Debates of May 18th, 2023

Opposition Motion—Opioid Crisis

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I represent Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, which is in the Fraser Health region. In British Columbia, the most deaths from opioids took place in the Fraser Health region. In 2022, 680 people died in the Fraser Health region. Since the implementation of the decriminalization policy of the Liberal government, those deaths have only increased.

I have a very specific question today for the minister. Part of the agreement, when the government decided to decriminalize hard drugs in British Columbia, was that there would be enforcement for schools and places where children frequent and that the policies of decriminalizations would not apply.

A week after the government decriminalized, my son's day care had to be shut down because people were injecting illicit substances and leaving things behind. I could not take my son to day care that day. He goes to a school in downtown Abbotsford.

What policies have been put in place to enforce areas where children frequent to ensure they are not exposed to illicit drugs? We are normalizing illicit drugs in our country and I want to know what the minister is going to do to stop that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the member recognized that, in the agreement for the section 56 exemption, it is still not okay to use drugs in playgrounds or schools. Many municipalities are looking at expanding that with their bylaws, but at the moment that is still illegal. What we are also saying to the member is that a lot of the deaths in the Fraser Canyon and all over the country are not of the people who have been using drugs for a long time.

I was with the carpenters' union in Victoria, where they are handing out naloxone because they are losing loved ones on the work site due to the poison drug supply. I want the member to understand that people are using alone and dying alone. We have to have policies that will prevent those deaths.

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

Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciated the approach my colleague used in her speech. It is true that this is a complex issue, a human issue. Behind the statistics and the numbers there are some very serious realities.

It is a really important issue. I have experience with this problem in my family. It is hard to talk about without getting emotional. I think that we agree with my colleague on the fact that it is a public health problem and that the Conservatives' approach to this crisis is a bit dogmatic. Public health is health.

Recently there were negotiations with Quebec on the matter of health transfers. Unfortunately, Quebec and the provinces, who were asking for $6 billion, barely got $1 billion. If we really want to help people, in this case addicts, on the ground, there needs to be an increase in health transfers.

When will the government increase the transfers?

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

Mr. Speaker, my condolences and my sympathies to the member for the truly sad situation in his family.

Part of the transfers to the provinces and territories, $25 million to be precise, is for mental health and substance use. I think that the action plan will help respond to this tragic situation in the provinces and territories.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, first we heard the Conservative from Fraser Valley rail against harm reduction when, in fact, they support harm reduction and they support treatment and recovery. There is no war between harm reduction and treatment and recovery. We need them both.

Today, I am seeing the Conservatives spreading misinformation, which is costly in a health crisis. However, we also see the Liberals taking an incremental approach, which costs lives. I asked the minister repeatedly to scale up efforts. This is a national health crisis. The government is spending less than 1% of what it spent on the COVID-19 crisis and the response to that. We have lost almost as many lives.

We look at the money the government spent on the AIDS crisis, on SARS and on other health crises. It goes beyond being pale in comparison. When is the government going to scale up on safe supply? When is it going to get involved in the recovery and treatment on demand? We need the government to get involved. It cannot keep downloading this to the provinces. That is where Portugal stepped up. We need the federal government to scale up with rapid investments so that, when people need help, they get it and we meet them where they are at.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the really important distinction, as the polarization of harm reduction versus treatment is extraordinarily unhelpful. We know people need access to treatment at the moment they are ready. However, we also know they need adequate aftercare so they do not fall back into the environment that made them sick in the first place.

As we move forward, as the member well knows, over $100 million has been designated for safe supply in this last budget. We received another $144 million for the substance use and addiction programs, as well as $25 billion going to the provinces and territories, where one of the four pillars is mental health and substance use. We hope that the provinces will be able to use that on the issues of complex care, treatment beds and aftercare.

I look forward to working with the member as we tackle the flawed ideology of the other side.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to address the motion from the member for Carleton and provide an update on our government's response to a complex challenge facing our country, the overdose crisis. This crisis is having a tragic and unrelenting toll on Canadians, their families and communities.

Each one of these deaths is tragic and creates a void in the community that can never be filled. Every person who has lost their life in this crisis has left behind someone who is grieving: a friend, a partner, a parent or a child.

There are four pillars recognized internationally as necessary for a successful substance use strategy: prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement. Our government is committed to a comprehensive approach that implements policies and supports for all four of these essential areas.

The dangerous, ideological and outdated approach proposed by the Conservative motion creates a false choice between harm reduction measures and treatment. We need both. As B.C. chief coroner Lisa Lapointe recently said, “There should not be a dichotomy between access to life-saving safer supply and access to life-saving treatment options”.

The intent of this motion is simply to create fear, increase stigmatization and score political points with the Conservative base. It is dangerous, anti‑science and would cost lives if implemented.

The toxic drug supply and overdose crisis is a daily worry for our government. When we think of the lives lost, the repercussions for communities, the devastating losses for families and the impact on the economy, we realize that it is a national tragedy.

It has never been more important for all levels of government, partners and stakeholders to work together to turn this crisis around.

To find solutions, we must first understand the many different factors that drive substance use. That must include addressing mental health. Harmful patterns of substance use are established over time. Some people can trace their substance use back to early childhood trauma. Others may be affected by poverty or housing instability.

While many people in Canada struggle with mental health problems, some groups face particular challenges because of systemic racism, discrimination, socio-economic status or social exclusion.

Marginalized groups are often victims of stigmatization or prejudice, which places them at higher risk. These include youth, indigenous peoples, racialized communities and LGBTQ+ people.

Stigma is harmful in several ways.

Stigma discourages people from seeking help and reduces their chances of getting help when they do seek it. It can also make it difficult to get the support needed to implement policies and programs to help people who use substances.

That is because there is still a deep-seated misconception that addiction is a choice, and that is just not true.

Addiction is a medical condition that can be treated.

The fact is that people who use substances need support, not judgment. They need community, not isolation. They need empathy and understanding, not stigma. When substance use is stigmatized, it creates a very dangerous situation. It can lead to people using drugs alone and prevent them from seeking help. That is why we need to provide a continuum of care to people who use substances, one that is woven through every area of their lives. Prevention, treatment and harm reduction measures all have a role to play, as too do actions that reduce stigma and provide continued access to health and social supports for individuals.

Our goal is to reduce the stigma and risks associated with substance use while providing people who use drugs with better access to health and social services.

To achieve this, Canada must address the risks of substance use from a comprehensive societal perspective.

Since 2017, the government has invested more than $1 billion in prevention, treatment, risk reduction and enforcement. This is in addition to the investments made by provincial governments within their jurisdictions.

The Government of Canada is now working with the provinces and territories on a transformative multidisciplinary care model that integrates patient centred mental health and substance use care.

From increased access to mental and substance use health through primary care to improve data and better sharing of health information between the professionals they consult, these tailor-made agreements with provinces and territories would improve access to the supports Canadians need when they need it.

However, we know that we need to do more, and that includes trying innovative approaches in order to save lives. It also includes making it easier for people who use drugs to access health and social services, such as treatment for people who are ready for it.

Budget 2023 sets out our plan to transfer nearly $200 billion to the provinces and territories over the next few years to improve health care, including support for mental health and substance use services. This will be done through a combination of increases to the Canada health transfer and new 10-year agreements with the provinces and territories.

These investments would help us build, among other things, a resilient health workforce that provides Canadians with high-quality, effective and safe health services when they need them. That includes access to timely, equitable and quality mental health, substance use and addiction services.

Through our tailored bilateral agreements, we will invest $25 billion over 10 years to work with the provinces and territories to advance shared health priorities.

This approach is the most effective way to integrate mental health and substance use services throughout the health care system.

This investment is in addition to the $2.4 billion over the next four years that will still be provided to the provinces and territories for mental health and addiction services as part of the 2017 common statement of principle on shared health priorities.

Harm reduction services are a vital part of a comprehensive, compassionate and collaborative public health approach to problematic substance use that includes prevention, treatment and additional social and health supports.

We cannot allow the Conservative Party's ideological agenda to shut down the safe consumption sites that have prevented more than 46,000 overdoses since 2017.

Safe consumption sites replace contaminated street drugs with a drug of known content and potency to keep people alive.

We need to keep people alive until they are ready to access treatment. We cannot allow the Conservatives to take us back to the failed ideology of the past.

Together, we can create real systemic change and give every person in Canada the support they need to live long and healthy lives.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in her speech, the member opposite just said that we need to help keep people alive until they are ready to receive treatment.

I represent the Fraser health region. We had the highest number of deaths caused by opioids last year, and we are on track to pass that number again. Under this policy, it is like death has become normalized.

I agree with part of the member's speech in that we need to have a comprehensive approach. However, right now in British Columbia, there is no comprehensive approach. In fact, in the Fraser health region, there are only eight detox beds. What we have done in Canada is normalize the use of hard drugs without providing any option or capacity for people who want to receive care to get it on demand.

Why has the government failed to provide detox beds in the areas of Canada where there is the highest number of deaths caused by illicit opioids?

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my thoughts are with the people in his riding.

There are several ways to help drug users, and if we want to keep people safe, supervised consumption sites and overdose prevention sites are part of the solution. They play a significant role in saving lives. Almost no one has died of illicit drug poisoning at these sites. We are there, and we will move forward with the opening of others.

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

Mr. Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois view the opioid crisis as a public health issue, and we believe in a supportive approach. Yes, there are times when these individuals must be allowed to transition to a safe place with what we call a safe supply. There is no harm in that. My concern is that the terms used in the motion are judgmental.

I am also concerned about the fact that when I very calmly and politely asked my Conservative colleague a question and challenged the Conservative stance, he responded by saying, “Shame on this member”.

I would therefore like to take this opportunity to ask the Liberal member a question. At least I can probably count on an answer other than, “Shame on you”. How can we reach a balance? When it comes right down to it, the Conservatives' intentions are not all bad. That is not what I mean. They want to offer more services and to offer therapy. A balance between the two remains to be found. I would like the member to share her thoughts with us.

How can we balance support for drug use in public spaces against the urgent need to help these individuals break free from this vicious cycle? Ultimately, we all share the same goal.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that important question, and no, I will not answer him in the same way.

The government's approach is built on four main pillars: harm reduction, supervised consumption sites, treatment and enforcement. This comprehensive and holistic approach provides a variety of solutions for people using drugs. It is a complex problem that affects everyone differently. We do not know why people use drugs. We do not know each person's specific reason. That is why we have to offer them a range of solutions so that they can find the one that works best for them.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, could I ask the member to talk in more detail about one of the four pillars and the importance of safe consumption sites? I do not know there is enough understanding about the importance of these places.

Could she please provide more detail about why they are so important?

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to answer that question.

As I was saying, the four pillars are prevention, risk reduction, treatment and enforcement. By relying on these four pillars, we can provide solutions that are better adapted to each person using drugs. The latest statistics show that 46,000 overdoses have been reversed at safe consumption sites. That clearly shows that these sites are essential and are an important part of the range of solutions that have been proposed to address this national crisis.

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

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to note that I will share my speaking time with my passionate, interesting and capable colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

Talking about drugs and their repercussions is not an easy topic for me. It is not easy because I quickly become emotional. When I do not want to be emotional, I get into data and statistics, so I distance the heart from the head. It is not easy because there are people from my past who will no longer be in my present or my future. Yes, it is a topic that is important to me. I need to find a middle ground in all this. Clearly, this morning, I did not find it, but it will be fine.

A full picture of the situation is needed to be able to act properly. The purpose of pilot projects is to obtain data, among other things. The opioid crisis is not a partisan issue or an issue that should become partisan. It is not the type of issue where the terms “me” or “my party” can be used. It is the type of issue that requires phrases like: “together, we succeeded”.

I will briefly recap the data reported in the media while adding a few caveats and stating the purpose of pilot projects and safe supply programs.

The date included in the Conservative Party's motion are true. I will not review them all. The opioid crisis kills 20 people per day.

Since 2016, over 34,000 people have died. Almost all the deaths were accidental. These are people who were supplied by the black market with products that those people did not even know contained fentanyl. In 88% of cases, the deaths involved adults aged 20 to 59, people in the prime of life.

Prior to the pandemic, 10 people per day died of an opioid overdose. That increase may be the result of mental health problems that were exacerbated by the distress experienced during the pandemic.

I heard my Conservative colleagues say that the pandemic has passed. Just because the pandemic has passed does not mean the distress has passed. Just because the pandemic has passed does not mean the addiction has passed.

In the media, it was noted that people were taking hydromorphone to sell it and then buy fentanyl on the black market. Are all hydromorphone users doing that? The answer is no. How many are reselling hydromorphone? We still do not know. I hope it will be possible to find out through the pilot projects and the data collected.

The black market exists because people cannot access something legally, no matter what it is. However, on the black market, it is impossible to control either the amount or quality of drug hits. That is the main problem.

People who become addicted leave the health care system, even if they can function day-to-day. These people quietly leave the system because they will not tell their physicians that they have an addiction and need help. It is a minority who will do this. The system needs to reach these people. How can they be reached? It is by seeking them out where they get their supplies.

Since these products are unfortunately addictive, one way to ensure the health of these people is to give them the opportunity to access products that are controlled in quantity and quality. When they come to pick up these products, there are people there who will listen to them, hear them and learn about their struggles, find out where they come from and quietly try to sort things out. It may take a very long time to overcome an addiction. Some never manage to do so.

Unfortunately, the Conservative motion does not mention the services provided by the pilot projects. These include medical care, mental health support, medical support regarding sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections, employment assistance, and housing assistance. These projects have a holistic and broad vision of the needs of people who are addicted. Their addiction did not just happen, all of a sudden. Something happened.

All these activities within the pilot projects and all these interventions must be based on understanding and openness, not judgment or punishment. We have to consider where the person is at. How did they get there? How can we help them? We need to unravel the knots in the addicted person’s mind.

The Conservative motion does not refer to the fact that, so far, participants who are actually involved in these programs have had many beneficial effects, such as improved health, well-being and quality of life; a lower risk of overdose and reduced use of street drugs, which are inherently dangerous; a willingness to deal with health issues related to their situation; having more energy and being more active; and having more time in their lives. These are all important factors. They are more engaged with themselves. Lastly, these people re-engage not only in their own lives, but in their own societies. Will they be cured for life? Maybe or maybe not, but they do get on the path to recovery.

Drug use is a public health and public safety issue. We must keep in mind that there is no single, simple solution. No single department is responsible. It is everyone’s business.

Interventions must be based on evidence-based best practices and seek to protect the health and dignity of individuals. Dignity is one of the most important factors in the process. It is amazing how the behaviour of people with addictions can be affected by the gaze of others. It is amazing how they are affected by their own gaze, when they look in the mirror and see how much they have deteriorated, destroyed from within. They know it.

They need help in dealing with that, in accepting and seeing the best in themselves. They should not be judged, not be ostracized and, above all, not be allowed to return to the black market with its uncontrolled hits.

Quebec has a strategy comprising seven areas for action that intersect with the interdepartmental action plan: information and awareness; overdose prevention and harm reduction; public policy and regulation; vigilance and monitoring; evaluation, research and training; addiction treatment; and pain treatment.

Those seven areas can be broken down into 15 measures that will consolidate and enhance access to naloxone as well as consolidate and expand the offer of substance use services. The goal is to protect people, even from themselves.

By developing safer supply practices, drug hits can be controlled, as I said before, in terms of quantity and quality. Most importantly, stakeholders are opening the door to recovery for people with addictions by giving them access to support services that would be inaccessible without the pilot projects. Is that perfect? No. Services are overwhelmed by the magnitude of the crisis, hence the importance of better and larger health transfers.

In short, the current crisis needs to be taken seriously. We must listen to stakeholders and develop a holistic vision to help people with addictions while cracking down on black market criminals. Above all, we must stop stigmatizing mental illnesses. The Conservative motion is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I would rather keep the baby and raise it right.

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

Mr. Speaker, I share my colleague's pain and emotion. To be quite honest, I prefer her emotion to the Conservatives' rigidness.

She talked about how others see people who use drugs and how those people see themselves. We know that stigma has a major impact on how they react, on how they act.

Does my colleague agree that working on reducing the stigma surrounding drug users could improve the current crisis?

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

Mr. Speaker, when we see someone who appears to be in crisis because they have been using or because they are having mental health issues, we need to see the human being behind that behaviour, not judge them. That is another goal of these pilot projects. That is important.

Sometimes people have hurts and hang-ups that explain the situation they are in now. We need to support them, help them, not judge them.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her very real, human speech. It is unfortunate, what this is turning into. I am hearing words like “rigidness” and “judgment”, and that is not at all the case. I know, here on this side, we heard one of our colleagues talk about the importance of community, connectedness and hope. We believe in the value of every single person. Dignity is so important, like the member said, absolutely. Empowerment is so important; the policies that are being put in place at every single level of government are there to empower the person.

I know I did hear the member talk about services. I definitely believe in the importance of wraparound services, such as housing, counselling and psychotherapy. Could she expand on whether she believes in the importance of these services as well to help people overcome addictions?

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

Yes, Mr. Speaker, those services are essential. There are functioning addicts, people who have housing but are at risk of losing it if their addiction gets worse. They need support.

They may be addicted because of pain. That pain, be it physical or psychological, needs to be managed. Sometimes people need help to learn how to manage their pain and live with it. Those services are essential, and better funding is urgently needed.

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

Mr. Speaker, these are heartfelt realities that are happening to families across this country, and I am just so moved by the member's speech today. I am disappointed, though, in the Liberals and the Conservatives, in their actions over the last 30 years in regard to investments, which the member spoke about in her speech, like housing, pharmacare and all those investments that matter to the well-being of people.

Could the member speak about the lack of investments and how it is affecting communities?

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

Mr. Speaker, the level of investment over the past few decades has been disappointingly low, but, as I said at the beginning of my speech, at this point, we have to say we have succeeded, we are aware of the problem and we are aware of the solutions.

After all, when we invest in housing, health and mental health, we are investing in the economy, because when these people are adequately housed and their basic needs are met, they manage to make something of themselves and get back into the labour market, or at least into society, to contribute in their own way. These investments are not losses. They make our society more beautiful.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am a little surprised by the direction of the debate this morning. Actually, I am not that surprised.

The debate is difficult, emotional, sensitive and human, and it affects people deeply. I know what I am talking about because I had first-hand experience with addiction in my family. I was exposed to different kinds of addictions throughout my childhood.

There is no denying that no one ever truly recovers from an addiction. The struggle lasts a lifetime. People who are addicted to drugs continue to be addicts for the rest of their lives, whether they use or not. It is something people are born with, and it is nothing to be ashamed of. Some people are born with addictive tendencies, just as others are born with brown eyes, the ability to run 100 metres in 10 seconds, or to become a soccer champion, a doctor, a major international researcher or a Nobel Prize laureate. People are born with this thing inside them and have to live with it. Judgment has no place in the conversation.

The problem with the Conservatives is that their approach is always a bit dogmatic. It is never easy. However, I would like to point out that they at least deserve some credit for raising difficult, complicated and important issues on their opposition days. In the past few weeks, they have addressed the housing crisis, which is another major crisis that we are dealing with in Quebec and Canada, and even around the world right now. It is a huge issue. The problem is their proposed solution.

Another Conservative opposition day focused on the carbon tax. They want to eliminate the carbon tax. The Conservatives were broaching another important issue of our time, another fundamental crisis that we are dealing with, the climate crisis. They suggested eliminating the carbon tax, but they did not suggest any other solutions.

Is it the same thing for the housing crisis. What solution did the Conservatives suggest? They suggested eliminating municipal governments. According to the Conservatives, there is one level of government too many in this country. We agree with the fact that there is one level of government too many. We could get on board with the option of eliminating one. However, we disagree with the Conservatives as to which level of government is unnecessary.

The Conservatives are raising these important issues, but they are presenting simplistic solutions that we are not sure will get us anywhere. The United States tried the “tough on crime” approach. My colleague spoke about it earlier. The Conservatives are suggesting being tough on drug addicts. They always want to take a punitive, prohibitive approach. If they see something as a problem, then they want to get rid of it. However, as I said earlier, when someone is born with this problem, they have to live with it every day.

The United States, a country recognized for its strict drug policies, has not managed to stem drug consumption. In the United States, opioid-related deaths increased from 50,000 in 2015 to almost 100,000 in 2021. This punitive approach towards drug users has had no impact on drug consumption in the United States. That is more or less the Conservatives' approach this morning. That is roughly what they are proposing.

The U.S. also has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and that is connected with drugs and drug consumption. This record disproves the ideological approach introduced by Nixon long ago. As mentioned earlier, some areas of the United States have changed tack, adopting an approach similar to those developed by Switzerland and Portugal.

In 2001, Portugal changed its approach to combatting drug consumption and the accompanying HIV epidemic by decriminalizing simple possession of drugs. This worked in Portugal. In the many studies that have followed, a new paradigm has emerged. We are familiar with it, and the Bloc supports it. Drug consumption is not just a criminal justice issue, it is first and foremost a public health issue.

Let us talk about public health. The Conservatives can be criticized for being dogmatic in their approach today. However, if we start from the paradigm that this is a public health and mental health issue, because it is, then health care needs to be funded properly. We need to help people, support them in the process, but that takes money. It takes people to support them, like psychologists and nursing aids. It takes centres where they will be supported. It is a mental health and public health problem. For that, health care needs to be properly funded.

What have we seen in the past few months? Over the past 30 years, every province in this country has been complaining non-stop about the lack of adequate funding for health care. There were negotiations recently. What happened? Quebec asked for $6 billion a year. We got barely $1 billion. Is that how we acknowledge the work of people who work in this field? Is that how we acknowledge even the most basic needs on the ground right now? The answer is: of course not. On one hand, the Liberals have an approach we can agree on, but it is largely underfunded, so we are left with a problem.

With substance use comes poverty. As my colleague mentioned earlier, this is another important issue related to the opioid crisis. With poverty comes difficulty finding housing. Difficulty finding housing means there is a housing crisis. There is a housing crisis in this country. How many times have we talked about it? I cannot believe how many times we have to repeat the same things in the House.

I am going to talk about the housing crisis because it is fundamental and it is related to what we are talking about today, although those on the other side of the House will not admit it. On Monday night, I was here in committee of the whole with the Minister of Housing and Diversity and Inclusion on the other side, the director of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, and all the senior officials from the department, and it was a pathetic display.

I have no doubt that the Minister of Housing is a very nice person. I do not want to be partisan in saying this, and I apologize, but he does not have the know-how to deal with the crisis that we are facing right now. That was very clear on Monday night. We were asking some very pertinent questions.

The challenge is real. Even the Liberals know it. The minister identified the housing problem that we have in this country. We must build 3.5 million housing units by 2030. He said so himself. We do not even need to tell him what the challenge is; he knows what it is. What is happening?

According to the National Housing Council, 115,000 housing units have been built since the national housing strategy was launched. I will remind members that we need 3.5 million units. We have built 115,000 units, but members might want to hold on to their hats, because according to the National Housing Council, we have lost 550,000 affordable housing units. We are in the red.

Over the past five years, the government has implemented an $82‑billion program. Not only are housing units not being built, but people have less access to housing. People with addictions could benefit from social housing with supports. It is desperately needed.

Let me close with this. As I mentioned earlier, an economist at the CMHC said that, in Quebec alone, 1.1 million housing units need to be built in the next 10 years. On its own, the market will build 500,000 units. Everyone needs to mobilize, all of us here in the House and all levels of government, to find a way to build 600,000 units in the next 10 years. That means 60,000 a year. Only 115,000 have been built in the last five years, so we are nowhere near that goal.

There are a number of considerations, including funding for housing and health care. There is also a human element underlying all of this. There are tragedies and families who have lost loved ones.

We need to mobilize. Unfortunately, dogmatic motions like the one the Conservatives introduced this morning will not move the debate forward.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I was reminded, while the member was speaking, that a few years back there was an article in the local paper in the St. John's area of Newfoundland, The Telegram. A former school teacher had lost his job and lost his family all because of drugs, and the drug of choice at that time was cocaine. In the article he said, “If you use it once, you're addicted, because you can't wait to get back to the place where it puts you.”

The member mentioned we need to do more, and I agree we need to do a lot more. As he said, there is housing, mental health and addictions services. We need to do more because this is a crisis. We just came through a pandemic and are still dealing with parts of it. This is going to be a bigger pandemic if we just sit down and do nothing about it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure there was a question in my colleague's comments, but that is fine. It is a real and very serious crisis. As I said, it is something very personal to me. I experienced this up close.

This comes with a human cost to the families. I have heard plenty of stories. I have met many people who have gone through this: Sons who lie and steal from their own mother in order to use drugs, which is just tragic; fathers whose fridge is empty and who use their rent money to pay for drugs. I could tell stories like that for hours. These are truly unspeakable tragedies.

We all need to come together. It is important and I want say it again: The Conservatives have a knack for raising important issues. The problem is that they rarely have good solutions. We all need to work together to come up with solutions.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his very sincere speech, because this is about real people. I would like to share with him that in my family we have struggled with this. I want to discuss what he accuses us of, which is strict dogma. The term “safe supply” was a marketing term by Purdue Pharma in order to get people to feel these opioids are safe. In the case in my family, it was not street drugs, it was prescription drugs. There may be less dangerous ways of managing them, but they are not safe. They are dangerous and they kill people.

A friend of mine who runs a recovery clinic said that with the Liberal approach the challenge is addicts are drowning. He said when they come in to see him it is like he pulls them out of the water and asks if they are okay. They say that they are and they thank him very much, and then he throws them back in for another day.

If he listened to our leader's speech, we were talking about recovery communities. Get them off the opioids and give them hope for the future. Does he agree the Liberal approach is not working and we have to invest in recovery and treatment in order to make a real difference? Nobody wants to be an addict. No family wants to lose a member because of this addiction.

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

Mr. Speaker, the truth is we need to do everything we can. The current approach being used might not be perfect. It could be improved. However, we are in a crisis, and at least we have something. As everyone is well aware, addicts cannot stop using overnight. That is not how it works. People need to be supported, especially when it comes to hard drugs, drugs that are injected. This requires medical monitoring and support.

After-care is also needed. We need treatment centres with psychologists who can provide after-care, but for that to happen, investments in health care are needed. The Liberals's track record is to acknowledge the crisis, but then refuse to provide adequate funding to address the needs. Adequate funding would allow us to create policies that could work.