Debates of Feb. 7th, 2008

HIV-AIDS among Aboriginal People

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the hon. member's speech for the last 20 minutes or so and I see it as something that actually diminishes the debate. She referred to the proposal of the former government as being a panacea that would have cured all the ills in the aboriginal communities. I see that as such a shameful statement.

When I look back at the proposals of the former government in its dying days in office, it brought forward a proposal that the Liberals felt was going to make a difference. I would like to ask that member, where was the systemic reform in that proposal? Kelowna was only a validation of the status quo. There is a broken system and the former Liberal government had 13 years to attempt to tackle it. It did not do anything. It waited until the last second and then it brought forward its validation of the status quo. I find that shameful.

I ask the member opposite, where was the systemic reform in her party's Kelowna proposal?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that is one of the most astounding comments I have heard from the member, and I have heard many astounding ones. It is absolutely clear that the member has no idea about collaboration, consultation, sitting and working together to develop a plan. He does not understand that there is not a one size fits all. He does not understand that it is not about one party telling the other what to do. It is about working with the communities for 18 months to hear their needs, concerns and how to remedy them. No, that member of Parliament thinks that each and every time he knows best what is required for aboriginal people. He does not respect the need to listen. He does not respect the need to hear. He does not believe in collaboration.

He sat in a committee and listened to over 20 presentations from communities where they said, “Do not do this,” and he said, “I know best”. The lessons of Kelowna are lessons of collaboration. They are lessons of working together. They are lessons of giving and taking and developing plans and developing frameworks, coming to a mutual and common understanding of what the issues are region by region and community by community right across the country.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Winnipeg South Centre for her comments tonight. She is very knowledgeable on aboriginal issues and she recently visited the downtown eastside, as she mentioned.

The member used the words “despair” and “notorious”. I have to say that sometimes I feel that the media spotlight on the downtown eastside portrays a stereotypical negative view of this community of about 10,000 people.

I know the member visited the Aboriginal Mother Centre Society, the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre and maybe other places. There are amazing organizations in this neighbourhood, such as the Knowledge Aboriginal Youth Alliance, KAYA, the Urban Native Youth Association, the Carnegie Centre, Downtown Eastside Residents Association, the First United Church, Vancouver Native Health Society, and Healing Our Spirit. There are incredible organizations that have a tremendous resiliency to what is going on.

There are groups like VANDU, the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users, or WAHRS that I mentioned earlier. These are people who are fighting back. I am always very concerned about the characterization of the community. There is despair over how governments treat the community but the sense of community spirit, pulling together and uniting is unbelievable. I do not see it anywhere else to that extent.

I wanted to put that into the debate because we are left with these negative views about the community.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite because her points are valid.

On my last visit about three or four weeks ago, I went on a tour with some of the liaison officers. I was struck by the vibrancy and the sense of community. Members of the community, whatever their living conditions, look out for each other. They know each other. They look out for each other. They know when others are there and not there. They know everybody's individual needs. Life is not easy for many of them, but there certainly is an energy, a vibrancy.

There are many community organizations, which the member knows far better than I do, that are working with them on the ground and beyond to create the kind of community, environment, health and education opportunities for the residents of the downtown eastside and beyond.

I thank the member very much for bringing that up. I had intended to acknowledge it and did not. It is an important aspect of that community.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Health]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully to the comments by the member for Winnipeg South Centre. It is really astounding what little respect she has for a member of the first nations community, the member for Winnipeg South, who is an expert in first nations both as a member of the community and as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

I have two comments. First, the Kelowna accord was not an accord. It was a press release which was released in the dying days of a government that had been in existence for 13 years. That is the best the Liberals could do, a press release. There was no money set aside or anything. It was just a press release.

Second, the precursors for success fundamental to everyone are human rights. I would like to know why the Indian affairs critic for the opposition is preventing this government from allowing human rights and section 67 apply to first nations people as it applies to her and me. It is absolutely despicable that human rights for first nations peoples are being denied by the official opposition.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, do I have a few minutes or only a comment?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre has two minutes. She has the floor.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the parliamentary secretary that he stop reading the speaking notes that he is given and that he try and get at the truth.

Liberal members of Parliament support the repeal of section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. They have supported it from the outset. What they have not supported is the lack of respect, the lack of process and the lack of consideration for the concerns of first nations communities when they came before the committee and said, “We want to know how this is going to impact on us. How is it going to affect our collective rights? Has an impact analysis been done? Is there some consideration for a non-derogation clause?”

I can give the member chapter and verse where we have said it over and over again that we support the repeal of section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. We support it. We do not like it being rammed down people's throats. We want it done with respect, with courtesy and with some understanding and listening to and hearing the communities, not telling them ”I know what is best for you”.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, I will just correct my hon. colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health. I am in fact a member of the Métis nation, so I do have some ancestry that has their feet in first nations communities. I am in fact Métis, but I will not hold that against him.

Of course this is an important debate tonight and that is why I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to take part in it. There is no doubt that high HIV rates among aboriginal people is a matter of grave concern not only to this government but of course to myself.

HIV is a plague upon the modern world and, unfortunately, we do see very high rates of HIV among aboriginal people in this country. However, one of the factors that can lead to an increased rate of HIV is that of poverty. As such, I would like to take some time to speak to that important issue which does face many people from aboriginal communities.

Our government recognizes that the aboriginal people in this country face unique challenges in overcoming poverty. I have already spoken to how we, unfortunately, have a system that holds too many aboriginal people back, a system that needs reform.

Consequently, in collaboration with aboriginal peoples and our partners across the country and in the provinces and territories, we are looking forward to continuing to implement results based initiatives that will have a real and tangible impact on the lives of aboriginal people, such as extending individual human rights to first nations people, something that we had to fight hard to push within this Parliament, something that seems so common sense to people on this side, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health has already just mentioned, a common sense approach of extending individual human rights, something that everyone has, something that I as an aboriginal person has, but something that first nations people did not have.

It is something that we had to push, each and every day for the last year, just to try to get this important bill through our committee. Finally, after considerable public pressure, it looks like it may be beginning to move forward, but it has been a challenge, and that is something that we face with all of our interesting ideas that we have brought forward to improve this broken system that I have talked about.

Other areas in which we are making progress are in the areas of water, housing, family supports and, of course, economic development in order to create conditions for healthy, sustainable communities, which are really the best means to combat poverty.

Our approach in these areas will have benefits for all aboriginal people. We have made a lot of progress toward our goal of improving the quality of life for aboriginal people in ensuring that they enjoy a standard of living that is comparable to other Canadians.

For instance, one area in which we took a specific interest was the area of clean water. When we first came to office, we inherited a situation where we saw nearly 200 aboriginal communities that were living under shameful water conditions. It was really a forgotten tragedy that the previous government paid no care to. We immediately put in a plan of action to address the drinking water on first nations communities and, since then, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has been working in partnership with Health Canada, Environment Canada and first nations governments themselves to improve the situation.

We launched the plan of action, which was part of our commitment, to monitor the progress and to make information available to everyone to ensure that our focus remained on this important task and to have measurable improvements in the lives of first nations people. The Minister of Indian Affairs recently released the latest progress report and it shows that it has been consistent and has had very encouraging progress.

Our government is committed to ensuring that residents of first nations enjoy the same protection afforded other Canadians when it comes to drinking water. When we came to office, there were 193 high risk systems in first nations communities. That number has now been reduced to 85.

When the plan of action was launched, it identified 21 priority communities with high risk systems and which also had drinking water advisories. The latest progress report has only six communities in that category. We are very proud of that progress but we will continue to move ahead because there are still a number of communities outstanding and we hope to see that improvement in those communities happen quite quickly as well. That is one area of our concern in first nations health.

We are also providing aboriginal women, children and families with the supports they need to contribute to prosperous, stable communities. We have invested over $55 million over five years in family violence and prevention programs on reserve. This sum includes funds for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada's family violence prevention programs, as well as money for the construction of new shelters through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's shelter enhancement program.

We all know that adequate housing is essential to healthy, prosperous communities. The government is committed to providing first nations living on reserve with the same housing opportunities as other Canadians. To that end, we are working with first nations to increase the availability of safe and affordable housing and help communities create new options that provide a means to build equity and generate wealth.

I know that hon. members are aware of the first nations market housing fund which was announced last year. This $300 million fund, expected to be operational this spring, will help increase the housing supply on reserve and give first nations families and individuals a greater range of housing options, particularly home ownership and market rental units.

Moreover, the government recognizes that one of the keys to improving quality of life and eradicating poverty is through skills development and by increasing aboriginal participation in Canada's economy, which really is the most essential part. When we can extend the benefits of the economy, giving people the hope and opportunity that a job and a career will provide them, this is the key to getting out of the shackles of poverty.

We see aboriginal peoples who are now enjoying unprecedented access to venture capital, business supports, training and educational programs. Mainstream businesses are eager to partner with aboriginal groups. Aboriginal people are well known for their entrepreneurial skills. I come from an entrepreneurial background myself and many in my family are also very entrepreneurial. We see this throughout aboriginal communities and across the country people are ready and more than willing to seize the opportunities that business can provide.

We are working with our partners to ensure that first nations, Inuit and Métis can take advantage of our current circumstances. We are also working to encourage aboriginal youth to pursue careers in business sciences and the skilled trades.

I would remind the hon. members that budget 2007 invested an extra $105 million over the next five years to more than double the skills of the aboriginal skills and partnership initiative which funded skills training for thousands of aboriginal people.

Through the aboriginal workforce participation initiative, we are working with the private sector to open the doors of wealth and opportunity for aboriginal people. This initiative secures partnership agreements between some of Canada's leading companies and public agencies, along with industry and professional labour groups.

The aboriginal workforce participation initiative helps employers recruit, retrain and promote aboriginal services. This is an extraordinarily important initiative and one where we are seeing significant progress being made. Our goal is not simply to create jobs but to remove the obstacles that separate employers from employees.

To maintain economic growth, we must establish new beneficial partnerships. We must encourage aboriginal youth to pursue careers in business and science and in the skilled trades. We must continue to get the message out.

Doing business with aboriginal people benefits all Canadians. This is why we have signed partnership deals bringing together first nations with private sector firms like EnCana and Siemens. In relation to Siemens, I actually had the pleasure of signing a historic agreement with Siemens Canada just last year in 2007 in Saskatoon, an agreement that was going to bring into force a human resources initiative where Siemens was going to be hiring many aboriginal people across Canada. It is something that I had the pleasure of being part of.

It is initiatives like that which will bring about the historic change that we are hoping to see in the next few years.

We cannot forget about the urban aboriginal strategy which has been renovated and extended for another five years with a tighter focus on employment. The urban aboriginal strategy has been seen throughout the 12 test cities as being highly successful. It is something that is in my home town of Thompson which has the highest percentage of aboriginal people in Canada in an urban centre. It is a program that delivers results.

I took part in an announcement last fall where the urban aboriginal strategy, in conjunction with the community, decided that there was a need for housing in that city for young mothers who were attempting to go to university so that they could get a career. That is an example of why we need to bring these resources to smaller centres so people can get the education they deserve.

In this fall's Speech from the Throne, we are committed to helping aboriginal people get the skills and training they need to take advantage of job prospects, especially in the mining and resource sectors where we are seeing an increase in employment opportunities.

However, there is no question that poverty cannot fully and finally be eradicated without robust economic opportunities. As the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has said, economic opportunities that generate not just wealth but purpose and a sense of progress toward a better future, is the path out of poverty.

Once again, our government is doing its part. Over the last year we have brought about Aboriginal Business Canada in a new form so that it is completely consolidated into one department so it can focus better on being able to extend the benefits of our economy to aboriginal people throughout the country.

We are building on the aboriginal business and economic growth that has already been achieved and we are looking at how to strengthen and deepen the positive results. For example, we are considering how to increase access to capital for small businesses and how to enhance opportunities in the marketplace for community based enterprises.

There is no question that these measures demonstrate a very strong federal commitment to economic opportunities for all aboriginal people, both on and off reserve and in urban and remote locations.

There are other positive signs all across the country. First nation leaders have been organizing and reaching out to governments and the private sector to build on our extensive economic agenda. Our government is committed to tapping into this enthusiasm and expertise. We have named an impressive group of aboriginal people to a National Aboriginal Economic Development Board. What is more, we have received useful guidance from the Senate committee on aboriginal peoples in this regard.

There is no question that aboriginal poverty is a serious and pernicious problem and there is no doubt that genuine progress is challenging. It requires clear thinking, diligent effort, patience and collaboration.

Our government will continue to work in concert with our aboriginal, provincial and territorial partners to achieve this progress. Together, we will create practical solutions, allocate appropriate funds; establish clear roles and responsibilities and set goals and achieve them.

We are committed to supporting initiatives that will alleviate the poverty that is endemic in too many aboriginal communities. By improving quality of life through addressing real issues, such as drinking water, housing, and supports for children and families, and by promoting economic opportunities and skills development initiatives, communities and individuals will be encouraged to grow and prosper and, ideally, no longer be shackled by the burden of poverty.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member's remarks did not seem to have much to do with the motion or AIDS or the real plight in Vancouver's downtown east side.

I would like to know if the member has ever been to the Vancouver downtown east side and, if he has, what he thought about what he found there.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in relation to the comments I have made over the last 15 minutes or so, I did speak at length about how, in my opinion, the best route out of poverty is through increased economic opportunities. This is much of what we have brought forward as an agenda, which will deliver what we see as economic outcomes for aboriginal people throughout the country.

First nations people, both on reserve and in urban centres, are always looking to have that opportunity to get a job, have a career and begin to have the same economic benefits that we see throughout the country. Unfortunately, not enough aboriginal people are able to take part.

Of course this is something that is very important to me. I have had the opportunity to go to university and as an aboriginal person I note that this is something that unfortunately is not seen as often as we would like. It is something that we would like to continue to promote, because it is through education that we will see the benefits and outcomes that we are all aspiring to have within our first nations, Métis and Inuit communities.

It is actually our initiatives in education that are the most exciting, in British Columbia in particular, where we have had an historic agreement with the government of British Columbia. That is bringing about an important systemic reform to the education system in that province. It is actually going to begin bringing about a type of school board system that will allow for a degree of standards to improve the outcomes for first nations students. It is an exciting time in British Columbia. I am looking forward to seeing that exported to other parts of Canada.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's comments and speech were interesting. Like my colleague, I wondered really what it had to do with the issue of the downtown eastside and HIV-AIDS and its prevalence.

While I agree with the hon. member, and we all do because it is kind of like motherhood to say that the way out of poverty is to get a good education and to have economic opportunity, we are talking about a certain cohort of people in an area that has the highest poverty rate in Canada. We are talking about people who have multiple challenges: people with mental illness, people who have lived with abuse, and people who have to deal with the everyday fact that they know they are going to die from HIV-AIDS or hepatitis C or some disease.

They are people who are so challenged with regard even to getting up in the morning that to talk about economic opportunity is far out of their ken, and we need to be able to talk about those other things. We are talking here about poverty so deep and a hopelessness so great that we have to deal with those issues before we can even begin to talk about economic opportunities.

I have a question for the hon. member. That is all very well and good and I know he seems to care a lot about human rights, but if the hon. member and his government care so much about the human rights of aboriginal people, why did they not sign the United Nations convention on aboriginal rights?

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that question in relation to the declaration on indigenous rights which the member referenced. It is true that our government was one nation that did not endorse or vote for that declaration, for a number of important reasons.

Canada has had a long and storied history with our first peoples. We have built a country that many in the world look to as one of the greatest. We have done this through a negotiated way with our first peoples. We have built a Constitution that has extended historic rights to first nations people. We have also had numerous settlements and treaties signed over the years.

Unfortunately, in regard to the declaration that the member would like to sign now, according to her and her leader, although the previous government had no intention of signing--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

In fact, Mr. Speaker, this declaration would reset Canada to a pre-contact moment. That is what it contemplates. It has a philosophy that wants to bring Canada back to a pre-contact moment, set aside all the constitutional changes we have made to incorporate aboriginal people and set aside all the treaties we have signed. That would be very damaging to our country. That is why we have acted quite prudently.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the comments from the parliamentary secretary and would certainly agree that economic opportunity needs to be there for all people, particularly people who have been disadvantaged by socio-economic status.

However, what drives me crazy is this lack of understanding or willingness to accept that before economic opportunity can exist people need to have basic necessities covered, whether it is shelter and housing, income security, food, or safety. If they do not have those, and if they think they will get kicked out at the end of the week or they do not have a roof over their heads, it is pretty hard to go to school or to take advantage of whatever economic opportunity there might be. If a person is living way below the poverty line, that economic opportunity does not exist.

I would like to ask the member if he acknowledges that. What does he mean by economic opportunity? Does he include in that the recognition of meeting these very basic human needs that in my community are being completely unmet by his government? We have not seen any housing dollars from the federal government coming into our community to build the housing that is desperately needed. Will he acknowledge that this needs to be addressed?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

I would appreciate a short response from the hon. parliamentary secretary because there is another questioner.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question and acknowledge the member, who has brought about this important debate tonight.

I have already stated that as an aboriginal Canadian I do have a lot of concern for the degree of HIV rates among my people.

In relation to housing, I think we have seen that the government has chosen to take two important paths. We have taken important initiatives within aboriginal housing, but in terms of housing that is outside the purview of aboriginal people, we have brought about a historic improvement in the way that equalization is delivered.

Let us look at the Manitoba example. I know that it does not apply exactly to British Columbia, but I will use it as an example. We have seen an additional $1 billion handed to Manitoba so that hopefully it can bring about the area of responsibility, which is housing, so that this province--and hopefully British Columbia as well--can begin to deliver housing in the way its responsibility allows it to do.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Health]

Mr. Speaker, I have a short question. The previous questioner talked about basic needs. Let us go back to the basics. The instant we are born we have human rights, unless we are aboriginal in Canada. That is disgraceful.

Can the member explain again to the other parties in the House why it is so important that we allow all members of Canadian society to have human rights right now? Why are the Liberals stalling?

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, having human rights on first nations reserves is of course something that I have been fighting for diligently over the last year. I am hopeful that we will still be able to see these rights extended to first nations people. It is a blight that was left on Canada some 30 years ago when the Canadian Human Rights Act first came about. Unfortunately, first nations people were left off the map.

I do not know why this had not been addressed before we got here, but thankfully we have been fighting hard. I will admit that it was challenging among the parties opposite wanting to stop us at every turn when trying to bring forward this historic legislation. I think we are getting closer to the end, but unfortunately we are not there yet. I hope we will have that opportunity to finally see individual human rights being available to first nations people on reserve.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Vancouver East for putting this motion forward for the emergency debate tonight. It is a very important consideration and I am glad that the House has taken the time to reflect on what is happening on the downtown eastside of Vancouver.

I also want to pick up on a theme that the member for Vancouver East mentioned a few moments ago. It is about the sense of community that exists on the downtown eastside of Vancouver. I think that often people have the sense that this is just a place of despair, a skid row area that does not have a sense of itself as a community, where people do not care for each other and where neighbours do not pay attention to what is happening with other neighbours.

My experience of the downtown eastside is exactly the opposite of that. People there are very much a community. It is very much a neighbourhood. People there do express incredible values of support and care for each other.

It is also a place of activism, where people take an interest in what is happening in their neighbourhood and are willing to organize, to fight and to stand in solidarity with each other to seek change and a transformation of the life that they know in that area.

It is a place of very difficult problems but also of great hope. I hope we never lose track of that.

The debate tonight is about the recent study which showed that Vancouver's aboriginal drug users on the downtown eastside were twice as likely as non-aboriginal users to be infected with HIV. This is certainly an issue that is of very great concern to all of us who know that neighbourhood, who know people who live there and who have friends and relatives who live there, but who also want to see an appropriate social policy in Canada.

The study showed that 18.5% of aboriginal men and women who injected drugs such as cocaine and heroin became HIV positive, compared with 9.5% of non-aboriginal intravenous drug users. There obviously is a particular issue here in this neighbourhood that is affecting the aboriginal community disproportionately.

Over the course of the night, we have heard about many aspects, many reasons and many theories about why that might be, but one of the things in this debate that has disappointed me is the sort of underlying assumption that we have limited resources with which to address problems like this.

We talk about how we live in a wealthy and well-to-do society and about how we have many advantages in this society. We here also know that the government is running surpluses. I find it a little hard to talk about surplus, about government having more revenues than it is spending on programs, when we have needs like those that exist on the downtown eastside of Vancouver and when we have needs like those that exist in the aboriginal communities across Canada.

It is clearly a misnomer to say that there is a surplus in the government coffers when needs like those that exist among the aboriginal community in Vancouver, among intravenous drug users and among people who are living with AIDS and HIV go unaddressed. I think it is absolutely unjustified to pursue huge tax cuts for profitable corporations, for banks and oil companies, when these kinds of needs exist in our community. How can we possibly justify giving breaks to profitable corporations, to the wealthy, when these kinds of needs exist in our communities and go unaddressed?

How can we do it? There seems to be no rationale in cutting the fiscal capacity of our federal government to the tune of $190 billion over six years when these kinds of needs exist in our community. Surely we should be considering the capacity of our government to assist citizens by dealing with the problems in our social infrastructure in Canada.

Many times tonight we have heard the Conservative members talk about the need to provide economic opportunity. I do not think anybody would disagree with the idea that it is an important facet, but are we to do that at the expense of addressing the important social needs of our communities?

Are we to do that and not recognize that it is hard to take advantage of an economic opportunity when people do not have a roof over their head, or when there is no food on their plate, or when they cannot dress decently to go for a job interview, or when their teeth are so bad that no one would hire them in the first place, or when they cannot get the treatment they need for mental illness, drug addiction, HIV-AIDS, tuberculous or hepatitis? These are all things that I think beg the question slightly.

We should be providing these services. We should be looking at these programs. Throwing money at a problem does not always solve it either. But to say that we have limited resources in the circumstances in which we live here in Canada and in the circumstances that our government operates is absolutely wrong.

There are a couple of things that I wanted to talk about specifically tonight during this debate. One is the whole question of drug policy. I think it has been proven very clearly and definitively that the kinds of drug policies that we have that stress enforcement and criminal sanction against drug users is completely ineffective. It does not solve the problem or address the problem of drugs in our society.

I wish we had taken advantage of the history that we have with the alcohol prohibition movement and learned lessons from that.

Mr. Speaker, I am reminded that I am splitting my time with the member for Burnaby—New Westminster.

We should have learned something from alcohol prohibition. When it was in force in the United States, we saw exactly the same kinds of problems we see now with drug prohibition in Canada. We see the same kinds of addiction issues. We see the same kinds of gang related crime issues. We see the same kinds of family dislocation and community dislocation.

We even see the same kind of danger in neighbourhoods when stills exploded in people's garages and basements as we see with grow-ops and meth labs in our neighbourhoods now. I think we could have learned from that experience. I think it has been clear and definitive.

Another issue that I want to talk about that I think bears on what is happening on the downtown eastside in Vancouver is the whole approach to harm reduction. In Vancouver we have been championing the four pillar approach to dealing with drug addiction and drug issues in the city: prevention, treatment, enforcement and harm reduction.

Harm reduction is always the pillar that seems to be the hardest fought and certainly with the current federal government. In Vancouver this approach is not controversial. I think, widely, people accept that this is the right way to deal with the crisis around drug addiction and drug use in Vancouver. We know that we need every aspect of that four pillar approach, but we particularly need harm reduction approaches.

Years ago when needle exchanges were first proposed, Vancouver was one of the first places to set up a needle exchange. That was controversial in the beginning. I think the appropriateness became very clear in Vancouver of ensuring that those people who were addicted to injection drugs had clean works to use, so that they were not spreading disease and were not harming themselves by that practice. The needle exchanges have proven very successful in saving lives and preventing the spread of disease in Vancouver.

We also have a very important project in Vancouver that should be a permanent feature of our approach to dealing with drug addiction in our community. That is in the Insite safe injection site. We know that Insite has been saving lives. We know that it has worked and it is effective in its goals.

We know that providing a clean and safe environment for people who are addicted to injection drugs and where there are medical staff to supervise and assist, and also provide referrals to treatment and other kind of health care has improved the circumstances of hundreds, if not thousands, of people in the city of Vancouver.

We also know that it has been studied by independent analysts. We have had over 25 studies of the Insite facility. The studies have shown that it is meeting its goals, that it is effective in reducing harm and saving lives, yet the federal government still looks for another study. It is looking for an excuse to not renew its licence permanently.

The short term licence renewals that we have are affecting the ability to deliver an appropriate service in our community. I think there is widespread support for the service and short term licence renewals should not continue. We need to make sure that the government reverses its policy there and gets its act together when it comes to dealing appropriately with Insite.

The whole issue of housing is one that I think is absolutely crucial in all of this. People who do not have a roof over their head, who are homeless and living on the streets also have severe health problems. They are not going to receive the assistance they need in dealing with their addiction issues. We know that the housing programs of this country are sorely lacking. There is no national housing program in Canada.

We had to fight tooth and nail to see the homelessness program renewed in the last couple of years. This program is coming up for renewal again in the next few months. All of these things will contribute to the health of the community in Vancouver. I appreciate having had the opportunity to speak on this issue tonight.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Health]

Mr. Speaker, even though there may be some philosophical differences, I think we all can agree that people suffering from HIV-AIDS, particularly in the Vancouver downtown eastside, face exceptional challenges.

We have talked a lot about that tonight. Could the member comment on research and the goal of finding a vaccine, not just for the people on the eastside of Vancouver but Canadians and people all over the world? The government is spending tens of millions of dollars each year in research initiatives and we are partnering with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.

Does the member support those types of research initiatives? If so, we thank him, and if not could he explain why not?

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, of course, I support and we support further research into a vaccine. There is great hope in that for many people in our country and around the world. The vaccine is something that is in the future. We are talking about people who are dying right now, today, as we speak because of HIV-AIDS, infection and drug addiction.

We know that there are far too many cracks for them to fall through in the current system that we have. Just a few weeks ago the member for Burnaby—New Westminster and I met with the Burnaby New Westminster task force on sexual exploitation of children and youth. It raised the issues of the cracks that young people, who are seeking treatment for drug addiction, can fall through.

We know that when a young person decides, or any person decides, to seek treatment for drug addiction that the treatment needs to be available immediately. It was pointed out to us that in the Vancouver area it is often possible to get someone into detox right away, which is the first step in that process.

When these people finish detox, they come out and they need to be housed some place because they always have to wait for treatment because the waiting list for treatment is so long and the places are so few and far between. However, when they come out of detox before they go to treatment, there are no transitional housing places for them to go. We cannot send them back to where they were before. They cannot be put back on the street or couch surfing in the environment where they were using drugs before because that will only set back their determination and the possibilities of treatment.

Once they get into treatment and they are finished treatment, they come out and again, they need supportive housing operations so that what they learned and the treatment that they experienced can continue outside of the actual clinical or treatment facility setting. Yet, it is hard to find those kinds of housing options for people. Again, the transitional housing just is not there.

Then again, we need to find independent housing options for those young people, so that they can take up a life and apply what they have learned, the kinds of treatments they have gone through, the kind of ongoing commitment they have to staying clean and sober. If they have to go back on the street, if they go back to couch surfing because there is no home for them, all of that is lost.

Those cracks related to housing between the various points of the treatment process are very serious indeed and are not addressed by the kinds of housing policies that we have at the federal government level. We had the first housing conference this week of provincial housing ministers in two and a half years, and unfortunately the federal minister of housing refused to participate in that meeting. I think that is a shameful act on his part.

The federal minister should have been there to contribute, to show that the federal government was interested in pursuing and participating in the solution to the housing crisis in Canada. Yet, the federal government chose to be absent. That is not acceptable and it needs to be fixed.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vancouver East for her strong advocacy on behalf of her constituents, and for bringing forward this emergency debate this evening. This is a fundamental issue. These are the kinds of issues that we should be debating a lot more in the House of Commons.

What this does is take us away from some of the obsessions we have seen in Parliament, corporate tax cuts being one, and puts us front and square on the main streets of this nation. In this case, we are talking literally of Main Street and East Hastings, which is the epicentre of one of the poorest neighbourhoods in the country. It is the epicentre for what we can see as a result of this debate and what has been said this evening. It is also the epicentre of an epidemic of HIV-AIDS among Canadians of aboriginal origin at this time.

I would like to say at the outset that I do not believe this is a partisan issue at all, as the member for Vancouver East said initially when she was leading off the debate this evening. She said she hoped that all four corners of the House and members from all parties would come together to move forward, so that we could begin to deal with this crisis, this epidemic, and in some way begin to find solutions for what is out there.

She suggested a number of solutions this evening. The member for Burnaby—Douglas, who just spoke, has made a number of suggestions, as did the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan. I hope the Minister of Health is taking careful note of what has been said thus far in this emergency debate. I hope that he right now is working diligently with his assistants in the health ministry to put in place an action plan to deal with this crisis.

This is an emergency debate tonight because it is a crisis and I certainly hope that the government will be looking to respond in a very fulsome and effective way as soon as possible, within the next day or two.

I was a bit discouraged, to be honest, by his comments earlier this evening, and I may have misunderstood, when he appeared to blame the victims of this epidemic. I hope I misunderstood and the Minister of Health and the government can certainly prove that I had misunderstood by bringing forward an action plan as quickly as possible, hopefully by early next week, so that we can begin to deal with this issue.

I would like to pick up where the member for Burnaby—Douglas left off. He was speaking about prohibition times almost a century ago and the lessons that we as Canadians should have learned from that time. It was an interesting series of comments he made in his excellent speech, particularly because the economic conditions that existed around the time of prohibition exist again today.

This is the sad shame and tragedy of what has happened over the last 20 years economically in this country. Essentially, we are recreating the same conditions that we had around the time of prohibition and, later, the Great Depression. This is not just limited to Canada. In the United States, we see similar levels of income inequality, as we well know.

The United States now, according to many economic indicators, has the same level of income inequality that existed in 1928. We have turned the clock back economically in the United States to a time prior to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's new deal, prior to the array of social programs that were put into place.

In Canada, we are seeing a similar situation. Through the actions of the previous government and the present government, we are now looking at levels of inequality that existed in the period of the Great Depression.

The poorest of the poor in Canada, the poorest 20% of Canadians, have actually seen a collapse of their incomes. They are now essentially living on the same income that they used to earn in 10.5 months in 1989. Today, they are earning essentially a month and a half less of income even though they may be working full time or through employment insurance, if they can access it, or welfare, which is increasingly difficult to access. They are living on far fewer resources.

This is extremely important, because as the member for Vancouver East said, and the members for Nanaimo—Cowichan and Burnaby—Douglas echoed, these are economic, social and health policy issues that fundamentally need to be addressed. At the same time there has been this catastrophic fall in the incomes of the poorest of Canadians. We know that aboriginal Canadians are among the poorest of the poor and share the sad title with Canadians with disabilities, with the poorest level of income in this country, levels of income that provoke the kinds of social situations that, as the member for Vancouver East said so eloquently, mirror third world conditions here at home. Because of that, we are seeing the tragedy of the downtown eastside of Vancouver where individuals who are able to access welfare are trying to live on $600 a month when the minimum cost to keep a roof over their heads is $1,300 a month. It simply does not add up.

They are simply living on less than half of the income that is required for any sort of sustainable living. As the member for Burnaby—Douglas said, we are talking about individuals who do not have access to housing, do not have access to dental care, do not have access to a simple telephone. They do not have access to the job market because of all those barriers, putting aside the immense tragedy of the residential schools and the racism that aboriginal Canadians have faced in society.

After the legacy of residential schools and of racism these individuals now find themselves in the downtown eastside living on incomes far below any incomes that are sustainable. It is not surprising that as a result of that we see higher levels of HIV-AIDS because of the misery and the hopelessness of the legacy of where they have come from and what is actually being provided to them in social supports.

This is not something that any of us can feel is alien to our experience. There is not a single person in the House who is immune from addiction, who is immune from the kinds of tragedies that we are seeing now in the downtown eastside. Any member here, as the result of the loss of a loved one, as the result of a personal tragedy, the loss of a job, the loss of income could find himself or herself in a situation where he or she becomes addicted.

We are not talking about Canadians who have a different set of circumstances from one that might cause any of us to become addicted. We are talking about human beings who, through immense adversity, find themselves in appalling conditions and are seeking our help. As a result of that we should be looking to provide programs that are culturally appropriate and programs that actually give the kind of solace and the lifting up that is required, but we do not see this from the government.

As the member for Vancouver East said, we are talking about hundreds of low income housing units in the area of Vancouver that have been closed over the past decade and a half. We are talking about federal funding cuts to outreach workers and to health care funding. Essentially we are talking about the federal government's lack of intervention, lack of supports contributing to, and in a very real sense worsening, the problem.

I will conclude by reading a few paragraphs from the study that was done by Dr. . Evan Wood about the incidence of HIV infection among aboriginal injection drug users. He said:

Aboriginal persons currently represent approximately 3% of the Canadian population but more than 20% of the incarcerated population, and many of these cases relate to illicit drug offences.

Our findings suggest the need for immediate action on the part of health policymakers. A plan of action will require policymakers to recognize that addiction is primarily a health and social issue and to acknowledge the harms of seeking to address addiction through a strategy that largely relies on law enforcement as an isolated intervention. These harms disproportionately affect the most vulnerable injection drug users.

Our cry tonight is for the government to take action and to be effective. We certainly hope the Minister of Health has heard our cry.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Health]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's comments. I can assure the member that this government is indeed very compassionate. He needs only to look at our actions.

We signed the residential schools settlement for $1 billion. We compensated the forgotten victims of hepatitis C to the tune of $1 billion. The previous Liberal government had refused to make any kind of compensation for those forgotten victims. The NDP members did support us on that and I thank them for that.

I also would like to bring to the member's attention the $270 million in our new homelessness partnership strategy to prevent and reduce homelessness. There is $300 million dedicated to the development of a first nation market housing fund to support market housing approaches for first nation communities.

I hope the member now is satisfied that the track record of the government shows compassion and demonstrates understanding. We are doing a lot to try to mitigate what is a very serious problem in Vancouver and throughout the country.