Evidence of meeting #36 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was insite.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
It's not necessarily an easy thing to deal with, as you've heard. I'm really sorry that you've had to listen to Mr. Berner and, really, just how he demonizes drug users and Insite with so much information—
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
I do think that Mr. Falk is correct in one point, and that is we are here debating Bill C-2 and whether or not this bill meets the test of the Supreme Court of Canada.
I remember that you were at the Supreme Court of Canada the day the decision came down. You've been involved in this for a very long time. One question I have, because you have followed it so closely.... Never mind all the studies. As you say, there are overwhelming studies that support Insite, but obviously some people will never ever believe the evidence before them. At the end of the day, you're someone who has direct experience, and not only in the process. You know how much we went through in Vancouver. There was a lot of public consultation, and sometimes it was really tough going—
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
It was really tough going, and there was a lot of opposition. I would say that at the end of the day, by and large most people now support it, and they see Insite as part of the solution—
4:05 p.m.
Prior Plaintiff, As an Individual
Exactly.
Ms. Libby Davies —and not part of the problem.
In looking at this bill and what you can see and knowing what we went through the first time around, do you think this bill will allow any other safe injection site in Canada? What does it look like to you in terms of the process that's laid out here?
4:05 p.m.
Prior Plaintiff, As an Individual
Well, I find it really interesting. I just want to say that a week ago I was out at this dinner-date thing and who arrived out of the blue but Judge Pitfield, from the very first decision at the B.C. Supreme Court. He's the most conservative judge in British Columbia. He sat down beside me. I said, “Judge”, and he laughed and said, “Mr. Wilson.” I put it to him and asked him, “When did you decide that this was going to be a legit thing?” He asked me if I remembered the first hour of the trial when he asked the opposition if this was a medical issue, and they hemmed and hawed. He asked again, “Is this a medical issue?” They said yes. He said that he decided right then that the next two days did not matter.
I believe that Bill C-2 will put too many fingers in the pie, or whatever, and too many people that can stop it on nothing but a whim of a moral judgment. I don't think that's right. Nine Supreme Court justices—it was nine to nothing—stated that this was a medical issue and should be treated as such. It was framed within Canada's laws.
The people inside that building are not breaking any Canadian law. If we allow everybody and anybody to have a say and they don't have an actual participation within it.... If you go to any city where there are a lot of drug addicts around, you're going to see those people want a solution. I'm saying that I believe supervised injection sites are a beginning solution to the problem. It's not the be-all and end-all. In fact, it's probably only the first 20 or 30 minutes of the change in my life, that injection. There's a lot after that, but if we don't give those people that first 20 minutes, where are they going to go?
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
I think sometimes there's an impression left that somehow Insite just came out of nowhere, but in actual fact there was a process already under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that gave the minister discretion to allow an exemption. It's not like there was a vacuum. There already was a process—
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
—and Insite had to follow that.
Now, Insite recently had its renewal, which is good; I'm not sure how many years it is. What's your opinion in terms of whether or not Insite had to come under this bill, what the chances are that it would actually be approved? With all of the criteria, the 26 criteria, and in fact additional ones if you're existing, plus the principles, what hope do you think there is that it would be approved?
4:05 p.m.
Prior Plaintiff, As an Individual
It would be as dead as those four addicts who could have used Insite last week in Vancouver, who died.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Okay.
Inspector Thompson, I happened to read an article in The Province newspaper a while ago where the Vancouver Police Department was issuing an advisory about some really bad drugs that were on the street and was urging people to go to Insite. Unfortunately, we've had a lot of misinformation from other police representatives at the committee, so I want to ask you, is it fairly routine that the Vancouver Police Department and the officers on the beat encourage people to use Insite, and that when there are some really awful things going on in terms of what's on the street they actually put out even a public advisory and encourage people to go to Insite? Is that something that's fairly routine?
4:10 p.m.
District 1 Commander, Operations Division, Vancouver City Police Department
It would be. We have a very close working relationship with Insite. Frankly, in this last crisis—there's still an active investigation—we certainly worked with Insite to get the word out on the street about the bad dope. It was a crucial part of our communications strategy. We can put something out via the media, but for this very marginalized population, will they actually hear that over the media? They will more likely hear it from, and maybe listen more closely to, someone who's working at that level at Insite.
So yes, they're a crucial part of any strategy we would have.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
Now we'll go to Mr. Carmichael, please. You have seven minutes, sir.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
Thank you to our witnesses today.
Mr. Wilson, I'd like to begin with you.
You started off mentioning how nervous you were. Congratulations. You did it. You got through it. Well done.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
I also want to congratulate you on five years of sobriety. Congratulations.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
I'd like to ask you a question. Because Bill C-2 focuses so much on the consultative process around community input into whether a consumption site, an injection site, should be located in a community, in your opinion should community views be considered in the application process of these injection sites?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
Somebody mentioned Abbotsford. Let's say a group goes to Abbotsford and they want to find a way to develop a centre similar to Insite in the Abbotsford community. Should the community, should the families, the people who live within the neighbourhoods where the establishing group might want to locate, have input into that location?
4:10 p.m.
Prior Plaintiff, As an Individual
For sure, but I think everybody's opinion should be given no more weight than the opinion from doctors, or the opinion from the police.