Dan Ruimy

[Criminal Code, May 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.

I will have to answer that one in English.

When we look at the entire program, training has to be part of it, because in order for officers to be qualified, they have to know how to use the devices, as well as how to calibrate them. We cannot just give them a piece of equipment and tell them to use it. That does not make any sense. Attached to the legislation is being able to train officers to identify what, where, and how so that there are no issues when it goes to court.

[Criminal Code, May 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, yes, sometimes the opposition will come up with very similar motions or private members' bills, but they lack certain bits of information. This bill is a result of months and months of task force investigation, consultation, and getting information. It includes cannabis as well. This bill actually complements the legislation that we are trying to move forward.

[Criminal Code, May 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, today I will be speaking in favour of Bill C-46, an act to amend the Criminal Code, regarding offences relating to conveyances, and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

Before I actually get into my speech, I think we all have a story to tell. When I was five, a drunk driver hit my parents. My mom was in the hospital for a year. My dad was gravely injured as well. Our whole family was split up to different multiple homes, and that has had far-reaching consequences throughout my life. Being here today allows me the opportunity to help do the right thing.

Bill C-46 is a non-partisan proposal to hit back hard against impaired driving, an issue all too familiar for many Canadians. We all want our roads to be clear of drug-impaired and alcohol-impaired drivers, and Bill C-46 would help to deliver just that. The bill contains a package of reforms that would make it far more difficult to escape detection and to avoid conviction. Bill C-46 addresses numerous elements found in the earlier bills, but it is, in my view, a more comprehensive approach to impaired driving, and includes new elements to deal with drug-impaired driving in advance of cannabis legislation.

This comprehensive bill has two parts. The first part would address drug-impaired driving and would come into force on royal assent. The second part would combine the new drug-impaired driving provisions with other transportation offences, including amendments to the alcohol-impaired driving provisions within a new part of the Criminal Code. This part would come into force 180 days following royal assent. The proposals in Bill C-46 are aimed at making our streets safer and at the same time are intended to boost efficiency and reduce delays in the criminal justice system.

I would like to expand on those provisions that would streamline the procedures surrounding impaired driving, both in and out of court.

In regard to proving blood alcohol concentration, I begin by noting that trials for the offence of driving over the legal limit for alcohol take up a disproportionate amount of trial time at the provincial court level. This occurs in part because of defence efforts to raise a reasonable doubt about the validity of the blood alcohol concentration. Bill C-46 proposes to address this in a manner consistent with current science by setting out that a driver's BAC, blood alcohol concentration, will be conclusively proven if the police have taken the following steps.

First, the qualified technician, who is a police officer trained to operate an approved instrument, must ensure that the approved instrument is not registering any alcohol that is in the room air. This is done by an air blank test. This is actually quite important; otherwise, the court could not be certain that the approved instrument detected only the alcohol that was in the driver's breath.

Second, qualified technicians must ensure that the approved instrument is calibrated correctly. They do this by testing a standard alcohol solution that is certified by an analyst to contain a specific concentration of alcohol. If the approved instrument produces a result that is within 10% of the target value, then the approved instrument is correctly calibrated.

Third, qualified technicians must take two breath samples at least 15 minutes apart. If there is agreement between the samples, meaning the results are within 20 milligrams, the agreement requirement is met and the lower of the two readings will be the reading that forms the basis of any criminal charge for driving while over the legal limit. For an offender with no prior impaired driving conditions, a lower reading typically would avoid a fine above the minimum fine.

If the qualified technicians take these three steps, the resulting blood alcohol concentration will be conclusively proven. The result is an enhanced trial efficiency, given that no court time is taken up by efforts to question the validity of the blood alcohol concentration analysis. This proposed change is based on the best available scientific evidence and would ensure trial fairness while preventing time-consuming challenges to reliable testing procedures.

There is another important change proposed in Bill C-46 that works hand in hand with the proof of blood alcohol concentration. This is the proposal to reformulate the offence from driving while over 80 to the new formulation proposed in Bill C-46, which is having a blood alcohol concentration at or over 80 milligrams of alcohol within two hours of driving.

A number of states in the U.S.A. already have such a formulation. It eliminates the bolus drinking defence, also known as the “drink and dash defence”. This consists of a driver claiming that they were under 80 at the time of driving because the alcohol, which they drank quickly and just before driving, was not fully absorbed into the blood. However, by the time they were tested on the approved instrument at the police station, the alcohol was absorbed and the reading on the approved instrument was over 80.

Assuming this pattern of behaviour has actually occurred, it is then argued in court that the effects of the alcohol did not make the driver drunk until the driver was stopped. This is very dangerous behaviour that should not be condoned by the law. This is a loophole that allows people to get out of the responsibilities of their actions.

The new offence also limits the “intervening drink defence” by tackling a strategy employed after driving but before testing at the police station. The driver either openly drinks alcohol once the police have stopped him, or they drink alcohol that was hidden, for example, in a pocket flask while they are waiting in the police car or at the station. This behaviour typically is aimed at interfering with the police investigation of an impaired driving offence. Again, if we look around and we look at the science and what has been happening out there, Bill C-46 aims to address these issues.

The Supreme Court of Canada indicated in 2012 that the bolus drinking defence and the intervening drink defence encourage behaviour that is dangerous or contrary to public policy. Bill C-46 would eliminate the bolus drinking defence and restrict the intervening drink defence to situations where the post-driving alcohol consumption occurred innocently, meaning that the driver had no reasonable expectation that a demand for a breath sample would be made by the police.

For example, the driver arrives home and begins drinking at home. There is no reason to expect the police to arrive and make a demand for a breath sample. However, if the police receive a complaint that the driver was driving while drunk and they investigate, in this rare scenario the driver could still raise the intervening drink defence.

Another efficiency measure in Bill C-46 is the clarification of the crown's disclosure requirements. The bill clearly and concisely specifies what the prosecution must provide to the defence with respect to a driver's testing on the approved instrument. If the defence wishes to obtain more, it can apply to the court but must show the relevance of the requested information. This disclosure provision is intended to ensure that police are not obliged to disclose material, such as historical approved instrument maintenance records, which is irrelevant to the scientific validity of the driver's breath test results.

Given that the disclosure phase is frequently a bottleneck in the process, these clarifications are expected to result in significant improvements in prosecutorial efficiency. This includes time and resources saved on locating, copying, collating, organizing, or otherwise providing scientifically irrelevant maintenance record materials to defence.

I am confident that the proposed changes in Bill C-46 will make the investigation and prosecution of impaired driving crimes a lot simpler. The approved instrument, when used by a qualified technician who first ensures that it is operating correctly, is scientifically reliable. It produces a reading that is a valid statement of a driver's blood alcohol concentration. Defence will be given full and complete disclosure of the steps taken to ensure the scientific validity of a driver's blood alcohol concentration result on the approved instrument. Defence will be able to see for itself whether the appropriate steps that are prerequisite to the conclusive proof of blood alcohol concentration were taken and it will ensure that time is not spent addressing irrelevant disclosure applications.

Through Bill C-46, efficiencies in the criminal justice system for impaired driving matters will be gained not only at the police investigation stage but also at the trial stage.

The impaired driving provisions have been the subject of extensive discussions with provinces and territories and are eagerly awaited by them.

I ask that all hon. members join in voting to pass Bill C-46 at second reading and send it to the legislative committee for review.

[Committees of the House, May 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, entitled “The Canadian Manufacturing Sector: Urgent Need to Adapt”.

I too wish to thank all the clerks who were on our committee, all our translators, and everyone who officially helped us to get this done. This is a unanimous report as well.

[Committees of the House, May 29th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology entitled “Main Estimates 2017-18”.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, May 19th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, as chair of the innovation, science and technology committee, I was pleased to take our committee to Washington, D.C. earlier this month to meet with business and government. It is so exciting to know that many of our companies have a strong relationship with our neighbours to the south.

For most of the last three decades, trade has been an important part of that relationship. Only last year, U.S. goods and services trade with Canada totalled an estimated $627.8 billion U.S.

Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development tell the House what he is doing to grow this mutually beneficial relationship on the ground?

[Youth Mental Health, May 17th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge is home to many talented, intelligent, and dedicated young people, and each and every one of them has an important voice. The youth council in my riding firmly believes that all Canadians, regardless of age, deserve to be at the table, and that includes young people.

I continue to be impressed by the passion and dedication this team of young adults has demonstrated in every group discussion, including taking action to address an issue of great importance to it: youth mental health.

The CYC is organizing a youth mental health town hall for our community. I am proud the CYC is working hard to address an issue that cannot be ignored.

I encourage everyone to attend this youth-led discussion on youth mental health, May 26, at 7pm, at the Maple Ridge seniors centre. Please visit my website or call my constituency office to RSVP. We can no longer remain silent on this issue.

[Committees of the House, May 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology entitled “Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Statistics Act”.

[Cancer, April 12th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, you may have noticed that I am wearing a daffodil today. April is daffodil month, and the daffodil symbolizes the work done by the Canadian Cancer Society to educate the public and raise funds for cancer research.

We can be proud of the innovative research being done in Canada.

Recently, researchers have been working to block breast cancer with Zantac, normally used for heartburn. Discoveries with pancreatic cancer cells may allow scientists to create drugs to block or reverse the spreading of the disease. New advancements have led to genetic screening, which is less costly, more accessible, and may boost cancer survival rates.

That kind of progress is truly remarkable. I want to thank everyone in Canada who is working to eradicate cancer and providing hope to us all. We need to work together to beat cancer.

[The Budget, April 3rd, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Pickering—Uxbridge.

When we took office in 2015, we knew that Canadian families had been discouraged by an economy that just was not working for them. We heard from Canadians from all walks of life that they were worried about their future and the current state of the economy and were looking for a government that would believe in them and invest in them.

In my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, I have spoken with families who are facing the challenges of an economy in a world that is rapidly changing. While we see these many challenges, we must also see the opportunities. I am proud of budget 2017 for seeing the optimism in a changing world and tapping into the opportunities for Canadians. Optimism and ambition have always been the telling story of Canadians. We are innovative, creative, compassionate people, who put our family first and believe that better is always possible.

To me, budget 2017 is about the empowerment of Canadians, empowering families, young people, women, and indigenous communities. It is also about supporting businesses and industries to succeed, not just here in Canada but around the world. Budget 2017 is an investment in the future of Canadians. Budget 2017 is a budget that I truly believe will empower communities and support constituents, addressing the vulnerable in our community, but also creating opportunities for families and generations to come.

As chair of the Standing Committee on Innovation, Science and Technology, and a member of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons With Disabilities, I have sat at the tables to listen to Canadians share their thoughts about our innovation sector, as well as our social sector. I have had the opportunity to speak with experts, academics, and everyday Canadians on the issues ranging from poverty reduction and labour shortages to supporting our industries and encouraging more women on corporate boards. The budget shows an understanding that these challenges, while distinct, are also interconnected. Quite simply, it is a reflection of the reality that Canadians are facing.

Budget 2017 is a strategy. It is a strategy to put Canadians ahead in global markets on the forefront of innovation and skills while at the same time supporting the urgent needs of vulnerable Canadians who have slipped through the cracks of a system that has not previously worked for them.

Our government is a government that looks to the future and knows that investing in modern skills training today will ensure collective success tomorrow. I know my community is filled with families who work hard each and every day so that their children can have a better future than their own, yet too many young people in our communities are struggling to find good-paying jobs after completing their education. A rapidly changing labour market and global workforce is presenting unprecedented challenges for our youth. Budget 2017 proposes a variety of measures that will support young Canadians in their transition to the workforce, as well as adult Canadians who are tying to adapt to a changing workforce.

The budget will expand on our youth employment strategy, investing $395.5 million over three years to help more than 33,000 vulnerable youth develop the skills they need to get back to school, create 15,000 new green jobs, and provide over 1,600 new employment opportunities in the heritage sector.

Additionally, budget 2017 will support the creation of a co-op and work integrated program for young people, particularly in STEM and business programs, while also renewing the government's support for pathways to education Canada. This is a program that assists low-income youth to complete high school and transition to the workforce or post-secondary education.

I am also proud that budget 2017 will equip our young people with the skills to succeed in a rapidly changing labour market by investing $50 million over two years for digital skills training, such as coding. Preparing our young people with the appropriate skills and abilities will help them and empower them to succeed in a modern job market.

As the chair of the industry committee, I have heard first-hand how important it is for our youth to have digital skills to be able to compete in a global workforce. This measure will not only help Canadians find good-paying jobs when they enter the labour market, but will also help Canada to be on the cutting edge of digital innovation and technology. This is a win-win that I hope everyone in the House can get on board with.

We are also helping adult Canadians retrain and develop new skills for today's modern labour market through changes to employment insurance, Canada student grants, and Canada student loans.

Changes to employment insurance will help unemployed Canadians receive skills training and get back on their feet without necessarily putting them at risk of losing their benefits, a barrier we heard at the human resources committee quite often that prevented successful re-entry into the labour market for so many.

Likewise, budget 2017 commits over $300 million over three years to assist adult Canadians with children who wish to go back to school to upgrade their skills.

Making investments is not about handouts. Over and over again at the human resources committee, we heard that it is about smart, calculated investments and partnerships that will most successfully empower Canadians to address the challenges we collectively face.

At our committee we also heard about the distinct correlation between mental health and poverty. As per commitments in budget 2016 and negotiations in the past year, my province of British Columbia will receive an additional $654.7 million over the next 10 years for mental health initiatives. This is in addition to the Canada health transfer of $6.7 billion in the 2017-18 year, which is an increase of $194.9 million from the previous year. Improving access to mental health initiatives will not only support millions of Canadians who struggle with mental health but will also work proactively to address a key contributor to poverty in Canada.

With respect to supporting vulnerable Canadians, job training is also one of the most effective—