Evidence of meeting #18 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was preamble.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Joanne Klineberg  Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

5:50 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Joanne Klineberg

—as opposed to replacing—

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Yes, the (a) is incorrect.

5:50 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Joanne Klineberg

—amendment LIB-9 as it was originally drafted with the new subparagraph (iv).

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Yes, I see what you're saying. Clause 4 is only amended by adding, after line 28, on page 9, the following: “the collection of information from coroners and medical examiners”.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

The first part is not what was amended, only the last one.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Exactly.

Do you see the problem?

5:50 p.m.

A voice

No.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

The blues are correct.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

We do see it.

This is what is right, and this is not right. He substituted this for the resolution.

5:50 p.m.

A voice

Oh, okay.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

He's only inserting to the bill “(iv)”, stating: “the collection of information from coroners and medical examiners”.

5:50 p.m.

A voice

So you wanted to remove (a) and (b)?

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Yes, this is all removed and it's by adding line....

5:50 p.m.

A voice

Okay, it's adding line 28, on page 9.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Yes, exactly.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

—adding line 28 on page 9, with the subparagraph (iv). The rest of the bill is intact.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Starting at “(c)”, this text is right; everything before (c) is wrong after the word “amended”.

5:50 p.m.

A voice

Okay.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

I'm sorry. We haven't had a chance to look at this yet.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

No, this is the first chance.

Thank you very much for bringing this to our attention.

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Yes, thank you so much for pointing it out.

Shall the bill, as amended, carry?

I believe Mr. Falk wanted to read something.

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

Bill C-14 is called medical assistance in dying, but make no mistake, Bill C-14 is physician-assisted suicide.

The Supreme Court was very clear that physician-assisted suicide is not a charter right, but an exemption that could be provided on an exception basis provided that individuals meet certain criteria. The person must be a competent adult who clearly consents to the termination of life and who has a grievous and irremediable medical condition that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition.

Bill C-14 clearly goes beyond this Supreme Court decision, with a mandate to study making physician-assisted suicide available to mature minors, advance directives, and mentally disabled individuals. This committee heard testimony from approximately 42 individuals and/or groups who have a vested interest in this issue, in addition to officials from the justice department and the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health.

Over 100 amendments were presented to committee, based on evidence from witness testimony that was provided to committee. Sadly, the government did not present, and in fact voted against, any meaningful amendments. The Conservatives presented many thoughtful amendments that would have strengthened the bill and added important safeguards. This is a missed opportunity.

Let me highlight a few of these missed opportunities. These amendments included assuring that only fully trained and qualified medical practitioners would assess the individual and administer the lethal cocktail that would procure death. We also provided an amendment that would remove psychological suffering as an eligible consideration for physician-assisted suicide. We also suggested that “reasonably foreseeable death” should be replaced with “imminent” or at least “expected death within 30 days”.

Insofar as safeguards, we presented amendments that when a person is self-administering suicide, a physician would be required to be present. We also presented an amendment where we thought judicial review... to ensure that all criteria for physician-assisted suicide eligibility had been met. We also presented an amendment where palliative care consultation, including awareness of all the options and ensuring that palliative care access was available and offered.

We also presented an amendment that would require psychiatric examination to confirm capacity to consent, when mental health was a factor. We also had an amendment that would require reasonable proof that all the criteria had been met, and not just an opinion to that extent.

Finally, we presented an amendment to Bill C-14 that would have provided meaningful conscience protection for individuals and institutions that do not want to participate in the killing of human beings for reasons of conscience and/or religious beliefs. We got a weak compromise.

Regrettably, Mr. Chairman, these opportunities based on evidence from the testimony and interventions of committee witnesses have been forfeited. Bill C-14 is a bill that could have been and should have been better and a bill that I can't support.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Thank you very much.

Mr. Rankin.

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

I would like to begin by thanking you, Chair, for an excellent job as chair of this committee. I see nodding around the room. I think you did an excellent job.

I must regretfully agree for different reasons that I cannot support this bill.

I believe this bill to be unconstitutional. I take that on the basis of advice we have received from eminent lawyers from coast to coast, from the Canadian Bar Association, from the Quebec bar association, and my own understanding of constitutional law. I believe that to have defined “grievous and irremediable medical condition” as this bill does not only flies in the face of the recommendation of the special joint committee that recommended that we not do that; I believe it fundamentally undercuts the victory that people achieved in the Supreme Court of Canada in the Carter case.

I do not believe this bill to be either Carter-compliant or charter-compliant. As a lawyer, I am simply unable to support a bill that I believe to be fundamentally unconstitutional.

Thank you.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Thank you very much, Mr. Rankin.

Does anyone else wish to speak to the bill?

Not hearing anybody, we're going to move to the vote on the bill as amended.

Shall the bill as amended carry?