Debates of May 17th, 2001

Aboriginal Affairs

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, if the member had been watching closely, last year our department went into the economic development business. We have been working with our partners, the provinces, the private sector and first nations, to develop a first nation economy.

The best way to deal with poverty is to find people jobs. That is our mandate. That is what we are working on together.

Young Offenders

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Berthier—Montcalm is currently touring Quebec regarding the bill on young offenders.

People are unanimously outraged to see that it will cost more in Quebec to implement an act that no one wants and that does not at all take into account our societal choices in dealing with crime.

Does the Minister of Justice not find it absurd that Quebec is forced to fight against the federal government to preserve an act that enjoys the unanimous support of Quebecers, and moreover that it will be forced to spend more on an act that no one wants?

[John Maloney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, certainly under the youth criminal justice act there will be funding to the province of Quebec. There is $206 million across the board for the initiation phase. Also nationally there will be approximately $1 billion for all provinces.

However over the next five years the province of Quebec will receive roughly $191 million to implement and support youth justice services in that province.

Justice

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have another question for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice. We all know that the crime rate in most categories of crime in most parts of the country have been reducing steadily over the last decade. Yet crime still happens daily causing more victims.

Will the parliamentary secretary explain to us what the government is doing to prevent and further reduce crime in our communities?

[John Maloney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, while Canada's crime rate is falling, we know that the cost of each crime is too much. That is why the Liberal government created the national crime prevention strategy. The strategy has supported over 1,600 projects across the country so far.

Today in my region of Niagara the justice minister will announce funding for 156 more projects in Ontario. These projects will provide local solutions to local problems and address the root causes of crime.

The national strategy demonstrates that the Liberal government's commitment to help prevent crime in the first place is paramount.

[Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we have another project for the minister. The solicitor general advised the House that a national sex offender registry was a matter of provincial jurisdiction.

First the commissioner of the RCMP and now the Minister of Justice acknowledged the need for federal action. Will the solicitor general bring forward the necessary federal legislation to protect all Canadians from sexual predators regardless of where they live in this great country?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I said that we have offered to the provinces to put the addresses of any offenders on CPIC.

We have had discussions with provincial and territorial ministers. Some provinces have indicated they will attempt to put a registry together. Provincial justice ministers agree that we should evaluate what takes place down the road, not duplicate, not waste money, and be sure that we do the thing right.

We have one of the best systems in the world. It is the envy of all police forces around the world.

Mining Industry

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, never in the history of Canada has there been a federal government to hold the people of Cape Breton in such utter contempt as that government over there.

Yesterday will go down as a day of mourning for the people of Cape Breton. The Minister of Natural Resources should resign his seat today for the way he treats the people of Cape Breton by going in there and destroying the hopes and aspirations of 440 miners and their families.

My question is for the government. Why do you hold the people of Cape Breton in such utter contempt after all the promises you told them in the last election, that if they vote Liberal you will look after—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member intends to address the Chair.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman should not rely upon his NDP colleague, Mr. Corbett, for his facts because he will get them dead wrong every time.

We have invited Devco to sit down with the union and negotiate an appropriate human resources package. In addition, we have topped up the economic development fund by $28 million, for a total of $108 million by the government to defend Cape Breton, the NDP notwithstanding.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of the Honourable Sue Edelman, Minister of Tourism of the Government of Yukon.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Business Of The House

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the usual Thursday question of the government House leader on the business for the rest of the week and the business for the week after next, after we all get the well deserved break next week to go home and spend some time with our constituents.

What can we look forward to when we return and have an opportunity to see the report from the members' services and pay commission that we expect any time? Can he tell us what we will be doing in the House?

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, we will continue this afternoon with the debate on the opposition motion.

Tomorrow, we will begin second reading of Bill S-24, the Kanesatake agreement legislation, and resume debate on Bill C-27, the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act.

When we return on May 28 we will complete consideration of Bill C-7, the youth justice bill. I will be seeking advice from members opposite about wrapping up that debate. As backup we would have Bill C-27, if necessary, and Bill C-19, the environmental legislation.

Around mid-week we hope to commence report stage of Bill C-11, the immigration legislation.

Thursday, May 31, shall be an allotted day.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the Thursday question. May I use this opportunity to inform the House, and in particular the Leader of the Opposition, that it would be the desire of this party that the Leader of the Opposition use his authority under Standing Order 81(4)(a) to continue the examination of the estimates of the Department of Industry in committee.

There are important questions that need to be answered before the House can decide whether to pass the estimates. We must move to facilitate this study and in the past it has not always happened. In the event the Leader of the Opposition is not prepared to designate a department, there are other members, particularly members in this party, who are prepared to act.

The House resumed consideration of the motion and of the amendment.

Supply

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, as I noted prior to question period, the focus of the enforcement efforts of the Government of Canada is against high level drug suppliers and traffickers rather than individual users. This is in accordance with the law enforcement priority of the government with respect to organized crime.

Organized criminal groups control a very large portion of the drug trade in Canada. The drug trade in turn provides a prime source of profit for these groups. Over the past number of years the government has taken action against organized crime. I will outline some of the things we have done in this very important area.

The government has provided significant RCMP budget increases in the year 2000-01 in order to bolster organized crime efforts and enforcement in this area. We have also made available 13 integrated proceeds of crime units which have been set up across the country to deprive criminal groups of their profits and property.

We have also made amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to ensure that people convicted of offences related to organized crime were no longer eligible for accelerated parole review. Further, new money laundering legislation has created measures for reporting suspicious financial transactions and the cross-border movement of large amounts of currency. Amendments were made to the criminal code in 1997 to specifically address criminal organization offences. These criminal code measures against organized crime will be reinforced in Bill C-24 currently before the House.

These are some of the steps the Government of Canada has taken in the past and will continue to do in measured efforts. We know this is a very serious problem.

We recognize that despite these efforts it is likely to be impossible to completely prevent all drug trafficking in Canada. That would be ideal but it is highly unlikely and unrealistic. Nevertheless enforcement can help to ensure that efforts toward prevention, treatment and rehabilitation do not become undone in an environment of unrestricted access to illegal drugs.

We also recognize that more can be done with respect to Canada's drug strategy. Now is not the time for Canada to rest upon its achievements, many that they are. Rather it is time for further action to build on what has been achieved.

Countries around the world struggle with the issues surrounding drug abuse and addiction. Canada unfortunately is no exception. The government is clearly committed to the issue and to further action. As part of that action I think it is very appropriate for parliament to be reviewing drug abuse issues.

I therefore have no hesitation in supporting the motion. It represents the kind of forward moving thinking we need as a government and on all sides of the House to prevent the kinds of things that are taking place in this area.

On behalf of the constituents of my riding and indeed all Canadians, we need to pull together in this very important area. It behoves all of us to move together to try to see if there are solutions. In the process we must remember that treatment, prevention and rehabilitation are key words when it comes to these kinds of things, especially when it comes to our young people who I believe Canadians, wherever they live in this great country, want us to prevent going down this path because at the end of the day there is nothing but trouble there.

I can say firsthand that all Canadians recognize the problem. Certainly we as a government recognize it. We need to work efficiently and effectively to ensure that what we do in this important area produces results at the end of the day. I believe that is in keeping with the great values of the country and of the people of Canada.

The motion is timely. I think it is one that we as a government can and will support. It is something of great note to all Canadians.

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to support my hon. colleague in this important effort. Keeping drugs off our streets and away from our children is one of the primary efforts of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. It is obvious that CCRA takes seriously the job of protecting Canada's borders. I for one am very proud of the work it is doing. Saving Canadians from the harmful effects of illicit drugs is an ongoing battle. I believe CCRA has shown that it is up to the fight.

Crime knows no boundaries when it comes to smuggling drugs. As a Canadian I find it comforting and reassuring that there are dedicated men and women at our borders who work diligently to prevent harmful, illegal drugs from entering the country. Day in and day out some 3,500 customs officials work tirelessly to stop illegal goods and inadmissible people from entering our country. Canada's customs officers are the frontline defence against the entry of illegal drugs into Canada, and they do an excellent job.

I will give some statistics. Last year customs officers seized almost $900 million worth of illegal drugs at the border. Some $900 million worth of drugs were kept off our streets, out of our schools and away from our children. Drugs have been found in some very interesting hiding places. Customs officers have detected drugs hidden in shipments of fish, shoes, statues, machines, picture frames, toys and even pineapples.

How does the CCRA seize almost $900 million worth of illegal drugs? The CCRA uses a variety of tools to help stop the entry of illegal drugs into Canada. The equipment can detect drugs hidden in various types of substances such as plastic, coffee and clothes. The use of contraband detection equipment and detector dogs enables customs officers to conduct effective, non-intrusive inspections and allows the CCRA to focus on high risk individuals and their goods.

Over the past several years the CCRA has invested approximately $12 million in contraband detection technology which is deployed at ports of entry into Canada. Equipment such as ion scans, contraband detection kits, laser range finders and night vision equipment help customs officers detect drugs in clothing, luggage, vehicles and marine containers.

There are detector dogs. Forty dog teams strategically located across Canada were responsible for over 1,000 seizures of drugs and weapons last year. For 22 years detector dogs have played an important role in stopping narcotics from entering the country and helping the CCRA to be more effective and efficient in its anti-smuggling initiatives.

The CCRA has forged important partnerships with other law enforcement agencies to stop the entrance of illegal goods into Canada. Together the RCMP and the CCRA have intercepted many elaborate schemes to smuggle drugs. Just this week, as a result of interdepartmental co-operation, 179 kilograms of cocaine with a street value of over $70 million was seized. This is an excellent example of law enforcement agencies working together to fight crime.

These partnerships extend worldwide. As part of the world customs organization, the Canada-U.S. shared border accord, the Caribbean customs law enforcement council and the Canada-U.S. cross border crime forum, the government is making a real difference in protecting Canadians.

The CCRA also works closely with the private sector to combat drug smuggling.

The partners in protection program involves a two way partnership in which a shipping or trading company and the CCRA sign a memorandum of understanding outlining ways to work together to stop illegal activities. The CCRA provides guidance on how to spot illegal activity and in turn the importer provides the CCRA with information it may have regarding illegal activity. I am very pleased that the CCRA has developed such proactive relationships with these companies.

Stopping the entry of illegal drugs into Canada is one of many ways these joint efforts are working to make our communities more safe. A safer community is a healthier, more prosperous community.

Partnerships like these help the CCRA fulfill its mandate of protecting the border. They attest to the government's commitment to improve the quality of life of all Canadians.

In conclusion, stopping the spread of drugs is critical to winning the battle for a healthy Canadian society. As past experience has shown, the drug problem is one that the CCRA and the government take very seriously indeed.

The CCRA is dedicated to enforcing Canada's laws at the border, stopping the entry of illegal drugs into Canada and protecting Canadian citizens.

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

I am pleased to participate in the supply day motion of the Canadian Alliance, the official opposition of Canada.

Last year I asked to ride along with Vancouver police to experience first hand the illicit drug infested area of east Vancouver. I did this for a few hours one night before I could not take it any more and returned home. What I saw was an appalling and shockingly dreadful experience of life.

Many young and old people were injecting drugs in back alleys which were littered with needles and condoms. Dirty hotels and dormitories looked extremely unhygienic and were full of drug addicts sitting or lying on the floor.

So-called refugees around 20 years of age, mostly from Honduras, were selling cocaine and heroin. Almost all of them had about $200 in their wallets in assorted denominations, were carrying refugee ID cards and had business cards for the same lawyer. They wore jewellery and designer clothing and had stereo Walkmans.

When they spotted the police in civilian clothes and cars approaching them they blew whistles to warn their colleagues. As soon as the police stopped them they stuck out their tongues, spread their arms and hands, and made themselves ready for inspection.

Some attempted to swallow drugs they had wrapped in plastic. Many tried to hop on the skytrain to escape and sell drugs elsewhere. Their suppliers were hiding in nearby restaurants. In the area where illicit drugs are sold there are pawn shops to make it convenient for drug addicts to sell stolen items such as TVs, stereos, computers, et cetera. Restaurants, back alleys and other facilities in the area are like one stop shopping centres for drug addicts.

The government and the community have completely neglected the issue. What I saw in Vancouver was the rule of the jungle. All three levels of government have talked and studied too much. They are all talk and no action. They have no effective plans. The future for those people looks bleak, and that is a pity. It is certainly not the Canada I dreamed of before immigrating here.

I also visited the port of Vancouver where there is no effective control of drug imports. They are not even minimized, let alone stopped. Less than 3% of cargo containers arriving at the port are examined. Of those that are, many are found to contain drugs. The government disbanded the Vancouver port police. It should have strengthened and supported them by co-ordinating their activities with the coast guard and other law enforcement agencies. Instead it abandoned them.

It is no wonder the lower mainland of B.C. has the highest needle exchange rate in North America. Our law enforcement agencies are stripped of resources to fight crime and illicit drugs. Our laws have no teeth. The government has no vision, no plans, no priorities and no focus. Illicit drugs are even available in government controlled prisons where criminals are supposed to be punished and not entertained.

I have visited schools in my riding. The students tell me they can purchase drugs faster than they can have pizza delivered. In a 1999 survey, 53% of students said cannabis was easily or very easily available. That is almost double the 28% recorded in 1981. Some 36% of students in 1999 said someone had tried in the last year to sell them drugs, while 32% said they had observed someone selling drugs in school.

It is no wonder the Marijuana Party received 3.5% of the votes in last night's B.C. election. About 100,000 people in B.C. supported the Marijuana Party. That tells us a great deal. Marijuana growing operations can be found on every third block or so. These grow-ops are a huge money making operation. Marijuana is traded pound for pound with heroin south of the border.

Motorcycle gangs are expanding their operations. Other organized criminals are thriving. They have excellent houses, cars, boats, planes, cutting edge technology, equipment and appliances. The government gives them passports. Instead of spending time in prison they go on cruises and exotic vacations, things the ordinary taxpaying citizen finds it very difficult to do.

Proceeds of crime are not confiscated from drug dealers and organized criminals because we have no effective laws with teeth. While money is the motivation, the lack of tough penalties is no deterrent.

I had an opportunity to visit a couple of harm reduction clinics in Surrey that are professionally managed by Dr. Anna-Marie Maguire. I was disappointed to see a large number of patients there but was encouraged to hear their success stories. One patient told me he had been on drugs 15 years and had never been home to see his family. He said he was completely changed after receiving treatment and had met with his daughter for the first time in 15 years. He had tears of regret and joy in his eyes when he told me the story.

Another individual had been on drugs for many years and had stolen car stereos and women's purses to finance an expensive drug habit. He also repented and was a completely changed individual.

To my surprise, the city of Surrey was reluctant to renew the clinics' operating licences. I noticed no support for the clinics from the community or from any level of government. I understand that there may be problems. However there must be a solution as well. The seriousness of the issue should not be ignored.

A head start program would help the early detection of children susceptible to drug and alcohol abuse and other anti-social behaviour patterns. A head start program could offer more effective treatment. Although a motion was unanimously passed in the House I have seen no action from the Liberal government. It lacks vision and political will.

More resources should be allocated to detect drugs which cause impaired driving. A breathalyzer may show no alcohol but a driver may still be under the influence of illicit drugs.

Illicit drugs are not only unregulated; they are in many cases lethal. The increased purity of heroin and other drugs is causing deaths. In Vancouver there are on average 147 deaths per year due to overdoses of illicit drugs.

In 1998 Canada's long term drug strategy was to reduce the harm associated with alcohol and other drugs to individuals, families and communities. The strategy accepts that eradication of the problem is impossible and that we must simply live with the problem.

Strategies always talk of damage control, harm reduction, cures, intervention, needle exchanges, et cetera, but not preventive measures. The solution is to stop illicit drugs from being manufactured and imported into Canada. We need to protect our borders. We need regular inspections at our borders and ports. The coast guard, surveillance planes, port authorities, local police forces and others must work together and with the tools and resources they need.

A national drug strategy in partnership with federal, provincial and municipal governments must work at the community level to reduce drug use.

We need to infiltrate gangs and criminal organizations. The RCMP and other law enforcement agencies have trouble getting permission to use wiretaps and other surveillance efforts. It takes about 1,500 pages of petition to get such permission. Even then the monitoring period is limited to 90 days. The whole process must be restarted after the 90 days expires. The investigation suffers in the meantime.

During this process codes need to be broken, languages on surveillance tapes have to be translated, and other such work needs to be done to complete the investigations. Our law enforcement agencies need the high tech tools. However the criminals have money and state of the art technology while our police struggle to maintain 20 year old technology.

Money is the motivation for criminal activities. Their money and assets should be confiscated and turned over to our law enforcement agencies to be used to fight crime. We need tougher laws and we need to have them enforced. We need the punishment to fit the crime.

This would establish tough deterrent measures and not encourage crime with the lax laws and lax sentences that the Liberals allow. What we have here is a Liberal government that lacks a will and a vision to address these things. It has been the cause of the problem for so many years.

Now is the time to set up a committee to look into all these things so that something effective can be done. I appreciate speaking to the motion and I look forward to all members of the House supporting the Canadian Alliance motion to set up a committee on the non-medical use of drugs.

[Reed Elley, Canadian Alliance, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to today's supply motion. I will begin by thanking my hon. colleague from Langley—Abbotsford for bringing this important matter before the House.

The motion before us today is very serious and addresses a very real problem in society. One of the greatest problems facing our young people today is the non-medical use of drugs. Over the past number of years the prevalence and availability of non-medical drugs have been overwhelming. Today's youth face enormous pressures in the world. Our young people face constant forms of peer pressure, one of which is to conform to the usage of drugs.

There are entire industries based upon the non-medical use of drugs. Internationally or nationally we can all point to situations where this is true. My home province of British Columbia is well known within the drug world for so-called home grown marijuana, as well as other non-medical drugs.

My hon. colleagues have already mentioned several different statistics concerning non-medical drug use. As the aboriginal affairs critic for the Canadian Alliance I am particularly concerned with the problem of substance abuse among our native people. I would like to take a few minutes to review some of the statistics because they have not yet been entered into the debate.

The Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse in its 1999 profile tells us that indigenous Canadians are at particular risk for substance abuse. The majority of aboriginal youth are at two to six times greater risk for alcohol problems than other Canadians. Indigenous Canadians have relatively high rates of illicit drug use.

I would like members to consider some of the following rates. According to the Canadian Journal of Public Health over 73% of natives use marijuana, 37% sniff glue, 6% use solvents, 5.5% use heroin, almost 10% use speed, 14% use LSD, almost 5% use cocaine and 8% use crack. Most disturbing about all these statistics is that the usage rates are higher than in the non-native population in some cases by as much as four times. This is completely unacceptable.

Our native people are among the most susceptible to non-medical drug use and the statistics seem to bear it out. I have been involved with native people as a counsellor and my wife and I have been foster parents for over 25 years. I have seen the results of many of these problems, and they are heartbreaking.

To see individuals, families and in some cases entire communities devastated by the use and abuse of alcohol and non-medical drugs is startling. The results of these actions should not exist but sadly they do. As parliamentarians and as a nation it is time that we take real action against this problem.

As I mentioned earlier, my home province is well known in the drug world for illegal drugs. Unfortunately along with the beauty and the splendour of a craggy remote coastline come thousands of miles of secluded coves and places to import illegal drugs from offshore.

Along with hydroponic growth operations, the remoteness of the gulf isles and many parts of the B.C. interior provide ideal locations for marijuana fields. The RCMP searches and finds some, but with its limited resources, the overwhelming scope of the territory and the sophistication of the growers only a small percentage of the drugs are actually found and destroyed.

Nanaimo is the largest city in my riding. Many tourists call it the hub city. However it has also become known as the heroin capital of Canada. What a sad title to bestow on such a beautiful city.

My colleagues have referred to the drug problems of Vancouver's downtown east side and they were absolutely right to do so. There are very serious problems there. I remind the House that there are serious and equally devastating problems not only in a city like Nanaimo but throughout a thousand other cities and towns across the country.

We all know what the problem is. It is important that we start doing something about it. Our past actions have not been wrong. They were all well intentioned but for some reason do not seem to be working. We have had an escalation, a growing epidemic of illicit drug use across the country.

There are many other consequences beyond simply the non-medical drugs. Drugs are not free and profit is the motive for the drug dealers, be they at the local level or the major international players in the drug game. Another consequence involves both petty and major crimes and prostitution, including the exceedingly young. My heart breaks when I see young people 13 and 14 years of age trapped on the street. These are children. They are our future and their lives are being squandered and wasted in a life of drug abuse.

In 1996 the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse estimated that the economic cost of illegal drugs was $1.37 billion or $48 per capita. The largest cost, approximately $823 million, was as a result of lost productivity due to illness and premature death. A substantial portion of the costs, $400 million, was for law enforcement. Direct health costs due to illicit drugs were estimated at $88 million. There was also the social cost of lost families whether through death, illness or retreat from society as a whole.

How many potentially great minds in the nation have been lost to the illegal use of non-medical drugs? Can we afford, financially or otherwise, to continue down this sordid path of human sorrow? Can we in all good conscience stand idly by and allow these problems to continue? I suggest not.

I believe George Eliot said it correctly when she said:

Failure after long perseverance is much grander than never to have a striving good enough to be called a failure.

Let us not fail for a lack of trying.

One of the issues arising out of today's debate is the medical use of marijuana. We all recognize that this is a contentious issue. When we refer to marijuana we often relate it to the criminal element and the role it often plays in leading to other drugs. I personally do not dispute this but I do believe there is room in the debate for the medical use and research of marijuana, particularly in a non-smokable form, such as pills and inhalers. In turn, it should be treated like any other drug that is approved and regulated in Canada. The body of medical research appears to be showing that the medical use of marijuana can be most helpful for some diseases.

We should differentiate between the medical and the recreational or street use of marijuana. If there is a possibility of bona fide medically proven results then we should not close the door to this kind of help.

Earlier I mentioned that the motivating factor of profits is the drug world. From a personal perspective, I think we need to rethink how we approach the drug problem. The criminal element in our society is interested in only one thing and that is profits, not just small profits but obscene profits that have no regard for the waste of human lives and ongoing suffering. In simplistic terms, if we can remove the profit element we can reduce or ideally even eliminate many forms of non-medical drug use.

How do we do that? How do we remove the profits from the sales? I do not have the answer and that is why we need this kind of committee. It may be able to come up with some kind of innovative way to take the profit motive out of the drug scandal.

I am pleased to be part of the debate today. I hope the motion receives non-partisan support from right across the House, and that it will eventually lead to something being done about the most pressing problem among our young people today, which is the use of illicit drugs.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his intervention. He mentioned the medical use of marijuana. One of the debatable points on that is that youth may get the wrong signal. They may think that if marijuana was fine for medical use, then maybe it would be fine in a more recreational form.

How would my hon. colleague prevent youth from getting the wrong signal from those who say that medical marijuana is just fine?

[Reed Elley, Canadian Alliance, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a distinction has to be made in our society, particularly when we are engaged in any kind of drug education with our young people.

Personally I do not believe that the recreational use of marijuana should be a legal activity in Canada. Studies show that the continued use of marijuana, particularly in a very heavy way, does lead to all kinds of physical consequences, such as a lack of concentration and brain damage of some kind that eventually leads to the person becoming a far less effective person.

However we also have to be able to say, and this is a basic philosophy, that all things created do have a good intention because that is the way the Creator meant it to be. We need to see the benefits of marijuana for medicinal purposes. We must also make it very clear to our young people that the continual recreational use of marijuana is very harmful to them.

[Werner Schmidt, Canadian Alliance, Kelowna, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that the hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan is actually entering the debate because he has firsthand experience from his past life of some of the results of the abuse of illicit drugs.

One should appeal to people who have had that experience as to why they are so involved in this particular debate. It is no accident that we are talking about setting up a special study committee for this particular subject. The problem is all around us. I wonder if the hon. member could explain perhaps in more detail just how in his family or in the families of his friends we could actually create a change in attitude toward the illicit use of drugs.

[Reed Elley, Canadian Alliance, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I do thank my hon. colleague for the question. It is true that in my former life I did have a great deal to do with people who were addicted to non-medical drugs. It is a very involved process. It means coming alongside people in critical situations and providing them with real reasons for, first of all, why they ought to live. In many cases people just simply do not want to live. We have to provide them with a reason for living.

That goes not only to the physical, but to the spiritual, to the emotional, to the whole person. I was very involved in helping people work those things through so that they did not have to become dependent upon a chemical substance to try to find the reason for living.

Also, as foster parents of aboriginal children, we are very well aware of the results, for instance, of fetal alcohol abuse and what happens in little lives when the mother drinks heavily during gestation. That little life, who never asked for that, is scarred by it forever.

Somehow we have to do something to help change the attitudes of people at a primary level so that they know life is worth living. Many times, I think, that is why people enter into this kind of thing.

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening closely to the debate. I congratulate the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan for his informed remarks.

I took note of the latter reference in the remarks to the medical use of marijuana, but I have to say that this is an infinitesimally small piece of whatever this problem is. In the overall scheme of what we are dealing with today, marijuana has to be very low in priority. In my own personal view I am not too sure why it even shows up on the Richter scale. However, it is an illegal substance in our law now. Let us focus on the big picture.

We all know the costs of illegal drug use. There are of course the huge costs of lost lives, the policing costs, costs of prosecution in the courts and sentencing in our institutions, incarceration costs, rehabilitation costs, medical treatment costs, the costs of theft of goods, break and enters in homes, thefts of automobiles, the VCR, and the jewellery. How many grandmother's rings have been stolen in the last year by people stealing to pay for a drug habit? It is an epidemic.

There are also corruption costs. In some quarters our society is being undermined by the sheer corruption of the organized crime that drives the illegal drug trade. If left unchecked it will undermine our society, as it has some other societies around the world. It is insidious. So far we have been lucky but we should not take our luck for granted.

The costs of needle sharing are huge. One statistic I have here covers injection drug use, with all the harm it causes, such as overdosing, HIV, hepatitis and other communicable pathogens, suicides, abscesses, infections, poor nutrition and endocarditis.

An estimate for all the direct and indirect costs for only injection drug use is $8.7 billion over a six year period. That is principally related to HIV-AIDS. The costs related to hepatitis C that comes from injection drug use are anticipated to overtake even the costs of treating HIV-AIDS over the years.

These are huge costs which we as a society are now bearing or are about to bear. I do not think anyone has truly added up the costs. Is there one minister in the House whose responsibility it is to add up the costs of illegal drug use? The Minister of Health will have a perspective. The solicitor general will have a perspective. The customs and revenue agency will have a perspective. There are a lot of perspectives.

My taxpayer constituents do not have the total number, but it is huge. I am sure most members in the House will agree with that. We do not even know what the total is. What cost do we put on a young life snuffed out by illegal drug use?

I maintain that we have to radically change the way we look at illegal drug use. We must radically change it because the methods we are using now are virtually the same methods we have used for the last 75 or 100 years. Essentially they involve criminalizing the use of certain drugs.

There will be some real restraints in changing the way we deal with this. I know that and most members of the House know that. I am sure that by the end of this debate, maybe by the end of my own remarks, there may be some phone calls to my constituency office. I do not know. However, I am suggesting that we have to radically change the way we look at this if we are to make any progress as a society. I think we are afraid to change. Some of us are and some of us are not, but I think a lot of us are afraid to change the way we look at drugs.

There is another constraint. We as a country are bound into certain international treaties that oblige us to criminalize possession or use of certain drugs. We as a country are a good boy scout. We criminalize it, we prosecute it and we follow the other countries in these international conventions. That does not give us much freedom. We have to be bold and take the initiative. We do not have to reject the treaties, but we have to find ways to find new approaches.

Our neighbour to the south, the U.S.A., is a constraint, believe it or not. The way the U.S.A. treats this issue is the same way it has treated it for 75 or 100 years. It is based on enforcement and interdiction. That is not working. It is not working there and it is not working here. It is imported across our border just about the same way that a lot of other things are imported across our border. I am not talking about the drugs. I am talking about the policy, the method of enforcement.

It is difficult for us here to do things in a way that is radically different from the way policing and medical counterparts deal with it across the border, but we have to find a way to do it.

Lastly, we have to look at our own attitudes toward these drugs. Why do we criminalize certain drugs? Is it that the drug removes some degree of sobriety? Is it that individuals get a bit of a buzz with marijuana? Is that the evil thing? However, maybe that is the same thing that alcohol does. We do not criminalize alcohol.

Is it that some drugs are addictive? Is it evil because it is addictive? Possibly, but cigarette tobacco is addictive. It is just about as addictive as a drug can get. We do not criminalize tobacco, but we can identify the drug, it is addictive and we sell it in corner stores.

It is not intrinsically sobriety or addictedness that is the key to why we criminalize. I do not think we know why we criminalize certain drugs, but it is in our law and we just cannot change. However we have to, we must, find a way to break out of that paradigm. If we do not, we will not find any new solutions and we will stay on the same track we have been on since the years of prohibition.

I will suggest that we make a significant change. We do not have to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We will have to maintain strict laws and strict enforcement. For those who distribute, for those who create the stuff, for those who break the laws, we will maintain strictness. We cannot forget that we are dealing with organized crime as a business. Organized crime is driving virtually the entire gamut of illegal drug use.

We must keep the dynamic in mind. The dynamic is not that people intrinsically as individuals walk out and seek addictive drugs. The problem is that a businessman, a criminal, is bringing in the drug and marketing it to the individual. That is the most important part of this dynamic.

Am I suggesting that we legalize drugs? No.

Mr. Speaker, I notice that you have been indicating the passage of time. It is not my intention to split my time. I would like to continue and if there is some time left perhaps my colleague could use that.