Public Safety Committee on Oct. 29th, 2014

[Gwendolyn Landolt]

Yes, thanks very much. I just wanted to add—

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Go ahead.

[Gwendolyn Landolt]

—that Bill C-2 is essential to try to moderate the terrible tragedies that are taking place in Canada with regard to the drug injection site in Vancouver.

We have done a brief where all this and the police statement are referenced for you to read, and all the studies backing up what I said are in our brief, if you care to read it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Landolt.

We will now go to the rounds of questioning. We will start off with seven minutes.

Ms. James, please.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all of our witnesses for appearing.

When the Minister of Health appeared before committee in our last meeting, she stated that this bill would give greater clarity and transparency for her, the Minister of Health, via consultations with a wide range of stakeholders. One of those stakeholders pertains to a very direct and specific clause in this bill, and it has to do with seeking input from the chief of police in the city or municipality where the applicant seeks to establish an injection site.

I'll direct my first question to you, Chief Larkin. Would you be in favour of that specific clause with that particular stakeholder?

[Chief Bryan Larkin]

Yes, absolutely. The CACP and in fact all chiefs across Canada applaud that inclusion, because it really integrates the whole process to safe communities and the well-being of communities. It takes the issue of social determinants of health, which policing is looking at significantly as it relates to crime, and actually turns it into a community discussion. Hence, we feel that's absolutely necessary and we applaud that inclusion. It's a step in the right direction.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Are you concerned at all about a potential increase in crime related to an injection site in a particular area? The reason I ask that question is that in the first hour we had two witnesses, and one of them asked which neighbourhood would be sacrificed. He went on to talk about the fact that illicit and illegal drugs will be transported in and around that area. In fact, he talked about a perimeter, or even a border, that goes around an injection site that will allow someone to freely walk in that area without any ramifications from law enforcement. So there were some concerns there. He also talked about increase in other crimes.

The other witness we had in the previous hour said very specifically that in many cases drug addicts support their addiction by committing crimes. He went on to talk about an increase in property thefts, and so on, in particular areas. Of course, as someone in law enforcement, you know that drug dealers will go where markets are.

So having said that, and kind of reiterated what the first witnesses said, are you in agreement with those types of issues pertaining to an injection site?

[Chief Bryan Larkin]

Yes, to a certain extent. I think you have to take it in context. I think there are some myths, and I think there are misconceptions. That is the importance of the localized discussion; the important piece of this is when you drill this down. In Canada, we're looking at two public policy experiments and they're both in Vancouver, which from a chief's perspective is unique. There are many communities that have drug issues. In fact the tentacles of drug and substance abuse reach across Canada—east to west to north to south.

That being said, what we experience on the west coast in Vancouver is something that no other communities in our country are experiencing. I think you have to look at it and localize it. You have to look at what the current crime rate is in the area. For example, if we met the 27 criterion and we were going to open up a safe consumption site and create this process, what is the current crime rate? You have to look at the benchmark. What is the potential to create those types of pieces?

There's lots of discussion about what our friends in Vancouver have been doing, but I can tell you that we have a member from the organized crime section who sits on the drug abuse committee. It's a misconception that Vancouver police officers do not enforce the law within the 500-metre radius, which is often recognized. I think one of the pieces around that, though, is that the Vancouver Police Department will tell you that within the 500-metre radius, since 2003 drug overdose and calls for service related to drug overdoses have been reduced by 35%.

That being said, calls for service and demand on police is up. Some of that is around deployment strategies and the Vancouver Police Department deploying more resources there, which will naturally generate more calls for service; it's wherever we direct police officers. The Canadian chiefs have a simple message here: we can't arrest our way out of substance abuse issues. We cannot arrest our way out of a public health issue. In fact, it is silly and not a financially innovative concept anymore. We need an integrated approach. We're significant supporters of the national anti-drug strategy, and hence our message is that it has to be a balanced approach. This bill clearly starts that discussion.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Are you in support of this legislation? I'm not sure if I heard you say yes or no.

[Chief Bryan Larkin]

Yes. The CACP is in support of the legislation.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Okay.

We heard from a witness in the first hour—I put it on my BlackBerry because I wanted to make sure I said it correctly—that he was concerned that the measures in this bill were excessive compared with any other public health services that are offered.

Having heard from the first two witnesses, and the concerns with crime and other issues that might be in the area, can you think offhand of any other public health service that might...? I'm trying to word this the correct way, because we're not here to talk about the merits of InSite or injection sites. That's not the purpose of the bill. It's about community consultation and making sure that local law enforcement has a say.

Can you think of any other publicly administered health service that may cause the same degree of concern that we heard from the two representatives in the first hour?

[Chief Bryan Larkin]

I listened to the witness testimony and certainly understand some of the concerns, but I can't think of anything off the top of my head. I think it's a discussion. One of the lessons we learned, if I can use the harm reduction strategy, was around methadone clinics. I think police chiefs would argue that there was not enough consultation with law enforcement around the placement and the location of methadone clinics, and hence created a significant impact on policing because it creates community concerns. There's very little consultation when you look at the implementation of a methadone clinic.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Sorry, I don't mean to cut you off. I have one minute left.

[Chief Bryan Larkin]

Sure.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I just want to say to Mr. Grinham, thank you very much for the service that you provide. I just wanted to put that on the record.

I do have a question for Ms. Landolt. I looked at your biography. It indicates that you were a crown prosecutor, you had a legal career and a private practice, you specialized in certain issues, and you also have written extensively on Canadian constitutional issues.

Do you have any concerns with this bill with regard to—

[Gwendolyn Landolt]

Sorry, I didn't hear the question.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Do you have any concerns with regard to this legislation with the charter, based on your legal background?

[Gwendolyn Landolt]

The Supreme Court of Canada said there has to be a balance between public safety and public health. It seems to me that Bill C-2 is desperately trying to create that balance. The court ordered a proliferation of drug injection sites to go forward, providing there was that balance. I find that Bill C-2, within the margins that the court gave the government to bring in legislation, has attempted to do that very important job of balancing the two aspects of drug addiction.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

I suspect that my time is up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

That's it. Thank you very much.

We will now go to Ms. Davies. I do believe you're splitting your time.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I think Marjolaine will go first, and then me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine.

Carry on, Ms. Boutin-Sweet.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Over the course of this study, we have received a half dozen briefs, and I have read them all. To my surprise, the choice of witnesses is not at all representative of the views expressed in the briefs. It's quite the opposite.

For example, the Canadian Association of Nurses in HIV/AIDS Care recommends that the bill be withdrawn and a new bill be drafted. Moreover, the Canadian Bar Association, through the National Criminal Justice Section, which represents 37,000 lawyers across Canada, states the following in its brief. I will read you one paragraph of their brief, since the association has no witnesses here in committee to speak on its behalf. The following is stated in the brief:

However, other parts of the Preamble reflect a continued emphasis on prohibiting illicit drugs. This approach ignores overwhelming historical and current evidence that prohibition drives the drug supply underground and increases violence and debts associated with drug activity and overdoses. Not only dangerous, this approach has proven expensive and ineffective, even after decades and endless public funds to allow it to succeed.

The Canadian Bar Association and many other stakeholders are rather advocating in favour of harm reduction when it comes to illicit drugs and addiction. I think that the establishment of supervised injection sites leads to harm reduction. We should rather participate in the establishment of those sites, as the association suggests in its brief.

Mr. Grinham, you appear to be saying otherwise. What is your response to the association's statement?

[Chris Grinham]

It has been our position, as I've said, from the research that we've looked at—and we've looked specifically at Ottawa—that the numbers that are often quoted are either quoted out of context or quoted without the full information. As I've said before, it's important that the entire story be told and that everybody be heard from all sides.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Did you know that studies conducted in other countries point to the exact same conclusions as the Canadian studies?