Bill C-224 (Historical)

Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act

An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose)

This enactment amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in order to exempt from charges for possession or charges related to the violation of certain conditions or orders a person who seeks emergency medical or law enforcement assistance for themselves or another person following overdosing on a controlled substance.

Opioid Crisis in Canada

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Chair, I have listened to this debate right from the very start and I appreciate our colleagues sharing their stories and coming at this from a point of respect.

It is interesting to stand here and talk about a national crisis, which is really truly what we have today.

I will gear most of my speech towards the impact that this crisis is having on my province of British Columbia. British Columbia has had a significant number of deaths each month, approximately 100 deaths per month. Last January our minister of health called on her federal counterpart for help with this issue. She asked the federal government to declare this a national health crisis.

I heard some of the arguments and talking points from our government friends. I listened intently to our friends in the NDP. I listened to the passionate speeches given by my friend from Sarnia—Lambton as well as my good friend from Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte. It is clear that we are not there yet. We still have a crisis. People are still dying every day.

I listened to a comment by the government House leader. I hope she was not heckling me.

We cannot stand up and say we are winning this war. I get it. I understand this is an election year and government members are standing up and saying their government has pledged $350 million for this. This is a take-note debate. We should be listening. The government should be taking notes. We should be trying to move forward. We should be having a healthy discussion.

I will bring us back to the very first emergency debate that we had here in the House after the last election. It was on the suicide epidemic on Attawapiskat First Nation.

I do want to offer this before getting more heckles from anybody across the way. I have come to this debate with some personal experience in terms of a loss from an overdose.

I will bring members back to the debate that we had when our colleague from Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam brought forward his good Samaritan bill, Bill C-224. In that debate I talked about a day in 2008 when I received a call that my brother, who was not a drug user, was found deceased from an apparent overdose. It is still to this day hard to discuss. I strongly believe that our colleague's Bill C-224, the good Samaritan bill, will save lives. It allows people who are with someone who may overdosed or is struggling with some form of massive intoxication from some form of drug to dial 911 and ask for help knowing that they themselves will not be prosecuted.

Since 2016, over 8,000 Canadians have lost their lives because of this. In 2012, the death toll from fentanyl or opioids in British Columbia was 42, and right now we are sitting at over 1,000 in 2018 alone. This is a crisis like we have never seen before.

This past March was the worst month in B.C.'s five-year-old fentanyl crisis. There were 162 deaths. As a matter of fact, the week of July 23 was the worst week for Vancouver Fire and Rescue. It responded to 147 overdoses.

In preparation for this debate, I talked with a friend of mine who is with the RCMP. I also talked with a friend of mine who is with Vancouver Fire and Rescue. I asked if safe injection sites were helping. They did say that safe injection sites probably do help. However, they said that it probably helps those who are on the streets more so than the blue collar worker or the teenager, or the real estate agent that died recently of an overdose, who did not know what was in the drugs. They said the challenge that we have, and I do not think I have heard this brought up yet, is the drug is getting across our border. We are powerless.

People can say what they want about President Trump but at the G20 recently, he managed to get China to designate fentanyl as an illegal substance. I have to get the exact words. It is a controlled substance, “China agrees to make fentanyl a controlled substance after talks with the U.S. at G20 summit.” That means that people from China who sell fentanyl to the U.S. will be subject to China's maximum penalty under the law. We need to get tough on this ourselves.

To give an example of what we are dealing with here, fentanyl is 100 times more powerful than heroin. A dose the size of a grain of sand can kill. When prescribed by doctors, it is prescribed in the millionths of a gram. If someone takes ibuprofen for a headache, the dosage is usually around 400 milligrams. Imagine cutting that pill into 400 pieces. Fentanyl is 100 times more powerful than heroin.

It has been described as readily available to purchase on the Internet, that it is as simple as ordering a book from Amazon. That is how easy it is to get. A kilogram of fentanyl over the Internet costs around $23,000. A kilogram of fentanyl would be about the size of a cantaloupe, and on the streets that kilogram which costs $23,000 sells for $20 million.

That is the problem we have today. We need to be investing in things that will help us along the way, but we need to get people the treatment they need. Is a blue collar worker who is addicted to fentanyl going to check into a safe injection site? What about that real estate agent? What about a high school student who is at a rave or a party and ingests something, and he or she has no idea what he or she ingested?

It is now found in marijuana. It is found in cocaine. It is found in ecstasy. It is found in crack. It is coming across our borders, and we seem to be powerless to stop it. I would offer, respectfully, that our first line of defence is to make sure that this drug does not come into this country. We have to make it tougher for those who are importing it. We have to make it tougher for those who are selling it.

We have to educate Canadians that it could be found in anything they are trying. How many times do we have to pick up the newspaper and read about a teenager who went to a party or who was on a party bus and ingested a pop or a drink and overdosed? That is the reality. That is what we are hearing.

I do not have the answers. The people I have talked to who have been tasked to save lives, whether it is the RCMP or other police officers, say that safe injection sites may help, but we need to get people the treatment. We need to get beds. We need to stop the drug from coming into our country. When drugs the size of a grain of sand can kill, we have to do whatever we can to stop them from coming into our country. With that, I will cede the floor.

[Simon Kennedy]

Mr. Chair, on this issue I would say that Health Canada sees the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act as an important part of the government's strategy on dealing with the opioid crisis, in particular around the issue of stigma reduction.

We have heard anecdotally that there has been some progress with that legislation, but there's probably more that we can do to help support its adoption and awareness across the country.

I don't have good empirical data I can share off the top of my head, for which I apologize. I would be happy to see if I can get some firm statistics, but what I can report is that my own staff in their dealing with people at the front lines have indicated that there's probably more we can do to raise awareness and boost awareness at the street level in various places across the country. That's something we're looking at very carefully, to see whether we can put an additional profile on the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act as part of our go-forward public education and anti-stigma work.

I don't know if the member is aware, but the other thing is we have been printing up wallet cards and doing a lot of activity to increase awareness and to make sure that frankly the young people in the community and people out in the cities and towns across the country are aware that this legislation exists and aware that this option is now there.

There's a lot of activity going on, but I think our assessment is that we could do more and there's more that needs to be done.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

I have a very quick question. My other questions are all about the opioid crisis, which has been very thoroughly canvassed with the minister.

I would like to talk about the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act, which was my private member's bill that has been law now for about a year and a half. I wonder if you can tell me—and I hope you can tell me—that there have been positive impacts and maybe what they are.

[Suzy McDonald, Assistant Deputy Minister, Opioid Response Team, Department of Health]

In the collaborative spirit of the way we do all our work around controlled substances in Canada, I'll be giving remarks on behalf of my colleagues, but we're all happy to answer questions, obviously.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My name is Suzy McDonald. I am the assistant deputy minister for the opioid response team at Health Canada, but I'm also responsible for the regulation of controlled substances in Canada and the federal government's approach to drug and alcohol use under the Canadian drugs and substances strategy.

Problematic substance use is an ongoing health and safety concern in Canada. While the opioid crisis and cannabis legalization and regulation are often top of mind for Canadians, Health Canada is very much aware that a growing number of people are also struggling with methamphetamine use. In particular, we know that provinces such as Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan are seeing increased reports of methamphetamine use, hospitalizations and interactions with law enforcement. Some first nations communities are also reporting significant health and safety issues related to meth use.

Methamphetamine is generally an inexpensive drug that can produce a short-term or a long-term effect, depending on how it is taken. It can be smoked, snorted, swallowed or injected. It can increase attention and energy and create an overall feeling of well-being or euphoria. However, its use can also lead to addiction and harmful effects, such as paranoia, aggressiveness and even psychosis. A methamphetamine overdose can cause convulsions, cardiac arrest, stroke and, in some cases, death.

We know that people use stimulants for a variety of reasons. These can include for personal enjoyment, to relax, to socialize, or to cope with pain, stress or other related trauma. Compared to other substances used in Canada, such as alcohol, cannabis and opioids, rates of meth use are relatively low. However, we are seeing reports that other drugs are sometimes mixed in with meth, including highly potent opioids like fentanyl, which further increases the potential for harm and increases the risk of fatal overdose. In fact, available data for some jurisdictions suggest that meth may be playing a growing role in overdose deaths where polysubstance or dual-substance use is involved.

The Government of Canada is concerned about all forms of problematic substance use, and we are taking action through the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, through our four pillars of prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement.

In terms of prevention, we know that we need to take a broad approach, which includes both informing Canadians about the risks of meth use and addressing the underlying social determinants related to its use. This is a role that all levels of government undertake in Canada, along with a large number of non-governmental organizations.

We also know that public awareness campaigns will not suffice, as social determinants of health often underlie problematic substance use. For example, we know that homeless individuals or lower-income individuals are at greater risk of harm related to problematic substance use.

We also know that substances can be used as a coping mechanism by those who have experienced trauma, violence, social marginalization and loss of cultural identity. For aboriginal people, that may include the loss of language and culture, racism, discrimination and the intergenerational trauma of residential schools.

Through the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, the federal government is committed to working collaboratively to better address the social determinants of problematic substance use and develop upstream efforts to help prevent problematic substance use before it begins.

Moving on to the issue of treatment, the evidence clearly shows us that problematic substance use is a health condition that can be managed and successfully treated for those who are ready. Unfortunately, methamphetamine use is a very difficult condition to treat. To date, the most effective treatment options for methamphetamine use include psychosocial counselling and behavioural management approaches. Unlike opioid use disorder, where medication-assisted treatment is available, there are currently no drug-based therapies to treat problematic meth use. This is an area where more research would be useful.

I know from my experience in managing the federal response to the opioid crisis that there are simply not enough drug treatment services in Canada to meet the demand. To help address this gap, the federal government committed $150 million for an emergency treatment fund to help improve the availability of treatment options in Canada, including for those struggling with methamphetamine use. To date, five provinces have signed bilateral agreements with the federal government under the emergency treatment fund, including Saskatchewan, which is using some of the funds to enhance treatment services for people seeking help for substance use disorders, including crystal meth use.

ln addition, the federal government has made a number of investments in federal budgets to support expanded mental health and drug treatment services in first nation communities, including $200 million over five years, and $40 million ongoing, provided in budget 2018.

Harm reduction is a key factor of the federal approach to the opioid crisis. Unfortunately, there is no similar range of options for harm reduction related to methamphetamine use. More specifically, there are no drugs that can reverse the effects of a methamphetamine overdose, as in the case for an opioid overdose, which can be treated with naloxone.

The most common evidence-based approach in methamphetamine harm reduction focuses on reducing the risk of blood-borne infections, such as HIV and hepatitis C, which can be contracted by sharing drug-using equipment, such as syringes and pipes.

The Canada Public Health Agency is investing $30 million over five years through the harm reduction fund to reduce those risks by supporting projects in Canada that will help reduce the transmission of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C among people who share equipment for using drugs by injection and inhalation.

Another key component to harm reduction is addressing stigma toward people who use drugs. In particular, the visible physical effects of methamphetamine use, coupled with sometimes very erratic and unpredictable behaviour, create a highly stigmatized image. This perception creates barriers when accessing treatment and other harm reduction and social support services, and it is something that we are committed to working to reduce to help ensure that people get the support they need.

For example, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act encourages people to seek help in the event of an overdose by providing some legal protection for those who experience or witness an overdose. We hope this act will reduce the fear of police attending overdose events and encourage people to help save a life. As part of budget 2018, the federal government invested $18 million over five years for actions to address stigma toward people who use drugs, including a national anti-stigma campaign, which has just been launched, and training for law enforcement officers. Although much of what Health Canada is doing on stigma is done in the context of the opioid crisis, we are confident that it will also have a positive impact in other areas.

Drug regulation and enforcement is the fourth pillar of the Canadian drugs and substances strategy and remains a critical part of the federal government's approach. It encompasses a wide range of activities, including enforcement, regulation of activities with controlled substances and precursors, border control, financial surveillance and tax audit measures to reduce the profitability of drug trafficking.

Methamphetamine is controlled under the federal government's Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, as are many of the chemicals used in its production. Given that many of these precursors are legal substances, it can be difficult to control their availability and diversion. The RCMP is working in close partnership with chemical industry partners through the national chemical precursor diversion program to identify suspected criminals and organized crime groups that attempt to acquire precursor chemicals that can be used to produce methamphetamine. Health Canada continues to work with its partners, including the Canada Border Services Agency and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, to examine options around scheduling and control of novel precursor materials.

While some methamphetamine is produced in Canada, a proportion of methamphetamine consumed in Canada is likely trafficked into Canada from other countries such as Mexico. The Canada Border Services Agency continues to work closely with its international and domestic law enforcement partners to disrupt the methamphetamine supply at the border.

Our partners at Correctional Services Canada are also taking a number of actions to reduce the demand for illegal substances, including methamphetamine, among the federal incarcerated population. These include preventing contraband from entering federal prisons, increasing awareness of the harms from problematic substance use and supporting innovative and effective treatment and harm reduction approaches, such as the recent implementation of a prison needle-exchange program.

I'd like to touch on one final area of the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, and that is the serious role of evidence. Evidence is the foundation of everything we do.

Supervised sites are another part of the government's harm reduction approach. Although the use of meth in supervised consumption sites varies widely across the country, preliminary data shows that up to 40% of visits to some sites in western Canada are by people who come to use methamphetamine.

The federal government supports high-quality research on substance use through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian research initiative on substance misuse.

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research are currently supporting a pilot project to identify effective interventions to reduce methamphetamine use among men who have sexual relations with other men, an activity that has been associated with an increased probability of contracting HIV/AIDS.

In addition, the substance use and addictions program is a federal grants and contributions program that provides $28.3 million annually to provinces, territories and non-governmental organizations that support evidence-informed and innovative initiatives targeting a broad range of legal and illegal substances.

While it is difficult to paint a detailed picture of the scale of the methamphetamine problem in Canada, we are committed to working with provinces and territories and key stakeholders to fill gaps in our knowledge. Health Canada, the Public Health Agency, Stats Canada and other organizations are exploring targeted data and research initiatives to better reach marginalized populations.

We are also working toward developing and implementing a Canadian drugs observatory that would act as a central hub to provide a comprehensive picture of the current drug situation in Canada, identify emerging drug issues before they escalate, track public health interventions and other control measures, and facilitate data sharing.

In closing, I would just like to say that we are deeply concerned about the growing number of Canadians who are struggling with methamphetamine use. Through the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, we will continue to work with provinces, territories, indigenous leadership and communities, people with lived and living experience and key stakeholders to address the issue using a comprehensive, collaborative and compassionate public health approach based on the latest available evidence.

Last, we have recently launched an online public consultation to inform potential next steps on the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. This consultation closes on December 4. We look forward to feedback from Canadians on how we can improve our approach to substance use issues in Canada, including our actions to address methamphetamine. At last count, I think we had more than 1,200 responses to that, so we expect a fair amount of analysis to happen.

In closing, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss what we believe is a very important and growing issue in Canada. We look forward to the presentations to this committee from other stakeholder groups and to the committee's forthcoming report and recommendations.

My colleagues and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Health

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his work and his tireless efforts in this matter. Like him, I was extremely disappointed yesterday when I heard the opposition leader's outdated belief. Unlike the Conservatives, our government is actually supporting law enforcement where it matters. Rather than prosecuting those with mental health and addiction issues, we are disrupting illegal drugs at the border and diverting people out of the criminal justice system.

With Bill C-37 and C-224, our government is taking a compassionate, evidence-based approach to reduce barriers to treatment and encourage innovative measures to prevent overdoses and save lives.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

This is a coordinating amendment, following along from the addition of clause 8.1 earlier in this process. It brings the language that was introduced into the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act with the passage of Bill C-224, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act, concerning the use of the word “overdose” to instead use the phrase “medical emergency”. This will bring the CDSA into conformity with the newer language incorporated into this act by means of clause 8.1.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clauses 196 to 199 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 200)

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

The Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act. It was Bill C-224.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Chair, the purpose of this amendment is to bring the provisions of my private member's bill, Bill C-224, to bear on this legislation. As you remember, Bill C-224, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act, which received royal assent in May and passed all stages in both Houses—I believe, unanimously—amended the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to exempt from charges for simple possession, certain breaches of conditions, and so forth, people who seek emergency medical or law enforcement assistance for themselves or another person in the event of an overdose.

This is working, and it is an effective tool to help stem the tide of death that pertains to overdoses in this country. However, should this bill pass and receive royal assent, cannabis would be removed from the scope of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and the provisions of that act would no longer apply to cannabis, which means that those exemptions would no longer apply to cannabis.

What this amendment would do is it would add into this section those self same exclusions that were previously introduced and passed in the Controlled Drug and Substances Act.

We have also suggested a minor change. The word “overdose” is sometimes confusing to people. They don't know necessarily whether a particular medical situation is in fact an overdose, and so they are reluctant to make the call. This would change the language to “medical emergency” as opposed to using the word “overdose”.

I think this avoids for us a situation where someone who might be in possession of marijuana but in a circumstance where someone has been called in relation to, say, an opioid overdose is subject to possession charges that would take from them the incentive to call for help, which is really what we want to do. We want to encourage people to call for help when help is needed.

I hope for support from the committee for this amendment.

Resuming Debate

[Jane Philpott, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the wonderful opportunity to speak to the amendments adopted in the Senate relating to Bill C-37. This is an act, as we know, to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and to make related amendments to other acts.

Before I begin, I thank my colleagues in the House and the Senate for their work on the bill to date, for reviewing this important legislation, and for recognizing the urgency of the issue. I particularly want to thank all my colleagues who supported getting the bill through the House as quickly as possible.

This bill, as proposed, will help our federal government and its partners to combat the existing opioid crisis and deal with the more general drug problem in Canada.

For that reason, I urge my colleagues to support the bill so it can be adopted without delay and to help protect the health and safety of Canadians and their communities.

It is clear that we are in the midst of a national public health crisis. Last year in British Columbia, more than 900 people died from illicit drug overdoses. If trends continue in 2017, we can expect 1,400 people in British Columbia to die this year as a result of overdoses.

However, British Columbia is not alone. In Alberta, close to 500 people died from overdoses in 2016.

We are also seeing signs that the opioid crisis is spreading to other parts of Canada.

For example, seizures of fentanyl have increased in almost every province over the last year.

Our government is responding. We are taking actions that are compassionate, collaborative, comprehensive, and evidence-based in our approach to drug policy. Our aim is to take a public health approach to addressing the opioid crisis and problematic substance use in general, while also ensuring law enforcement officials have the tools they require to keep communities safe.

That is why, last fall, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and I announced the new Canadian drugs and substances strategy.

This new strategy replaces the previous approach by addressing problematic substance use as primarily a public health issue, restoring harm reduction as a key pillar of Canada's drug policy, alongside prevention, treatments, and enforcement, and supporting all those pillars from a strong evidence base.

Bill C-37 and the revised amendments our government proposed support this strategy by updating the law to focus on harm reduction measures.

Streamlining the application process for supervised consumption sites is central to this legislation.

Solid evidence shows that, when properly set up and maintained, supervised consumption sites save lives, and they do it without increasing drug use or crime in the neighbourhood.

To this end, Bill C-37 proposes to amend the current legislation in two ways. It will establish a streamlined application process that aligns with the five factors set out in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in 2011, in Canada vs. PHS Community Services Society. It will also improve the transparency by requiring decisions on supervised consumption site applications to be made public, including reasons for denying such an application.

We need to create an environment that encourages communities that want and need these sites to apply for them. I can assure the House that Bill C-37 and the revised amendments our government is proposing will ensure that communities that want and need these sites do not experience unreasonable delays in their efforts to save lives.

The first amendment specifies that should the Minister of Health choose to post a notice to seek further public input regarding an application, the public should have a minimum of 45 days to provide feedback.

Some members, and indeed members of the public as well, have questioned why we are accepting this Senate amendment. To be clear, the ministerial authority to post a public notice regarding an application for up to 90 days exists under the current legislation. Bill C-37, as introduced by our government, made that time period more flexible but retained the optional nature of the posting and the optional nature of an extra consultation. The only thing that would change with the Senate's amendment is that should a public notice for further consultation be posted, it must be posted for a minimum of 45 days.

Our government supports this amendment, as it would ensure that in the special cases where further community consultation was warranted, communities would receive a reasonable amount of time to provide comment on specific applications.

I will repeat that this consultation would not be required by legislation, and indeed, it would be the exception rather than the rule.

The second Senate amendment would give the Minister of Health the authority to establish citizen advisory committees for approved sites where deemed necessary.

Our government understands the intent of this amendment. It could be to bring together supervised consumption sites and community members. However, adding this oversight of supervised consumption sites, which is not used for any other health service as a legislated requirement, would further stigmatize their clients and potentially reduce the use of these critical facilities. As such, we respectfully disagree with this amendment.

The final amendment adopted by the Senate would require that clients of supervised consumption sites be offered an alternative pharmaceutical therapy before they consumed substances at the site. While the intention of this amendment may be to encourage the provision of evidence-based treatment options to people who use drugs, it is critical that the application process for supervised consumption sites not be hindered by additional federal requirements for immediate access to treatment services. This could impose an additional burden and make it more difficult to establish and operate supervised consumption sites.

As written, this amendment could result in charter challenges on the grounds that an individual's safety and security could be jeopardized if that person could no longer access the services offered at a supervised consumption site. It also represents significant jurisdictional issues, since it could be construed as regulating a health service or clinical practice.

In addition, repeated offers of pharmaceutical treatment could actually discourage people who are not yet ready to begin treatment from using supervised consumption sites. This would be counter to the aim of supporting communities that need these sites to save the lives of their community members.

For these reasons, our government proposes that we amend the wording to say “may” instead of ”shall” and remove subsection 2 of this amendment.

For all the reasons I just outlined, our government does not support the amendment to the motion moved by the member for Oshawa.

I also want to remind the House that this bill includes other important initiatives, because the opioid crisis is a complex problem that requires a comprehensive response.

The pathways to addiction are numerous, but they are connected through their origin in personal pain, whether that be mental or physical pain. These issues are all too often exacerbated by multiple social determinants of health, including poverty, homelessness, and lack of access to economic resources, making the reality of addiction and the path to recovery all the more difficult to navigate.

To add to this complexity, the drug environment in Canada has changed drastically in recent years. Strong drugs like fentanyl, carfentanil, and other analogs have made their way into Canada, and they are often being disguised as prescription drugs like Percocet or oxycodone, or they are mixed with other less potent street drugs, such as heroin or cocaine.

With that in mind, l would like to take this opportunity to specifically discuss the Senate amendments with respect to establishing supervised consumption sites.

This crisis is impacting high-risk, long-term drug users as well as recreational drug users who do not expect that the drug they are using could contain fentanyl. As we all know from the devastating local news reports across this country, the crisis is also affecting young people who are experimenting with drugs. That is why, in addition to important provisions regarding supervised consumption sites, Bill C-37 also includes proposals that would modernize the current legislative framework and create new law enforcement tools to confront the ongoing crisis.

For example, Bill C-37 proposes legislative measures to prohibit the unregistered import of pill presses to Canada. If passed, it would allow border officials to open international mail of any weight should they have reasonable grounds to suspect that the item may contain prohibited, controlled, or regulated goods. As well, it would grant the Minister of Health the necessary powers to quickly temporarily schedule and control a new and dangerous substance.

It is important to point out that Bill C-37 and the revised amendments our government is proposing are part of a suite of vital measures that our government has taken to combat the opioid crisis. For the benefit of the members, I think it is worth mentioning some of our government's other initiatives.

We have made naloxone available without prescription, and we have expedited the review of naloxone nasal spray to ensure that multiple formats are available to Canadians. We have granted exemptions to Insite and the Dr. Peter Centre to operate supervised consumption sites in Vancouver, and we have now issued exemptions for a total of three supervised consumption sites at fixed locations in Montreal and are expediting reviews for the approval of 18 additional sites in 10 cities: Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Surrey, Ottawa, Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, Kelowna, and Kamloops.

Our government has also rescinded the prohibition on access to an important treatment option, prescription heroin, to treat more serious addictions.

We have finalized new regulations to control chemicals used to make fentanyl, making it harder to manufacture illegal substances in Canada, and we have supported the passage of the important Bill C-224, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act, which I am pleased to say achieved royal assent on May 4. Finally, we are providing $100 million in federal funding to support the Canadian drugs and substances strategy, as well as an additional $10 million in emergency funding to British Columbia and $6 million in emergency funding to Alberta.

It is important that members understand that there is no single action that will end this opioid crisis immediately. There is no single law or policy that will do so. It requires comprehensive, urgent action. The adoption of the amendment our government is now proposing and making Bill C-37 law would be, however, a very important step forward in supporting a new approach to drug policy in Canada.

As proposed, this legislation would give our government and law enforcement agencies more effective tools to fight problematic substance use and provide more support to communities that are battling this crisis locally.

The amended legislation would also help our government work with partners to implement an evidence-based approach that is comprehensive and collaborative. Therefore, I encourage all members to support Bill C-37 and our approach to the Senate's amendment in order to protect Canadians and save lives. I thank my colleagues for their important work in this regard, and I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to discuss it.

Royal Assent

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received as follows:

Mr. Speaker:

I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General of Canada, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bills listed in the schedule to this letter on the 4th day of May, 2017, at 11:30 a.m.

Yours sincerely,

Stephen Wallace

The schedule indicates that the bills assented to were Bill S-201, an act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination, and Bill C-224, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose).

Now I believe the hon. opposition House leader has the usual Thursday question.

The Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to express to you my thanks for so many dedicated women and men, in the House administration and at the library, for their incredible work. Without them, Bill C-224 would not have achieved the success it has had up until now.

In particular, I want to thank Marc-Olivier Girard at the private members' business office, Isabelle D'Souza and Wendy Gordon at the office of the law clerk, and Michael Dewing at the Library of Parliament.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in the House today to support private member's bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, including the amendments made in the Senate. These amendments bring further clarity to the bill and they expand the circumstances where immunity would be provided to increase the likelihood that bystanders would seek emergency help during an overdose, expanding the opportunities for the bill to safe lives.

Simply put, the bill would help to address the systemic barriers that would prevent many Canadians from seeking help from first responders during an overdose. Their fear is that they may be charged and convicted of drug possession once first responders arrive.

I want to take this opportunity to commend my colleague, the member of Parliament for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, for bringing this important bill forward and for proposing a simple legislative change that would help save lives. His work on the bill is an honour to him, the House, and to the people he represents.

As everyone in the House knows, we are in a crisis situation. Opioid related overdose deaths in Canada have increased at an alarming rate and we must continue to act to save lives.

In British Columbia alone, there were over 900 overdose deaths in 2016, and so far the rate of death from drug overdoses in 2017 sadly shows no sign of decreasing. There were 102 overdose deaths in B.C. in February of this year. This is an average of 3.6 deaths a day for that month. These are not just abstract numbers. Each one represents a Canadian who has lost his or her life in a way that is preventable.

Most overdoses occur in the presence of others and, like many other emergencies, a person's chances of surviving an overdose depends on how quickly he or she receives medical attention. Calls to 911 during an overdose are typically either not made or may be delayed to such an extent that the victim can suffer irreparable brain damage or other harms.

A 2014 report from Ontario found that only half of those surveyed said they would call 911 in the event of an overdose and wait at the scene for emergency personnel to arrive. This is consistent with international research where studies have found 911 call rates for overdose events to be as low as 15%.

At a recent forum discussion on the future of drug policy, the Minister of Health pointed out that as one part of responding to the opioid crisis, we needed to call out stigma and reduce the discrimination associated with drug use.

The high rates of drug overdose deaths we are seeing in the country and the low rate at which Canadians are willing to contact emergency services when they witness an overdose are unacceptable and clearly point to an issue that is being made worse by stigma and fear, the impacts of which must be addressed before we lose more lives.

The Government of Canada is supporting the response to this crisis through the new Canadian drugs and substances strategy, a comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidenced-based approach. The strategy is built on four pillars—prevention, treatment, harm reduction, and law enforcement—and will also serve to improve the evidence base.

The good Samaritan drug overdose act is in keeping with our government's approach to drug policy. The elimination of drug possession charges for people seeking help for an overdose is a harm reduction measure that strikes a balance between public health and public safety. What is more, the implementation of this bill will provide the opportunity for law enforcement officers to strengthen their relationship of trust with drug users, a relationship that could put drug users in a safer environment and give them better access to treatment when they are ready to seek it.

As originally written, Bill C-224 guaranteed anyone experiencing or witnessing an overdose immunity from minor drug possession charges if that person contacted emergency services or law enforcement for help.

The Senate has made several amendments to the bill. Most of these amendments are meant to bring further clarity to the legal text so it can be more easily interpreted by law enforcement and the courts.

I will not spend too much time on these amendments except to say that the government supports them and that they certainly strengthen the Bill. For example, the proposed amendments make it clear that the law will protect those who call and leave the scene as well as those who arrive at the scene after the call has been made. In addition, the amendments clarify that witnesses to an overdose, as well as the person who has overdosed, will be provided with immunity under this proposed law.

The more substantive amendment proposed by the Senate would expand the immunity provided by Bill C-224 to include protection from charges for offences concerning a violation of a pre-trial release, probation order, conditional sentence, or parole relating to simple possession.

I understand that this broadened scope of the immunity provided under this good Samaritan bill may cause some of the members of this House to reconsider their support for this bill. However, we are in a crisis situation where preventable deaths are occurring daily. I urge all members of this House to maintain their support for this important piece of legislation.

The Government of Canada would not be the first to provide such immunity. In fact, 15 states in the U.S. have a good Samaritan drug overdose law that provides immunity from charges of possession as well as protections from probation or parole violations.

There is a simple reason why the Senate has proposed these amendments and why these 15 U.S. states have covered such violations under their good Samaritan laws. It is because fear of being charged for the possession of a controlled substance is only one reason why people are afraid to seek help during an overdose.

The Ontario report I mentioned earlier also looked at reasons why people were afraid to call for help during an overdose. The two most common barriers to calling 911 during an overdose event were fear of arrest, and being on parole. Of those respondents on probation or parole, only 37% indicated they would call emergency services and wait for help to arrive if they witnessed an overdose.

Extending the immunity guaranteed by Bill C-224 would increase the number of situations that could be a matter of life or death. However, this would not prevent law enforcement officers to focus on public safety and security efforts concerning the most serious offences, especially if officers were to discover the production or trafficking of controlled substances when they were called to the scene of a crime.

As many people have pointed out, fighting the current opioid crisis will not be an easy task. Passing the good Samaritan bill will not fix the whole problem, but it can be part of the solution and it is a big step in the right direction. I hope that all members of the House will join me in supporting this important bill.

I would again like to thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for his dedication and hard work. I am very proud to serve with him.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking and congratulating my colleague from Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam. As the member for Gatineau pointed out earlier, I too was in the House for the first hour of debate on this bill. I heard his very moving testimony.

People sometimes forget that the issues our constituents bring to us and our political parties' positions are not the only things that motivate us in our work. Sometimes, we are motivated by very personal stories.

That is why it is so gratifying to see a member do so much to improve legislation about such an urgent public health issue. This is something we can all support, and the NDP is very pleased to do so.

I know there is no place for jokes in a conversation about such an important issue, but we also want to thank the Senate for its work. That is not something the NDP says a lot. I think these amendments are reasonable and improve the bill. We can continue to support the bill with these amendments, and we hope this matter will be acted upon quickly. This is something we have been waiting for for a long time.

We just heard from the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford from British Columbia, who has been working hard on this file, as well as the member from Alberta. People often think that this is an issue that concerns western Canada, and it is, as proven by the thousands of deaths that have occurred since the beginning of this public health crisis, that is, the opioid crisis. However, this crisis is making its way east. We recently began seeing cases in Ontario and Quebec. That is why it is important that we all work together to pass the necessary legislation to save lives.

We are talking about Bill C-224, the good Samaritan bill. As my Conservative colleague just clearly illustrated, people might wonder why anyone would not seek help when someone they are with, often a friend, has overdosed, whether in the context of a party or any other situation.

Obviously, the legal consequences may dissuade people from seeking help. Unfortunately, all too often, young people are the ones who suffer the consequences of substance abuse and the associated legal ramifications. It is therefore essential that we put in place a legislative framework to ensure that people are not afraid to ask for help. That is the least we can do.

The Senate proposed some very important amendments to clarify and improve this bill. The Senate changed some of the wording so that the bill provides clear explanations of the measures to protect against possession charges, which is the intent of the bill. We want to make sure that it is clear that anyone who is with the victim of an overdose, often a friend, and who calls 911 to get help for the victim will not suffer the legal consequences that would normally apply.

As part of its amendments, the Senate also proposed that overdose victims and those at the scene when help arrives be protected from being charged with an offence concerning a violation of pre-trial release, probation order, conditional sentence, or parole.

These are offences that do not pose a direct threat to the public, as my Conservative colleague pointed out earlier. For example, this type of exemption would not apply in a case of impaired driving. The types of violations targeted are those likely to be committed by a person who is at the scene of an overdose or who could, him or herself, be a victim requesting help. That is very important.

I want to come back to the question I raised earlier, because it often comes up during discussions on substance abuse or the use of certain illegal substances.

Unfortunately, there is a stigma attached. Consider the example of the debate surrounding the opioid crisis and safe injection sites. Whether we like it or not, there is a link between that and the bill currently before us. The question remains, and political courage is needed. That is why we are happy to see that the House supports this bill and the efforts made by our colleague, the bill's sponsor.

There is a misguided idea out there that we support illegal activities and encourage people's addictions. On the contrary, we want to tackle a public health problem. We want people who have health problems and who cannot find the support they need to get help. That is what we hope this bill achieves.

This is very important if we want to be able to address the crisis we are facing at this time. Indeed, as I have said, this often has an impact on young people. Even in the context of the debate on the legalization of marijuana, there is often talk of the importance of prevention, education and all of those issues. It is all very well and good to talk about the money that would be invested and to engage in prevention or educate people on the subject, but if there is no legislative framework to assure us that people will be able to get help, whether it be through the good Samaritan bill or safe injection sites, all of that is futile. It is very important to ensure that all the efforts made by the government or by Parliament via the various proposed bills are closely linked.

I will provide a few figures on the opioid crisis in British Columbia. I think it is important to share these statistics in order to illustrate the extent to which this is a public health issue. I am saying this as the NDP public safety critic. This is no longer a public safety issue, but rather an issue related to people’s health. In my view, it is the reason why we have to start studying evidence-based policies. On this subject, I recognize the efforts that are contained in this sort of bill.

I must acknowledge that, although we see this in the news, we do not necessarily see it in my riding, in our own backyard. For the people listening to us, I think it is important to demonstrate the extent to which this is a health-related crisis.

There was a record number of deaths in British Columbia in December. The number reported was 142. That was up from the previous monthly peak in November 2016, which was 128. That is enormous. In December, as the holidays were approaching, 142 families lost a loved one because we did not act fast enough. I believe that no one in the House, whatever their political allegiance, wants to continue in this direction and have this reality on our collective conscience. This is an unacceptable number of deaths.

In Vancouver, every week between 9 and 15 fatal overdoses are reported. It is scary and completely unacceptable. If we can support bills like this one and efforts like this, which will give us a legal framework to provide people with the help they are looking for, then we can transition into the government making further efforts. We would be prepared to support the right kind of progressive, fact-based efforts because that would help address this urgent health crisis and eradicate this scourge. I think that this is our collective responsibility.

Again, I want to thank my colleague from Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam. I want to reiterate how inspiring it is to see such incredible efforts being made for such a personal story. I also want to thank the Senate for its work to improve the bill. We hope that this is just the first step. We have to move forward and put an end to this public health crisis once and for all.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in strong support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, as amended by the Senate and introduced by the hon. member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam.

I want to first commend the hon. member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, whom I have the privilege of serving on the justice committee with, for his leadership and stewardship in raising this important issue and moving this important legislation forward. Without more, Bill C-224 is a good bill, a needed bill, and a bill that would save lives. It could not be more timely. It could not be more timely, because Canada faces an opioid overdose crisis. It is a crisis that has claimed the lives of thousands of Canadians. Mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, neighbours, colleagues are gone, taken. It is a crisis that has torn apart families and devastated communities. It is a crisis that is not slowing down.

The opioid crisis is particularly acute in my home province of Alberta. In 2016, Alberta emergency responders responded to some 2,267 fentanyl-related events and 343 Albertans died from a fentanyl overdose. That is up from 257 in 2015 and way up from the two dozen who died in 2012. Even more concerning is that we are seeing more and more potent opioids, such as powdered fentanyl, being pushed out onto our streets. Powdered fentanyl is 80 times more potent than morphine. The percentage of deaths in which fentanyl has been detected has increased from 5% in 2012, to 30% in 2015, to a staggering 62% in 2016.

The vast majority of drug overdoses occur in the presence of at least one other person and yet, far too often, individuals who witness a drug overdose do not do the right thing. They do not pick up the phone. They do not call 911 to get help. One may ask why someone would not call for help. The simple answer is that far too often they are afraid. They are afraid of being charged with a criminal offence. They are afraid of being caught up in the criminal justice system, so they do not call. They do not act, and the consequences of inaction can be fatal.

The Standing Committee on Health, which I know my colleague, the hon. member for Calgary Confederation, serves on, studied Bill C-224. As well, the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs heard powerful testimony from Christine Padaric, the mother of the late Austin Padaric. Austin was a promising high school student. One night he went to a party and made a choice that a lot of high school students make: he took drugs. He reacted and Austin's friends did not call for help. They did not call 911. They thought they could handle it on their own. Perhaps they, in part, were worried about the police arriving, maybe charges being laid, and maybe being caught up in the criminal justice system. Unfortunately, they were not able to handle it and as a result, Austin died at the age of 17.

Sadly, Austin is not alone. There are many Austins out there, and there will be many more Austins if action is not taken. That is precisely what Bill C-224 seeks to do. It is to prevent future Austins by providing immunity from prosecution for individuals who witness a drug overdose, do the right thing, call for help, and as a result of doing the right thing, are found to be in possession of illicit drugs.

It is important to note that Bill C-224 applies, in terms of immunity from prosecution, to only simple possession. It would not apply to other offences, such as impaired driving or drug trafficking. Moreover, it would only apply to offences listed in schedules I to III of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act: in other words, street drugs. What Bill C-224 would not do is provide immunity to drug pushers, drug dealers, and drug traffickers who are pushing dangerous and illegal drugs onto the streets that are killing thousands of Canadians each and every year.

Bill C-224 is legislation that makes sense. It went to the Senate and was amended in the Senate. I have to say that the Senate did a good job of improving Bill C-224, as the hon. member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam pointed out. There were amendments from the other place that would extend immunity from prosecution to breaches of release orders arising from simple possession. Those amendments make sense. They are consistent with the spirit and objective of Bill C-224. In that regard, I would submit that it does not make sense that a good Samaritan should be immune from prosecution on the basis of simple possession but then be charged for breaching a release order arising from the very same simple possession. That would be self-defeating.

While the good Samaritan drug overdose act is new to Canada, it is not a new concept. Indeed, some 37 states, plus the District of Columbia, have similar legislation on their books, and the legislation that has been passed in the U.S. is having the intended effect. More and more people are calling 911, and as a result, more and more lives are being saved.

I urge the speedy passage of Bill C-224 as amended. This legislation is needed. It is needed now. It is needed to save lives.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

moved the second reading of, and concurrence in, amendments made by the Senate to Bill C-224, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance in overdose drugs) be now read a second time and concurred in.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand before you today to speak to Bill C-224, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act.

Last month, I had the pleasure of sitting in the Senate gallery during report stage and third reading stage. The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs amended the bill in committee in order to correct the errors and omissions in the original version of my bill. The amendments to Bill C-224 are in line with my objectives and my intent in drafting the bill, and they clarify certain points.

They provide greater certainty for people who call 911 in the event of an overdose.

I have to thank the Senate for not only accepting my bill but, frankly, for making it better. They tightened up the language to ensure that a person who is being given assistance would not be charged, nor would anyone accompanying them be charged. That is the intent. As long as they are giving assistance they cannot be charged or convicted for possession.

Another Senate clarification makes it clear that both those who remain at the scene of the drug overdose and those who accompany the victim to seek medical assistance are also protected. Again, the Senate reinforced the language to ensure that the person suffering from an overdose is equally protected from prosecution.

If someone is suffering an overdose, or a friend comes to help, they may already be under some other court order for possession charges. The bill as amended by the Senate makes it clear this would not be held against them.

This was sober second thought in action. Senators have demonstrated once again that their collective scope and depth of knowledge really does make better law. I am grateful to Senator Larry Campbell for sponsoring the bill and to senators Murray Sinclair and Vern White for their amendments, which reflect their expertise in judicial proceedings and law enforcement.

In Senator Campbell's speech at third reading in the other place, he talked about the lives that have been lost in our home province. At the time he introduced the bill, he stated that 600 British Columbians lost their lives to drug overdoses, and by the end of 2016, 914 had died that year alone. We share the same hope that when this bill becomes law, this number will start to decline.

The scourge of overdose deaths is increasing across Canada, from coast to coast to coast, and the number of overdose deaths is rising. The bill will not fix the entire opioid problem. It only addresses one small piece of the puzzle. We all know that.

All members of the House and senators also know that to fight opioids in Canada, we, the legislators, must act quickly. That is why in its report the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs asked that the two chambers study Bill C-224 as quickly as possible.

Accordingly, here we are debating Bill C-224 today, because it was moved up in the order of precedence just one month after the Senate report.

I urge all my colleagues here in the House to come together today. Let us pass Bill C-224. We can send an important message to all Canadians that together we can start saving lives through a very simple action, by telling Canadians it is okay to call for help.

Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House today to speak in support of Bill C-37, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make related amendments to other acts.

As members are aware, Canada is facing an opioids overdose crisis across this country. We have seen very troubling figures and have heard many tragic stories. As stated earlier in the House, British Columbia alone saw 916 illicit drug overdose deaths in 2016, an almost 80% increase from the year before. The majority of these overdoses are due to opioids. Other parts of the country have been impacted as well, with Alberta reporting 343 apparent overdoses related to fentanyl in 2016, which is an over 30% increase from the year before. While some areas have been more acutely affected that others, drug use is not unique to one part of the country, and the potential for this crisis to spread is very real.

Our government is committed to addressing this complex public health issue through a comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to drug policy in Canada. To that end, the Minister of Health with support from the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Justice announced the new Canadian drugs and substances strategy on December 12 of last year.

This new strategy replaces the previous national anti-drug strategy with a more balanced approach for restoring harm reduction as a core pillar alongside prevention, treatment, and enforcement, and supporting these pillars with a strong evidence base. The Canadian drugs and substances strategy formalizes our government's commitment to taking an evidence-based and more appropriate health-focused approach to addressing problematic substance abuse in our country.

The bill before us would ensure a sound and modernized legislative base to support this new strategy. This comprehensive bill aims to balance protecting public health and maintaining public safety. It is designed to better equip health professionals and law enforcement with the tools they need to address this issue.

Specifically, this bill would improve the government's ability to support the establishment of supervised consumption sites as a key harm reduction measure in communities. It would address the illegal supply, production, and distribution of drugs, and reduce the risk of controlled substances used for legitimate purposes being diverted to the illegal market by improving compliance and enforcement tools.

In addition to introducing this new strategy, proposing this bill, and building on our five-point action plan, our government has taken and continues to take concrete steps to address problematic substance use. Since coming into office, our government has used all the tools available to address this issue.

One of the first steps our government took, as expressed by experts, was calling for an increase in availability of naloxone, a drug that temporarily reverses an opioid overdose. We acted quickly in this regard to remove the requirement to have a prescription to facilitate access to naloxone in March 2016. Further, our government completed an expedited review of an easier to use nasal spray version of naloxone, which, as of October 2016, is now approved for sale in Canada.

In the meantime, our Minister of Health used the extraordinary legal authorities available to her under the Food and Drugs Act to issue an interim order to allow the emergency import of naloxone nasal spray from the United States. This significant step has increased access for emergency responders and helps to address the growing number of opioid overdoses.

We have also demonstrated our support for the establishment of supervised consumption sites, a key harm reduction measure. Through a thorough and rigorous review in January 2016, Health Canada granted an exemption from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act for the Dr. Peter Centre to operate as a supervised consumption site.

Not long after that, in March 2016, Health Canada granted Insite an unprecedented four-year exemption to continue its extremely important work in the Downtown Eastside neighbourhood of Vancouver. Insite has demonstrated time and again through a countless number of peer-reviewed research studies that it saves lives without increasing drug use and crime in the surrounding area. This four-year exemption is a positive shift from the previous annual exemptions. Just last week, Health Canada issued three new exemptions for supervised consumption sites in the city of Montreal, the first such exemptions outside of the province of British Columbia.

I do want to briefly touch upon a concern that was raised in this House by the opposition, that the views of communities would no longer be important in the assessment of an application to establish a supervised consumption site. Let me be very clear; this was actually determined by the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada determined that the Minister of Health must consider expressions of community support or opposition when reviewing such applications.

Our government is respecting the Supreme Court of Canada's decision by proposing to include these factors in this legislation. We support the need for community consultation in the application process for considering the establishment of supervised consumption sites. We understand and respect that communities may have valid concerns about a proposed site, and that these concerns deserve to be heard and should be adequately addressed by applicants in their applications. The proposed amendments would demonstrate that respect for communities is a multi-faceted issue. It means that the concerns of communities must be considered and addressed by the applicants. However, it also means that the federal government should not place any unnecessary barriers in the way of communities that need and want to establish supervised consumption sites as part of their local drug harm reduction strategy.

In order to combat this crisis head on, our government is also supporting private member's bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, a bill that would help encourage individuals who witness an overdose to call for emergency help. It would provide immunity from minor drug possession charges for individuals who experience or witness an overdose and call for emergency assistance.

The opioid crisis is something we know we cannot fix alone. We need collaboration with all levels of government, experts, and professionals. This is why we are committed to working with our colleagues across Canada to address the opioid crisis, from medical professionals to law enforcement partners.

In November last year, the Minister of Health co-hosted an opioid summit and conference along with the Ontario minister of health. The summit and conference brought together governments, experts, and key stakeholders to address the opioid crisis and to determine a path forward. Participants heard a number of perspectives on this crisis from people who use drugs, families devastated by opioid misuse, health care providers, first responders, educators, and researchers. Provincial ministers and heads of organizations with the ability to bring about change committed to a joint statement of action to address the opioid crisis. This joint statement of action reflects a combined commitment for each participant to work within respective areas of responsibility to improve prevention, treatment, and harm reduction associated with problematic opioid use by delivering on concrete actions. We will publicly report on the progress of these actions, starting in March 2017.

In conclusion, Bill C-37 is a key example of our government's commitment to establishing a comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to drug policy in order to reduce the harms caused by drugs that are currently being experienced by individuals. One life lost to an opioid overdose is one too many. We need to take action now. As this bill would help save lives, I strongly encourage all the members in this House to support this very important piece of legislation.

Motions in amendment

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the government is doing all it can to respond to this crisis. The question allows me to point out a few things that this government has done.

Health Canada has issued a necessary exemption to Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux to provide three supervised consumption sites in Montreal, which took nearly two years under the previous government's 26 criteria in Bill C-2, and now we are moving forward with Bill C-37.

We have made the overdose antidote naloxone more widely available. We have provided an emergency interim order to allow the importation of bulk stocks of naloxone nasal spray from the United States. We have scheduled W-18 under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. We have scheduled precursors to fentanyl. We have supported Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. We have enabled access to diacetylmorphine via Health Canada's special access program.

In addition, we have launched a five-point action plan to address opioid misuse, which focuses on better informing Canadians about the risk of opioids, supporting better prescription practices, reducing easy access to unnecessary opioids, supporting better treatment options, and improving the national evidence-based strategy. We also held a summit on opioids, resulting in 42 organizations bringing forward 128 concrete commitments to address the crisis. Also budget 2016 provides $50 million over two years, starting in 2016-17, to Canada Health Infoway to support short-term digital health activities in e-prescribing and telehomecare. That is just to name a few.

We have done a lot to respond to this opioid crisis, and Bill C-37 is one of the steps we are taking to respond to this crisis. I appreciate the member's support and work on Bill C-37.

Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Edmonton Centre.

I am pleased to rise today to speak in support of Bill C-37, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make related amendments to other acts. My private member's bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, is currently in the other place. Just like Bill C-37, it is just one piece in the harm reduction tool kit that would help to save lives.

Protecting the health and safety of Canadians is a key priority for this government. That is why on December 12, 2016, the Minister of Health, with support from the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, introduced Bill C-37 in the House of Commons.

This bill makes several amendments to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Customs Act in support of the government's efforts to respond to the current opioid crisis and problematic substance abuse in general.

This comprehensive bill aims to balance the important objectives of protecting public health and maintaining public safety. It is designed to better equip both health professionals and law enforcement with the tools they need to address the issue.

Over the last decade, the harms associated with problematic substances abuse in Canada have become more complex and have been changing at a rapid pace. The line between licit and illicit substances has blurred with the opioid crisis, prescription drug misuse, and the rise of new designer drugs.

The government has committed to helping Canadians affected by these problematic substances and their use. Legislative and regulatory controls are certainly an important part of this approach. However, as we know, drug use and dependency pose significant risks for individuals, families, and communities. Our approach to addressing problematic substances abuse must include preventing and treating addiction, supporting recovery, and reducing the negative health and social impacts of drug use on individuals and their communities through evidence-based harm reduction measures. This must also be a part of our approach to addressing problematic substances abuse.

Harm reduction is viewed by experts as a cost-effective element of a well-balanced approach to public health and safety. Harm reduction connects people to other services in the health and social systems related to treatment and recovery. It recognizes that individuals and whole communities benefit when people with substance misuse and addiction issues can obtain the support and services they need rather than being marginalized or stigmatized. The evidence regarding harm reduction is absolutely clear. Harm reduction measures are a critical piece of a comprehensive approach to drug control.

That is why the government is determined to take a balanced, evidence-based approach that supports rather than creates obstacles to harm reduction.

To that end, on December 12, 2016, in addition to introducing Bill C-37 in the House, the Minister of Health announced that a national anti-drug strategy would be replaced with a new, more balanced, and health-focused approach, called the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. The new strategy will strengthen Canada's approach to drug policy by providing a comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to the protection of public health and safety and the reduction of harm from misuse of licit and illicit substances. To reflect the new health-focused approach, the strategy will be led and co-ordinated by the Minister of Health, in close collaboration with her colleagues.

Canada has had successive drug strategies in place since 1987 that have aimed to balance public health and public safety. In 1992, the government launched Canada's drug strategy, which was intended to reduce the harms associated with alcohol and other drugs to individuals, families, and communities. In 1998, harm reduction was added as a pillar alongside prevention, treatment, and enforcement.

However, the balance between public health and public safety in Canada's approach to drug policy shifted in 2007, with the release of the national anti-drug strategy. This strategy reflected the previous government's priorities of public safety, crime reduction, and safe communities.

The national anti-drug strategy focused primarily on youth and illicit substance use and did not retain harm reduction as a pillar. This shift brought Canada out of step with other like-minded countries, most of which include harm reduction in addressing problematic substance abuse.

The new strategy will retain and build upon the aspects of the national anti-drug strategy that worked well and, specifically, the new strategy will maintain the existing and well-established areas of prevention, treatment, and enforcement. These pillars, respectively, aim to prevent problematic drug and substance use, support innovative approaches to treatment and rehabilitation, and address illicit drug production, supply, and distribution.

However, perhaps the most important aspect of the new strategy is that it will improve upon the national anti-drug strategy by formally restoring harm reduction as a pillar. This shift to a more health-focused approach has been welcomed by stakeholders, including the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, and our provincial partners.

Our government is committed to ensuring that its policies under the new strategy will be informed by a strong foundation of evidence, including data related to harm reduction policies, programs, and interventions. This will enable the government to better identify trends, target interventions, monitor impacts, and support evidence-based decisions. It will help ensure that Canada has a comprehensive national picture of drug use and drug-related harms and can fully meet our international reporting requirements.

Even before the new strategy was announced, our government included harm reduction measures in our efforts to reduce the negative health and social impacts associated with problematic drug use, including the transmission of infectious diseases, overdose deaths, and stigma.

For example, under federal legislation, we have improved access to naloxone, an overdose reversal drug, by making it available without a prescription specifically for emergency use in cases of opioid overdose outside of hospital settings.

This important measure broadens access for emergency workers and will help address a growing number of opioid overdoses.

We have also demonstrated our support for the establishment of supervised consumption sites, a key harm reduction measure.

After a thorough and rigorous review, in January 2016, Health Canada granted an exemption from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act for the Dr. Peter Centre to operate a supervised consumption site.

Not long after, on March 16, 2016, Health Canada granted Insite an unprecedented four-year exemption.

If passed, Bill C-37 would go further to support the implementation of evidence-based harm reduction measures. In particular, it would reduce the burden on communities that wish to apply for an exemption to operate a supervised consumption site.

The proposed amendments would streamline and simplify the application criteria, while ensuring that community consultation continues to be an integral part of the process. By streamlining the application and renewal process and adding a new transparency provision, applicants could be assured that the process would not cause unreasonable burden or delay.

In conclusion, our government's approach to drug policy strives to balance the important objectives of protecting public health and maintaining public safety.

The Canadian drugs and substances strategy will restore harm reduction as a pillar, alongside prevention, treatment, and enforcement, and will formalize our commitment to a comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to Canada's drug policy.

It would mean that harm reduction-focused policies, such as support for properly established and maintained supervised consumption sites and increased access to naloxone, would now officially be part of Canada's drug strategy.

Implementing measures proposed in Bill C-37 would be a key step in realizing the objectives of the Canadian drugs and substances strategy.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am truly honoured to stand today and talk about Bill C-307. I want to thank the member for Battle River—Crowfoot for allowing me to second this bill, for supporting me in terms of the debate, and for bringing forward this incredibly important issue. He did an excellent job talking about what the bill is about, what it will do, and why he has moved it forward. However, I will talk about a few areas that I do not think have been covered yet in this debate.

We have a record. Often when we hear we are number one or number two, it is something that we are very proud of. However, we are not and should not be proud of this particular record. Canada and the U.S. are the world's heaviest opioid users, with the rate of overdoses and deaths increasing dramatically. In 10 months in British Columbia alone we had 622 deaths. I wrote these notes yesterday. I had to revise that. It is now 623. This is in British Columbia alone. Of those, 322 have been related to fentanyl. Over 2,000 naloxone kits have been handed out, which is the antidote. Therefore, there were 2,000 potential overdoses and death might have been prevented with the use of the naloxone kits.

Back in September, I spoke in favour of the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam's bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. At that time, I talked about a young man and his wife I knew. They had both died from an overdose, leaving behind a young baby. However, I want to give another face to this crisis. I think it is important to give faces to the crisis and that it is important for the government to hear this if there is any way that it will help. I will talk about some of the evidence later, but I hope the bill will at least go to committee to get the most up-to-date evidence and to really have it looked at.

There was a young man who lived in Kamloops named Paul. I knew Paul as a very young boy. He had the cutest little smile, and he was a hockey player. I watched him grow up from someone who tottered around on skates to someone who was very skilled in the arena. He was a very fine young man. I saw Paul in September. I was at a golf tournament. I had not seen him for a long time, and I chatted with him for a while. I asked him what he was up to. He had graduated from university, he had a job with the Investors Group, he had a girlfriend, he was smiling, he was happy, and he seemed to have the world by the tail. That was in September. In October of this year there was a wedding. Paul was a groomsman at this wedding and did his duties for the day. Then he made a fatal error. He kissed his mom, and he and four friends went upstairs to the hotel room and decided to ingest some drugs. That was a fatal mistake, a silly mistake, and the wrong thing to do. The groom noticed that his friends were missing and decided to go and find out what had happened to them. He went upstairs and five of them had overdosed on fentanyl. They were unconscious. What had been a joyous occasion ended in panic, mayhem, and tragedy. There were four who lived after being given the antidote naloxone. However, Paul's mom and dad had to come and say goodbye to him. This is our neighbour.

Today, we have the premier of British Columbia, we have the health minister here, and we have this conference happening. They have said that we are the face, the whole face, of this tragedy—and people need to recognize it is a tragedy. If it has not impacted members yet, we can only hope that it does not, because in the community where I am there is Ryan's mother, there is Jordan's mother, there are way too many who have tragically made a mistake that has ended in tragedy.

I do recognize that Bill C-307 is just one tool. We have talked about its tamper resistance and abuse deterrence. It is strictly one tool in the tool box, but it is a tool that could make a difference.

We have to have many strategies and I noted that one of the questions from the Liberals was about the importance of an overall strategy. Absolutely, we need an overall strategy, and I hope the conference over the next two days will get us to a better place with an overall strategy.

However, I want to point out that it did not stop the Liberals from moving forward with Bill C-224, which they recognized made sense. Again, I would suggest that it should not stop them from moving forward with Bill C-307 or at least taking it to the next step. We moved forward on naloxone, in terms of the nasal spray. We have moved forward in many ways. Just because there is a need for a comprehensive strategy does not mean that we should not move forward with this particular bill.

I heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health talk about the evidence and the balloon effect. To be quite frank, the evidence is actually contradictory. She talked about the worry about a balloon effect, but she did not cite references. I will follow up to see what her sources were.

The New England Journal of Medicine, which is a very respected publication, had a study where the new formulation decreased abuse from 35% down to 12.8%. That is one piece of evidence that needs to be taken into account.

A lot of work has happened in Australia, which has shown a significant decrease. The study focused on 606 people who had regularly misused opioids and due to the tamper-resistant and abuse-deterrent formulation, there was a significant decrease in the misuse, without the balloon effect that Liberals talked about as their reason for not supporting this legislation. The balloon effect was not there. There was not a shift, in this particular study, to using other drugs. There are a number of studies that have shown that is not an issue.

There was another study done by the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of New South Wales. Opioids were used 3,500 to 4,000 times a month and once they established the tamper-resistant and abuse-deterrent formulation, it went down to 500 in terms of usage.

What I would tell the Liberals is this is such an important issue and they need to look at this very carefully. They need to vote for it, at least at second reading, because when it gets to committee, they will be able to review the evidence. When the Americans made their decision, they had a lot of evidence and moved forward. The previous minister of health for the Province of Ontario regularly asked for Canada to move forward with this.

We would be missing an opportunity to review the latest evidence. Concerns have been expressed around pricing. Again, things have changed over the last couple of years. As a result of studies done by the House of Commons and the Senate, they recommended we move forward. Those studies are a couple of years old now, so it would give us the chance to review this in light of new evidence.

To sum up, this is not the be-all and end-all and I am hoping the conference tomorrow and much of the other work will help us at least get a handle on this. The tamper-resistant and abuse-deterrent formulation has a very important role to play and we should not miss this opportunity. This is for Jordan, Hardy, and Ryan. Today the premier, with one of the mothers, laid out 54 pictures for the minister to see. These are 54 of the 600-plus who have died in British Columbia in the last few years, deaths that can be prevented.

I support this bill. Let us check the research and evidence and send it to committee to see where we are at.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my remarks on this piece of legislation, I would first like to take a moment to discuss the current crisis that is facing our nation.

Across this country we are facing a national emergency that has cost lives. This tragedy is something that I think all members agree is completely unacceptable and one that we need resources and initiatives to address.

Earlier today the Minister of Health, along with the Minister of Public Safety and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice , met with the premier of British Columbia and her cabinet colleagues to discuss the crisis in British Columbia. The province's delegation provided parliamentarians and Canadians with a glimpse of the real human impact of this crisis. This meeting built on a trip that the Minister of Health made to Vancouver last week where she met with local first responders, the mayor, provincial ministers, and the provincial task force addressing the crisis.

How we go about addressing this crisis is incredibly important. We do not want to create potential harm or unintended effects with well-intentioned ideas. This is why any action that the federal government takes must be based on sound evidence. With this thought in mind, I would like to speak to Bill C-307, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, tamper resistance and abuse deterrence.

Insofar as the intention behind the bill is to address the opioid crisis, I share the member's concerns. The minister, I, and our government commend the member for wanting to work to address this crisis; however, while I appreciate my hon. colleague speaking about this, unfortunately our government cannot support Bill C-307.

As a brief reminder to members, in the case of pills intended to be swallowed, tamper-resistant properties could, for example, make them more difficult to be crushed or dissolved. If tamper-resistant regulations were put in place, it would mean that only tamper-resistant versions of certain drugs or classes of drugs could be sold in Canada.

I would like to make the point that we strongly support tamper-resistant products and continue to encourage pharmaceutical companies to continue to make progress and invest in this technology. We also know that any strategy to address opioids needs to be comprehensive and that there is no silver bullet to address this issue.

Our government acknowledges that making tamper-resistant products mandatory has an intuitive appeal. However, Health Canada's review of the evidence concluded that the introduction of tamper-resistant versions of one drug does not reduce the overall harm of opioid misuse. This is a concern that was also echoed by many witnesses studying the opioid crisis who appeared before the Standing Committee on Health.

These conclusions came about due to a number of factors, and the minister's decision not to move forward with these regulations at this time was not taken lightly.

I should make the point here that the minister already has the ability to do what this legislation intends, under regulation, and at this time the risks outweighs the benefits. Regardless of this legislation, if evidence changes, the Minister of Health will already have the ability to take regulatory action.

However, the evidence today points to several things that do not make it possible to support the bill. First, tamper-resistance has not been shown to prevent the most common form of misuse, which is swallowing intact tablets. Second, the small number of individuals who choose to crush or dissolve a drug are more likely to switch to non-tamper-resistant drugs, including illicit drugs, than to stop misusing drugs altogether. This is also known as the balloon effect. These people may even be at increased risk of harm or death if they switch to using street drugs such as heroin or illegal fentanyl.

Beyond the minimal impact that requiring tamper-resistance would have on opioid misuse, such regulations could also negatively impact patients who legitimately need access to these drugs. I would also stress that mandatory tamper-resistant formulations primarily benefit the patent-holder. New tamper-resistant formulations can be patented and sold at substantially higher costs than their generic equivalents. Passing regulations requiring pharmaceutical companies to only produce tamper-resistant forms of their products would increase the cost to patients and provincial governments, which in many cases pay for their prescription drugs.

These extra costs are estimated to run into millions of dollars if only one drug, OxyContin, is legally required to be tamper resistant. Therefore, the minimal potential benefits simply do not outweigh the risks and the costs.

I would also like to note that tamper-resistance technology is not sufficiently developed to cover the entire class of opioids, some of which come in the forms of patches, sprays, or injectable liquids.

As members can see, it simply is not in the public interest to move forward with regulations requiring drugs to have tamper-resistant properties.

This is not to say that Health Canada is not supportive of drug companies voluntarily including tamper-resistant features in their products. That is why Health Canada released a guidance document for all opioid manufacturers that will help guide them in making their products tamper resistant, should they desire to do so.

As I said earlier, over the next two days, the Minister of Health will be hosting a summit on opioids to bring together experts, patient groups, governments, and regulators to discuss the current crisis and identify actions for moving forward, building on our five-point plan announced earlier this year.

Other actions to save lives have also been taken. We are switching the status of naloxone and improving a user-friendly nasal spray version of naloxone following an expedited review. We will also be proposing a variety of regulatory changes, including requiring both a prescription for low-dose codeine products and new warning stickers to be placed on dispensed opioids. We will be approving properly established, managed, and community-led supervised consumption sites. We will be proposing regulations to control the precursors of fentanyl. We will be allowing physicians of certain patients to apply for special access to heroin-assisted treatment under the special access program. Also we will be supporting the private member's bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, proposed by the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, a bill that would save lives, as Bill C-224 would encourage people witnessing an overdose to call 911 by providing immunity from minor drug possession charges.

In conclusion, I would like to once again reiterate our government's support of any measures grounded in sound evidence that would help address this troubling public health crisis, and once again, I want to thank the hon. colleague for raising this issue.

As previously stated, if forthcoming evidence demonstrates that there would be a positive net benefit impact from requiring drugs to be tamper resistant, there are already existing authorities within the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to move forward with regulations.

Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at third reading stage of Bill C-224.

The House resumed from October 28 consideration of the motion that Bill C-224, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance—drug overdose), be read the third time and passed.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. I thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for introducing this important piece of legislation.

In my riding of Edmonton West, similar to many parts of the country, we have seen a growing crisis with fentanyl and opioid use. According to the CBC, there have been 338 deaths from fentanyl overdoses in Alberta alone this year. If we think about that, it is equivalent to every member sitting in the House of Commons being wiped out since January. The numbers continue to rise, with no indication of its slowing down. It has become so bad that even the Alberta Health Services' web page cannot keep track of the number of fentanyl deaths. In Edmonton alone, there have been 102 overdose deaths since January. Even more deadly is the opioid W18, which is now showing up in Edmonton. Ironically, it was created at the U of A, but it is now hitting the streets. Recently, we have had a drug bust with enough W18 to wipe out half of the population if it were taken individually. Drugs like fentanyl and W18 are taking their toll on our cities and communities. Perhaps the most heartbreaking aspect of this crisis is that many untimely deaths could be prevented.

Dr. Charmaine Enns, chair of the Health Officers Council of British Columbia, has said, “Every year, psychoactive substances...are linked to greater than 47,000 deaths and many thousands more injuries and disabilities.... Sadly much of this carnage is preventable.”

I hope no Canadian is prevented from taking action when necessary because they fear the consequences of doing so. It is my hope that if anyone is ever in a situation in which they need to act to save someone's life, they can act without fear of repercussions, to spare a family the agony of losing a loved one, and to be able to act in the best interest of someone who needs help and in the best interests of their community. In a previous career, I experienced this first hand. I was a young hotel manager, and as I was living closest to the hotel, I would often get the first call when there was an emergency. I received a phone call from a frantic night auditor at four in the morning. I went the hotel and found four people suffering from overdoses. One had died. When the police arrived, once the people were revived, they said they had seen their friend writhing and dying but did not contact anyone for fear of being arrested. This is something that is still happening today. Therefore, I support this bill by our member.

As elected officials and lawmakers, we are obligated to take action in areas in which there is a clear and present need. In the case of unreported overdoses, it is my belief that the good Samaritan drug overdose act would fill this legislative gap.

Combatting drug-related crime requires a collaborative approach between municipal, provincial, and federal partners. Together, we must ensure that our levels of governments send a strong message to drug traffickers, while not penalizing users who are at their most vulnerable and in an overdosed state. While this bill will not change the rates of drug-related crime, something that our party has consistently taken a tough, clear stance on, it may help encourage people to take action and call emergency professionals in life-and-death situations, potentially saving the lives of hundreds, if not thousands, of Canadians from coast to coast.

As the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam mentioned in committee, as I think has been noted more than once throughout the debate on this bill, there is often a barrier to accessing help in the time needed to prevent a potentially fatal situation due to fear of the consequences or legal ramifications for the person making the call. While these findings are indicative of a separate, albeit related, issue facing Canadians, namely access to banned substances, it is important that our efforts to remain tough on crime and drugs do not come at a human cost. We as lawmakers truly believe that life is worth protecting, and we need to ensure that the Canadians who need help get it.

According to the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council, “Fear of arrest weighs heavily on this life or death decision. People legitimately fear the police showing up, being criminally charged for drug possession, and for mothers, having their children taken away.” By removing the possibility of criminal charges against those who call emergency professionals, we are encouraging people to take life-saving action. This is especially true now, with deadly fentanyl and W18 on the streets, where ever moment's delay in receiving the miracle drug naloxone can literally lead to death.

On the issue of W18, this drug is reported to be 100 to 1,000 times more deadly than fentanyl. Oddly enough, it is just now being regulated as a controlled drug under the Controlled Drug and Substances Act, and until recently could be manufactured freely. Like others in the House, I would encourage the government to work faster on this and other W series drugs.

I would also urge the government to take steps similar to the Government of Alberta to restrict access to the pill presses used to make illegal drugs. By limiting the purchase of pill presses, table machines, and pharmaceutical mixers to only pharmacists and licensed professionals, we would take the necessary steps as Canadians to protect our communities.

Now as to the bill, it is not, as some critics have said, condoning drug use. This would ensure that drug users and addicts, in some regard the victims of drug trafficking, are provided with support and assurance that their lives still have value, and that a person acting in the injured person's best interest would not be penalized for saving a life.

I am pleased to support the bill and hope my colleagues in the House will support the bill as well.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand in the House today at third reading and support Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act.

First and foremost, I want to thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for bringing this extremely important piece of legislation to the House. This is a piece of legislation that, if passed, would help to break down systematic barriers that deter people from calling 911 in the event of an overdose.

Evidence indicates that individuals are too often afraid to call for medical help in the event of an overdose. This is due to a number of concerns, one of which is fear of arrest or criminal charges. Bill C-224 would help to address this issue by providing those who experience or witness an overdose, call 911, and stay at the scene with immunity from minor drug possession charges. In other words, Bill C-224 is a harm reduction measure.

Our government is committed to protecting the health and safety of all Canadians. We recognize that problematic substance use can have devastating impacts on individuals, their families, and their communities. This is why our government is taking a balanced, comprehensive, collaborative, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to addressing the serious issue of problematic substance use. It is an approach that aims to protect both public health and public safety.

The term “harm reduction” often elicits strong reactions from people. I believe this is at least partly because it is misunderstood. I would like to take a moment to explain what it means to our government.

In general, harm reduction refers to policies, programs, or initiatives that aim to reduce the negative health and social impacts associated with problematic substance use on individuals and communities, without requiring abstention as an immediate goal. Our government has demonstrated strong support for evidence-based harm reduction measures that have been proven to help prevent the harm associated with problematic substance use, including overdose death.

However, I want to make it clear that this does not mean that harm reduction and abstention are mutually exclusive. In fact, while abstention is not the primary goal of harm reduction initiatives, harm reduction can act as a first step to meeting longer term goals such as reduced problematic use of drugs and full recovery. In other words, harm reduction measures can help pave a path to recovery by meeting people where they are in their lives right now.

Another common myth is that a focus on harm reduction is inconsistent with the objectives of drug control. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is our government's view that harm reduction is part of a comprehensive policy continuum and can complement and reinforce prevention, treatment, and enforcement initiatives. It is part of a holistic approach to addressing drug-related crime and problematic substance use.

Bill C-224 reflects these values. It melds public health and public safety interests and would provide an opportunity for law enforcement to build trusting relationships with individuals who use drugs, relationships that would help to reduce fears of calling 911 to save the life of someone experiencing an overdose.

I do not want to sell Bill C-224 as a solution that would prevent all overdose deaths. It will not. We do no favours to Canadians suffering from addiction when we debate a drug policy in black and white terms. Problematic substance use is a complex issue that requires a comprehensive response. Just like any other drug policy, Bill C-224 must work in conjunction with other initiatives to address the full scope of issues associated with problematic substance use.

That is why our government recently announced a new opioid action plan. The plan focuses on five key areas: better informing Canadians about the risks of opioids, supporting better prescribing practices, reducing easy access to unnecessary opioids, supporting better treatment options for patients, and improving the national evidence base upon which policy decisions are made.

Two of the action items under the plan were an expedited review of naloxone nasal spray, a more user-friendly version of the overdose-reverse drug, as well as an interim order to buy bulk stocks of the drug from the United States during the review process. I am pleased to say that Health Canada has completed its review and has authorized naloxone nasal spray for non-prescription use.

With federal market authorization, the manufacturer is now able to take the necessary steps to bring this drug to the Canadian market. This is a key step in helping to reduce overdose deaths, as the two crucial actions that can be taken to help save a life during an overdose are calling 911 and administering naloxone.

Also, next month the Minister of Health will be hosting a summit on opioids to bring together experts, patient groups, governments, and regulators to discuss the current crisis and identify actions for moving forward.

In conclusion, Bill C-224 supports and complements our government's approach to drug policy and will help save lives. That is why we are supporting this extremely important piece of legislation.

As a registered nurse, I am extremely concerned about the opioid crisis occurring across Canada. We know that addressing this issue will require a comprehensive and evidence-based public health approach. Bill C-224 would be a welcome addition to our government's efforts, and I hope colleagues from all across the House will continue to support it. As many members have already stated, every life matters, and we have a duty to do what we can to help prevent these tragic accidental deaths from taking place.

This is an issue that requires a whole-of-government approach, and we are dedicated to working with our provincial and territorial counterparts, as well as experts across the country, to address this devastating crisis. As a country, we know we are facing an opioid crisis, and together, we will find a way to address this tragic situation.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. I thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for presenting this important piece of legislation. He has certainly worked very hard.

When I first read through the bill, I have to admit that I was a bit concerned. We are currently facing one of the worst drug epidemics that our nation has ever seen, and that is with regard to the opioid crisis. The combination of diverted pharmaceuticals, veterinary tranquillizers, and illicit drugs has created a very deadly mix of street drugs.

This past week in my riding of Lethbridge, 777 fentanyl pills were seized by the police in two separate drug raids. This is impacting every single nook and cranny within my community.

Having said that, many Canadians would agree that we need to tackle the root factors that are causing this epidemic. I agree with that. This is why we definitely need tougher laws to get drug dealers off the streets, and certainly not weaker ones. This legislation is part of a multipronged approach that should be taken in all communities across this country.

As a member of the Standing Committee on Health, I had the opportunity to examine the bill closely, and I heard from many expert witnesses from all corners of the country. Regardless of the geographical region or the sector from which they came, all of them agreed that Bill C-224 would save lives.

How exactly would this legislation do that? At the present time, when someone overdoses, there are barriers to that individual getting help quickly. For instance, young people often experiment with drugs with friends and family. In the event of an overdose, those who are with the person are often scared to call for help because they are afraid of the legal repercussions. As a result, they either do nothing, or they call 911 and then quickly flee the scene so they will not be prosecuted. As a result of this fear, young lives are lost.

When I was first made aware of this piece of legislation, I was concerned that it might allow dealers to go free or prevent police from being able to take action to shut down crack houses or illicit drug operations. After listening to the legal experts, it became clear that the bill would not provide another legal loophole for drug dealers to escape conviction. The exemptions provided in the bill only apply to those who are in simple possession.

Criminal Code offences, such as possession for the purpose of trafficking, would still apply to individuals at the scene of an overdose. Why is this important? It is important because it means that this legislation finds a balance between removing barriers to individuals having the courage to call 911, as well as preserving the power of law enforcement to convict criminals responsible for pushing these drugs on our streets. We see more than ever the organized crime rates in Canada, so it is important for me to discuss this. Again, the specific exemption within this legislation would apply to simple possession only. In this context, only those using the illicit drug, and not those who are trafficking the drug, would be exempt.

One of the heartbreaking stories we heard during my time on committee studying this legislation was from a mother who lost her 17-year-old son to an overdose. He was hanging out with his friends. There were about six people around him at the time, and they refused to call for medical assistance because they were afraid of the negative repercussions they might face. As a result, this young man's life was lost that day.

When it comes to opioid overdoses, there are simple and effective treatments such as naloxone, which can halt the effects of the opioid long enough to get a patient to hospital to receive the attention he or she needs. With the strength of illicit opioids, minutes matter in this endeavour. A few minutes can help spare a life. If bystanders were to wait for those few minutes to determine if an overdose was mild or life-threatening, that indecision could result in that person losing his or her life.

This is particularly true of young recreational drug users who have more to lose because of police involvement in an overdose. Young people who are experimenting with illegal drugs are more likely to try to keep their involvement with them a secret. As expert witnesses at committee repeatedly stressed, it is easier to deal with a drug addiction at the start of the addiction rather than caring for it later on.

Bill C-224 has the ability to facilitate early intervention and access to treatment, which I believe would serve our younger generation very well.

For addicts who are housing insecure or altogether homeless, the bill would simply puts in place what would already be common practice in many jurisdictions, and that is this. When front-line workers are called to an overdose situation, what often happens is the EMS will respond right away in order to care for that individual. Police officers will often hold back rather than going into the scene. The reason for this is because they will enter if there is a threat to medical staff or to the staff on site, let us say at a shelter. However, for r the most part they will hold back. The reason for that is because then it creates safety for concerned individuals to call EMS responders to the scene to react to the overdose.

Right now Canada is facing a significant crisis when it comes to deaths caused by opioid overdoses. In B.C., for example, the situation is so serious that public health within B.C. has declared a state of emergency. The truth is that we have been aware of this problem for a little more than a year now across our country, but there has been very little discernible action from the federal government on this file. At health committee, it was the NDP as well as the Conservatives at the table who put forward the motion to study the opioid crisis in Canada and to deliver recommendations to the health minister for consideration.

No steps have been taken to limit the import and the operation of pill press machines in Canada that enable criminal organizations to pump out hundreds of thousands of oxycodone knock-offs on a daily, monthly, and annual basis. The Liberal government reversed the Conservative regulations to move Canada toward a tamper-resistant prescription opioid, which is a very unfortunate decision. By reversing this direction, the Liberals allowed the easy conversion of legal pharmaceuticals to be used in a variety of street drugs, thus adding to the problem that we see today.

It took until last month for Health Canada to finally make naloxone a non-prescription drug and therefore accessible across Canada. Even after doing that, the provinces still need a few more months to loosen up their own restrictions to have this antidote make a real difference within streets.

The health minister finally decided that she would hold an opioid summit in mid-November. Although I am very thankful that this decision has been made, I am also disappointed with the amount of time it has taken just to achieve this. We do not need to wait for a summit this fall in order to start taking action on this file. We already know that border controls need to be ramped up. We know that Health Canada needs to make regulatory changes to limit prescription opioids that could easily be tampered with. We also know that stricter prescribing as well as tracking practices need to be implemented. We know that the over-prescribing of opioids on reserves needs to be addressed. We also need to provide treatment care for those who wish to get off of these addictions.

There is a saying on a reserve near my riding, which is “The drug dealers wear white coats”. This is made in reference to the availability of legal prescription opioids from doctors. The devastating effect this has for persons susceptible to drug abuse is tremendous. Dozens of people are dying each and every month. Dreams are being shattered. Potential is going unfulfilled and hope is disintegrating altogether.

I would contend that waiting to act on this national crisis is not an option. If we value human life, we must act now. I would contend that this requires a national strategy with regard to the opioid crisis we face in our country today. Bill C-224 is just one step, one very small step, in the massive puzzle that is needed to be put together in order to tackle this problem.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank all members of the House for their support of the good Samaritan drug overdose act. Members from all regions of Canada became co-seconders of Bill C-224, although the rules of the House did not allow for more than 20. It is a resounding call for the need for the legislation to be passed, and quickly. Members recognize that the bill would save lives.

In my speech at second reading, I spoke about two young men, Austin and Kelly. Austin, Kelly and countless others might still be with us today if the good Samaritan bill on drug overdose had been a law when they made that one, fatal mistake. However, we will never really know.

When I was researching the bill, even before I introduced Bill C-224, it was evident that this law is sorely needed. What I did not expect was the groundswell of support that came out shortly after the bill's first reading. Groups and individuals from every part of Canada called and emailed, telling me how much the legislation is needed. I thank them for that. Their support motivated me even more to make sure that the bill became law.

The House is steeped in democratic traditions. Our legislation process gives members the ability to scrutinize legislation. We are elected by and for our constituents to represent their values, beliefs, and desires. During second reading, I heard impassioned speeches from both sides of the House, some of which were very personal, making it clear that the good Samaritan drug overdose act had broad support.

Outside this chamber, it is the committees that continue Canada's democratic traditions. Committees give each piece of legislation more scrutiny, and the Standing Committee on Health did just that. The committee did its job well. They heard from many witnesses, from paramedics, front-line workers, Austin's mom, academics, and from drug users themselves.

For me, the most compelling testimony came from the drug-using community. That community does not feel safe and does fear law enforcement in an overdose situation. The committee heard that the bill would not go far enough, that exemptions from prosecution should be broadened beyond simple possession. I agree with that.

Studies show that fear of prosecution for possession is just one of the key reasons that people do not call 911 in the event of a drug overdose, but there are also other reasons, such as outstanding warrants and breach of probation. The bill is only one piece in the harm reduction tool kit. It is a tool kit that needs to be broadened and expanded over time.

I believe it would have been good to have broadened the scope of the bill to include outstanding warrants and breach of probation. However, that would have made the bill way too complex and controversial, lessening the chances of its passage.

If passed in its current form, the good Samaritan drug overdose act would still save lives.

I laud the Standing Committee on Health for their work on this bill and for referring the good Samaritan drug overdose act back to this House without amendment. The committee recognized the urgency of opioid deaths and how Bill C-224 is desperately needed in Canada.

The committee should also be commended for taking heed of the testimony they heard during the study of Bill C-224. The powerful testimony of witnesses led to a motion being introduced during the deliberations on the good Samaritan drug overdose act, a motion to study the opioid crisis in Canada. Now, the committee is doing just that, and I have been honoured to have participated in some of the committee's meetings on that study. We cannot delay taking action on the opioid crisis in Canada.

During the course of the deliberations on the bill, countless lives have been lost. I see it in the news every day. We do not know how many lives would have been saved if the Good Samaritan drug overdose act had been law.

Our government has been continuing to put more tools in that harm-reduction toolkit since the bill was introduced. That includes removing naloxone from the list of prescription drugs. The government is also listing the six essential ingredients that make fentanyl deadly as controlled substances.

In the coming weeks the Minister of Health will be arranging an opioid abuse summit, which will prioritize how we can start to get out of this mess.

I thank members of this House for their support of the good Samaritan drug overdose act.

I want to thank the Library of Parliament, the House of Commons legal department and the private members' business office for their incredible support on Bill C-224. There are several moving pieces to drafting and supporting legislation and without them this bill would not have happened.

Ultimately this bill needs to become law. I ask all members of the House to come together and support the good Samaritan drug overdose act to help save lives.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

moved that Bill C-224, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose), be concurred in.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-224, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose), as reported (without amendment) from the committee.

[Réjean Leclerc, Chair, Syndicat du préhospitalier (FSSS - CSN)]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, I would like to thank you for having me here before you today. I am aware of what a privilege it is to appear before you so that I can contribute, however little, to the work concerning the opioid crisis.

My name is Réjean Leclerc. I have been a paramedic for over 20 years and I am currently the president of the Syndicat du préhospitalier, or FSSS-CSN, the union that represents almost 1,000 paramedics who work for Urgences-santé and provide emergency medical services to the populations of Montreal and Laval. The corporation is the only government emergency medical services body in Quebec. It has an annual budget of about $130 million and reports directly to the ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.

During fiscal 2015-16, the paramedics we represent were sent on 315,575 assignments serving a population of about 2.4 million people living in 744 square kilometres. This makes Urgences-santé one of the largest emergency medical services providers in Canada.

While a lot of information has already been given out about the work of this committee, we note that so far, there have been no presentations about the situation in Quebec here. Although the crisis is not comparable, at present, to what some other regions of Canada are experiencing, we are seeing a marked increase in opioid overdoses in Quebec. The Institut national de santé publique du Québec has said that the mortality rate attributable to overdoses associated with drugs and narcotics has increased in the years since 2000.

That increase primarily reflects the rise in fatal overdoses after taking opioids. From 2000 to 2012, a total of 1,775 deaths attributable to an overdose after taking opioids were recorded in Quebec, representing a rate of 2.97 deaths per 100,000 people. In addition, we have the article recently published in La Presse. According to the article, in summer 2014, Montreal was at the centre of an epidemic of overdoses linked to the use of street drugs. In the space of a few weeks, 233 cases were recorded and nearly 30 people died.

It should be noted that, according to the statistics published by the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec, between 2011 and 2015, opioid prescriptions had increased by 29%, rising from 1.9 million to 2.4 million. The Régie also said that the number of people who received prescriptions had risen by 10%, to 377,365 people in 2015.

In light of that information, some people will say there is a crisis and others will say there is not. But in any event, it is recognized that we have to continue collecting data on this subject, and even improve the work being done on that, in order to get a better picture of the situation and react better in real time.

It has also been brought to our attention that initiatives have been or are being proposed. Whether these consist of training and distributing naloxone kits to friends and family of people at risk of overdosing, wanting to set up supervised injection centres, creating watch groups to do a better job of identifying cases, or the wish expressed by the Collège des médecins du Québec to extend its members' investigative powers, the objective is the same: to significantly reduce the number of deaths attributable to opioid overdoses.

Because we are dedicated to our mission of reducing mortality and morbidity among our fellow citizens, we, as paramedics, support these initiatives, as well as Bill C-224, which was introduced by the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam. We believe that the chances of survival of a person who is the victim of an overdose will be better once this bill is enacted, as long as the public is informed about it. The best thing is therefore to do it as quickly as possible.

Everyone agrees that paramedics provide the public with essential care. In Quebec, the responsibility for evaluating and maintaining the quality of that care rests with the physicians designated by the minister of health and social services. There is thus no professional order that governs paramedics in Quebec.

Because the paramedic profession is not officially recognized, which will be the case for another several years, does this mean that, if Bill C-224 provides for an exemption from possession of substances charges for persons present on the scene when health professionals arrive, the Quebec public would not be able to benefit from that exemption when only paramedics attend to a person who has overdosed? That is the question we have on this point.

Subject to interpretation by the experts, should Bill C-224 be amended to reflect this situation?

In addition, Mr. Chair, I would like to take advantage of the forum I am offered today to draw the attention of MPs and the public to a situation that we believe to be a matter of concern. Given the challenges inherent in the rising numbers of opioid overdoses, we would like to express our concern today about the way that Urgences-santé handles the training of paramedics in the naloxone protocol.

In November 2014, when the corporation was offered an opportunity to train all paramedics in the space of a few months, we made a proposal, following the usual procedure, to promote the rapid and uniform deployment of this antidote in Montreal and Laval. To our great surprise, Urgences-santé did not act on our request, claiming budget issues. The corporation preferred to adhere to the austerity vision imposed by the minister of health and social services and chose, in the middle of the opioid crisis, to train only a few dozen managers and paramedics. With only about 50 paramedics authorized to give this invaluable drug, that number being plainly insufficient, in our view, to meet rising demand, it was foreseeable that there would be unfortunate incidents, like the one that occurred and was recently described in La Presse by Dr. Marie-Ève Morin. In the case in question, an ambulance arrived urgently to find that when the paramedics arrived, they were not trained and also did not have the antidote with them that would have enabled them to rapidly reverse the effect of the drug ingested by the person suffering from an overdose.

What message are we, as an emergency service, sending the public when a large majority of paramedics are unable to do what is needed when they are called out to provide care in an emergency in the hope that they will make the difference between life and death?

Amending legislation to encourage the public to call 911 more often and faster is a fine thing, but if the luck of the draw results in the team of paramedics that are prepared to provide care not being authorized to act in overdose situations, we are failing in our objective and losing all credibility the first time out.

Is the public better served in Montreal and Laval today? According to the figures obtained by the CBC from the ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux in September, only 35% of the thousand paramedics we represent have been trained to administer naloxone. We have to admit that this statistic is disturbing and seems to be incompatible with the efforts and policies supported by this committee and a number of other interested parties. In our view, this regrettable situation must be publicly denounced, until this training for Urgences-santé paramedics has been completed so that they are authorized to administer naloxone in order to save more lives.

Thank you for your attention.

Health

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by stating that both I and our government are deeply concerned about the misuse of opioids.

Misuse causes considerable harm to families and communities. However, we also know that patients need to have access to these drugs for legitimate medical treatment of pain. This is why the Government of Canada is supporting a comprehensive approach to addressing this issue and reducing harm associated with problematic opioid use.

To do this, we are supporting properly established and managed supervised consumption sites. We are proposing regulations to control six precursors that can be used in the production of fentanyl, once again allowing physicians of certain patients to apply for access to heroin-assisted treatment under the special access program, improving access to naloxone, and supporting private member's Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. This bill would encourage people witnessing an overdose to call 911 by providing immunity from minor drug possession charges.

These actions are part of our five-point action plan to address opioid misuse. The plan focuses on informing Canadians about the risks of opioids, supporting better prescribing practices, reducing easy access to unnecessary opioids, supporting better treatment options, and enhancing the evidence base upon which policy decisions are made.

Other specific actions under the plan include, for example, an expedited review of easy-to-administer naloxone nasal spray, proposing regulatory changes that would require a prescription for low-dose codeine products, new warning stickers to be placed on dispensed opioids, and mandatory risk management plans for all high-potency opioids.

Within the context of our comprehensive and evidence-based response to the opioid crisis, we will not be proceeding with new regulations on controlled-release oxycodone at this time. Ultimately these regulations would not have been in the public interest.

Health Canada's review of the evidence concludes that the introduction of tamper-resistant versions of one drug would not reduce the harms associated with opioid misuse writ large. This is because the small number of people who choose to tamper with a drug are more likely to switch to another non-tamper-resistant opioid rather than stop misusing this highly addictive class of drugs. These people may even be at increased risk of harm or death if they switch to using street drugs such as heroin or illegal fentanyl, which are often being disguised as other drugs.

Further, the regulation would have increased the costs to patients that are prescribed oxycodone, because they would have been unable to purchase a lower-cost version of the drug. It would have made no sense to penalize patients with a policy that would not have the intended effect of reducing the harms of opioid misuse.

That being said, the Government of Canada is supportive of tamper-resistant features. Health Canada has published guidance for drug manufacturers that will allow them to request the review and approval of tamper-resistance claims.

I want to be clear. Our government takes the exponential growth in opioid misuse and the rising numbers of overdose deaths very seriously. Next month, the Minister of Health will be hosting a summit on opioids to bring together experts, patient groups, governments, and regulators to discuss the current crisis and identify actions for moving forward.

In closing, I would like to reiterate our commitment to improving public health and safety for Canadians. I look forward to continued collaboration with all my colleagues from across the floor on this extremely important issue.

[Bill Casey, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Health in relation to Bill C-224, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose).

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report it back to the House without amendment.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

On a point of order, sir, I thought I had moved the motion that we end debate on this and begin our clause-by-clause study on Bill C-224.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

We have a very important bill in front of us, Bill C-224. We have to go to the clause-by-clause study. We have about 20 minutes left, so I am going to move that we waive further discussion on this motion.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Thank you, all, for being here today.

Dr. MacKenzie, you mentioned that Canada is the number one country using opioids in the world. You also mentioned that there's been a 75% increase in deaths due to opioid overdose usage, one death every 14 hours. That's shocking.

Ms. Brown, you mentioned that this is the first step, Bill C-224, but that this is one of a multitude of strategies that can be implemented.

Dr. Buxton, you mentioned that there are 750 deaths in a year due to fentanyl and that we need to act now.

Mr. Poirier, you mentioned that this should be a federal initiative for a provincial mandate, that we need a national strategy, and that this is an epidemic.

I would ask Dr. MacKenzie first, is this a public health crisis?

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

The definition of overdose in the bill notes that a reasonable person would believe that the situation requires emergency medical or law enforcement assistance. Given that individuals in the circumstances encompassed by Bill C-224 may be impaired by drugs or alcohol, could the use of the reasonable person standard in the definition of overdose be problematic? Please explain why or why not.

My question is for Dr. Buxton.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thanks.

When we had Donald MacPherson from the Pivot Legal Society come before this committee in June, he talked about how such laws and policies should try to restrict police attendance to overdose calls. He said that police should maybe only show up if there are public safety issues.

Do you agree that restricting police attendance at routine overdose events would do what Bill C-224 is intending to do?

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

In the U.S., some states have laws similar to Bill C-224. Do you know of other places and jurisdictions with similar laws? Can you point to some of these laws? Are they very different from Bill C-224?

[Pierre Poirier, Executive Director, Paramedic Association of Canada]

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Pierre Poirier. I'm the executive director of the Paramedic Association of Canada.

There are approximately 40,000 paramedics in this country, and we respond to almost three million calls annually. I want to note that there are different classifications or designations within the term “paramedic” that cover different scopes of practice, and that's an important detail that I'll refer to later.

The Paramedic Association of Canada absolutely supports Bill C-224, although we have concerns about its application or whether it sufficiently meets the intent to save lives in a timely manner.

I've taken some excerpts from other presenters and have parsed some of their words.

Opioid overdose deaths are preventable with timely intervention. Good Samaritan legislation is one component of a comprehensive public health approach to overdose within a harm reduction paradigm. We need to improve the community response of Canada as part of a comprehensive response to overdose deaths. The community response must involve a comprehensive approach.

Let's make naloxone available, absolutely. Let's provide naloxone to the overdose victim in a timely manner, because seconds count. Let's coordinate the health care system on this important issue—and that's an important piece that I want to make reference to—with consideration of the alignment of a federal initiative with the provincial mandate in the health care system and with the way we approach health care.

This is an important piece that I want to spend a couple of seconds on. I have to admit that change has been rapid, but I still don't think our addressing of this issue has been fast enough. Paramedics regularly respond to incidents in which an individual has overdosed. We provide medical care. This is a life-and-death event.

Let me explain how a patient is treated. There is the 911 call, and paramedics are requested. Police are often asked to attend for safety and security reasons. Recognizing the triage system and that for a medical emergency it is the paramedic who is called and not necessarily that police go to attend to every call is, I think, an important point.

The paramedic will assess the patient and determine an overdose. This is the important piece: often the paramedic is required to call a physician for permission to administer naloxone, and oftentimes some paramedics may not have permission to provide this drug in this country. That's an important distinction. We have this law that approaches it in good Samaritan terms and as a public health issue, but we should also recognize that the individual providing care may not be allowed to provide the care that is really intended or that is life-saving. This is important as an issue.

Here is the problem. I noted earlier that seconds matter in this life-and-death situation. In the event I described, paramedics may not have permission to administer naloxone. That could happen in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland.

Also, if they do have permission.... They may be required to call for permission to administer. A paramedic who administered without permission would now be subject to discipline by the health care system or by a regulatory agency to which they report. This is a significant issue.

On the one hand, then, we would have legislation that supports an individual's providing it, but by the same token a paramedic on scene may not have that permission. How do we resolve this? There are a few things.

I have to admit that I'm not familiar with all the nuances of the prescription drug list and its relationship to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, but if we were to remove naloxone from schedule I of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, that might actually help the situation.

One question is whether there is really a need that naloxone continue to exist within schedule I. I think there are important lessons to learn. Paramedics often work under medically delegated acts or things with that description. When we went through the last 40 years of experience with AEDs, automated external defibrillators, we came to a point at which we made them publicly accessible, but we removed the designation of their use being a medically delegated act, which really benefited the community and all health care providers in that situation.

I'm not sure that we can consider Bill C-224 is applicable to all Canadians, and that would be a motivation behind this, because if you look at good Samaritan legislation, if there's remuneration, there is no longer the cover of the good Samaritan legislation. Paramedics in the performance of their duties are deemed to be providing a service and therefore being paid to provide that service, and therefore are not provided the cover of the good Samaritan legislation. That's an issue, and I think it can be resolved.

Last, we should consider other applications of the drug, and look at the provision of naloxone in a similar manner to the development of EpiPens. You don't need to provide it as an injection; it can be provided as a nasal spray or by other methodologies. That wouldn't require it to be a medically delegated act, and it would be a simpler, more accessible, easier way of providing a service to our community.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

[Dr. Jane Buxton, Professor, University of British Columbia; Epidemiologist and Harm Reduction Lead BC Centre for Disease Control, As an Individual]

Thank you for the opportunity to present today. I'm a public health physician and a professor at the School of Population and Public Health. I'm also the harm reduction lead at the BC Centre for Disease Control.

I wish to provide some evidence about the overdose crisis in B.C., the emergence of fentanyl, and the importance of calling 911.

The BC Drug Overdose and Alert Partnership was developed following an increase in illicit drug overdose deaths in 2011. Members include stakeholders from health enforcement, emergency services, coroners, researchers, and people with lived experience. The goal is to coordinate communication and action to enable timely alerting and responses to illicit drug issues.

The B.C. take-home naloxone program was introduced in 2012 and provides overdose training and naloxone to people in the community. It enables naloxone administration by bystanders while waiting for any emergency health services to arrive. We've had over 2,000 overdose reversals reported.

An opioid overdose crisis is occurring in Canada. A public health emergency was declared in B.C. in April 2016 due to rising opioid overdoses. In 2015, there were 505 illicit drug overdose deaths, which is the highest number ever recorded, and in the first seven months of 2016, there have been 433 deaths. We're on route for 750 deaths in the current year.

The proportion of deaths where fentanyl has been detected increased from 5% in 2012 to 30% in 2015 and to a staggering 62% in 2016 year to date. Fentanyl is also increasingly identified in Alberta and across Canada. Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid often described as 80 times more potent than morphine. In an unregulated market, there is no control of the amount and dose of fentanyl in illegal drugs. The Health Canada laboratory has found pure fentanyl in powder sold as heroin and in varying, and sometimes fatal, concentrations of fentanyl in fake OxyContin tablets.

Although some people may intentionally take or seek out fentanyl, many don't know they have taken it. In a study performed in B.C. last year, we found almost three quarters of those who had fentanyl detected in their urine were unaware that they had taken fentanyl.

In an opioid overdose, the breathing slows and a person becomes unconscious. Lack of oxygen to the brain even for a short period of time can cause brain damage and death. The onset of a fentanyl overdose is much faster than other opioids. As we've heard, the effect of naloxone wears off after 20 minutes, and the high concentration of fentanyl in drugs requires large and often repeat doses of naloxone. It's vitally important to restore breathing as soon as possible and seek professional help for immediate and ongoing assistance.

People who administer naloxone in B.C. complete an administration form. The program emphasizes the importance of calling 911, and although the proportion that call 911 has increased over time, in 2015, 30% of people responding to an overdose did not call 911. It varies by region. Approximately 82% of people in Vancouver call 911, but less than 60% in regions outside of Vancouver do. The differences by region may reflect previous interactions with the police and policing policy, and the influence of other bystanders.

Enforcement members of the Drug Overdose and Alert Partnership have shared that most police would not make an arrest for simple possession of drugs in B.C., but this may vary by province. A good Samaritan act would ensure consistency across the country.

We also found people were more than 10 times more likely to call 911 if the overdose took place on the street rather than in a private residence. That may be because they're concerned about the residence being identified and the ability to flee if police arrive.

To explore reasons why people didn't call 911, we interviewed 20 naloxone program participants. They shared the barriers to contacting emergency services during an overdose, which included concerns about being arrested for illegal activities such as drug possession, breach of probation or parole, and outstanding warrants. Police were noted to be collecting the names of those present at an overdose scene and checking the police database.

We also heard stories about people who had overdosed being dragged down stairs into the street before 911 was called, and people calling 911 and then leaving the scene rather than staying with the person until first responders arrived.

According to a review by the U.S. National Conference of State Legislatures, good Samaritan or 911 drug immunity laws are enacted in 37 states and provide immunity from supervision violations and low-level drug possession and use offences. However, a recent study of young adults in Rhode Island found fewer than half were actually aware of the good Samaritan law.

It's important if Bill C-224 were to be enacted that this would be communicated broadly to the populations at risk of witnessing or having an overdose. Dissemination will require different approaches for youth experimenting with drugs and afraid of arrest and parents being informed compared to those with substance use disorders.

In summary, fentanyl prevalence in illegal drugs is increasing. Fentanyl has a rapid and long duration of action and overdoses may need large and repeat doses of naloxone. Therefore, it is imperative to call 911 and receive rapid and professional help. There is evidence that fear of arrest deters people from calling 911, and that good Samaritan laws can increase the likelihood of calling for medical assistance if people are aware. Expanding immunity in Bill C-224 beyond simple possession to include supervision violations could increase the rate of calling 911 and thus prevent further brain damage and save lives.

Thank you for your attention.

[Sarah Brown, Harm Reduction Worker, Centretown Community Health Centre]

Good morning and thank you for this opportunity.

I understand that you've received a great deal of evidence on the realities of overdose and the opioid crisis in Canada. I'm here today to offer a front-line perspective and talk about how Bill C-224 would improve community health.

I want to preface my statement by imploring this committee to hear from the community of folks who are most directly affected by overdose and criminalization, and that is the community of people who use drugs. I am here with one member of that community, my colleague, Christine Lalonde. I'm a front-line harm reduction worker at Centretown Community Health Centre, just 10 blocks from Parliament Hill. Every day I provide safer injecting and safer smoking supplies to people who use drugs in this city. In addition to distributing supplies and offering health education and referrals, I also listen, support, and build trust with people who use drugs. At times I am the first and only point of health care contact for folks who use drugs.

Nearly every person I talk to about overdose has had a personal experience with it. Either they have overdosed themselves or they have been present at an overdose. I have worked with people who have overdosed and died in Ottawa's parks, overdosed and been resuscitated in shopping centre washrooms, and folks who have had peers overdose and die in their homes. Community members continue to be apprehensive about calling 911 in overdose situations. Calls occur less than 50% of the time, according to Ottawa Public Health, due to concerns about police presence, fear of arrest, or being implicated in the overdose. Individuals who do call 911 often report being heavily questioned by the police, assumed to be suspicious rather than praised as quick-thinking witnesses.

If you are someone who has regular contact with police and the criminal justice system, you may be reluctant to involve the police in an overdose situation. Past charges and criminal records have a way of influencing police behaviour. One man I work with who has a long history with the police in Ottawa has instructed his partner to never call 911 if he overdoses. He knows he will face charges if that happens. The last time he overdosed, his partner ran to the nearest fire station and asked them to help but not to involve police. Criminalization impacts this community's health. People who use drugs are incredibly stigmatized in our culture. They are frequently judged for their behaviour and perceived as undeserving of care. This stigmatization plays out in health care settings and impacts people's decisions to seek care, be it with their own doctor, or by calling 911 for an overdose. While our law and law enforcement need to adjust their attitudes towards people who use drugs, so too do we as Canadians. Bill C-224 challenges criminalization and stigma by prioritizing public health and safety at overdose scenes.

There are a great many drug policies that you as decision-makers can implement to address the opioid crisis in Canada, which include decriminalizing the use of all drugs, supporting the expansion of supervised consumption services and take-home naloxone programs, increasing access to drug and alcohol treatment, opioid substitution therapy, and medical marijuana. The good Samaritan drug overdose act is just one of a multitude of strategies this country desperately needs to respond to the current public health crisis.

Like some of your previous witnesses and members of this committee, I feel the immunity outlined in this bill needs to be broader than possession. Nevertheless, I support this bill as a first step and I applaud MP McKinnon for proposing it and using his position to support the lives of people who use drugs. Bill C-224 is a harm reduction strategy that this committee has the influence to pass into law. A common definition of harm reduction is “any step towards greater safety is a step in the right direction”. Bill C-224 is a step towards greater safety.

Thank you.

[Dr. Meredith MacKenzie, Physician, Street Health Centre, Kingston Community Health Centres]

Good morning. Thank you for asking me to come to speak to this bill.

More than two years ago, this committee issued its report “Government's Role in Addressing Prescription Drug Abuse”, which recommended that the government consider overdose immunity law that would exempt individuals seeking help for themselves or others during overdose situations from criminal prosecution. Since this committee's recommendations more than two years ago, the situation in Canada has profoundly worsened. We're now the number one consumer of prescription opioids in the world. Non-medical use of prescription drugs is a public health crisis and there's an opioid overdose epidemic occurring across our nation.

In April 2016, British Columbia's provincial health officer declared a public emergency as more than 200 people had overdosed in the first three months of this year. In June the Coroners Service of B.C. reported that overdose deaths increased by 75% in 2016.

The situation here in Ontario is also grim, with opioid-related mortality increasing 463% between the years 2000 and 2013. This represents one death every 14 hours. Preliminary figures from Ontario's Office of the Chief Coroner show that fentanyl overdose accounted for one in every four opioid fatalities in 2014. So we see we've had 13 years of increasing and record-setting overdoses, more than double the number of drivers killed in motor vehicle collisions.

This government has acted to make naloxone available by amending the prescription drug list. Take-home naloxone programs have been available in most provinces for a few years. As you know, naloxone is a medication that is first aid for opioid overdose and can reverse fatal respiratory depression. Communities that do provide take-home naloxone and overdose prevention training have lower opioid-related overdose fatalities.

We know that 85% of overdoses occur in the presence of another person. Naloxone injections for opioid overdoses are most often given by bystanders, just like epinephrine pens are used for life-threatening allergies.

A critical step to surviving an opioid overdose is seeking medical attention. We know that more than 90% of people who have a heart attack will call 911 for help, but an Ontario study showed that only 46% of people will call 911 in an overdose situation. The primary barrier cited is fear of police involvement.

Opioid overdose is a medical emergency. Once naloxone is given to a person it lasts between 20 to 90 minutes. That means once naloxone wears off the overdose can recur. Calling 911 is a crucial step to survival and a cornerstone of opioid overdose treatment.

With the arrival of more potent opioids like powdered fentanyl and other fentanyl analogues across all communities in Canada, activating 911 is of particular importance. A shipment of one kilogram of carfentanil, an elephant tranquillizer, was seized in Vancouver by the Canada Border Services Agency in June of this year. This drug is 100 times more potent than fentanyl. Put another way, that's 10,000 times more potent than morphine, and this shipment contained enough drug to kill 50 million people. If people do not call 911, the risk of death is increased substantially.

We are also increasingly seeing drug contaminations in our communities. People who report non-opioid drug use are overdosing and dying because the drug they used unknowingly contained fentanyl. In Vancouver earlier this month there were nine overdoses in 20 minutes, in people who were using cocaine that was contaminated with fentanyl.

The best way to encourage people who have overdosed or witnessed an overdose to seek help from 911 is to provide protection from charges of possession. Early evidence in the U.S.A. indicates that 88% of people who overdose on opioids are more likely to call 911 after establishment of good Samaritan law and being made aware of its existence.

Many organizations have supported the adoption of Bill C-224. Some of these include the Canadian Medical Association, the Ontario Medical Association, the Municipal Drug Strategy Co-ordinator's Network of Ontario, the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, and many boards of health and police agencies across Canada. A parliamentary petition garnered more than 700 signatures from coast to coast to coast.

This time of year many of our children head off to post-secondary schools. This is a time in life when they may make some dangerous or questionable decisions as their frontal lobes mature. They may be at a party and someone offers them a pill or something else to take. This pill doesn't look too dangerous. It looks like medication. We have seen fentanyl and other drugs being pressed into pills that look like prescription medication. The potential contamination of all drugs with highly potent opioids that are readily available in all of our communities makes overdose in this setting a very real possibility. Will their friends call 911 or will they be too afraid to call?

Constable Brian Montague, the media relations officer for the Vancouver Police Department issued a statement in June of this year confirming their position that they will not send a police officer to an overdose unless one is requested. He went on to describe that calls to 911 are not just coming from what he termed, “hard-core drug users”. He stated, “We're getting calls from 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds who are experimenting with drugs.”

The Vancouver police hope that this new strategy will mean that people who use drugs won't ever be too afraid of getting into trouble when they call 911. This government has already shown its commitment to bring forward a balanced approach to drug policy. Health Canada has supported access to supervised consumption sites like Insite in Vancouver. They have also revised the federal prescription drug list for naloxone. These are just some of the actions the government has taken to reverse the tidal waves of death across Canada.

The disaster of opioid overdose deaths across the nation requires every tool we can muster. Bill C-224 is not all that is needed to address this public health emergency, but it is a critical step forward. We need to protect the most vulnerable in our society. We must ensure that people feel safe to call 911. We must help Canadians in all of our communities to do the life-saving thing and to call for help immediately, without fear that their futures will be ruined by criminal charges. Canadians need this law passed now.

I thank the committee for your work on this legislation.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

What I would worry about is that those [Inaudible—Editor]

I was going to be getting into the business of Bill C-224, so I'll wait until you're through with the procedural matters. I did have a motion to make with respect to Bill C-224.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Let's do Bill C-224 first, if that's all right.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We have to decide what we're going to do with Bill C-224. We're going to have further witnesses. As to who they are going to be, we're going to talk about people and name the names of potential witnesses.

Dr. Carrie.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

If Bill C-224 were to become law, it would be important that people be made aware that they would potentially be exempt from possession charges in the circumstances set out in this bill. In your opinion, how should these amendments be communicated to the public? Should they be part of a larger public information campaign related to preventing drug overdoses?

[Michael Parkinson]

I'm aware of a small study out of Massachusetts, and it was a hospital-based overdose prevention intervention program. People who went through it were informed about the good Samaritan law in Massachusetts, and the call rates jumped close to 90% from 41% upon entering this kind of program. That's a small survey.

To your point about putting officers at risk or people getting off scot-free, I think Christine's example is one of tens of thousands across Canada that lives would be saved. If there's something more important than saving lives of Canadians, then I think communities across Canada would like to know what that is.

When we did our report in the Waterloo region, we convened, as we always do, a multi-sectoral table. Senior management from all first responders were there. The medical community was there. Community services and social services were there. What we learned in those discussions was that police want to attend in an overdose emergency. There may be evidence; it may be things go wrong, but their first priority is the preservation of life, and I absolutely believe that to be true.

But we have situations in Ontario, in Nova Scotia and so on where people do get charged with possession, and that sometimes includes the victim. It has a chilling effect.

One story out of Halton spread through Ontario within two weeks. Everybody knew about it. So I think at the end of the day, you're on the right side of history to pass Bill C-224.

[Michael Parkinson]

The 88% wasn't a group that we surveyed. It was a group surveyed out of Washington state. The research was reported by the University of Washington, I think. It indicated that 88% of people who were using opiates would be more likely to call after being informed about the good Samaritan legislation that existed there. We are in the same boat at the Crime Prevention Council: evidence-based or evidence-informed, and lots of really great ideas. I am not aware of any evaluation of existing state initiatives in the U.S.A. I am aware that something is coming in from New York state. I think that this is a flaw, really, on the Americans' part. We don't have to walk down that road in Canada. It might be palatable to pass Bill C-224 with a commitment to evaluate and revisit it, particularly some of the issues that have been addressed around this table, in a year or two.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Mr. Saint-Denis, is the definition of overdose contained in the proposed Bill C-224, an acceptable definition? Would doctors and the police agree with that as well? Is that a standard accepted definition?

[Christine Padaric]

My name is Christine Padaric and I live in Heidelberg, Ontario.

I'm honoured to be invited to speak to you today and share my story of loss in an effort to save people from going through a similar experience.

We're all aware that drug usage is rampant in our country and shows no signs of slowing down. With the introduction of bootleg fentanyl, it will only result in more deaths.

Passing Bill C-224 would help make strides towards improving the relationship between citizens and police. I know that it would save lives.

On April 12, 2013, my sweet, funny, affectionate, handsome, stubborn, athletic, pot-smoking, 17-year-old son died. He died from a pointless, unnecessary prescription overdose, which I've since learned is the leading cause of accidental death in North America. If this tragedy can happen to me and my family, it can truly happen to anyone.

The night my son overdosed, it was witnessed by a group of six individuals in their twenties. They watched him exhibit every symptom of overdose and did not do anything. That is how deeply ingrained the fear of legal involvement is when drug use is concerned.

Briefly, this is an account of the events that happened the night of April 5, 2013, from witness statements.

Austin was administered a lethal dose of morphine in the early hours by a drug dealer who crushed and held morphine to my son's nose and demanded that he snort. My son was already high from a previous tablet and so obeyed. Around 3 a.m., Austin went into medical distress. Everyone was aware of this. The six young adults discussed the situation. They put him in a tub of cold water. They talked about calling 911. However, the dealer, who was also the owner of the apartment, wanted no part of that. The dealer threatened the lives of others if anyone called 911 and because of the dealer's perceived authority, others were intimidated and feared reprisal from the dealer himself.

As well, the young people did not fully understand the signs and symptoms of an overdose or even what it means to be overdosing. They had allowed themselves to be manipulated by the drug dealer, and rolled Austin on his side on the couch in the hopes that he would sleep it off. The six individuals all slept in this one bedroom apartment that night, right next to Austin.

When the first person woke up at 7:30 a.m., she described him as looking dead. Panic ensued. The cowardly drug dealer fled his own apartment. At that point the others called 911. EMS worked on Austin for about 30 minutes, shocking him repeatedly, trying to get a heartbeat. He eventually succumbed to his injuries six days later in hospital and peacefully died with his family surrounding him.

On a positive note, Austin was able to save five adult males from terminal illness due to organ donation.

Today my mission is to shed light on the devastating reality of abuse of prescription drug use, which is rampant in our country, and find solutions to overcome this problem and save lives. I facilitate a chapter of GRASP, which stands for Grief Recovery After a Substance Passing. It's a peer support group to help others recover after the loss of a loved one due to substance abuse. Regretfully, four of the five regular attendees in our Waterloo chapter all lost sons under circumstances where a call to 911 would likely have resulted in a life saved.

I've created an organization called SKATE For Austin. SKATE stands for Save Kids Abusing Thru Education. I use SKATE as the acronym because of Austin's love for hockey and skateboarding. Under this organization, along with assistance from Region of Waterloo Public Health, I teach an overdose awareness class to high school students. I will teach it to service groups. I'll teach it to anyone who will actually listen.

I believe drugs are part of our society today and we need to equip our young people with the knowledge to make informed decisions and to recognize an overdose if they witness one. The steps are basic: quiet stimulation to determine if the person can be aroused; call 911; perform rescue breathing and/or administer naloxone, if available; put the person in the rescue position until help arrives.

I've done my own informal study during these training sessions with the students and I've learned that girls are far more likely than boys to call 911. I've also been told on two separate occasions that teens were at a party where someone went into distress. In one case 911 was called, and in the other case the individual did regain consciousness. Both individuals who approached me said that everyone is more careful in Elmira.

Elmira, Ontario, is the town where my son died, and also where he went to high school. Everyone in Elmira is much more careful at parties today since Austin's death, and the revelation that he did not have to die.

I am also a member of a number of harm reduction committees with the Region of Waterloo. I've created an overdose map of Canada online where I post details of those lost to overdose to show visually the crisis we are in.

I strongly support Mr. McKinnon's proposed bill, Bill C-224. It's one more step we can take toward harm reduction in our country. Because people fear being arrested, risking parole, being charged with drug possession, having their parents notified of their actions, etc., a lot of work will be required to educate the public if this bill is passed. It will take time for law enforcement to gain trust. I was told by doctors that in all likelihood, my son Austin would be alive and well today had one of the six people present that night called 911 at the first sign of distress instead of allowing Austin to suffer for seven long hours.

I'm speaking on behalf of all parents when I say I do not want to see anyone lose their child because someone else was afraid to call 911.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

[Donald MacPherson, Board Member, Pivot Legal Society]

Thank you. My name is Donald MacPherson. I am a board member of the Pivot Legal Society. I am also, I have to confess, the director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, and Pivot is one of our coalition members. I'll try not to repeat many of the statistics that have been thrown around here.

Canada is in the grips of an overdose epidemic; there's no doubt about it. One simply has to look at the numbers that Michael just told you. B.C. has indeed declared a public health emergency; other jurisdictions might consider doing the same. At a time like this, we need all hands on deck across institutional contexts, political parties, and the broader community. These deaths are preventable with timely intervention. We know that.

We know that naloxone has reversed thousands of overdose deaths since the epidemic in B.C. in the early 1990s. We know that no one has ever died on a supervised consumption site from an overdose even though many non-fatal overdoses take place in these facilities.

We know that psychosocial treatment and substitution treatments such as methadone, buprenorphine, hydromorphone, and heroin-assisted treatment can be successful in assisting people with substance use disorders. All of these interventions need to be scaled up in Canada as part of a comprehensive response to overdose deaths.

This brings us to Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. We see good Samaritan legislation as one component of a comprehensive public health approach to overdose that fits within a harm reduction paradigm.

Harm reduction is part of a spectrum of non-judgmental strategies aimed at reducing the harms related to drug use and connecting individuals with health and social services that they might not otherwise access. Harm reduction also places a priority on the protection of human life and strives to improve health and safety in our communities for everyone.

Most overdoses occur in the presence of other people. The chance of surviving an overdose, like that of surviving a heart attack, is almost entirely dependent on how fast one receives emergency medical help.

Michael covered some of the other data on the Waterloo-Wellington overdose response survey. I won't repeat that. However, I will add that the survey found that in over half of overdose cases, 911 was not called or the respondents did not know if it was called. In addition, recent amendments to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act which stipulate mandatory prison sentences for some drug-related offences will unquestionably intensify fear of prosecution for witnesses of drug overdose and increase rates of preventable overdose deaths.

The good Samaritan legislation in the U.S. has parallelled efforts to improve layperson access to naloxone. The United States have scaled up since 2007, as you have heard. Good Samaritan laws complement the tremendous efforts taking place within health authorities, provincial governments, and the community to maximize the availability of naloxone, a life-saving drug which when administered to a person suffering an opioid overdose immediately reverses the overdose.

Overdose response at this level, which is perilously close to the end of life, must involve a two-pronged approach: having naloxone available and getting it to the overdose victim in a timely fashion. Seconds matter.

Good Samaritan legislation can be enhanced by operational policies within local police departments that address attendance at overdose situations. The Vancouver Police Department has an explicit policy of non-attendance at routine overdose calls. The VPD policy document reads, “There is little value in police attendance at a routine, non-fatal overdose. It would be a rare circumstance for criminal charges to arise from attendance at a routine overdose call”.

Policy should tend to restrict police attendance to overdose calls only in the event that there is specific need for public safety. Restricting police attendance at routine overdose events would support the intent of Bill C-224.

We would also add that we would encourage the government to look at the broader context and explore the idea of decriminalization of all drugs, such as has been implemented in some jurisdictions and is being contemplated in others in order to better focus our response to overdoses with health responses rather than with criminal justice ones. That's a discussion for another day.

The Pivot Legal Society is supportive of the direction of Bill C-224. The benefits of this bill include a strong signal from political leaders that the protection of life is a priority in these situations and that the imperative to call for help trumps the fact that criminalized drugs may be a part of the context of the call for help.

We don't think the legislation goes far enough and it could be improved.

We would like clarification of the language of the bill, similar to a previous statement. It wasn't clear to us that the actual person overdosing was protected under this bill.

Another shortcoming that we see is that the bill covers only possession, and not possession for the purpose of trafficking, which is quite a broad provision and would include people sharing drugs, which is common since drug use is often a social activity.

We are concerned that the immunity provided by the bill is not broad enough to maximize the chances that a call would be made in a timely fashion.

We also believe it would be in keeping with the spirit of the bill to ensure that people who have outstanding warrants, particularly for non-violent crimes, don't hesitate to make a call that could save a life, and they should be covered under the immunity provided by the bill.

Thank you.

[Michael Parkinson, Community Engagement Coordinator, Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council]

I'm going to talk fairly quickly.

My name is Michael Parkinson, and I am with the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council. It's my pleasure to provide evidence discerned from our research investigating the barriers to calling 911 during an overdose emergency.

The Crime Prevention Council mandate is to address the root causes of crime, fear of crime, and victimization. We work collaboratively with partners in a variety of fields, including social services, justice, health, enforcement, and so on. We've done that since 1995. We're the Canadian model for crime prevention through social development within Canada and beyond.

We began working on drug-related issues in 2006, knowing there's a relationship between problematic substance use, crime, and victimization. While likely most people will never engage in criminal behaviour because they're using substances, prescription medications, alcohol, or illicit drugs, we know that Canadian prisons are filled with people who have a connection to substance use. Correctional facilities, as you know, are an expensive intervention. They consume half the cost of the Canadian criminal justice system, and they have questionable outcomes for individuals, communities, and taxpayers upon release.

When health and social service systems fail to treat the root causes, the justice system is left to punish the symptoms, and drug-related issues provide a poignant example. We can do better, and indeed we must.

Canada is experiencing the worst drug safety crisis in our nation's history. It's not often reported in the media, but I assure you that is absolutely the case and not just recently either. In the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that Americans are in the middle of the worst drug epidemic in U.S. history.

For both countries, the substances driving those overdose fatalities to record-setting levels are a class of pain medications called opioids, which are essentially pharmaceutical-grade heroin, and substances of known dependency for more than a century. There's a relationship between opioid sales, overdose deaths, and addiction. Canada holds the dubious distinction of being a global leader in prescription opioid consumption. The U.S. comes in for the silver medal.

In my province of Ontario, a person dies every 14 hours of an opioid-related death. That's a rise of more than 500% since the year 2000. That's more than 6,000 dead Ontarians. Deaths from acute drug toxicity surpassed fatalities on Ontario's roadways five years ago. Now we have what I would call the bootleg opioids, which is a class of high-potency opioids the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council first advised about in 2013. They're produced exclusively and distributed exclusively on the black market. They're being detected in substances in a variety of formulations across Canada and the U.S., and they are now responsible for driving overdose fatalities up, even as prescription opioid fatalities plateau.

In Alberta, from 2011 to 2015, the rise in overdose deaths was 4,500%. That's not a typo; it's 4,500%. In British Columbia, overdose deaths in the first five months of this year have risen 75% compared to the same period last year. You've heard they've declared a public health state of emergency for overdoses, but most provinces have no monitoring, and there are no emergency preparedness plans, much less interventions, in place.

Some of the fentanyls, and these are the bootleg fentanyls, are essentially weapons-grade substances. A kilogram of powdered fentanyl...there was a kilogram of powder seized in Quebec City a couple of months ago that contained enough lethal doses to kill every resident in Quebec City, or about half a million lethal doses. Multi-kilogram seizures are no longer unusual in Canada. The profit margins for the black market are absolutely extraordinary.

From research in B.C. we know that most people who tested positive for fentanyl are completely unaware of ingesting it. People who used substances occasionally and daily are at a significantly elevated risk of death. Canada's overdose crisis seems certain to get worse before it gets better. Bill C-224 is a key life-saving tool in our nation's first aid kit.

It is always worth remembering that an opioid overdose is a medical emergency, whether the victim was using it as prescribed or not. Opioid overdose victims cannot save themselves. They depend on a witness or a good Samaritan. Seconds do matter. It's the difference between life and death, or between a lifetime of brain injury or not. The best medical advice from the colleges across Canada always includes calling 911 and providing resuscitation to the victim.

In 2008 we provided a first glimpse into the extent and typology of overdoses in the Waterloo region. We combed through hospital data. We combed through coroner's data. One of the significant findings was that more people showed up at hospitals for an overdose than were brought in through 911. That's what we call the “dump and run” strategy. You want to do the right thing, but you're not going to call 911 because of fear of entanglement with the criminal justice system. You do the next best thing you can think of in the moment. You drive to the hospital, dump the victim off, and you split right away.

In 2012 we sought to determine the barriers to calling 911 during an illicit overdose emergency by conducting primary research in an area of southern Ontario that we thought might be representative of Canada in the main. We surveyed 450 people who were using substances or were on a path toward recovery from addiction. Almost 60% had witnessed an opioid overdose emergency. We found that despite the best of intentions, witnesses to an illicit overdose—and most often there's at least one witness—will call 911 and wait with the victim just 46% of the time. In contrast, 911 call rates for cardiac arrest are above 90%. We found that the primary reason for not calling 911 was fear of the police presence. We found that 83% of those surveyed thought they might face criminal charges if 911 was called. We could find no literature suggesting that one could educate people into calling 911.

These findings that 46% of witnesses would call 911 and that fear of the Canadian criminal justice system is the major barrier are consistent with some newer, albeit limited, data from across Canada. They are consistent with findings from across the U.S. and are the primary reason that most states in the U.S. have a good Samaritan law.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I'm looking forward to it.

Mr. Chair, I want to thank you and the committee for so proactively taking up this study so we can deal with it before we adjourn for the summer.

The bottom line is that the Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, is intended to save lives. We need to find a way to save precious time and get this bill through the legislative process, and this proactive study is certainly a help in that direction, because we need to start saving lives and preventing the deaths of countless Canadians. I recognize your interest and effort in moving this legislation forward.

This bill is a simple amendment, as you know, to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. In order to save lives, we are adding three paragraphs that will have a great impact. It provides an exemption from prosecution for simple possession when a reasonable person believes that emergency medical assistance is required in the event of an overdose. It does not provide protection for offences such as trafficking, or outstanding warrants, or any of a myriad of other possibilities. It's focused simply on possession.

We kept it focused so narrowly because we felt, and continue to feel, that extending it too far and too broadly potentially would make it difficult to pass. Keeping it sweet and simple, we believe, is a recipe for success, besides which, extending the exemptions would require considerably more study and is probably beyond the scope of what a private member's bill should try to accomplish.

At second reading, I spoke of two young men whose lives ended far too early. They died because no one called 911 soon enough. No one called for help for one reason only: they were afraid that they would get into trouble. They were afraid that they would get charged with possession or have to deal with the police, and they were scared. Delay of course in a situation like this means death.

It's a story that is far too common. The largest barrier to calling for help during a drug overdose is fear of criminal prosecution for simple possession. Bill C-224 intends to remove that barrier. This bill is intended to make it okay for you to call for help.

Later today, you will hear from the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council, whose report factored very heavily in my own presentation earlier. In their 2012 report on the barriers to calling 911, they reported on a study showing that 46% of the respondents, in the absence of a law such as this, would either not call for help or would call and run. That's problematic in a number of ways. Certainly, if they call and run, for example, there's no one left to help the first responders find the person or to inform them of what the problem is that they're trying to deal with. Again, it means delay, and it potentially means death, and that's tragic. That's why we've introduced the Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, which is now before this committee.

We have had feedback from law enforcement agencies and first responders who are very, very supportive of the principle of this bill. In fact, Port Moody's chief constable recorded a video, complete with logo, uniform, and all that stuff, in support of this bill. A number of first responders—paramedics, firemen, and so forth—have also signified their support. That support also includes faith-based organizations in the community, which have given similar testimonials, and politicians from all levels of government, including the municipal, school board, provincial, and federal levels.

Governments across Canada have expressed their support. I've received letters supporting this bill from the health ministers of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. Of course, as mentioned earlier in previous speeches, many states in the U.S. have legislation of this kind. At last count, 36 states plus the District of Columbia have similar legislation on the books, and these laws work. In 2010, the State of Washington passed similar legislation. A study in that state reported that 88% of respondents said they would call for help because of the protection in law.

Currently, overdose deaths are happening at alarming rates. For the period of January to May 2015, in British Columbia, we had 176 deaths, and last week, the B.C. Coroners Service said that this year, in the same time period, there were 308 deaths. That's over two a day, on average.

I think I'm out of time, so I'll call an end to it right there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Ladies and gentlemen, I call the meeting to order, and I welcome our guest, Mr. McKinnon.

We have a little housekeeping to do here on a couple of things.

We have two panels today. We have the proponent of Bill C-224. I'm going to propose that he speak for five minutes and that we then have a 28-minute round of questioning. Then we're going to take a small suspension and have our second panel. I propose that they have five minutes each, and that we have rounds of questions for 51 minutes.

Does everybody agree with that? That's a little change from our normal format, but we have two panels.

All right. Mr. McKinnon, the floor is yours for five minutes, and then we're going to question you for 28 minutes.

Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise at the end of this debate to acknowledge and thank the many members on both sides of the House who have risen in support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, many of whom have shared with us their personal, powerful stories about why the bill is so important. This support has resonated not only on a multi-partisan basis throughout the House but throughout Canada as well, from coast to coast to coast.

We have, for instance, received strong expressions of support from the ministers of health in several provinces. In B.C., there is support from the B.C. chief coroner and the B.C. public health officer, as many have noted already, who has just recently declared a public health emergency due to the surge in overdose deaths, a dramatic increase that has in fact echoed across the whole country.

In my own tri-cities community as well, a great many of our local public officials have stepped up, from the mayors of each of the tri-cities to school board trustees and a large number of city councillors. Indeed, Port Coquitlam city council passed a unanimous resolution of support.

We have heard from police, firefighters, and paramedics as well, for first responders know that they can only save lives if they actually get the call. We have heard from religious leaders and ordinary citizens, as well as, throughout the country, families of victims who might have lived if only someone had picked up the phone and made that call a little earlier. By providing limited immunity from simple possession charges, we would remove a significant barrier to making that call. This means more lives will be saved and more people will live to have a chance to make better choices.

In my opening speech, I spoke of Austin Padaric and Kelly Best, two young men who tragically died too young and who might have lived if someone had made that call earlier. Austin and Kelly are just two of the all too many unfortunate victims throughout this land who on a daily basis needlessly die because someone was afraid to call for help. Austin and Kelly, let these names stand now on behalf of all those victims through all the years, but better yet, let them stand as well for all of those we might yet save in the years to come by passing this bill.

The bill will not end the scourge of drug overdoses and we will not end the intolerable toll of death, but surely, we can stem the rising tide. We will not slay this dragon in this one fell blow, but we can bring it to its knees.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I will keep my comments short, but I would first like to address the member's concerns in regard to W-18. We know it is a very powerful drug that has caused a great deal of damage to society. I can assure the member that the Government of Canada has acted very quickly on it. It is now on the illegal substances list. That means it is illegal in Canada for production, possession, importation, exportation, and trafficking. All of that is now illegal for the W-18 drug. We see that as a good thing, showing that the government can respond to incidents of this nature.

I want to compliment our colleague, the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for the efforts he has put in to provide us with Bill C-224 today. It should be acknowledged that through the efforts of the member he will in fact be saving lives if we pass the bill. There seems to be a will of the House to give it, potentially, unanimous support. That speaks volumes.

We have a member who recognized just how important the good Samaritan bill on drug overdose is not only to the community he represents but the community as a whole. I did get a chance to go over the comments the member provided and listen to the two examples. They were both young people, one in Ontario and one in Saskatchewan. These types of stories of overdoses and unnecessary deaths are very sad and tragic. It happens today in a very real and tangible way.

I rise with pleasure to indicate not only my support, but the government's support for Bill C-224 in hopes that we will ultimately see unanimous support.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, we will be supporting the bill before us, which would provide an exemption from drug possession charges when someone calls 911 to report an overdose. It is a simple, common-sense, proven policy that will save lives. I thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for bringing the bill forward.

We know all too well how desperately our communities need action to end this crisis. As the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo mentioned, British Columbia's health officer has declared a public health emergency. This is the first time that such emergency powers have been used. The province took this step, because in the first three months of this year, there have been more than 200 deaths from overdoses of fentanyl. At that rate, we could see 700 to 800 British Columbians dead by the end of this year. We are talking about an opiate that is exponentially more powerful than morphine or heroin.

We have seen provincial task forces created and police alerts issued in major cities across Canada. We know that this problem will not go away on its own. Indeed, it could get much worse.

Recently, police in Edmonton seized a shipment of white powder from China before it could be prepared for street sale. Lab testing revealed it to be a substance called W-18, a synthetic opiate that is unimaginably deadly. It is 100 times more powerful than fentanyl, and 10,000 times more potent than morphine. To put that in perspective, the amount seized recently in Edmonton, four kilograms, according to public health officials, is enough to kill every person in Alberta 45 times over.

However, this drug is so new that it has not yet been included in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Therefore, it is clear that in the face of such a complex crisis, many things need to be done, and done quickly. Bill C-224 is one essential step, and we must take it without delay.

One study cited by the Pivot Legal Society suggested that most people who witness an overdose do not call 911. Fear of arrest for drug possession is one barrier among many, but it is one that we have the power to lift.

This is a step that many jurisdictions have already taken. In the United States, New Mexico was the first to pass a good Samaritan law in 2007, and 31 states have followed suit. By all accounts, these laws have been successful in reducing the fear of police involvement as a barrier to calling emergency assistance during an overdose.

We need to do more, as well, to ensure that drugs that counteract opiate overdoses are more readily available where they are needed. Naloxone was delisted by Health Canada on March 22. This followed the unanimous recommendation of 130 community groups, health experts, and other groups. However, this still leaves it up to the provinces to ensure broader access.

In B.C., naloxone is now available without a prescription and is in the hands of almost all EMS personnel. In Alberta, more than 500 pharmacies are offering free kits without prescriptions. However, access is not as open in some other provinces, where it is still available only to trained responders, or through a doctor's prescription to friends and family of opiate users. Furthermore, cost and access in rural areas still present barriers to saving lives from overdoses.

There remains a federal role to play in encouraging access to easier forms of dosage, for instance, replacing an injection with a nasal spray. Of course, we must also do more to prevent overdoses by increasing awareness about fentanyl-laced street drugs and by reducing its availability by tackling illegal production.

On the former, I note, for example, the recent initiative by Toronto Public Health to create a simple website, ReportBadDrugsTO.ca, to allow fast, anonymous reports of tainted street drugs so that warnings can be spread immediately to opiate users through community agencies. On the latter, I note the recent introduction in the Senate of Bill S-225 by Senator Vernon White. This bill would add the ingredients of fentanyl to the schedule of controlled precursors in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Together with the provinces we must do more to control the use of highly addictive prescription opioids. These initiatives must be considered as elements of a broader response by all levels of government to a crisis that is overwhelming too many communities.

The bill deserves to be praised in the context of removing the ideological blinders of the previous Conservative government and instead adopting the evidence and public health based approach to drug policy for which New Democrats have long been proud advocates.

I salute here the work of Libby Davies, the former member for Vancouver East, who has been a powerful advocate for harm reduction, public health, and safer communities for many years.

If we are to make this long overdue paradigm shift real it will take much more from the government. We need to see the government's promise to repeal Bill C-2 honoured and to support supervised consumption sites. We need to see a review of criminal justice laws, including mandatory minimum sentences in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. That, as we saw in the Supreme Court just days ago, may not only be costly and ineffective but also unconstitutional.

I know I speak for many communities when I say that this is not an issue that we can afford to leave on the back burner. In communities across Canada, overdoses are an epidemic, and we need action now.

Just last week, the CBC printed an interview with a Winnipeg opiate user named Amanda. She reached out to reporters after a close friend died of an overdose. She said, “I've had 15 contacts on my phone and two of them die in three days. That's scary enough, that says it all.”

There are many things we can do to help Amanda and the thousands of Canadians struggling with addictions and to renew and strengthen the health and safety of the communities they call home. This is one step we can take now, and I believe we should do it without delay.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for putting forward Bill C-224, an important piece of legislation. Not all of us are so fortunate as to get such an early spot for our private member's bills and to have a bill that is going to potentially make a lifesaving difference. It is truly a privilege.

I would like to provide a bit of perspective around what the issue is that my colleague is trying to address.

In British Columbia, the province both the member and I are from, between 2010 and 2015 there was a 50% increase in deaths due to drug overdose. In 2016 we have seen a really worrisome spike. There have been 201 deaths in three months in British Columbia. The situation is so serious that public health has declared a state of emergency. This is not only a big issue in British Columbia but it is a big issue across Canada.

We think this perhaps happens only in some of our larger centres, such as the Downtown Eastside. That is not accurate. In Kamloops alone there have been 13 fatalities in three months from drug overdoses, and six of those happened in one day. Four individuals managed to get treatment and are fine.

These are not just numbers and facts. These are people. These are our friends. These are our children. In Kamloops, three families have spoken out directly on this issue. They want to raise awareness, especially about fentanyl and the tragic consequences of its use.

Ryan Pinneo's family has spoken out publicly. Their son was an athlete with a very supportive family. He struggled with addiction and succumbed to a tragic overdose.

There was another young man from Kamloops named Lance Ritchie whose parents have also spoken out. The reason they are speaking out is to raise awareness in terms of the incredible danger that is out there. Lance Ritchie loved the outdoors. He loved to fish. His family has beautiful pictures of him. They have shown the people of Kamloops the pictures and have told them that, yes, he did something wrong and foolish but he was a wonderful man.

Twenty-four-year-old Ben Coan is another whose family is grieving, and it is so tragic to hear the mothers and fathers talk about their children.

Someone that I knew from a very young age, and it was a fairly high-profile tragedy in North Vancouver, involved Hardy and Amelia, a couple of young parents. They made a foolish decision, no question about it. They were good people who made a bad mistake.

What would this legislation mean? The research the proponent of the bill shared was that sometimes there is a barrier to getting help quickly and that barrier is because the people who are with their friends or their classmates or their mothers and fathers are worried that there will be some consequences in terms of the substances. The research is clear that at times there has been a barrier because of possession. We also just heard from a doctor across the aisle who, in his own experience, found that there was a barrier for people in terms of self-interest or many reasons in terms of getting help quickly.

In the case of opioids, what does getting help quickly mean? I am a nurse by background. I can remember in the hospital there was a case, and this was a legitimate use of a narcotic for pain control. We had given a woman some pain medication post-surgery and just a couple of minutes later I happened to go into the room and she had stopped breathing as the result of an allergic reaction to the pain medication.

It was absolutely shocking to see someone who had stopped breathing and who was on the brink of death. The hospitals have something called Narcan or naloxone. We injected the naloxone, or Narcan as it was called, into her and she started breathing again. She opened her eyes and wondered what had happened. For someone who has never seen this, Narcan can reverse the effects an allergy to medicaitons.

This is a multi-issue and this is one piece of the puzzle that our colleague has introduced in getting help for people quickly. Removing barriers for them to seek help is a really important piece of the puzzle.

British Columbia has a take-home naloxone program to make it readily available. Health Canada worked rapidly, going through a process to make naloxone available, not a prescription. It is cheaper for patients who have a bee allergy. We will often see their kits and learn how to do an injection to reverse the effects of the allergy to the bee. This particular injection can be easily learned and is truly life-saving.

The other important feature is that lay people can learn how to deliver naloxone. It is absolutely life-saving and there is very minimal adverse effects.

I noted that some people have said that we perhaps should be criticizing this because we are endorsing drug use. That is not actually what is happening. It has been very clear that what is happening is life-saving, whether it is someone who is suffering from an addiction who has taken an overdose, or whether it is a young person who has been at a party and who has made perhaps a foolish decision.

If we put this bill into the context of what is a dramatically escalating situation in British Columbia and across Canada and provide some basic life-saving tools, then we have a good bill. I too hope all members in the House will support the bill. Again, even if it saves one life, it is a bill well done.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am proud to once again rise in strong support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. I would like to thank the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for bringing up this vital piece of legislation. Now is the time to help our fellow Canadians in need.

Drawing on my 20 years of experience as an emergency physician, I can say with confidence that, if passed, Bill C-224 would save lives. During my clinical experience, I have witnessed and treated many overdose victims in the poverty-stricken downtown core of Winnipeg. Emergency room doctors, nurses, and first responders are better able to help people when they know what the victims have ingested into their systems. Finding out what someone has ingested is vital when determining what one can do to help them.

The findings on physical examination are often too variable to yield any useful information and laboratory tests can take too long to be of benefit. I often have to ask these patients or those who accompany them what substances they have taken. Typically, they are reluctant to provide this information. However, once I explain that there is no risk of prosecution due to patient and physician confidentiality, they give me honest answers and I am able to provide better care.

Doctor and patient confidentiality should be extended to the individuals who accompany the victims and fear of the law should not prevent someone from potentially saving a life. As physicians, nurses, first responders, and as a society, we all have a duty to care for the most vulnerable in our communities. I believe this bill would help our vulnerable population be less afraid to ask for the help they need for their friends and themselves.

Some may argue that people who routinely ingest harmful drugs are responsible for their outcome and what happens to them is their choice. I disagree. It is almost unanimously accepted by the medical profession that addiction is an illness. Furthermore, it is not widely understood by the public that addiction is highly correlated with underlying mental illness. Someone with an undiagnosed or poorly controlled mental illness may take harmful substances in an attempt to self-medicate. This bill is vital to helping these vulnerable individuals.

Critics of this bill might claim that by preventing legal sanctions against drug users, this bill facilitates and encourages drug use, as is claimed with other forms of harm reduction. On this point, the evidence is also clear. Harm reduction saves lives, improves outcomes, increases access to rehabilitation, and does not increase either the use of drugs or incidence of crime. This is the conclusion of the Canadian Medical Association, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization.

While we have made steps in other areas of harm reduction, Canada lags behind other jurisdictions on this issue. In the United States, over 30 states and the District of Columbia have some form of good Samaritan overdose immunity law. In 2014, the House Standing Committee on Health recommended considering good Samaritan overdose legislation in the future. This recommendation has yet to be implemented. What are we waiting for?

When looking at this bill, we should consider the evidence. A Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council study found that fewer than half of respondents would call 911 in an overdose situation, citing potential charges as a major barrier. A study of Washington state, which passed good Samaritan overdose legislation in 2010, found that almost 90% of respondents aware of the law would make the call.

When considering this legislation, it is important to recognize these people are our sons, daughters, friends, and family members. Young people at a house party may be too scared to call for help for their overdosing friend if they fear charges. Too often we have seen this story in the news, how fear caused delay, and there should not be a need for hesitation or a second thought when calling to save a life. If this bill is passed, scared young people at a house party will be more likely to call 911 if their friend is in trouble. A bystander will be more likely to put compassion and conscience before fear and self-interest.

I expect this legislation will receive very wide support in the House, with very little opposition. In fact, if any members are considering opposing this bill, I urge them to please talk to a recovering addict, an emergency room doctor, or a victim's family. Members should ask these persons with direct experience if they think this bill could save lives, and then they should vote their conscience.

Evidence-based legislation should appeal to our hearts as much as it appeals to our logic. We need a law that responds to the rising fatalities associated with opioid use. With these rising fatalities, it is now more important to act. The future victims of an overdose cannot wait any longer. The sooner this legislation is implemented, the more vulnerable Canadians could be saved because someone made the right decision to make the call to save a life.

We are dealing with an ongoing and escalating tragedy. Let us wait no longer. The time is right to pass Bill C-224. As the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam has said, there is no time for saving lives like the present. Let us pass Bill C-224. Let us save lives.

The House resumed from May 4 consideration of the motion that Bill C-224, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act.

As we have heard, the bill would encourage people to call 911 to report drug overdoses by protecting them from prosecution for drug possession. It would also exempt anyone at the scene from possession charges, but it would not apply to more serious offences like trafficking or impaired driving.

Drawing on my 20 years' experience as an emergency physician, I can say with confidence that, if passed, Bill C-224 will save lives.

We have all seen the headlines about rising numbers of overdose deaths in Canada, especially from the powerful opioid, fentanyl. On Friday, April 15, British Columbia declared a public health emergency with over 200 overdose deaths in the last three months. In the emergency room and too often in the morgue, we see the human toll behind these numbers.

Victims of drug overdoses are not statistics. They are our fellow Canadians. They are our neighbours, our friends' kids, maybe our own family. I stand today to say with conviction that in a medical emergency brought on by an overdose, fear of the law should not prevent people from picking up the phone and saving a life.

I hope all members will join me in thanking the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam for bringing forward this timely and important piece of legislation. Common sense tells us and evidence confirms that Bill C-224 will help eliminate the delays in treatment that lead to debilitating injuries and death. I only wish Parliament had passed such a law years ago. It is heartbreaking to think of the lives that could have been saved.

In my own clinical experience in the emergency room, I have encountered patients who, because of their signs and symptoms, have caused me to suspect that they are under the influence of one or more potentially dangerous substances. The findings of physical examination alone are too variable to provide sufficient information, and laboratory tests often take too long to be of benefit.

I have to ask these patients, or those who accompany them, what substances they have taken. Typically, they are reluctant to provide this information. However, once I explain that there is no risk of prosecution due to patient-physician confidentiality, they give me honest answers and I am able to provide better care.

On more than one occasion this ability to gather information has prevented tragedy. However, this degree of confidentiality is not guaranteed in the community when people have to communicate with first responders. This freedom to communicate frankly with emergency services must be extended to anyone in our communities who witnesses or experiences an overdose. How can we compare the value of convicting someone on a minor charge with the value of saving a life?

In 2016 we see addiction as a health issue. I speak as an emergency physician with much of my 20 years of clinical experience in the poverty-stricken core of Winnipeg. I am aware that some people perceive persons who overdose as having made a bad decision and are therefore responsible for their fates. Perhaps they believe that saving overdose victims is not a moral obligation. However, it is almost unanimously accepted by the medical profession that addiction is an illness.

Furthermore, it is not widely understood by the public that drug abuse is highly correlated with underlying mental illness, as many individuals with undiagnosed or poorly controlled mental illness ingest substances in an attempt to self-medicate.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health to support my colleague, the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, as we debate his very important bill, Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act.

Canada is experiencing an unprecedented rise in accidental drug overdose deaths, particularly related to opioids such as fentanyl. As a legal pharmaceutical, fentanyl is usually prescribed for patients already tolerant to high doses of other less powerful opioid drugs, such as morphine or oxycodone. However, it can also be diverted from a legitimate source, stolen from a pharmacy or patient, or manufactured illegally in a lab. This is extremely troubling because illicit fentanyl can be mixed with or disguised as other drugs, such as oxycodone or heroin. This means people who use these drugs are not always aware of their high potency. The unknown potency of street drugs, including fentanyl is being linked to the recent increase in accidental overdose deaths occurring across Canada, particularly in the western provinces, where it is being characterized by some health officials as a public health crisis.

The majority of overdose deaths are preventable if early intervention is made. Many overdoses occur in the presence of others, and instant death is rare. The chance of surviving an overdose often depends on how quickly an individual receives medical attention. Provinces, territories, municipalities, and other public health organizations know this and are making efforts to raise awareness about how to detect the symptoms of an overdose and the importance of calling 911 as the first course of action. However, far too often people are afraid to call 911 if they or a friend experience an overdose.

A 2014 Ontario survey shows that only half of individuals said they would call 911 and wait at the scene for emergency personnel in the event of an overdose. The remainder would hold back for fear of negative consequences, such as an arrest or criminal charges. No one would think twice about calling 911 for any other medical emergency. This is a clear sign that there are systemic barriers at play here, as well as issues of stigma and fear that need to be addressed. No one should be afraid to reach out for medical help in the case of an overdose.

I think all members can agree that the most important thing for emergency personnel and law enforcement to do at the scene of an overdose is to save a life. I recognize that problematic drug use is a complex issue for which there are no easy answers, but we cannot arrest our way out of this problem. Government must take a comprehensive approach that is based on evidence and that balances regulation and law enforcement with support for the health and well-being of Canadians affected by drug use and addiction.

Neither the medical community nor the law enforcement community can address this issue on their own. That is why our government is committed to a balanced approach to drug policy. Health Canada has demonstrated this commitment through several recent decisions.

First, through support for the Dr. Peter Centre and lnSite, both of which are supervised consumption sites that have proven to have a positive impact on the health and well-being of individuals who use drugs. These centres have trained medical professionals who monitor drug users and can help save their lives in the event of an overdose. They also provide clean needles so that drug users do not contract life-threatening blood-borne diseases, such as HIV and hepatitis, while also connecting them with treatment and other health care services. In some cases, this is their first contact with a medical professional.

Second, in March 2016, Health Canada removed naloxone from the federal prescription drug list, clearing the way for this life-saving drug to be purchased without a prescription. Naloxone is a drug that temporarily reverses the effects of an opioid-induced overdose. This change will make the drug more accessible to those most likely to need it, including friends and families of drug users, as well as first responders, such as paramedics or law enforcement personnel.

However, improving access to naloxone is only one piece of a comprehensive approach to reducing overdose deaths.

The effects of naloxone eventually wear off and overdose symptoms can reoccur. In fact, repeat doses of naloxone may be needed to save the life of someone who has overdosed on a stronger opioid, like heroin or fentanyl.

This underscores the importance of calling 911 for an overdose, even when naloxone is administered. To encourage individuals to call 911 in overdose situations, Bill C-224 would provide immunity from minor possession charges for anyone who experiences or witnesses an overdose and seeks emergency help. This is a harm reduction measure that is typically known as good Samaritan legislation and has been implemented in more than 30 U.S. States.

The good Samaritan drug overdose act is consistent with our government's approach to drug policy. It would support efforts by law enforcement to help curb overdose deaths and would recognize the importance of saving lives. Law enforcement personnel are often the first to arrive at the scene of an overdose and in some communities, law enforcement is the only first responder available. This bill sends a clear message to all Canadians that every life matters.

Bill C-224 also complements our government's efforts to curb overdose deaths, including through improved access to naloxone. This bill would help to ensure that people who experience or witness an overdose would not be afraid to call 911 for fear of charges for minor drug possession. At the same time, let me assure the House that our government recognizes the extremely important role that law enforcement plays in drug control and we commend the ongoing efforts of our police to protect the safety of Canadians by getting dangerous drugs off the street.

We know there are illicitly produced opioids like fentanyl that are being sold in Canada and we know drug trafficking brings gang activity and crime with it. That is why law enforcement efforts are focused on drug trafficking and associated violence.

Our government recognizes that problematic substance use is both a health and safety issue and that reducing demand is an important piece of this puzzle. We believe government has an important role to play in helping to protect Canadians from the problems substance use can create. That means preventing and treating addiction, supporting recovery, and reducing the negative health and social impacts of drug use on individuals and their communities.

We know that a major predictor of having an overdose is having experienced an overdose in the past. Therefore, rather than arresting those who are suffering from a disease of addiction, an overdose is an important opportunity for first responders to intervene and help direct individuals toward community and social services to obtain treatment for their illness.

I fully support Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act. It is an example of a balanced approach to drug control. It aims to address a systemic barrier that is preventing individuals from seeking help for an overdose, while not impeding law enforcement from focusing public safety efforts on the issues that are truly at the crux of Canada's drug problem, which are drug production and trafficking.

Once again, I congratulate my colleague for introducing this very important bill.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak in favour of Bill C-224, and I want to thank my colleagues for their very impassioned plea for the bill, particularly the member for Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam. I lived in Port Coquitlam for 10 years, and I am sure the constituents there very much appreciate this bill coming forward.

I want to begin by sharing with the House some of the headlines from my riding of Kootenay—Columbia in the recent weeks. These come from Cranbrook Daily Townsman and the Columbia Valley Pioneer, two of the many fine community newspapers we are fortunate to still have in Kootenay—Columbia.

On April 7, the Townsman headline was “[East Kootenay] getting eight ‘substance use’ beds from [Interior Health]”. The text reads:

These new beds for Interior Health are part of a large provincial initiative to improve care outcomes for individuals living with substance use challenges, said [the province's health minister].

The beds will provide a safe and supportive environment for clients [who have complex substance issues].

A few days later, there was another headline, this time from the Columbia Valley Pioneer: “Overdose reversal drug now available in BC without a prescription”. The text from this one is:

The goal of reducing the fatal effects of an opioid overdose among the B.C. drug-using community has recently gained momentum.

Health Canada revised the Federal Prescription Drug List on March 22nd to make a non-prescription version of naloxone, which is the life-saving antidote commonly being used to reverse the effects of an opioid overdose, more accessible to Canadians....

...making the medication more accessible to the people without a prescription [will help to save lives].

[This new measure] is separate from [B.C.'s] Take Home Naloxone program...[which] has trained over 6,500 people to recognize and respond to overdoses.... 488 overdoses have been reversed since the program's inception.

On April 15, going back to the Cranbrook Daily Townsman, the headline read: “B.C. declares drug overdose emergency”.

The B.C. government has declared its first-ever public health emergency to deal with the sharply rising cases of opioid drug overdoses across the province. ...the [emergency] measure will allow for rapid collection of data from health authorities and the B.C. Coroner's Service, so overdose treatment kits can be deployed to regions where there are new clusters of outbreaks.

There has been a steady increase in overdoses of drugs containing fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid made in Chinese drug labs and smuggled to Canada.

We have to do what's needed to prevent overdoses and deaths, and what is needed is real-time information, [said B.C.'s health minister]. Medical Officers need immediate access to information about what's happening and where so that they can implement effective strategies to prevent these tragedies.

We are in a crisis situation when it comes to drug overdoses. We must do everything we can to save those lives.

That is where Bill C-224 comes in. Bill C-224 would provide a good Samaritan exemption, ensuring that no evidence obtained as a result of responding to a drug overdose can be used to support possession of substance charges. This exemption would apply to any person at the scene when police or paramedics arrive.

The exemption would apply to all schedule I, II and Ill drugs, the common street drugs, but would only cover charges for possession. Production and trafficking charges would not fall under the good Samaritan clause. Let me say that again. The good Samaritan exemption in Bill C-224 would only apply to possession charges. Drug producers and drug traffickers will not be let off the hook.

The bill will also not in any way diminish our efforts to fight organized crime or to support communities affected by gang-related violence. Bill C-224 simply removes a barrier to medical help reaching a person who is overdosing in time to save them.

Some of the validators for the bill are the Pivot Legal Society and Canadian Drug Policy Coalition executive directors. They say:

Fear of prosecution has proven to be a barrier for people to call for help when they are with someone who's having an overdose. Only 46 per cent of respondents to a Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council survey said they would call 911 during an overdose situation. Seconds matter in these cases and saving a life shouldn't be weighed against facing a potential drug possession charge. Granting amnesty to Good Samaritans is a simple answer. The Liberals should move to pass this bill as quickly as possible.

A Facebook user, posting on Overdose Canada in support of this bill, said, “My son Austin would be alive today had those who witnessed his overdose called 911.”

An article in The Globe and Mail reported:

Amid mounting signs that the illegal form of the painkilling drug is expanding east from Western Canada, where it is linked to a surge in overdose deaths, health-care advocates say federal and provincial government leaders are not doing enough to address the problem.

Pivot Legal Society, in an article entitled “A three-point plan for ending overdose deaths”, wrote:

Research suggests that between 10 and 56 percent of people witnessing an overdose actually call for assistance.... We need to remove the barriers...

The NDP has a proud, progressive record of standing up for sensible drug policies that promote harm reduction and create safer, healthier communities. Supporting this bill is very much in keeping with this tradition.

Bill C-224 is about saving lives. More lives could be saved if users and witnesses did not hesitate to seek emergency assistance for overdoses.

New Democrats will always stand for smart, progressive, evidence-based policies that promote stronger, healthier, and safer communities. This bill does that, and it deserves the unanimous support of this House.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, obviously this is an issue that our hon. colleague from Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam feels strongly about and I stand with him.

I rise in the House today to speak on behalf of private member's Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act.

The hard truth is this. If a friend or a loved one suffered a heart attack, none of us in the House would think twice about calling an ambulance. Unfortunately, this is not the case when it comes to drug overdoses, many of which result in death because people are simply too afraid to make that call.

In 2015 alone, there were as many as 465 overdoses in British Columbia. As our colleague mentioned, the statistics for January 2016 show 77 deaths alone. That is simply unacceptable.

Witnesses fear that when they pick up the phone, they may be criminally charged for possession. They fear judgment from others. These fears ultimately force the witness to choose between saving a person's life or being arrested and charged. It is time that we recognize that it may not be always in the public's interest to prosecute an individual who picks up the phone and asks for help when someone has overdosed.

There are some who will say that this may encourage drug use or in some way minimize the severity of drug use. Let me be very clear right from the onset. I am not for drug use, nor would I ever promote or advocate for the use of drugs. However, if this bill would give people the courage to pick up the phone and take greater action because they are not afraid, then there is no question that this would benefit the nation. It would save lives.

All members of the House can agree that in our country every life is valued. In fact, the courageous debate and discussion that we have had over the last few days is evidence to that.

If this holds true, considering the number of overdoses occurring in Canada, we also must believe that it is necessary to take every measure possible to protect these vulnerable lives.

In the U.S., accidental overdoses are now the leading cause of accidental death. In fact, overdoses now count for more deaths each year than HIV and AIDS, murder, or car accidents. Many of these are preventable if and when emergency assistance is summoned.

With the increasing strength of prescription drugs and the popularity and availability of synthetic party drugs, these statistics will only grow if we do not take action. In fact, we are seeing an emergency in our province of British Columbia.

Action, we have talked a lot about that this week. To be clear, good Samaritan laws do not protect people from arrest for other offences such as selling or trafficking drugs, or driving under the influence of drugs. These policies protect only the caller and overdose victim from arrest, prosecution for simple drug possession, possession of paraphernalia, or being under the influence.

Most deaths and complications occurring from overdoses can be prevented with the appropriate medication and emergency response time. Too often, however, these calls are not made and people are left without the necessary medical assistance. The British Columbia Review Panel found that when a person overdoses, immediate medical intervention is critical to reducing the risk of death or serious injury. Statistics point to the fact that in the case of 15% of youth overdoses, someone expressed concern about the well-being of the individual, yet 911 was never called.

Police routinely attend emergency 911 calls involving suspected overdose. Research indicates that in some cases fear of police involvement may heavily influence a witness's decision to not contact emergency services. The facts are indisputable. Research also suggests that medical attention was attempted in less than half of the young adults who suffered from an overdose.

Fear of criminal charges should not be a barrier to calling 911. Police departments are already aware of this stigma and have attempted to mitigate the perception of fear. The Vancouver Police Department is known to have policies about police attendance when it comes to an overdose. They do not normally attend the calls involving a non-fatal drug overdose unless B.C. Emergency Health Services advises that its assistance is required. The rationale for this is to reduce a potential reluctance that people will have to seek emergency medical intervention when someone is overdosing. When police do not attend an emergency 911 call for a suspected overdose, the health and well-being of that person who requires medical attention remains the paramount focus.

The review also concluded that it would be beneficial for all police agencies to reinforce the message of calling 911 to report people in medical distress in an effort to reduce any perceived barriers to seeking help. Simply put, police recognize the stigma around picking up the phone and they want to fix this. They want us to fix this.

In doing my research for this debate, I spoke to many of my friends in police agencies across Canada. There is overwhelming support for this bill. As a matter of fact, one of my very good friends who has been a police officer for decades said that in his line of work, they develop relationships with people from all walks of life and because of how often they work with them or interact with them, they develop feelings of friendship. They care about their well-being. These relationships truly are the only reason the police can be successful. He said, “Over the years, I have had several of them overdose. Some of them unfortunately are no longer with us.” In almost all of the instances, death could have been avoided by calling for help.”

Police experience human tragedy every day. They do not want to see another case where an individual makes the wrong decision and does not seek emergency care for his or her friend or loved one. I believe everyone is on the same page when it comes to Bill C-224. I hope they are on the same page. It is necessary. It means the difference between life and death.

I recall reading an article in the Toronto Star of a teenager who overdosed and died at the age of 17. The victim was showing signs of distress and overdosed seven hours before being attended to by emergency medical services. There were numerous people there who could have called for help in those seven hours, but no one called 911. Instead, they put him in cold water, then laid him on his side on a bed, assuming that he would wake up and everything would be okay. It was not okay. By the time the paramedics were called in the morning, it was too late. The victim's mother said that had there been a law, she thinks it would be reasonable to think that her son would still be around, would still be alive.

We have stated our support for a bill pertaining to this issue before, suggesting that Health Canada, the government, consider the introduction of federal legislation that would exempt individuals seeking help for themselves or others during overdose situations from criminal prosecution for trafficking and possession of controlled substances. Bill C-224 would accomplish this. This is one way that barriers may be broken down by providing limited immunity for criminal charges.

As I have already stated, every year, far too many lives are being lost to drugs and alcohol, and many more Canadians are injured or disabled as a result of an overdose.

I am a husband. I am a father of four beautiful young adults. I have brothers and I have a sister. Accidental death by overdose has negatively impacted our family also. In 2008, as I was preparing to head overseas to speak at an aviation conference, we received a call that my brother-in-law had been found deceased just a few minutes before the call. My brother-in-law was not a drug user. He was not a criminal, and he did not live a high-risk lifestyle. While all of the facts of his death are still unknown to this day, so many years later, the facts are that he died of an accidental overdose. Whoever was with him at the time chose not to call the police or an ambulance to provide assistance. Rather, they erased all the call history and contacts on his phone, and any evidence of their involvement.

I cannot help but think that if this bill was in place in 2008, my brother-in-law would still be with us today. My mother-in-law and father-in-law would still have their only son. My wife and her sister would still have their little brother. My children would still have their uncle. Our family would still be whole.

I have stood in the House before to say that collectively we can leave a positive legacy. Like countless others, the growing numbers, my brother-in-law did not have to and should not have died. That is why I choose to rise in the House today to speak on behalf of Bill C-224. Through this bill, we have a chance to end the stigma of fear, and choose life instead. If the bill will allow people to pick up the phone and take greater action because they will not be afraid of being charged, there is no question it needs to be adopted.

Once again, we can give individuals a second chance at living. We can restore hope in humanity that might otherwise have been missed. It is our duty as members of Parliament to facilitate change, and this bill is a perfect place to start. Maybe, just maybe, lives will be saved in the process.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

moved that Bill C-224, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce Bill C-224, the good Samaritan drug overdose act, this evening. This bill amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act with respect to assistance during a drug overdose.

Three subclauses in this bill have a big impact on Canadians, and Bill C-224 will save lives.

Let me tell members about Austin Padaric. Austin was a typical 17-year-old high school student. He lived in Heidelberg, in rural Ontario. An athlete, Austin was passionate about sports, skateboarding, hockey, and all things outdoors.

Those of us who are parents worry about our teenagers and what they get up to with their friends and acquaintances. However, when I spoke with Austin's mother recently, there was no worry about Austin. He was a good kid.

Austin was just a typical high school student, but we cannot ignore the fact that kids experiment at parties. One night, he attended a gathering in rural Ontario and made a decision that so many young people make. He took some drugs that night.

In the wee hours of that morning, Austin showed signs of distress. He was overdosing. Timely medical attention could have saved his life, but his acquaintances decided not to call 911. They figured they could handle it themselves. They placed him in a bathtub of cold water. When that did not work, he was put into bed on his side, where he stayed until the next morning. When they woke up and checked on him, they thought he looked dead. That is when they called 911.

Austin died seven days later, in hospital, with his parents, brother, and extended family at his side. A timely call to 911 could have prevented this tragedy.

That is the point of this bill.

Let me tell members about Kelly Best from Saskatoon. He, too, was a young man full of promise, full of hopes, and dreams. This was another young life tragically cut short.

He, too, took some drugs with a friend and began to overdose. The friend panicked, texted other friends about what to do and, eventually, phoned his dad, who immediately called 911. The delay was about an hour. It was fatal.

The friend had a small amount of drugs on him and did not want to go to jail.

Austin Padaric and Kelly Best, two names, one story, both had tragic outcomes. They paid the ultimate price. These kids did not have to die.

Their story is far too common. Yet, it is a story heard over and over again, like a broken record. There are many more names, many more needless, pointless deaths, but the same story. This needs to stop.

When I first heard these stories, I asked a very simple question. Why did anyone not bother to call 911 earlier?

The typical reason is that they were scared, scared that they, themselves, would get into trouble. They did not want to go jail. They did not want a fine or a criminal record.

Fear of prosecution is the largest barrier to people calling for help in an overdose situation. In fact, according to a 2012 Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council report, in the absence of a law such as this, 46% of respondents would either not call for help or would call and run. That is tragic and that is the point of the bill.

That is why a significant majority of U.S. states have passed legislation of this kind. In a study in Washington state, where this has been law since 2010, 88% of respondents said they would call for help because of the protection in law.

At last count, 36 states, plus the District of Columbia, have similar legislation on the books. Even states that are prone to a tough-on-crime approach, such as Alaska and Louisiana, have moved forward with such laws. Recently, Michigan's good Samaritan law passed unanimously. While the specifics vary slightly from state to state, the underlying intent is the same, for some things are crystal clear: delay means death and seconds matter.

They also recognize that it is hard to learn from being dead. These laws are a turning point in the way drug policy is understood. Harm reduction actually works. It reduces harm. Every life saved is an opportunity for people to get the help they need, an opportunity to make better choices and move forward with life.

In Canada, our laws are a bit behind.

In Canada, we have been a little slow in helping to stop the harm caused by drug overdose, where people like Austin or Kelly could otherwise have lived, but that is not to say that there have not been calls for good Samaritan drug laws. The Waterloo report I just noted illustrates the barriers to calling 911 in the event of a drug overdose. It clearly highlights the need. It identifies that criminal justice response is the most significant barrier to calling 911.

This report also shows that in the U.S.A. good Samaritan drug laws are the most widely recommended policy response to alleviating barriers to 911, laws such as the bill now before the House. The bill would provide limited legal immunity from drug possession prosecution for people who are involved in an overdose incident, who witness an overdose, and would encourage them to do the right thing, to call for help, to save a life.

The work done by Waterloo is echoed in other reports across Canada. The Canadian Drug Policy Coalition also identified this as an issue and has made very similar recommendations. The compelling argument is that most overdoses occur in the presence of others. That noted Waterloo study also points to statistics from 2003 showing that 61% of drug overdose deaths occurred in the presence of others. That means that 61% of the time, there was someone else present who could have called for help, but witnesses, far too often, hesitate or waver on whether to call for help. In many cases, they just do not. What is even more frightening are cases where people are put in alleyways, abandoned on the street, or dropped off at a hospital emergency with no explanation.

In January of this year, a report to the British Columbia coroner stressed the importance of a bill such as this. It highlighted the critical importance of working to develop strategies to promote calling for help.

In more alarming recent news from B.C., Dr. Perry Kendall, B.C.'s provincial health officer, declared a public health emergency because of the alarming rise of drug overdose deaths. In January alone, there were 76 deaths due to drug overdose. At the current rate, Dr. Kendall estimates that B.C. could have up to 800 drug deaths by the end of this year. That is an average of more than two deaths each day, every day, in B.C. alone.

This has to stop. These are people's children, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, friends, and family. That is what this bill is for. It will not stop the overdoses, but surely, we can stem the toll of death.

Dr. Kendall and B.C.'s chief coroner, Lisa Lapointe, both support this bill because it would reduce barriers and save lives. In my own riding, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam's school district no. 43 trustees, Judy Shirra and Michael Thomas, support this bill. The city of Port Coquitlam unanimously passed a resolution supporting it. Coquitlam's mayor and many Coquitlam councillors support it as well.

I have spoken and met with Coquitlam firefighters; Port Moody mayor, Mike Clay; and Port Moody's police chief, Constable Chris Rattenbury, who in fact sent a video endorsement expressing his own support. Port Coquitlam's firefighters sent a letter of support. First responders agree that their first priority is to save lives, but they can only do that when they are called.

The Government of British Columbia's minister of health wrote to me expressing the importance of this legislation. These are among the growing number of Canadian jurisdictions that recognize that drug overdose deaths are becoming epidemic and need action now to start saving lives.

It is time we listen to Canadians and take our own advice. In a 2014 report on prescription drug abuse, the House Standing Committee on Health recommended considering good Samaritan drug overdose legislation. This bill is precisely that. It is simply about saving lives.

This bill is about giving people the tools they need to make life saving decisions in a time of crisis. It would make it okay to call for help. Many members of this House recognize this. That is why the NDP member for Vancouver East seconded the bill and many more members on both sides of the House have rallied behind it. I thank them all for their robust support. They are showing that they too want to stop the harm.

I ask all members for their support to demonstrate to all Canadians that we know that lives are worth saving, to show that we value life over death, life over punishment, and support over fear.

The purpose of this bill is to ensure that people are not afraid to call for help and, thus, to save lives.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-224, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose).

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the good Samaritan drug overdose act. Unfortunately, with drug overdoses, many people are afraid to call 911 for fear of getting charged. People die. Saving lives needs to come first.

With this bill, people who call 911 to report a drug overdose and remain on the scene cannot be charged for drug possession. It does not apply to trafficking or driving while impaired.

Thirty-four U.S. states and the District of Columbia have some form of overdose immunity law.

Canadians need to take care of each other, especially the vulnerable among us. This bill means that when lives are at stake, people can take action without fear of penalty. Hopefully, they will pick up the phone and save someone's son or daughter. People will live who might otherwise have died.

I hope all members will back this bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)