Evidence of meeting #65 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 impaired.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Daryl Mayers  Chair, Alcohol Test Committee, Canadian Society of Forensic Science
Patricia Hynes-Coates  National President, Mothers Against Drunk Driving
Andrew Murie  Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving
John Bates  Chief of Police, Saint John Police Force
Catherine Latimer  Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
Michael Stewart  Program Director, Arrive Alive DRIVE SOBER
Louis Hugo Francescutti  Professor, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, As an Individual
Anne Leonard  President, Arrive Alive DRIVE SOBER
Rachelle Wallage  Chair, Drugs and Driving Committee, Canadian Society of Forensic Science
John Gullick  Chair, Canadian Safe Boating Council
Michael Vollmer  Vice-Chair, Canadian Safe Boating Council
Barry Watson  Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, As an Individual
Thomas Marcotte  Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of California, Co-Director, Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research
Commissioner Doug Fryer  Assistant Commissioner, Road Policing Command, Victoria Police

4:05 p.m.

Chief of Police, Saint John Police Force

Chief John Bates

I'm concerned.

I can just speak from the hard work that's being done in New Brunswick. I know they are trying to get regulatory measures in place in time.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Fair enough.

I hope I haven't taken up all the time of my colleague.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

You have, but we'll come back to short snappers at the end for Mr. Cooper's questions.

Mr. Fraser.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you all very much for being here and sharing your presentations with us.

I would like to start with you, Mr. Murie and Ms. Hynes-Coates. We heard a suggestion—I think it was the last time we were in session—regarding Canada doing a pretty good job on impaired driving, and the fact that we've seen the rates of impaired driving in Canada going down over the last number of years. I think the suggestion misses the point. I note in your brief you cited in 2016 that the Centers for Disease Control in the United States released a report indicating that Canada had the highest percentage of alcohol-related crash deaths, 33.6%, amongst the 20 wealthy countries that were looked at.

I wonder if you can provide some comment, Ms. Hynes-Coates, to the suggestion that Canada is doing a good job on impaired driving because we've seen a decline over the last number of years, or Mr. Murie, if you have something to add to that.

4:10 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

Andrew Murie

Canada has seen a dramatic decrease in our alcohol-related deaths. If you go back to the 1980s, it was not uncommon that 70% of our deaths on our roads were alcohol-related. Now we're down to 33.6%, as correctly stated in the report by the Centers for Disease Control.

What you have to realize is that the other countries have done better. One of the reasons they have done better is that the majority of them have a lower BAC and mandatory alcohol screening. Those two things seem to work hand in hand on the deaths and injuries and also the number of charges going through the courts.

Canada has made great progress. That's not an incorrect statement, but when you start to compare us to other wealthy nations, internationally, we've fallen behind.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

With the selective breath test versus the mandatory alcohol screening, you indicated that with the selective breath test 60% of people that have the blood alcohol concentration over .08% are missed, and between .05% and .079%, 90% are missed. What can you attribute that to?

4:10 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

Andrew Murie

The simple reason is people who drink and drive don't show.... You have a very quick intervention as a police officer, and if you don't have the overt signs of intoxication right there, you're not picking that up. A lot of times at .05%, you don't see those signs in that quick interaction because, in a sobriety checkpoint, you're moving people through really quickly.

It's interesting when you look at arrest rates. When you look at how people are arrested, 70% come because of random police patrols where police have observed some divergence from regular driving, 24% come from where they crashed themselves, and 6% come from sobriety checkpoints. Again, obviously observation is the key method and the ability to test them right away is very effective.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Thank you very much.

Mr. Mayers, you had talked about the presumption of blood alcohol concentration in the legislation. You talked about a judicial calculator allowance.

Could you expand on that? I wasn't sure what that meant.

4:10 p.m.

Chair, Alcohol Test Committee, Canadian Society of Forensic Science

Dr. Daryl Mayers

That was just a joke or a poor one, that the judges now have to add five every half hour and they may need a calculator to do it.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Okay. Fair enough.

4:10 p.m.

Chair, Alcohol Test Committee, Canadian Society of Forensic Science

Dr. Daryl Mayers

I'm sorry that it was a poor attempt at humour.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

That's okay. The joke went over my head, but that's not always uncommon. Thanks for that.

I'll move on to Police Chief Bates. You talked about the incidence of drug-impaired driving going up in your city. I assume you see, like many police across the country, the incidence of youth usage of cannabis being quite prevalent and having gone up.

Do you see incidence of youth or young people driving impaired by cannabis happening in your city?

4:10 p.m.

Chief of Police, Saint John Police Force

Chief John Bates

I can't say that I can one way or the other. The comments about the drug-impaired driving going up.... There's an old saying we used to say around the shop, “If you want to double the drug problem in your city, double your drug squad.” I think probably one of the driving factors of the higher stats is that we have, as a policing community, taken steps to train drug recognition expert and standard field sobriety officers. I think part of the driving force behind those elevated numbers will, in fact, be police officers out there and making those arrests. I think that goes without saying.

I base my comments on that we can expect to see more impaired driving by drug just simply on the stats that have flowed out of the United States: Colorado and Washington. We're sort of relying on those numbers to make the presumption that we're going to see increased numbers of people driving while impaired by drugs.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

As a police force, have you seen the number of people being charged with drug-impaired driving going up? I gathered that from your previous testimony.

4:15 p.m.

Chief of Police, Saint John Police Force

Chief John Bates

Yes. I can tell you that we in Saint John have seen the numbers increase. I gleaned provincial numbers. I didn't get the Saint John-centric numbers themselves, but I can tell you that we have a drug recognition expert who lives in another city in New Brunswick, who quite regularly helps out that city with their examinations when he's off duty.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

With that going up, you would agree that the added money that has been announced for tools and training and resources for the police, coupled with per se limits, would be beneficial to your ability to deal with the incidence of drug-impaired driving?

4:15 p.m.

Chief of Police, Saint John Police Force

Chief John Bates

I'm very hopeful that it would, and I'm very anxious to see how the money is going to make its way to police agencies at the local level.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Thank you very much.

Mr. Rankin.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you.

First, I'd like to direct my questions to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and to thank Ms. Hynes-Coates for reminding the committee about the terrible losses that Canadian families have suffered. That perspective is very valuable as we get into the statistics and the like. It's very helpful, so thank you for coming.

Mr. Murie, you spoke about your support, and MADD's support, of mandatory alcohol screening, and at one point you said that it would save our system $4.3 billion, if I've quoted you correctly. What is the source of that, and what does that include?

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

Andrew Murie

The source is a study that was done by Transport Canada, where they calculated the number of deaths and injuries; there was a cost value to that. Then we took that cost value and estimated if there was a 20% savings of lives and injuries, what value that would bring back. It looked at loss of life, the system, hospital care. It was a comprehensive evaluation of estimating that loss.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Including valuation of life itself.

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

Andrew Murie

Absolutely.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

I know that Mothers Against Drunk Driving has endorsed the idea of what are called per se limits for cannabis. I think MADD has supported the idea of a five-nanogram limit for an oral swab test. We've had testimony about per se limits that would suggest there are problems with that. I wonder if you could speak a little more about that.

Then afterwards I'll ask Dr. Mayers if anything from the perspective of scientists about this would shed some light, although I realize your expertise is in the alcohol field.

Mr. Murie.

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

Andrew Murie

We think that Bill C-46 capturing the three different limits has done an excellent job of what we would consider a good beginning with per se levels for drugs. Having between the two and five nanograms as a summary offence, again there are a lot of studies out there. The problem with the studies is threefold.

One is the strength of the THC they're allowed to use in these studies. It's very low compared to street level. Two, all these studies are done on driving simulators, not real roads. It's a very different type of research compared with what we do and have historically done for alcohol. Three is the rapid dissipation as it goes through the body, very unlike alcohol, so at time of driving the per se levels were probably much higher than by the time you fail a standard field sobriety test or an oral fluid test, make the demand for the blood, and get somebody to a place that can draw the blood, and there—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you.

Dr. Mayers, I know your expertise is in a different field, but have you turned your mind to per se limits for cannabis?