intervention, the community action program for children, the aboriginal headstart program, the Canadian prenatal nutrition program reach over 100,000 children and families in thousands of communities every year. The nobody's perfect parenting program targets vulnerable parents of young children, aiming to increase their understanding of their child's health, safety, and behaviour. The Public Health Agency's recent investments in mental health promotion initiatives are reaching high-risk populations in over 50 communities across Canada. Mental health promotion for aboriginal youth works with over 15 aboriginal communities in three provinces providing culturally based, family centred programs to address aggressive behaviours and other community conditions that can lead to suicide.

We are making headway on promoting mental health through solid action at the community level and within federal, provincial and territorial governments in co-operation with many stakeholders.

The declaration on prevention and promotion, endorsed by all ministers of health in 2010, affirms positive mental health as a foundation for optimal overall health and well-being throughout a person's lifetime. Provinces and territories are developing approaches to these issues that make a difference in the lives of Canadians every day, and a desire for greater collaboration on suicide prevention has been articulated at all levels of government.

After all, it is not an easy time for many Canadians. We are not completely sheltered from the global economic crisis. The world is faster and more connected and changes to our everyday lives from rapid developments in science and technology have outpaced previous generations. These all contribute. Things such as, in schools, preventing bullying, providing counselling and support, facilitating information, supporting advocacy and contributing to the development of a mental health strategy in Canada are very important.

Suicide prevention is an extremely complex issue that no one organization can tackle alone. Our partners in this country understand the importance of breaking down barriers to work together.

Bill C-300 was developed to encourage collaborative and aligned action in the following areas: providing guidelines; disseminating information; making stats publicly available; promoting collaboration; and knowledge exchange across the boundaries. The Government of Canada recognizes the need to better understand the factors that contribute to suicide.

While the work ahead of us is long term, a marathon rather than a sprint, this bill, combined with a renewed momentum, gives us the solid footing for a long journey ahead. I want to congratulate the member again for bringing forward this very important bill that can save a lot of lives in our country.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise this evening and speak to this bill. I cannot say that about a lot of bills that I have spoken to. I would like to spend a few minutes to praise the author of this bill, the member for Kitchener—Conestoga.

The member's work on this has been exemplary. We were fortunate enough to co-chair an ad hoc committee that we put together on palliative and compassionate care. He was clearly a leader on that study. We were able to produce a substantive report that contained several chapters addressing the issue of suicide and suicide prevention.

I say, proudly, all parties contributed both their time and effort in the hearings that we conducted, in gathering witnesses together, taking the evidence and funding the committee. We did it all from our parliamentary budgets outside the regular course of events. Again, he was a stalwart in leading in all those areas. He did it from a core within his own soul, with the passion and caring that needs to be drawn to this issue in order to accomplish what he has accomplished. As a result of that, we have this private member's bill, Bill C-300, that very clearly sets out a framework from which Canada can finally address this scourge on our society.

I want to recognize the contents of the bill. It would create a framework for suicide prevention. It would recognize suicide as both a mental health and a public health issue. That was interesting. From some of the new evidence, he and I learned during the course of this that it was both a mental health issue and a public health issue. It would designate the appropriate entity within the Government of Canada to deal with and assume responsibility for the program.

The program would be designed to improve public awareness, disseminate information on suicide and on suicide prevention, and make statistics publicly available so that we would be more knowledgeable on the issue. It would define best practices for prevention. We saw that in Canada in a number of areas, but they tended to be isolated.

The agency would be designed in such a way as to promote collaboration and knowledge exchange within the NGO community, the health community, the provinces and the territories. More specifically, it would require the Government of Canada to enter into negotiations with the NGOs and the provinces and territories within 100 days of the bill receiving royal assent. It would set up an ongoing collaboration with all levels of government, along with the NGOs.

Within four years there would be a report back and every two years after that so that we could see what progress had been made. Perhaps if there were any changes to be made, we would address those.

The member and I were both taken aback by the fact that what came out in the course of those hearings was that Canada was in a very strange position. We had led the way. This is testimony from all sorts of experts we have in the country, including one from my own riding. I want to acknowledge the work that Dr. Antoon Leenaars has done in the area of suicide and suicide prevention. He is a psychologist in the Windsor area and a recognized expert in this area, not only in Canada, but across the globe. He has worked for a number of other governments in helping them implement the program that we developed in Canada and then never implemented.

We started working on this in 1993. We developed it. It is a model for the world. All of the other G8 countries have adopted and implemented it. They have reduced the suicide rates in their countries. We did not. To some degree it is a shame that we have not. All levels of government assume some responsibility for that. I want to repeat that the United States, England, Ireland, Scotland, Finland, Australia, and a number of other countries beyond the G8 have adopted it.

I want to also acknowledge the work of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention. It has been a stalwart for a number of years in helping develop that program. Initially, it was an integral part and is continuing to push to finally get it into place.

I want to single out the province of Quebec. Its provincial government, I think I am safe in saying, has moved extensively in implementing this national program that the Canadian government was instrumental in developing but never implemented. In the course of its implementation over the years, Quebec has actually reduced its suicide rate by 50%. That is not unique but reflects what happened in other countries, where we saw similar reduction rates in suicide. Rates of 25%, 40% and 50% were very common in all of the countries that implemented the program that was developed in Canada. They saw a very successful response within their communities and a very substantial reduction in suicides.

The program also works in Canada. It was implemented in the province of Quebec fairly extensively. Quebec still wants to do more and if this program is put into place at the federal level, it will complete the work it wants to do. Again, there was a 50% reduction. On an approximate basis, there are 4,000 suicides every year. If we implemented this across the whole country, we would be talking about saving 2,000 lives on an annual basis. The faster this bill gets through the process, receives royal assent and is implemented, the faster we will begin to reduce these deaths in our society. These deaths are so tragic not only for the victims but their families, friends and communities more generally.

I want to finish by again congratulating and acknowledging the work of the member for Kitchener—Conestoga. We need more parliamentarians like him.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the House for the opportunity to continue my earlier remarks on this matter first delivered in support of the private member's legislation that was introduced by my hon. colleague from Kitchener—Conestoga in October 2011.

Bill C-300 is extremely important and I would like to share with the House several personal experiences I have had over the last few months, which have assisted me in developing a stronger appreciation for the work done by professionals in communities all across Canada in regard to mental health and specifically suicide prevention.

As some of my colleagues here in the House know, my community of Sarnia—Lambton was rocked by a series of youth suicides in a short period of time in the recent past.

Stakeholders, particularly those on the front lines of the mental health community, were doing everything in their power to assist families in my riding that had been hurt by youth suicide, while at the same time providing preventative services to youth who were depressed and possibly having suicidal thoughts.

With this in mind, I began organizing a one day symposium for my community to address these serious issues.

From the beginning, the Mental Health Commission of Canada played an integral role in working with my office to bring the issue of youth suicide and mental health to the forefront in my own community.

This idea grew into the Sarnia—Lambton symposium on youth mental health, which I was able to host in my riding at Lambton College that provided logistical support.

In addition, I worked with a myriad of community mental health stakeholders from Sarnia—Lambton, including Joanne Klauke-LaBelle from Harmony for Youth, Sharon Berry Ross from the Sarnia—Lambton Suicide Prevention Committee and also Ruth Geurts, a prominent faculty member within the social work program at Lambton College.

I would also like to thank Aaron Levo and Claire Checkland from the Mental Health Commission of Canada for their outstanding contributions to the symposium as well.

There were many others who attended and participated in the event, including special invitees who were considered regional stakeholders, such as local mayors, education directors from school boards and also my colleague, the member for Kitchener—Conestoga, who was able to attend for the full day and speak in support of his Bill C-300 at the symposium. We were also thankful to have a keynote address from Dr. David Goldbloom, who appeared courtesy of the Mental Health Commission of Canada.

Dr. Goldbloom is the senior medical advisor at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and a professor of psychiatry at the U of T. He is one of Canada's greatest minds on the issue of youth mental health.

The Sarnia—Lambton symposium on youth mental health was an effort on my behalf to raise the issues of youth suicide in a proactive forum of mental health stakeholders from across various levels of government so we could discuss the benefits and pitfalls of the existing framework in Canada across provincial lines.

I heard an array of stories that pointed out areas where we as policy makers could make direct improvements. I also heard that there was a strong willingness from all levels of government to do their best to ensure we were implementing policies that would help our youth in communities that were having issues with depression and other forms of mental illness.

With this in mind, I strongly support my colleague's efforts to further assist in this regard, which will be accomplished by the measures contained in Bill C-300.

Although Canada has made several important investments under the current government for mental health, including the formation of the Mental Health Commission of Canada and long-term funding for this organization, we have much work to do to address the severity of the issue of youth suicide. I realize it is now an issue we are all seized with as policy-makers, as youth suicide occurs in every community across Canada and is the second leading cause of death among our youth aged 10 to 24.

It is extremely upsetting to think of the bright lights of our youth being faced with such inner turmoil that they would choose to end their own life. However, in Canada it is an alarming issue that we must work together to address immediately.

In addition to events like the Sarnia—Lambton symposium on youth mental health, it is good to see corporations like Bell coming forward with innovative ideas such as the Let's Talk campaign that began this week.

I would even like to commend our hon. colleague, the member for Toronto Centre, who has shared his own battles with depression with Canadians in a very public manner. It takes a great deal of courage to share such personal stories and actions such as this can and will have a positive impact on the overall discussion toward mental health and specifically youth suicide prevention.

As we continue to place these issues on the forefront of Canadian discourse, I believe we will see more Canadians taking action to ensure that we enable discussions on mental health issues rather than treating the issue with stigma. Although it is good to see youth suicide prevention being discussed more openly in our society, the reality is it is still an urgent matter.

Regrettably, the day following the symposium in my community a youth tragically took his life. This pointed out to me the fragile nature of the youth we were attempting to reach out to and it really hit home how severe the issue had become across all of our communities. Therefore, we need to back the talk up with actions and it is my belief that Bill C-300 would build upon other actions already taken by this government, such as the formation of the Mental Health Commission of Canada, so we can truly make a difference on this issue.

I understand the commission will be releasing a report this year and I greatly look forward to reviewing it when it becomes available. Furthermore, I support the efforts of our Minister of Health who has had the opportunity to raise the issue of suicide prevention with provincial health ministers.

The efforts taken by those like my humble colleague from Kitchener—Conestoga can help shine like a beacon in the darkness and it is my sincere hope that members in the House will join together to support this important legislation fully and completely. Our youth are depending on us to do so.

The House resumed from October 28, 2011, consideration of the motion that Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Organ Donations

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is an honour to have the opportunity to speak tonight to this important issue of organ and tissue donation.

My comments tonight will no doubt come from a different perspective than most of those who have already spoken. I do not serve on the health committee, nor do I presume to be an expert on organ transplant issues. So I ask for the indulgence and the patience of my colleagues as I share some of my personal journey over the past seven months.

On May 2, election night, as my wife, Betty, and I were watching the early results of the election, along with a campaign volunteer, Betty suddenly experienced a headache. Within seconds she collapsed to the floor, and while she was breathing normally and had a strong pulse, there was no response. Minutes later, following a 911 call, local volunteer firefighters from the New Dundee detachment were on the scene to provide assistance, and they were followed very closely by EMS personnel. Betty was taken by ambulance to Grand River Hospital, placed on life support, and immediately transferred to a major health centre for more specialized care.

ICU personnel and surgical specialists cared for her and explained in some detail that Betty had experienced a spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage and that, in spite of surgical intervention attempting to stop the bleeding, their best efforts had been unsuccessful. The intense bleeding had applied extreme pressure to sensitive brain tissue and brain function had ceased. After consultation with neurosurgeons and ICU doctors regarding Betty's neurological death, we now were faced with the question of the possibility of organ and tissue donation.

We were then introduced to a team of very compassionate personnel representing the Trillium Gift of Life Network. They presented the options to us and provided the answers to all the questions that were raised by me or by my three adult children. There was no doubt in our mind as to what Betty would want to do. We knew that she would want to continue giving in the same spirit of generosity in her death as she had always done in her life.

Betty and I had also discussed this issue openly each time we renewed our driver's licence and had always both agreed that should anything happen to either of us, which would open the question of organ donation, we would want to help in that way.

As I reflect on the difficult journey of our grief over the past seven months, that journey has been made less difficult by two key factors: first, our personal faith journey as followers of Jesus Christ; and second, our decision to follow through on Betty's wish that upon her death, if possible, her organs be donated.

I will briefly expand on both of those factors. As it relates to the tragic, premature loss of life, there are no easy answers, but these past seven months have been possible because we possess a profound sense of hope.

As I said just a little over a month ago in the chamber in regard to suicide prevention and Bill C-300:

Hope is dependent on having a sense of connection to the future, even if that future is very short-term.

Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit; without it our spirit dies.

This is a quote from Margaret Somerville of McGill University.

Each of us can relate to the importance of having hope in our lives. That hope may be a very short-term hope, such as getting through grade 5, or graduating from high school, or getting a driver's licence for the first time, or the upcoming weekend trip. For people of faith, a longer term hope, in fact an eternal hope, is ours because of our belief in the reality of the resurrection.

A colleague in this chamber recently used the phrase “death shall have no dominion”, crediting the phrase correctly to Dylan Thomas. In fact, this phrase finds its origin in the scriptures in the Book of Romans, chapter 6, verse 9, in the context of Christ's victory over death, a victory offered to each of us. My ultimate hope is in this reality that I will again see my wife, Betty, who left this earth just seven months ago yesterday.

I will return for a moment to that hospital. It was clear that Betty's physical life was over. Brain activity had stopped completely. We knew instinctively that the Betty we had come to know and love was no longer there. Her spirit was still very much alive but her body was only breathing with mechanical help. What to do?

Again, our faith has its foundation in the Christian scriptures, which uses many different metaphors for the physical body. It is referred to as a tent, a house, a temple, or even as clothing for the spirit within. So if the person who lived in that temple or had occupied that house or camped in that tent was no longer here to need any of those things, why would we not share them with someone in need?

Why not help out one of those thousands of people who are currently on waiting lists for a specific organ? Many of those waiting are still in the prime of life. An organ donation can make the difference between life and death. Our decision, while not easy, was made lighter by knowing that someone else would possibly receive the gift of life even as we journeyed into our own grief and loss.

Was there a downside to agreeing to organ donation? Yes, there was. We had to prolong the inevitable by agreeing to multiple tests in order to determine if in fact the organs were healthy and suitable for transplant. There were detailed personal history questions in order to mitigate any risks to potential recipients.

Let me assure members of this House and Canadians that they can rely on the safety of organ transplants in this country. This is because of Canada's strong organ transplant community and Health Canada's work in establishing rigorous safety requirements through the implementation of the safety of human cells, tissue and organs for transplantation regulations.

Today in 2011 Canada is now seen as a leader in the area of transplantation safety. This is reflected in the fact that our standards are recognized by the World Health Organization.

The additional tests required the continued use of mechanical means to keep her breathing for another day or more in order to conduct those tests, and then to allow arrangements for transplant teams to be put in place.

All through this, however, while sitting at Betty's bedside, meeting with family and friends in the intensive care waiting room and having Trillium Gift of Life personnel work through our intense grief with all of us, we were carried by our faith and by the knowledge that some good would come out of this very difficult time.

Over the past seven months, the resources of Trillium Gift of Life Network have been incredible. The network followed up regularly with letters of support, offering access to resources, letting me know the health of the organ recipients. Five people have received the gift of life through organs that were transplanted: heart, liver, lungs and two separate kidney recipients. In addition, others have also benefited from the gift of her eyes, bone and vessel tissue which will aid in the transplant process.

Trillium Gift of Life has also sent lists of books and other resources written for people who have experienced the loss of a loved one. One of those books on the recommended reading list is entitled, A Grace Disguised, written by Jerry L. Sittser. I highly recommend this book for anyone grieving. I have purchased more than 20 copies of it and have shared it with family and friends.

We know the need. Four thousand Canadians are waiting for organ donations at any given point. In Ontario alone, over 1,500 people are waiting for a life-giving transplant. Over 1,000 of those people are waiting for a kidney transplant. It is easy to register one's intentions to donate. In Ontario, one simply goes to the website beadonor.ca. Elsewhere in Canada, one goes to www.transplant.ca.

Right now only 20% of Ontario residents have registered their intent to be an organ or tissue donor. Why not go online now and register? In addition to registering, it is important to discuss this matter with one's family members. I ask everyone to please discuss it with them, too. This decision could very well save a life and offer hope.

I know that because of our decision to donate there are now at least five people enjoying fuller, richer lives and even more who are benefiting from tissues transplanted. We are in a death-denying society. No one wants to think he or she will die before 80 or 90, and because of amazing medical advancements many people will live to that age or even beyond. However, we have no guarantee as my family discovered so quickly and with no warning of any kind.

Thousands of adults and children are counting on us and their fellow Canadians to give the gift of life. It is time we as a nation closed the gap between the need for lifesaving and life-enhancing organs and the supply of organs available. Why not take steps now to make a difference? It could be anyone, a son or daughter or granddaughter, who will be the recipient of someone else's good decision to donate their organs.

This past weekend I walked in a Christmas parade with a heart and double-lung transplant recipient. I met many other recipients who have been blessed with the gift of life through organ transplants.

I know that every one of the recipients is extremely grateful for the fact that someone else took the time to register to be a donor, and now they as recipients are enjoying the gift of life.

Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, suicide, mental illness and depression have been the topics of several thoughtful and compassionate discussions of late in the House of Commons and it is an honour for me to participate in this critical discussion today on Bill C-300.

I congratulate the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga for his leadership on this critical issue. I thank him for his leading role on the parliamentary committee on palliative and compassionate care, where he has entertained submissions from the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.

As we have heard today, suicide is a tragic issue which affects all Canadians. Sadly, as members of the House know all too well, aboriginal youth are affected by suicide more than any other group within our society. I will use my allotted time today to address issues within the aboriginal community.

Helping young aboriginal people, their families and communities as a whole is and must remain an issue of importance to Canadians. Our government has invested in many initiatives that play an important role in improving the quality of life for aboriginal people. We are building safer, healthier and stronger communities.

As a government we remain committed to working with all partners to help improve aboriginal health outcomes. As part of our commitment, budget 2010 allocated $730 million over five years to renew aboriginal health programs. They focus on suicide prevention, diabetes, maternal and child health, health service integration, and aboriginal health human resources.

That builds on investments made through Canada's economic action plan to help create and renovate health facilities in first nations communities. By providing $135 million in funding over two years we have successfully completed 40 major health infrastructure projects and 135 renovation projects on existing infrastructure.

My time for debate is coming to end so I will close there. There are many more initiatives the government is undertaking to help aboriginal youth and aboriginal communities. We will continue to work with our partners to invest in first nations and Inuit suicide prevention programs in order to support communities, families and individuals in tackling this complex and wide-reaching issue.

[Philip Toone, NDP, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the House to support Bill C-300, regarding the creation of a federal framework for suicide prevention.

The NDP congratulates the member for Kitchener—Conestoga for introducing this bill. For years, the NDP has been calling on the government to develop a national suicide prevention strategy. It is encouraging to see the Conservative government introduce a bill to address the serious issue of suicide at the national level.

The issue of suicide is particularly worrisome to me. I cannot forget the recent suicide of Jamie Hubley, a 16-year-old gay man who was the victim of harassment by his peers. As member of the NDP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender caucus, I was proud to hear our caucus's LGBT critic, the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, speak in the House of Commons on October 20, Spirit Day.

Spirit Day was started in 2010 by Canadian teenager Brittany McMillan to remember the LGBT and questioning youth lost to suicide. Spirit Day is also a time to rally governments and institutions nationwide to denounce homophobic bullying, which is a major contributor to these tragic losses.

In the Gaspé, this issue has many faces, and every year dozens of families and children are tragically left in mourning. These situations are even more tragic because they are often shrouded in silence and guilt.

In Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine the suicide rate per hundred thousand people is 25.2. This is far above the Quebec average, which is 15.

According to the Portrait statistique des conduites suicidaires en Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, a report on suicide published in 2009 by the health and social services agency in Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine:

The Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine region has one of the highest suicide rates in Quebec. The region's suicide rate is 64% higher than the provincial rate.

According to statistics from 2003-2007, men in the region have a significantly higher suicide rate than other Quebeckers.

According to the most recent data, the regional hospitalization rate for suicide attempts is significantly higher than the provincial rate.

Following the increase in suicide in the 1990s, the provincial rate has decreased since the start of the 2000s. However, studies on suicide trends in Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine paint a different [and very worrying] picture for the region, where the suicide rate continues to increase.

This increase in the regional suicide rate since the mid-1990s is mainly attributable to the increase in the number of male deaths. If we compare the five 5-year periods between 1983 and 2007, it is clear that the male suicide rate significantly increased during that period. For example, the suicide rate for males in the region increased from 25.4 per 100,000 in 1998-1992 to 38.1 per 100,000 in 2003-2007.

Suicide affects every part of society; however, there are some segments in which the suicide rate is quite a bit higher for social, economic and personal reasons. These segments must therefore be directly targeted by a national suicide prevention strategy. We are speaking about aboriginal people; youth, particularly young men; people with disabilities; abuse victims; seniors; people suffering from serious mental illness; lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people; and others.

While I applaud the member for Kitchener—Conestoga for bringing the bill forward and recognizing that suicide is a medical issue that needs to be dealt with nationally, it is also true that suicide is much more than a medical issue. It is a social and economic issue as well.

In fact, a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concludes that suicide rates rise and fall with the economy. In tough economic times, suicide rates go up as people lose their jobs and often their homes.

According to the study published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011:

The overall suicide rate generally rose in recessions like the Great Depression (1929-1933), the end of the New Deal (1937-1938), the Oil Crisis (1973-1975), and the Double-Dip Recession (1980-1982) and fell in expansions like the WWII period (1939-1945) and the longest expansion period (1991-2001) in which the economy experienced fast growth and low unemployment.

If we want to keep people from falling through the cracks, we need to ensure they have decent jobs and good government services.

My riding is made up of dozens of small towns and villages. Because there are no large cities in the region, residents do not have access to all the social and economic supports and services available to city dwellers. The government services we do have are crucial to our well-being.

Federal government services and programs like those offered by Service Canada centres and post offices are anchors for the communities in the Gaspé and the Islands. This is why the NDP is fighting to stop the Conservative government from closing down Service Canada centres in regions like mine.

At the New Richmond Service Canada centre, as many as 30 employees could lose their jobs delivering essential services to my constituents, services like employment insurance benefits. Citizens in my riding rely on EI payments to keep food on the table when they are out of work.

The Service Canada centre in New Richmond also provides access to training programs for aboriginal people, labour market information, disability benefits, pensions, old age security and job search tools. All these services help keep people from falling through the cracks. They help keep communities intact by making it easier for people to stay in their regions instead of being forced to move to a big city to find work and obtain government services.

Suicide is a problem for the communities in my riding, but in fact it is a national problem. People in distress need support in their community and appropriate public health resources. The suicide rate in Canada is one of the highest in the industrialized world. In Canada, 10 suicides are committed a day, or more than 3,500 suicides a year. More than 100,000 Canadians have committed suicide over the past 20 years. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among people aged 25 to 49 and the second leading cause of death among those aged 10 to 24.

In Canada, the number of people affected by suicide is roughly 3 million. No sector of Canadian society is spared from suicide and everyone suffers from the stigma attached to suicide, depression, addiction and mental illness. Suicide is symptomatic of a community that is not doing well, that is facing challenges. That is why Canadian society as a whole has to work on finding solutions to deal with this scourge.

It is this need to act on a national level that makes Bill C-300 so important. It is a first step in ensuring that Canada has a national strategy for addressing suicide.

The bill calls on the Government of Canada to establish a federal framework for suicide prevention that recognizes suicide, in addition to being a mental health issue, is a public health issue and that, as such, it is a health and safety priority.

The bill would ensure that suicide prevention is a national priority and would allow experts to work toward reducing Canada's suicide rate. Given time and the political will, we can move our communities to a place where the factors that can lead to or cause suicide are significantly improved upon.

I call on the Conservative government to pass the bill, but I also call on the Conservative members to consider that suicide is more than a mental health problem. It is just as much a problem caused by the weakening of our society and our economy. It is the Conservative government's responsibility to invest in Canada's economy and to maintain and improve the essential programs and services that all Canadians rely on.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, put forward by the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga. I am also pleased to have the opportunity to provide some insight into the context surrounding suicide prevention and to highlight some of the efforts under way.

Suicide has devastating impacts on families and communities across the country. In Canada, suicide is the tenth leading cause of death overall. Approximately 3,600 Canadians commit suicide every year. Among Canadians aged 15 to 24, it is the second leading cause of death, and at-risk groups face disproportionately higher rates than the rest of the country.

Along with the enormous life-changing toll this takes on families and communities, it impacts every one of us directly or indirectly. For example, the economic cost of suicide and related behaviour in Canada is estimated at over $2.4 billion per year. Recently several high-profile cases have brought significant media attention to this issue, including here in Ottawa.

Canadians know of the complexities of suicide and want to hear that we are acting collaboratively with communities, governments, health professionals, the private sector and many others. They want us to help ensure that resources are there, awareness is being raised and the information on prevention, treatment and coping is being shared. This is where we can make a difference, and these are the reasons I am pleased to speak to the bill put forward by the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga and thank him for his tireless work to bring the issue of suicide prevention out of the shadows.

As my colleagues will know, this bill seeks to establish a federal framework for suicide prevention. It calls for a framework to recognize that suicide, in addition to being a mental health issue, is a public health issue, and as such is a health and safety priority.

The framework would guide and strengthen coordination of existing Government of Canada suicide prevention efforts. It would promote collaboration and coherence, guide our engagement with many partners, including provinces and territories, and help inform potential future initiatives. It would also serve as a reporting tool for more systematic documentation and tracking of related current federal actions and investments. Further, federal work on each of the elements of the framework would help support multiple stakeholders across Canada to optimize their efforts. The baseline information, best practices and research results generated would help ensure that the most effective interventions and services are provided to Canadians.

The bill recognizes that the prevention of suicide is complex and, like so many other health issues, cannot be addressed within the health portfolio alone. The bill provides a solid rationale for why we must harness the great work happening across the country. Many schools and communities across Canada are helping to raise awareness about the stigma of mental illness, initiating programs to prevent bullying and providing counselling and support for at-risk populations.

Provinces and territories are also carrying out programs to strengthen individual resilience and self-esteem and improve mental health. Nunavut's suicide prevention strategy, New Brunswick's Connecting to Life strategy and the 10-year plans established in Alberta and British Columbia are just a few examples. Countless others are providing new means of counselling, services, awareness raising and other activities for the workplace, schools, the community and individuals.

The Government of Canada is also a full partner and participant in suicide prevention. It invests in a number of programs designed to build positive mental health and address the underlying factors that can affect mental health and potentially lead to suicide.

For example, the government is very proud to provide funding of $130 million over 10 years to establish and support the Mental Health Commission of Canada. The initiatives of the commission include the development of a mental health strategy for Canada, a knowledge exchange centre, and an anti-stigma campaign entitled Opening Minds.

Several federal departments and agencies also support and disseminate leading-edge research on mental health and suicide, including Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, among many others.

The Public Health Agency of Canada is investing $27 million over the next four years to support nine large-scale mental health promotion initiatives in over 50 communities across Canada, and Budget 2010 provided $75 million until 2015 to extend the national aboriginal suicide prevention strategy.

We can work together, and are working together, in a more collaborative way within government to ensure that our actions are guided as coherently and efficiently as possible. For this reason, the creation of a framework, which Bill C-300 proposes, is an important next step in this battle. It will report on progress being made and outline concrete measures that can improve the state of mental health.

After all, the federal family is complex and involves activities related to the health of many populations. For example, the RCMP and Canadian Forces are directly responsible for the health of their members, Health Canada is responsible for the promotion of health for first nations people living on reserve, as well as Inuit populations in the north, and Veterans Affairs provides services in support for veterans who have performed active service in a war.

By contrast, there are other departments whose actions provide guidance to Canadians as a whole. The Public Health Agency of Canada, for example, is responsible for providing public health guidance and coordinates health promotion and chronic disease prevention with complementary activities of individual provinces and territories.

Research on mental health and compilation of mental health statistics is conducted by a myriad of federal players, including the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Statistics Canada.

Given a topic as big, broad and complex as the prevention of suicide, it would make sense for these departments and agencies to come together, share information and ensure their approach to this issue has the benefit of shared expertise, best practices and lessons learned.

It requires that the Government of Canada assume responsibility for six main activities: first, in providing guidelines to improve public awareness and knowledge about suicide; second, in disseminating information about suicide, including information concerning its prevention; third, in making existing statistics about suicide and related risk factors publicly available; fourth, in promoting collaboration and knowledge exchange across domains, sectors, regions and jurisdictions.

I want to elaborate on this point for a moment. We will be undertaking this activity in the very near term; I raise the point because it gets to the core of why we are all here, which is to ensure a collective and coordinated effort across Canada.

The fifth recommendation lies in defining best practices for the prevention of suicide. The final area is promoting the use of research and evidence-based practices for the prevention of suicide.

We are in agreement with the spirit of Bill C-300: that collectively, we can and must and will do more.

I want to again thank the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga for his dedication and passion in bringing the bill to the House.

We are committed to doing more. We encourage people to talk about suicide and mental health concerns with loved ones or with health professionals. We hope no one suffers in silence.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the hon. member for his initiatives on Bill C-300. I have to admit a certain fondness for that name and a fondness for the member as well. I and our party will be supporting the bill. Therefore, from that standpoint there is not really much of a discussion about the issues.

However, I wanted to get into his vision about what the bill, in his ideal version, would accomplish. The bill talks about designating the appropriate entity to establish best practices, do education and things of that nature. In the member's ideal vision of how this bill would roll out over time, what would he actually see, both from an organizational standpoint and also from a best practices, best purposes standpoint?

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

moved that Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to begin our discussion regarding Bill C-300, an act respecting a federal framework for suicide prevention.

I want to thank the member for Toronto Centre for dedicating an opposition day to this important issue, and the member for Halifax for raising this issue in two consecutive Parliaments. I thank them for ensuring that this very political issue did not become partisan.

In that spirit, I use the word “discussion” rather than “debate” because I am convinced that the House is eager to take action on the national tragedy that suicide represents.

I also want to acknowledge the important contribution of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, its executive director, Mr. Tim Wall, and president, Dammy Albach, and Dr. Adrian Hill.

I also wish to extend a special thanks to Mr. Rory Butler of Your Life Counts, as well as Tana Nash and the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council, and Dr. Antoon Leenaars, psychologist and suicide researcher.

Each of these individuals and groups has contributed to my work and I thank them for their efforts in suicide prevention.

I also want to acknowledge the 20 members who have added their formal support for Bill C-300 by attaching their names as seconders of the bill. Members of all parties in the House have voiced their support formally and informally and I am grateful as it signals that long awaited action is imminent.

I believe that all members will want the bill to move quickly on to committee for further study where any possible improvements can be incorporated into Bill C-300 before it is returned to the House for final approval. The sooner the bill receives royal assent, the better for all Canadians.

This will be the first small but very crucial step in providing additional hope for those who have worked in the trenches doing this noble work for years and years, often with far too little coordination, too few resources, and a lack of federal leadership and vision.

For far too long there has been a call for some strategic national leadership and unifying coordination of the great efforts of many community groups all across Canada, suicide prevention groups that have been key in identifying and addressing the risk factors relating to suicide. They have also worked within communities, schools, commercial companies and families to provide support and care for those left to deal with the burden of grief.

Bill C-300 establishes the requirement for the Government of Canada to develop a federal framework for suicide prevention in consultation with the relevant non-governmental organizations, the relevant entity in each province and territory, as well as the relevant federal departments.

In Canada, far too many lives, almost 4,000, are lost each year to suicide. Over 10 Canadian lives are ended each day prematurely and tragically, leaving behind broken communities and shattered family dreams. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among Canadian youth 10 to 24 years of age. In my home area of Waterloo region, three youths lost their lives to suicide in just one single week last year. Suicide has a horrific impact: shortened lives, shattered dreams, grieving families, devastated friends, and broken communities.

We need to do more to protect the sacred gift of human life, and I believe that all human life is sacred. I will stand for the protection and preservation of the dignity of all human life well after others may have decided that a specific life is no longer worth the extra effort, the extra care, or the extra protection in late senior years. My convictions and beliefs as they relate to this issue of life without a doubt have been shaped by my life's journey.

I was elected to Parliament in January 2006. I have the honour of representing the great people of Kitchener--Conestoga. Throughout these past five years plus, I have had the honour of meeting some incredible people from all sides of the House, many of whom have become very close friends.

One of the most welcoming and encouraging MPs I met in those early days would often take the time to say “great job” or “this 2006 class of MPs is exceptional”, or “hey, I know where you could find this, or here is someone who could help you with that”. Dave Batters was positive, he was an encourager, and he was fun to be around.

Our Prime Minister spoke at Dave's memorial service about his many contributions:

Dave held a place in all our hearts. To his wife and family, he was a loving and beloved husband, son and brother. To his friends, he was unfailingly loyal, generous and caring. And among his colleagues in Parliament, myself included, he was greatly admired for his dedication to his constituents, our party and our country.

In my experience, no one on either side of the aisle ever had a bad word to say about Dave.

His passion for the causes he embraced was combined with respect for his opponents. Dave was always excited about whatever issue or initiative he was working on. His energy and enthusiasm were infectious. He had a good sense of humour. He lifted spirits and inspired others. In fact, I used to tell my staff that I wished I could match Dave Batters' liveliness and optimism.

Members can imagine my shock and disbelief, and the shock of my colleagues, when we heard the tragic news that Dave Batters, MP, had lost his life to suicide. How could it be that someone so full of life could lose hope when he seemed to be enjoying life so much, including his role as member of Parliament? What brought about that deep sense of despair?

These are bigger questions than I am prepared to answer. Suicide and its causes are extremely complex and the solutions are also not simple. However, these big questions bring me back to another question. Why did I run for public office in the first place?

The reason I ran for public office, as I am sure every member in the House did, was to do my part to make this great country of Canada an even better country for my children and for my grandchildren. My family, my community, my life experiences here in Canada and internationally have all shaped my world view.

My faith journey as a Christian informs me that as humans we have the imprint of our creator deeply imbedded within each and every one of us regardless of social status, educational achievements, ethnic background, gender, colour of skin, so-called disability issues, or age. The list of the glorious variety placed within the human race goes on and on, but we are brothers and sisters.

As it relates to the tragic premature loss of life, what steps can we take to restore hope to those who are in despair? What can we do to improve the support mechanisms for those who are dealing with acute and chronic mental health challenges, or for those who have simply lost hope? What leadership can Parliament or the Government of Canada provide?

I am certain that everyone in this chamber can tell us how they, their family, or a member in their community has been negatively impacted by suicide. Each of us knows someone whose sense of hope was overcome by despair and ended his or her life by suicide. We understand that suicide does not end the pain; it simply transfers it to the family, friends and community.

There is no way to calculate the loss to families, our communities and our country. It is estimated that for every suicide there are 22 emergency department visits and 5 hospitalizations for suicide-related behaviour. It is a huge economic cost that must be considered.

More important than the economic costs, we must think of the thousands of families robbed of loved ones long before their time. These losses deprive our communities and our country of the important contributions that those lives, which were ended prematurely, could have made. Four thousand times a year we suffer a tragic loss of human potential.

Suicide is a triumph of fear and the loss of hope. Suicide is most often the result of pain, hopelessness and despair. It is almost always preventable through caring, compassion, commitment and community.

In the first paragraph of the preamble to Bill C-300, members will find the following words:

Whereas suicide is a complex problem involving biological, psychological, social and spiritual factors, and can be influenced by societal attitudes and conditions;

It is widely recognized that in many cases, there may be biological, psychological, or physiological factors related to chemical balances and imbalances which lead to mood disorders.

The Canadian Mental Health Association of Ontario states:

People with mood disorders are at a particularly high risk of suicide. Studies indicate that more than 90 percent of suicide victims have a diagnosable psychiatric illness, and suicide is the most common cause of death for people with schizophrenia.

Social factors also may be a contributor to higher suicide rates. As we know, the suicide rate among aboriginal youth is five to seven times higher than among non-aboriginal youth. Along with the biological, psychological and spiritual factors, there are some key social factors that are having an impact on these high suicide rates.

The national aboriginal youth suicide prevention strategy was launched by Health Canada in 2005. It is a five-year strategy developed in full partnership with the Assembly of First Nations and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, with an investment of $65 million to establish community-based, culturally appropriate levels of prevention. Specific focus was placed on promotion of life and well-being. Budget 2010 added $75 million to expand this program up to 2015.

Evidence is accumulating that when aboriginal communities, including Inuit communities, design their own interventions, typically, based on traditional cultural values and practices, the efficacy of these interventions is high. Therefore, there is hope, but much more needs to be done. We need to offer hope to those who are facing this unbearable pain and who subsequently descend into a state of hopelessness and despair.

I have touched briefly on the possible biological, psychological and cultural factors that may affect suicidal behaviour, but there is another key factor that far too often is ignored.

Professor Margaret Somerville of McGill University has said:

Hope is dependent on having a sense of connection to the future, even if that future is very short-term....Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit; without it our spirit dies.

Hope is a sense of connection to the future. Hope is the emotional state which promotes the belief in a positive outcome related to events and circumstances in one's life. Hope is a belief that life's events will turn out for the best.

Each of us can relate to the importance of having hope in our lives. That hope might be very short term, like getting through Grade 5, or graduating from high school, or getting one's driver's licence for the first time or even the upcoming weekend trip.

For people of faith, a longer term hope, in fact an eternal hope, is ours because of our belief in the reality of the resurrection.

A colleague in the House recently used the phrase, “death shall have no dominion”, crediting it to Dylan Thomas. In fact, this phrase finds its origin in the Scriptures, in the Book of Romans 6:9, in the context of Christ's victory over death, a victory offered to each of us.

I have a strong hope of seeing my grandchildren in a few hours, when I travel home for the weekend. Over the next number of years, I hope to see my grandchildren graduate from elementary school and secondary school. I hope to see my grandchildren get married and develop strong families. I hope to see each of them contribute to the building of a stronger and better Canada. My ultimate hope, however, is in the reality that I will again see by wife Betty, who left this earth almost six months ago.

These smaller and shorter hopes and the longer-term hope remind us of the many joys in life. However, for those struggling with life, and perhaps struggling with suicidal thoughts, these sources of hope have dimmed or perhaps been lost altogether.

How can each of us make a difference? How can we help?

The very fact that this discussion is happening in the House of Commons in Canada is a huge step forward. It is time to break the silence.

Too many Canadians are in the dark about this issue. A recent survey by Harris-Decima conducted on behalf of Your Life Counts found that 86% of Canadians did not know that suicide was the second leading cause of death among our youth. Over one-third thought it was a small problem or not a problem at all. Over 96% of respondents stated that in order to reduce suicide, the topic should be freely discussed, without fear or shame. An overwhelming 84% believed that government should invest in suicide prevention.

Suicide is obviously a mental health issue, but it is so much more than that. Suicide is a public health issue affecting all Canadians. All of us, including all levels of government, need to do our part to face this issue head on, to work with communities across Canada to do all that we can to relieve the mental, emotional and spiritual pain of those who are in despair and who are struggling with suicidal thoughts, so we can keep them alive and safe.

A national framework for suicide prevention will create the connections, promote the consistent use of best practices, offer hope and send a clear message that this issue matters and is important, that every life is important. By working together, we can, and we will, make a difference.

Already a lot of great work is being done in suicide prevention across the country, but with some federal vision, federal coordination and federal leadership, we can do better for vulnerable Canadians.

I ask all hon. members of the House to please support Bill C-300 in order to make that happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Are there comments or questions? Bill C-300 is votable.

Next is Bill C-215.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Are there questions or comments? Seeing none, Bill C-309 is considered votable.

Next is Bill C-300.

Did I miss one? Okay? Everybody is so quiet that I thought I missed one.

Opposition Motion--National Suicide Prevention Strategy

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will start with the last question first.

In terms of best practices, that is exactly what the motion today and Bill C-300 speak to, the fact that we do not know what all those best practices are. There are many groups doing excellent work. By having a central repository as well as the coordination of research and statistics we will do a better job of that.

I applaud the work of our government in funding the Mental Health Commission of Canada. In addition, it has provided the aboriginal youth suicide prevention strategy with $75 million in funding over a five-year period I believe it is. There are 150 community-based projects that are being funded.

I must clarify that not all suicides are a result of mental health issues. People working in the field of suicide have underlined this fact. We must not miss this public health aspect and need to address that in our suicide prevention strategy with a desire to move forward on those issues.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt thanks to my colleague from Kitchener—Conestoga not only for all the work he has done on this issue but also for Bill C-300 which he brought forward.

He opened his speech by saying that we must end the silence. We have had that opportunity today in the House. I commend all members who have contributed to this debate and discussion because it is something that affects all Canadians.

My question for my colleague regards the link between mental health and suicide. He is aware that the World Health Organization estimates that: 90% of all suicide victims have some kind of mental health condition, often depression or substance abuse; suicide is the most common cause of death for people with schizophrenia; both major depression and bipolar disorders account for 15% to 25% of all deaths by suicide in patients with severe mood disorders.

Would the member explain how important it is for the government to continue funding research through the Mental Health Commission of Canada?

He mentioned best practices. Does the member have any ideas as to how we could better work with the municipalities, communities and different service groups in order to bring these best practices together?

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon for his insightful remarks. I also extend my thanks to the leader of the Liberal Party for bringing this motion forward today and to the member for Halifax for her work on suicide prevention and for tabling a private member's bill in regard to that.

It is important that we, as a Parliament, are the leaders in doing all that we can to end the silence around this very tragic epidemic. We need to do what we can to reduce the stigma of those families who have been the victims of suicide. On this side of the House, we are committed to doing all that we can.

Last Thursday, I had the honour of tabling in this chamber my private member's bill, which deals with this very issue, Bill C-300.

We have a lot of good work already being done by hundreds of community groups throughout Canada, and most of these, if not all, are volunteer groups. We have the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention. It has done amazing work over the years developing its blueprint. I congratulate the association on its efforts. It works with very little encouragement from other levels of government, but it has done amazing work for us.

We have the Ontario Association for Suicide Prevention. In my own area, we have the Waterloo Region Suicide Prevention Council, which has done just amazing work in the Waterloo region. Just recently I had the honour being in my colleague's riding, the Minister of State for Science and Technology , for a golf tournament that was raising funds to raise awareness of suicide prevention issues. I thank them for that good work.

Another agency with which I have had the honour of working over the last two years is called Your Life Counts. This is a group of people who voluntarily do work on the Internet. They provide Internet resources to young people especially who are dealing with suicidal thoughts and struggling with issues in life that are difficult for them to handle, challenges that face all of our youth. They are doing good work in providing that Internet access but they do not end just simply with the Internet access. They then offer personal services to people who contact them.

I will highlight another story, which we have all heard numerous times today, for those who may not have been here earlier. The story is about my colleague, Dave Batters, who tragically ended his life a few years ago. I congratulate his family for the great work they are doing in bringing awareness to this issue. I have had contact with Denise Batters since we started this initiative. She draws our attention to the YouTube video that highlights some ways that we can raise awareness around this issue.

Those groups have worked hard on our behalf and all they are asking for is some federal coordination, some federal leadership, and that is exactly the motivation for my private member's bill.

I will not read the entire bill but I would like to highlight some of the actions that my bill would ask for.

The bill would formally define suicide as a public health issue and a health and safety priority. It would improve public awareness of suicide and its related issues. It would make statistics publicly accessible, promote collaboration and knowledge exchange. I think this is one of the things we have heard many times today. If we could exchange the best practices that are already being implemented across our country, we could do so much more.

The bill would define and share the best practices and get the research that is being done out of the classroom, so to speak, and into the hands of those who are actually doing the work on the ground.

Finally, there would be a responsibility on the part of the government agency to report back regularly to Canadians.

The number of suicides in Canada is a great tragedy. We have heard many personal stories today. We have heard the story of the Richardson family. Many of us will remember the story of the Kajouji family here in Ottawa who lost their daughter. This particular suicide was done at the hands of an Internet predator who used the Internet to actually encourage suicide.

My motion in the fall of 2009 was to encourage our government to implement within the Criminal Code clarity as to the penalties for those who would encourage suicide. We already know that encouraging someone to commit suicide is punishable by up to 14 years in prison. What was not clear is whether that included technologies such as Internet and computer system. That was my motivation for that motion.

It is estimated that there are 10 suicides a day in Canada. If we take that on a monthly basis, that is the equivalent of a large airliner going down every month and every person in that airliner dying. If that were happening, I think there would be a huge call for action. That is exactly what we are hearing today with this motion. That is the motivation for my private member's bill. It is my hope that, through these initiatives and others, we will actually see some action on these issues.

I just want to read the motion for those who may be watching because it is important to get the entire context of what is said here.

That the House agree that suicide is more than a personal tragedy, but is also a serious public health issue and public policy priority; and, further, that the House urge the government to work cooperatively with the provinces, territories, representative organizations from First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people, and other stakeholders to establish and fund a National Suicide Prevention Strategy, which among other measures would promote a comprehensive and evidence-driven approach to deal with this terrible loss of life.

At this point I will stop for a moment and offer my heartfelt condolences and sympathies to those who have had to deal with this tragedy. It has been mentioned many times in this chamber today that there is not one person who has not in some way been touched this tragedy, some closer than others, some immediate family members and others close friends and colleagues.

The grief that people experience when they lose a loved one who is close to them can only be described by the people who going through that grief. My family and I have had our own share of grief over these past five months. In fact, it is five months ago today that Betty passed away. I can say that the grief is real but I cannot imagine how much more profound that grief must be for those who are left with the question and the additional emotional burden of wondering what they could have done, what they should have done or why they did not see the signs, all of those questions that I assume must come crashing in on them.

I think part of our overall approach to this issue needs to include, at some point, ways and means in which we can encourage communities with resources as to how they can walk alongside those who have experienced this tragedy.

I indicated earlier today that one of my favourite quotes as it relates to suicide prevention is the quote by Margaret Somerville, the famous ethicist from McGill University. She says:

Hope is the oxygen of the human spirit; without it our spirit dies....

I think that capsulizes what we are looking at here. We are trying to find ways to give hope, hope to people who are dealing with suicidal thoughts, for sure, needs to be our motivation, but also hope for those who are working on the ground and who have been struggling as volunteers without adequate resources, as they struggle with their efforts.

Any of the investments that we make in trying to move this ahead need to keep at the heart of it the hope that we are trying to give to people.

I will conclude with some of the statistics that I think will shock us into action in terms of the number of Canadians each year who are losing their lives to suicide. It is roughly 4,000 a year. Among our aboriginal population, t estimates show that it is five to seven times beyond that, and that is just counting the suicides. It does not counting those who may have tried to commit suicide and their emotional trauma.

At the heart of what we are trying to do here is to extend that hope to people who are dealing with suicidal thoughts and to provide the framework that will actually help those organizations on the ground that are trying to continue the good work they have started.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague the parliamentary secretary for outlining many of the positive initiatives that our government has initiated over the past five and a half years.

I also want to thank my colleague, the leader of the Liberal Party, for giving us the opportunity to debate this important issue today. Just the fact that this issue is being discussed is important because for far too long this has been shrouded in secrecy and silence. There is also a stigma attached to it.

Members will know that last week I tabled my private member's Bill C-300, which calls on the government to create a federal framework for suicide prevention.

As our colleagues have pointed out today, the numbers are truly appalling. Over 300 people every month end their lives by suicide, or the equivalent of the number of passengers in one large airliner. We have local stories here in Ottawa. Back in my region of Waterloo last year, in one week, three youths ended their lives by suicide.

We have good work going on across the country. Little chapters are doing excellent work. What we need is a federal leadership role, not just in terms of looking at risk factors and prevention but also in what we would term "postvention", in terms of caring for those who are left to deal with the aftermath of suicide.

I wonder if my colleague would comment on the importance of having some part of a framework or a strategy, or a government initiative that would deal with those families and communities that are left broken as a result of suicide.

Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-300, An Act respecting a Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to proudly introduce this bill.

The bill would establish the requirement for the Government of Canada to develop a federal framework for suicide prevention in consultation with the relevant non-governmental organizations, the relevant entity in each province and territory, as well as the relevant federal departments.

In Canada far too many lives are lost each year to suicide, almost 4,000, over 10 each day. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among Canadian youth ages 10 to 24. Aboriginal youth suicide rates are especially troubling at five to seven times higher than the non-aboriginal rate. In Waterloo region's high schools, three youths lost their lives to suicide in just one single week last year.

Suicide has a horrific impact: shortened lives, grieving families, devastated friends and even broken communities.

There is already lots of good work being done in suicide prevention across the country, but with some federal coordination and federal leadership, we can do better for vulnerable Canadians.

I invite all hon. members to join me in supporting this very important non-partisan initiative.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)