Evidence of meeting #35 for Health in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendments.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:25 a.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
This is also a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC
I would amend clause 2 by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 2 with the following:
(v) defining best practices for suicide prevention through the Public Health Agency's already existing registry, and
9:25 a.m.
NDP
Dany Morin NDP Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I feel that this amendment is a very judicious one, which takes into account the concerns of my Conservative colleagues. I recall their concerns during the discussions surrounding the first version of the amendment. So I am going to approve it. I hope that the my Liberal colleague's goodwill will be enough to satisfy the Conservative members of the committee, but I doubt it.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
This is actually new. It's not an amendment to an amendment. Dr. Fry made a new one.
Mr. Strahl.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
If we look at the section in context, we see in clause 2 that “The Government of Canada must establish a federal framework for suicide prevention that...(b) designates the appropriate entity within the Government of Canada to assume responsibility for...(v) defining best practices for the prevention of suicide...”.
I think that handles it perfectly. Prescribing where it goes after that is redundant. The bill already says to designate the appropriate entity for this. We don't need to say it has to go to the Public Health Agency, as opposed to the Mental Health Commission. The bill is instructive that we need to find the most appropriate entity. So I think the amendment is unnecessary.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC
Madam Chair, it would seem that it really doesn't matter what anyone here does; there's going to be a reason put up here to stop it. It seems that if a Liberal or NDP member of this committee makes any change, it is going to be unacceptable just because it was made by the Liberal or the NDP member.
I am responding to the reason I was given as to why this was an inappropriate recommendation. The reason I was given was that the Public Health Agency of Canada has a best-practice registry. So I asked if we could put it into the Public Health Agency. Now I'm told that it's redundant. Now I'm told that I'm being prescriptive, when I was told exactly that by the parliamentary secretary.
Madam Chair, I would not be surprised if witnesses refused to come to these meetings to waste their time. Seriously. We may just have to sit here and drink coffee, and possibly wine and cheese, and have a good time when we have meetings from now on.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
It will be a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
We'll now go to amendment NDP-5.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Dany Morin NDP Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I move that Bill C-300, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 2 the following:
(vii) conducting studies on the reduction of access to means and methods for persons to harm themselves.
We realize that, where suicide prevention is concerned, there are many unknowns. Unfortunately, when people commit suicide, we do not necessarily know why they killed themselves. Nor do we know what we could have done to prevent it. That is why I think it is important that studies be done, regardless of by whom, to find out more about suicide and, in this case, to reduce access to means and methods for persons to harm themselves. Thank you.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Again, with respect to conducting studies, studies are already being done. Depending on what is meant by that, they could cost significantly more money. So I think it would be outside the scope of the bill.
To repeat, we discussed it with the author of the bill, and he is good with the way it's written.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
I certainly support the amendment. As we've seen with the other amendments, these are all issues that have come from the study of the bill and from hearing the witnesses, in particular the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention. I really think they made a huge effort to support and strengthen this bill. They did their homework and brought forward very credible information.
I know that one of the issues they raised was this issue of looking at how one reduces access to lethal means. I don't think that's something we would necessarily have thought of, or that Mr. Albrecht would have thought of. It's the people in the field who kind of know the parameters of what needs to be done.
I think this actually strengthens the bill, and we should look at supporting it. It will allow the work to be done and will add another facet to the work that can go ahead. So I support it.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Dany Morin NDP Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Further to the concern of my colleague Mr. Carrie, I would like to ask the legislative clerk whether this amendment requires a royal recommendation.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Dany Morin NDP Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
In that case, I presume that my Conservative colleague will vote in favour of this amendment, unless he has some other objections, other flaws in this amendment that I do not see. I would like to offer my Conservative colleagues a chance for them to explain why they are not going to vote in favour of this amendment. Which would not surprise me.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Without getting into justification for the way one votes or not, I think subparagraph 2(a)(vi) already covers what this amendment tries to address.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
I would like a recorded vote, please.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)