Justice Committee on April 20th, 2010

[Mia Dauvergne]

One of the things we've recently developed, and I believe it was mentioned earlier, is the crime severity index. That index does take into account drug offences as well as all Criminal Code offences, so it might be useful for the committee to have information on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

The challenge, of course, will be....

Will that become the reporting norm for the public, or will the public still talk about crime rates as they have been reported over the last 30 to 40 years?

[Mia Dauvergne]

At this point in time, we are publishing both. It's difficult to determine what the future holds, but certainly our primary focus this year, for example, in our standard publication, will be on the crime severity index.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Perhaps that's the challenge we can leave you with, to take all of these comments into account. Whatever we can do to make our reporting more transparent and honest would be very helpful.

So thank you to all of you for appearing before us.

Monsieur Ménard.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I have one question. You have taken an initiative, but I believe we are all interested in that.

I believe the drug statistics aren't published, but that they have been compiled. What would be interesting for us would be to have that compilation, if possible.

[Mia Dauvergne]

We do have published drug crime offence statistics that we could certainly provide to the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

If you would....

[Mia Dauvergne]

Absolutely.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Can we have them?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Oui. Yes.

[Mia Dauvergne]

Oh, yes, they're publicly available.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

All right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you. We will suspend for five minutes.

Again, thank you to all of you, witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

We will reconvene the meeting.

We're moving now to consideration of Bill C-475, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, in regard to methamphetamine and ecstasy.

We have with us the proponent of the bill, John Weston, the member of Parliament for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country. That's a mouthful, but we're glad you're here. You have 10 minutes to present, but before you do, I want to remind members that we talked about getting the names of any proposed witnesses to us by today. If we don't have a long list, we'll also move to clause-by-clause at our next meeting. That's my proposal.

At our next meeting also, you should know, we may be in a position to consider one of the two order in council appointments, if that's the committee's wish. We have an order in council for the new appointee as deputy minister and AG. Of course, as well we have former Justice Iacobucci's appointment. Certainly we can fit one of them in at our next meeting.

If we can go clause by clause on this bill, as well as deal with that, that might be a good plan going forward.

In any event, we have with us Mr. Weston.

Please, you have 10 minutes to present.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members.

I'm very grateful to be here.

I'm surprised you've planned your schedule this way.

You have me here today, only six days after the bill passed second reading in the House. So I very much thank you.

I'm honoured to speak on this bill, which would amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. My appearance comes hard on the heels of last Wednesday's unanimous vote in favour of the bill on second reading, the first time a private member's bill has attracted unanimous support in this Parliament.

On behalf of the many agencies and people who have endorsed the bill outside the House, I thank the members for their support.

In the previous session of Parliament, a version of the bill received unanimous support from the House as well. That was the work of my colleague and friend, Chris Warkentin, the MP for Peace River, who also deserves thanks for all the work and time he has invested in this matter.

I also want to thank colleagues of mine who accompany me today, Joshua Peters and Adrian Reimer, who have spent untold time working on the bill and gathering endorsements for it. I'm sure the unanimous consent that we received inside the House was influenced by the long list of supporters outside the House, which so far include the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Solicitor General of B.C., the B.C. Association of Chiefs of Police, the Crystal Meth Society of B.C., the Town of Gibsons, the City of Powell River, the District of Squamish, the Municipality of Bowen Island, the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, Chief Gibby Jacob of the Squamish first nation, and several other groups and people.

Let me concede, colleagues, that I'm by no means an expert on the fight against drugs, but I am here to represent the public interest, the people of my riding, and all Canadians who are concerned about the fight against crystal meth and ecstasy. In that respect, I welcome your suggestions on how to improve the bill or make it more likely to achieve the goals of wiping out crystal meth and ecstasy use in Canada.

This bill would restrict the availability of crystal meth and ecstasy by providing additional possible charges against the drugs' manufacturers. These drugs are cheap to make, highly addictive, damaging to physical and mental health, and, in their manufacturing process, toxic to the environment. Increasingly, drug traffickers are mixing crystal meth into other drugs because it's inexpensive and it gives other drugs greater addictive qualities.

Crystal meth is a highly addictive drug, with a long-lasting high, and it produces an overwhelming euphoria. Those who use it are quickly addicted and experience more intense effects from prolonged use compared to other drugs.

These drugs have affected a large number of Canadians. In B.C., it was estimated by the Ministry of Health in 2003 that 4% of school-aged children have used methamphetamine-type drugs. At the same time, it was estimated by the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission that 5.3% of the school-aged population had tried methamphetamine-type stimulants. Between 2000 and 2004, 65 people died in B.C. with methamphetamine present in their bodies.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

John, I'm going to get you to slow down. The interpreters are having trouble keeping up with you.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

If I speak French, is that better?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

This number, which has been increasing each year for which statistics are available, charts a disturbing trend for all people in Canada. One of the most insidious qualities of these drugs is the covert way in which they attack users. Ecstasy appears to be a harmless drug to some. It's often marketed through colourful pills with cheerful designs such as happy faces. Police have found that a significant amount of ecstasy seized from the streets is laced with more dangerous drugs such as crystal meth. When combined, the two can become an addictive, toxic, and dangerous blend. Overdoses are common due to the unregulated nature of the drugs and also to the user's inability to monitor what he or she is actually consuming.

Side effects of methamphetamines are similarly worrisome. A 2007 position paper produced by the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre in Australia noted that methamphetamine use has often been associated with violent crime and the drug has a strong reputation for inducing violent behaviour.

The 2004 United Nations report made clear what a scourge these drugs are to youth in our country. Serious health implications resulting from chronic use of these drugs include dependence characterized by compulsive drug seeking and drug use, and a phenomenon known as amphetamine or methamphetamine psychosis, which includes strong hallucinations and delusions. Crystal meth and ecstasy use can translate over the longer term into schizophrenia, a side effect with lasting consequences. Trauma experienced by users includes great physical, psychological and emotional harm. Too many families and communities are being affected by these awful drugs.

In addition to the harm to the individual consumer and his or her community, we legislators should take note of the dangerous environmental aspects of the production of crystal meth and ecstasy. The covert nature of the production process means there's no way to control the quality of the substances produced, the safety of production, or the location. Though large-scale industrial production of these drugs is an increasing reality, the vast amount of crystal meth and ecstasy is still produced in small kitchen-like laboratories.

A 2004 Carleton University report stated that “Versatility is the term that best defines methamphetamine production.” Clandestine laboratories have been found in sites as diverse as private residences, motel rooms, dorm rooms, campgrounds, storage facilities, and almost any other place you could imagine. These laboratories appear innocuous from the outside as they're located in residential neighbourhoods, but they produce toxic waste, up to five kilograms of waste for each kilogram of crystal meth produced. They're also a major fire hazard. A UN report noted that “environmental harm and costs caused by illegal laboratories and their safe removal are considerable”.

Many of our colleagues in the House have expressed to me concerns about the effects of these drugs on people across Canada. However, the marketing of crystal meth and ecstasy transcends Canada's borders and tarnishes our reputation on an international scale. A 2004 UN report entitled, Preventing amphetamine-type stimulant use among young people noted that there is evidence that Canada-based Asian organized crime groups and outlaw motorcycle gangs have significantly increased the amount of methamphetamines they manufacture and export for the U.S. market, also for Oceania and East and Southeast Asia.

The report went on to note that Canada has grown to be the most important producer of ecstasy for North America. Since 2006, all ecstasy laboratories reported in Canada have been of a larger-scale capacity operated principally by Asian organized crime groups.

We have many resources, skills, and commodities to send abroad. How sad that we Canadians must now include crystal meth and ecstasy among our recognized exports. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime also noted in 2009 that Canada is the single largest supplier of ecstasy to the U.S. and a significant supplier of the drug to Japan and Australia.

I welcome this committee's suggestions on how to improve the bill so it can best eliminate crystal meth and ecstasy found on the streets of Canada. I'd also appreciate your input on how to ensure that it moves quickly through this committee and the House, and thus avoid the fate of MP Chris Warkentin's bill, which died in the Senate even though it had received unanimous consent in the House.

I thank you again, Mr. Chair, and I'm more than happy at this time to answer any questions about the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

With the committee's consent, I'd like to make a three-minute round. Is that all right?

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I have quick questions.

If I compare Bill C-428 to Bill C-475, I think there are three major differences. For one, your bill adds ecstasy. Two, it clears up how the previous intent section was drafted. It had sort of a passive use, “is intended for”, and yours is clearer in that it says “knowing”. In other words, the intent is very clear that it's with the accused, not objectified by the previous language.

I think the third point is that it specifies a maximum sentence of ten years. I'm not clear about what Bill C-428--unless I didn't get all the pages--intended to do for penalty. Maybe you can answer that.

The second thing I wanted ask you was, if someone is producing a listed drug in the schedule, is the maximum sentence ten years now? I didn't look it up so I don't know. Is this in league with the sentences that are there for other combined drugs?

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you for the questions.

The first thing I'd like to do is outline my approach in bringing the bill to the House.

It was very much an information-gathering, consensus-building approach. I went to the critics of the other parties to get their input. I went to law enforcement officials, both national and from my own province. It was recommended that we add ecstasy.

In my remarks, I mentioned that ecstasy is in many occasions a Trojan horse for crystal meth, so the law enforcement community felt that would be consistent with the intent of the bill and consistent with the health and welfare of Canadians. In terms of the intent, many people have asked about the intent provision. Any criminal offence in Canada has a mens rea or an intent portion, whether it's specific or not. We thought the clarity would both protect innocent users of the legal ingredients that may be covered by this bill as well as make it clear to the law enforcement community what they have to prove to get a conviction.

The sentence in this bill is ten years less a day, and I know there are various sentences for different offences in the Criminal Code. I suspect there are people at this table who are better able than I to make the comparison.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Mr. Lemay.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

To answer my colleague, Mr. Murphy, it is seven years that is provided for in subsection 4(3) of the act.

I have a question which it may not be possible to answer. Why is the term being increased to 10 years rather than being left as it is?

First, we are clearly not opposed to your bill. I even agree with it. However, the bandits are often faster than the police. I'm concerned, having been at the World Antidoping Agency, about Olympic athletes and athletes at all levels.

Everything is already provided for in Schedule I. I've examined it, and everything is entered in it, “Methamphetamine (N,a-dimethylbenzene-ethanamine), salts, derivatives”, etc. Are you going to ask that over-the-counter flu products be banned? It's merely a practical question.

I believe all my colleagues agree with this bill. There's no problem. However, it's the practical question. Would it not have been preferable to establish regulations, which are much easier than amending an act? Everything's already in it. I'm trying to understand what more this offers. That's my question.