Debates of Feb. 8th, 2022

The Opioid Crisis in Canada

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Chair, we have to work with the provinces and the cities where we are going to be putting this in place to understand what makes the most sense. There is lots of opportunity for us to look at SUAP, the substance use and addictions program, and ways in which we can direct funding from there to work with physicians to deal with safe supply.

There are so many options available to us, and we need to explore all of those options. I know the minister dealing with mental health and addictions has been putting a tremendous amount of time and effort looking into this. We can come up with solutions that work to serve Canadians in the most meaningful way possible, and hopefully with the support of all in the House.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Chair, the member for Vancouver Granville talked about how he listened to the stories of people struggling with addiction. Some of the most moving stories I have heard from my constituents have been from people who have struggled with addiction. Some of them have overcome it and are back with their families or forming new families, which is so moving. He outlined some of the paths we need to take to get people to that place.

My colleague from Courtenay—Alberni has tabled a private member's bill, Bill C-216, which will be debated here very shortly, that will tackle each of those things. It will tackle decriminalization of small amounts of drugs and it would form a national strategy with the provinces to talk about dealing with the harmful medical effects such as safe supply. I am wondering if he will support this bill.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for his advocacy on this issue. There are many elements we need to consider. Working with the provinces is key. Vancouver and British Columbia have already put in applications for exemptions. These are tangible things we can put into place right away.

All of these opportunities are ones for us to take up in partnership with the provinces and the cities. It is how we are going to get this done. It is how we are going to make sure we are addressing these issues in all the different ways required, from ensuring there is safe supply all the way to ensuring there is wraparound care for mental health and addictions, all of which are interlinked in many of these situations.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a background in education, and school boards and schools in Quebec have a need and a duty to prepare action plans. These plans must include objectives and state how they will be reached, how long it will take and who is responsible for doing it. Is it not time that we did the same for the opioid crisis? We have plenty of solutions to offer.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Chair, the time has come to work together and tackle this problem. We must work with all the provinces to find solutions that will work for their regions and for the cities facing this crisis.

We will work together, because that is what it will take to find these solutions and solve these issues in an effective manner.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I want to start by thanking the member for Yukon for his leadership in ensuring we have this conversation this evening. It is such an important conversation to come back to the critical need for us to save lives in the midst of a poisoning crisis.

Before we talk about that crisis, I want to share that in Waterloo region alone in 2021, there were around 155 overdose poisoning deaths. As a baseline, to give members a sense, we had 145 deaths from COVID-19 in Waterloo region. As many members also know, the average is now 19 deaths a day across the country.

For those in this place who like talking about the economics of decisions that are made here, in 2017 we spent $6.4 billion on policing, courts and correctional costs with respect to criminalized substances. Tonight and often, I have heard many folks say that this should be a public health matter, not a criminal justice one, and I could not agree more. The good news is that we have advice for all parliamentarians on how to ensure that our legislation reflects that, because the fact is that today it is not true. It continues to be that we are criminalizing unregulated substances across the country. To do that, I would encourage all parliamentarians to review the expert panel's advice from Health Canada on substance use.

This is why I am so supportive of the member for Courtenay—Alberni's private member's bill. It is taking a road map from this third-party advice to move toward legislation that would do exactly that. It would treat this as a matter of public health and, because it is a crisis, which is a view that every speaker this evening has shared, we should move forward with the urgency it deserves.

That is why I would encourage all parliamentarians to support the private member's bill. Specifically, in doing so, that bill includes recommendations from the expert panel, including the decriminalization of simple possession of unregulated drugs, expunging or wiping clean the records of folks so they do not have that discrimination throughout their lives and a national strategy that would include low-barrier access to a safer supply.

As we do that, I also want to point out the need, which was mentioned by the task force, to talk about the social determinants of health while also directly addressing the poisoning crisis we are in. We know that, for those who are currently addicted to unregulated drugs, that is heightened by the lack of access to quality, dignified and affordable housing. It is heightened by the lack of truly universal health care across the country and the lack of proper income supports.

With the rest of my time, I would love to share a quote from a frontline worker in Waterloo region. This is from Alice, who works at the Sanguen Health Centre, who supports and works with people every day who are on the front lines of this crisis. Her words are the following:

Regardless of the political climate, we are going to spend every minute of our day caring about people who use drugs, honouring their lives, their perspectives and their expertise, and advocating with them when their needs are not met. We will continue to build and create relationships that are based on mutual respect and love and walk with people in their times of joy and in times of heartbreak. We will remember each life that has been lost in preventable overdose deaths as the vibrant, complex and beautiful spirits that they were instead of cold statistics, and we will continue to refuse to accept the status quo: that people who use drugs are considered less important than other people in our communities. We will proudly declare to anyone who is listening (and many who aren’t) that people who use drugs are a welcome part of our community, not people happening to our community, just as we have every day for many years.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health]

Mr. Chair, the member mentioned that a lot of money has been put in the justice system. We introduced legislation that, among other measures, would require police and prosecutors to consider non-criminal responses to some drug-related offences. I would ask my colleague if he agrees that alternatives to prosecution should be considered for simple possession offences.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I do agree, and to go a step further, we recognize that mandatory minimum penalties, as has been called out in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, need to be moved away from. I would actually encourage the governing party to go further with that legislation to ensure that we follow through on the calls to action from the TRC.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, I want to very strongly agree with the aspect of the member's speech where he talked about affirming the immutable human dignity of everyone in our society, recognizing that those who suffer from substance abuse disorders need to be greeted with love, care and empathy.

Many members of the government, as did this member, spoke about advocating for the further liberalization of drug laws, such as decriminalization, and some members support full legalization. I think one of the problems with these arguments is that they do not take into consideration the fact that, in certain contexts in Canada, we already have, practically, very liberalized drug law realities at the local level. The reality, for instance, in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver is not formal legal decriminalization but effective legalization as well as the concentration of services. However, it just is not working. If we look at the regional context where there is a practical liberalization of drug laws, we continue to see very high levels of overdose deaths.

I do not agree with the member, but I would ask him to explain further why he assumes that further liberalization is going to solve a problem that it has not solved up until now.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for the question and for the tone with which the question was asked. It sounds like it comes from a place of genuine curiosity.

My perspective is to follow the expert advice that parliamentarians are being given, and that expert advice from the task force on substance use shares very clearly the need to move away from criminalization alongside other recommendations, many of which are reflected in Bill C-216, that would ensure that we would not only save lives but better take care of people across the country.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

We have talked about a lot of things this evening. For me, there are four takeaways: diversion; increased health transfers because health care is under provincial jurisdiction; increased investment in social housing because the federal government has neglected it for 30 years; and long-term investments to fight homelessness.

Which of those four ideas does my colleague think we should prioritize in tackling this crisis?

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

My priority is Bill C‑216, which was introduced here in the House.

It is a mix of policies. We do not need to choose one over the other, as we have in front of us a bill that would allow us to do a mix of what experts are already calling for.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Chair, I want to pick up on some of the barriers that these people face. They face many barriers, but when I talk to people who work with those struggling with addictions in my riding, in my hometown of Penticton, places like Discovery House, Pathways, Moms Stop the Harm, one of the big barriers is the stigma that many people have against those struggling with addiction.

I had the opportunity to have dinner with the Consul General for Portugal last summer, Marta Cowling, and we talked extensively about Portugal's experience with this. One of the big successes in Portugal when it decriminalized possession of small amounts of drugs was a great reduction in the stigma. When something is criminalized, these people are seen by many as criminals, and they are not. They are people struggling with a medical condition. I wonder if my colleague could comment on that.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, the three-word answer is that we need support, not stigma. We need to recognize that this is part of a vicious cycle. The stigma is part of why we need to move toward decriminalization. That is what helps us move away from this, which was one of the five core challenges the task force called out, as we move toward decriminalization.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be a part of the discussion despite the late hour.

We are gathered here this evening to address a major public health problem, the opioid crisis. We are here because the member for Ajax tabled a notice of motion on February 4 calling for a take-note debate on the opioid crisis in Canada to take place tonight, February 8, 2022.

The opioid crisis is not an especially divisive issue. I believe everyone here would like to stop it. Our approaches to achieving that, however, can be very different indeed. In a nutshell, the Bloc Québécois wants to implement diversion for simple possession, with the support of frontline health care services.

Let us begin by defining opioids. Opioids are natural or synthetic substances that act on one of three main opioid receptors in the central nervous system. Whether injected or ingested, these substances can have an analgesic or depressive effect. Just to be sure we are all on the same page, here is a list of some opioids: oxycodone, morphine, hydromorphone, fentanyl, codeine, heroin and methadone.

Whether prescribed or not, these types of drugs cause users' tolerance to increase over time. Users might need to increase the dose to feel an effect. This goes hand in hand with the obvious psychological and physical dependence that can lead to overdose. Opioid deaths in Quebec and Canada increased from 3,000 in 2016 to over 6,000 in 2020. In four years, the number of deaths doubled. The same statistics are seen in the United States. This is huge. It is sad. It is a crisis. It is unacceptable.

Although this crisis is now occurring from coast to coast to coast, Quebec has historically been spared, to some extent, relative to the western provinces and Ontario. I will get to that. I am not bragging about Quebec, but I think Quebec has been wise and proactive. We did not wait for this to reach national crisis proportions before taking action and creating the 2018-20 national strategy for preventing and responding to opioid overdoses.

This strategy was based on compiling reliable data. It talks about science, awareness raising, information, access to integrated and adapted services, and, of course, prevention. For instance, Quebec has been successful in reducing overdose mortality by providing free, universal access to naloxone, an opioid antidote, and ensuring that first responders can administer it to anyone who is, sadly, experiencing an overdose.

Quebec has set up supervised injection sites. We in the Bloc Québécois are very much in favour of this. In our view, these sites have myriad benefits, such as the ability to reach vulnerable populations, reduced numbers of overdose deaths, reduced health risks, and better care for drug users. I would like to point out that the Bloc Québécois considers supervised injection sites to be a powerful tool for fighting the opioid crisis.

We are asking the federal government not to undermine the rollout of these tools by interfering in Quebec's drug access policies. Quebec currently has the situation under control. Even if Quebec's mortality rate is not what it should be, it is nevertheless lower than in the rest of Canada. I would appreciate it if the federal government would let us work on matters within our jurisdiction.

Opioid overdose deaths are common. In the vast majority of cases, the drugs were purchased illegally on the streets, such as fentanyl mixed with heroin.

For that reason, the Bloc Québécois is advocating for diversion for simple possession of these drugs, with the support of frontline health care services. In concrete terms, this means that an individual arrested for simple possession of heroin could undergo training, rehabilitation or another appropriate measure in exchange for the charges being dropped. We have to treat these people as what they are: drug addicts, not dangerous criminals.

I would like to remind the House that my first degree was in criminology, so I am looking at this debate through that lens. People need opportunities to get treatment for their addiction. They do not need to be sent to crime school. We could kill two birds with one stone because helping drug users recover from addiction would also ease pressure on our legal and prison systems. These people are not criminals; they are addicted to a drug. We must prioritize recovery over punishment.

I think everyone here would agree that the opioid crisis is a public health matter, not a criminal matter. If members have any doubts, I want to emphasize that the phrase “public health” is very important in my speech.

The Constitution Act, 1867, states that health care is a shared provincial-federal jurisdiction with clearly defined roles. The Constitution states that the provinces are responsible for health care, the practice of medicine, professional training, the regulation of the medical profession, hospital and health insurance, and so on. The provinces are responsible for all of that.

It is therefore clear that Quebec is responsible for delivering the vast majority of prevention, treatment and harm reduction programs in a public health crisis such as the opioid crisis. However, the federal government is responsible for funding research, initiatives and pilot projects and promoting awareness.

To that end, Quebec and the Bloc Québécois are calling for an annual supplementary health care contribution of 6%, as well as an increase of the federal share from 22% to 35% of Quebec's health care costs, which are directly related to this pandemic.

As my colleague from Jonquière said yesterday, the federal government's chronic underfunding of health comes at a cost. There is a price to be paid for pushing health care networks to the limit. Today, Quebeckers are the ones paying the price.

I think it is imperative for the Liberal government to take note of this consensus and to sit down with its provincial counterparts to discuss it.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand from my colleague's comments that he agrees with Bill C‑5, which seeks to eliminate policies that have filled our prisons with people who needed help and that ultimately targeted vulnerable and racialized Canadians?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I completely agree. I am a humanist with a background in criminology. In Quebec and the U.S., half of all inmates are incarcerated on drug charges ranging from possession to trafficking. It is time to shrink the number of these criminals and pseudo-criminals and send them home or help those who really need help and are not criminals.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague raised a number of important points, including access to naloxone.

I would like to hear the Bloc Québécois's opinion on whether companies like Purdue Pharma, the Sackler family and McKinsey, whose products fuelled this crisis, should be held accountable.

Does he agree with me that the government should pursue these companies for compensation and use those resources to provide more funding for treatment?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, to be honest, I am not sure I understood my colleague's question.

If putting more money into either the health care system or the federal system fails to meet the need, we have to change course to get it right.

To be honest though, I am not sure I understood my colleague's question, so I am sorry.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague clearly demonstrated the consensus surrounding the need for diversion. He also made the point that health transfers are primarily the jurisdiction of the provinces and Quebec, but I will not go there.

I would like to hear the member's thoughts on a potential connection between social housing and the opioid crisis. What does he think the federal government can do in that regard?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

If I had had more time, I would have gratified my colleague, who is the Bloc Québécois point person on social housing, by taking a few minutes to talk about this issue.

The Bloc Québécois is calling for 1% of federal revenues to be invested in these programs. This is not without reason. There are huge needs in terms of social housing, but there are clearly some connections to the topic we are debating this evening. What I mean is that there are vulnerable people in need who are struggling with drug addiction and are living on the streets. Some of these people are homeless, some live in social housing, and some are among the least fortunate.

This is a priority for the Bloc Québécois. That 1% is important. We are advocating for it now and will continue to do so.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for speaking of the compassion we need to show in this crisis. I agree with the member wholeheartedly on the need for increased health care transfers to provinces, and I just wanted to confirm tonight that I think we also agree on decriminalizing those small amounts for personal possession.

I just wanted to ask the member this. Will he support the bill, Bill C-216, from my colleague for Courtenay—Alberni to decriminalize simple possession?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague.

I did talk about compassion. However, we need more than compassion. My comments this evening were also based on science. Two parties are battling, and they are both in favour of science and all that. My own university studies and training led me to science. They led me to something that is not absolute, but that guides us toward satisfactory answers to the difficulties we are experiencing.

We do need to be compassionate, but our actions must be based on facts. There is no justification for jailing people in need. Would we send a chronic alcoholic to prison? Yes, perhaps. If a minor crime were involved, the individual would definitely be sent to prison.

We do need to show compassion, but we need to do more than that.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for his very impassioned speech.

There are a number of different schools of thought about how justice should be conducted and how we should conduct our society. I wonder if the member can share some of his thoughts around how mandatory minimum sentences impact those who are suffering, those who are going through the opioid crisis and are in need of support.

Perhaps the member can share his thoughts about mandatory minimum sentences and the role of the justice system, as opposed to the health care system, when we talk about matters like these.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Chair, our health care systems in Quebec and in the rest of Canada are unfortunately overloaded for multiple reasons. The opioid crisis is very clearly one factor. If we could have reasonable, sufficient health transfers, in keeping with what Canadians across the country deserve, and bearing in mind that Canadians have asked for a 35% threshold, we would obviously be better equipped to meet peoples' needs and perhaps be more empathetic towards those with these kinds of addiction problems.

Once again, they are not criminals at heart.