Evidence of meeting #133 for Health in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was treatment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
I don't think there's anything else to say, but thank you, Chair. I appreciate you. I'm not finished, but yes, my time is up.
Thank you, Chair. I appreciate you.
Medical Officer of Health, City of Toronto
—again, I will emphasize that, yes, the application that we put forward as Toronto Public Health—
Conservative
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you very much, Chair.
The time, as we know in this committee...you've been very generous in doling out the time in allowing responses. I think the fact of the matter is, though, Chair, I didn't ask a question. It was a very clear statement that, again, is very important to put forward, considering the fact that Dr. de Villa wants to bring forward whatever her opinion is.
When the question is asked, people, yes of course, have time to respond. I didn't ask Dr. de Villa a question. I would say to you, Chair, that giving her a chance to voice her opinion, as she's done three or four times already, is not in the convention of what we do here. It's well beyond time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
You spoke right through the time that was allotted and there is some latitude for the chair.
Quite frankly, I think that it's in the interest of the committee to afford that courtesy to the witness. It was a pretty damning monologue. She wants 30 seconds to respond. I'm going to extend that courtesy.
Go ahead.
Medical Officer of Health, City of Toronto
Through you, Mr. Chair, I just want to remind the committee that my role as a public health physician is to actually offer the best evidence-informed advice. That's what I put in front of certainly local decision-makers in Toronto, and that's what I would offer to Canadians, although my purview is obviously for Toronto.
This is evidence-informed interventions. I cannot state enough, one, the application we put in front of the federal government was for a decriminalization approach, which is different from legalization, and it further argues for the necessity for more services across the board, including prevention, including harm reduction and including treatment.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Chair, I have a point of order. I would suggest that Dr. de Villa table with the committee the evidence on safe supply and decriminalization that she has.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
It isn't a point of order. You're open to make that request. Any member is open to make that request. She's also open to provide any additional information she wishes.
We'll go to Dr. Hanley, please, for five minutes.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you to all three of you for being here.
Particularly to Ms. Krupp, thank you for your courage in being here. I add my condolences not only for your loss, but for your current nightmare of trying to help your son, who wants and needs help.
Professor Fallu, can I start with you?
I wasn't aware of that quote that Dr. Ellis shared, but I thought it was an interesting one. What concerns you about a large-c Conservative approach to drug use?
Associate Professor, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Thank you for the question, because I think it's important to explain it, since Twitter—or X—doesn't allow us to say a lot of things.
The reason why I said this was after Pierre Poilievre made a couple of public statements on harm reduction, drug policy and the drug crisis we're facing, quite frankly, there were a lot of half-truths and even lies. I thought, if we want to have a democracy and we want to have a democracy that works, we need to have an informed, fact-based debate, not some emotional, half-truth arguments. That's why I mentioned that.
I don't necessarily want to personalize this, but any policies that are trying to push further and go on the path of prohibition, repression and stigmatizing language, and policies for people who are human beings, who exist and who have fundamental human rights.... Any policies going in that direction—pursuing what we did for decades, which put us where we are—are really bad and unfounded drug policies.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you.
It's interesting that you're currently in Lisbon. We have talked about the Portugal model frequently in this committee study. Do you think the differing policy in Portugal is protective at all against the incursion of fentanyl into Europe, and into Portugal in particular? What are your observations there?
October 22nd, 2024 / 12:40 p.m.
Associate Professor, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
That's another really good question.
I have to mention that the Portugal model has been evaluated. As with any political or scientific evaluation, there are limitations, so it's difficult to isolate causes and effects. However, we have, scientifically, a consensus that the model here has more benefits than the reverse.
We have to say the model is still a punishing model. Now it's better, but it's not reaching all drug users and heavy drug users. It mainly reaches cannabis users in big cities. It's not perfect. It's really complex to have policies that work.
We need to try something. Portugal did, and it's no catastrophe. It seems to be a step in the right direction.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you for that.
Dr. de Villa, in the remaining minute of time—I wish I had more time for all of the witnesses—can you tell me your thoughts on the current political climate, especially within Ontario, where there are now the impending closures of safe consumption sites?
How is the current political climate helping or hurting the pursuit of what you describe as a nuanced approach to a highly complex crisis?
Medical Officer of Health, City of Toronto
I'm not a politician. I am a physician trying to provide the best possible advice.
I do find that when the conversation turns to the political, it becomes emotionally charged and takes us away from an evidenced-informed discussion, which is incredibly important when we're dealing with this health issue.
What I can say is that supervised consumption services are among the services that have come under recent attack and criticism. When we look at the evidence that's available in Toronto about the implementation of supervised consumption services, we see a 67% decrease in fatal overdoses within 500 meters of supervised consumption services. We see that there is an impact.
These are the kinds of data that need to come forward. There's no question. There's pain and there are challenges.
Ms. Krupp spoke of her own personal experiences, and those are very real. As I mentioned at the beginning, we're talking about people here, and that's all the more reason for us to really focus on the evidence, to think about the facts and to engage in that very difficult discussion, because oversimplifying and—
Medical Officer of Health, City of Toronto
—suggesting that one method is good and another is bad and there's no—
Medical Officer of Health, City of Toronto
—gray or in-between is doing us all a disservice.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Thank you.
Mr. Thériault, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The toxic drug crisis is complex and multi-faceted. We must be rigorous in our approach. Solutions must be based on facts. I actually think that playing politics with people's suffering is toxic. I wanted to mention to Mr. Fallu that, during one of the Leader of the Opposition's speeches, the Bloc Québécois asked him about the distinction between legalization, decriminalization and criminalization, and he said they were all one and the same.
You operate at an international level, where that kind of answer would not be given much credence. What's toxic is rising in the House of Commons during question period and mixing up legalization, decriminalization and criminalization and further polarizing a debate about coexistence in Montreal by saying that the Mayor of Montreal wants to legalize hard drugs.
Would you agree, Mr. Fallu?