Evidence of meeting #18 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was police.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Darshan Singh Kang Liberal Calgary Skyview, AB
My concern is that they trust you, but still in the back of their mind they're going to think that if the police show up, they may be charged. That's where I'm going.
10:15 a.m.
Harm Reduction Worker, Centretown Community Health Centre
So it has more weight if it comes from...? I see, okay.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
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?
10:15 a.m.
Physician, Street Health Centre, Kingston Community Health Centres
Yes, it is a public health crisis.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Dr. Buxton, is this a public health crisis? And of course, Mr. Poirier, is it a public health crisis?
10:15 a.m.
Professor, University of British Columbia; Epidemiologist and Harm Reduction Lead BC Centre for Disease Control, As an Individual
Yes.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
I suspect that everyone on this committee also sees this as a public health crisis, the use of deadly fentanyl, and so notwithstanding normal practices and procedures for introducing a motion, I'd like to seek unanimous consent to discuss this issue promptly before this committee, in the hopes that we can save lives.
I would ask that I receive unanimous approval to table the following motion for debate, and then I would also ask my colleagues that we move immediately to a vote, so as to not belabour this, and allow the clerk as much time as possible to plan for such a meeting.
My motion is that, pursuant to Standing Order 102(2), the committee undertake an immediate study of the fentanyl and opioid crisis in Canada, in light of the alarming and growing number of deaths caused by these substances, to determine what action can be taken by this federal government.
That is the motion I have now put on the table, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank you all again for being here today. I hope that this committee will support this opportunity for me to table this motion.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I'm just advised that normally this type of motion requires 48 hours' notice. I wonder whether you could give us the 48 hours, and then we'll discuss it at the next meeting.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
I'm asking for unanimous consent around the room here to allow this to be tabled now.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
That's fair, but normally it takes 48 hours. I just asked whether you would consider it, to give it thought.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
The fact is that this is a national crisis, a public health crisis. This is an emergency, Mr. Chair, and I would ask that we have a vote here right now to determine whether or not we need to proceed forward immediately on this motion.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
We have a motion on the floor seeking unanimous consent.
Yes, Mr. Davies.
10:20 a.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Chair, I have a question for the clerk. Procedurally, our Standing Orders require 48 hours' notice of any substantive motion.
Can a standing order be waived by unanimous consent?
September 20th, 2016 / 10:20 a.m.
The Clerk
Yes, if we want to move them parallel to a motion that we have adopted, we need unanimous consent. It is sometimes done, but usually it is 48 hours' notice for substantive motions.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Mr. Chair, given the fact that our panel of presenters have all admitted that this is a public health crisis and an emergency, I would say that we move forward with this study immediately and pass this motion.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
During the evidence that was presented by our witnesses, I heard many other issues arising, such as removing naloxone from the schedule I prohibitions so that it is available for treatment. I think there are a number of very urgent things at stake here, and I am just worried that rushing to one aspect of the problem doesn't really look at what the most direct beneficial thing we can do is, in addition to passing this very important piece of legislation.
I just have a concern that we haven't given this full consideration to be unanimously waiving a 48-hour notice of a motion.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Would your motion also consider the debate about decriminalizing all drugs and about public injection sites?