Libby Davies

[Heroin Prescription Trials, April 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would seek unanimous consent to have the matter sent for further discussion to the Standing Committee on Health.

[Heroin Prescription Trials, April 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the members who participated in this debate, in particular the member from the Bloc Quebecois and the member from the Conservative Party for their very thoughtful comments. That is what this discussion was about, to talk about this very serious issue and to examine what options and possibilities there are for dealing with the very very serious situation of chronic injection drug users who may be using heroin or cocaine or a combination of drugs.

It was disappointing to hear the response from the government member. To me this debate is about saying we must have a variety of options available. I would certainly agree with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health that methadone must be improved, it must be expanded. There have been calls for that in all the reports I have read and I would certainly agree with that. Indeed the other options she mentioned need to be brought forward and put on the table as real possibilities that can be used.

My concern is that we not rule out what has been shown to be successful in other countries in terms of a heroin maintenance program that can be viable and beneficial in circumstances where individuals have not been able to get successful treatment using other options.

To characterize the heroin maintenance program in Switzerland or anywhere else as something that is not well established or that is very risky, I would encourage the member to look at some of the material that is available from the very credible organizations that have been monitoring the Swiss program. The evidence shows very clearly that we are not talking about risky situations but about a program that actually produced very amazing results.

To the member from the Reform Party, it is very disappointing that this would be characterized as the NDP wanting to give out free heroin to addicts. Morphine is also a controlled substance. We recognize that it has a legitimate use within our medical system. Nobody here is advocating handing out heroin all over the place to whoever wants it.

This motion talks about setting up a very tightly controlled scientific and medically supervised pilot program in which we can enrol people and make contact with people who otherwise are totally marginalized and seem to be outside of our health care system.

To characterize a very complex health issue by throwing it away and saying that it is about free drugs really does not do service to the complexity and the compassion we need to show for people who are really suffering out there. I was very disappointed to hear the remarks from the Reform Party.

I have heard other members from the Reform Party say they have been to Vancouver's downtown east side in my constituency of Vancouver East and they are very horrified at what they have seen on the streets. If that is the case, I would encourage them to look at this seriously and to seek out information from the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Addiction Research Foundation, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, coroners offices, and the list goes on and on.

This motion was brought forward to bring about a debate, to bring about understanding, to encourage the government not to close the door on this matter. It has had a lot of discussion within the health care community and the justice community. This is something that should be taken note of and examined further. We should be working with the medical community to look at the protocols that would be necessary.

From what I have been able to read in articles, even officials from Health Canada believe there is a place to have this kind of program set up. I would encourage the government not to reject this outright as being too controversial and risky but to look at it as an option, as part of a comprehensive harm reduction strategy for dealing with illegal drug use.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for the unanimous consent of the House to make this a votable motion.

[Heroin Prescription Trials, April 28th, 1999]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should, in co-operation with the provinces, implement clinical, multi-centre heroin prescription trials for injection to opiate users, including protocols for rigorous scientific assessment and evaluation.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House today to debate my private member's Motion No. 454. I would like to spend a few minutes detailing why the issue is very important not just to my constituents but to people across Canada.

When I was first elected in the riding of Vancouver East in 1997, the first event I attended, before I actually arrived in the House of Commons, was a very tragic community gathering in Oppenheimer Park. The neighbourhood people, who were very concerned about the number of deaths from drug overdoses, had gathered to put up 1,000 crosses in the small park in the middle of this very low income community on the east side of downtown Vancouver. The 1,000 crosses were put up to represent the very tragic lives and deaths of people who had died from drug overdoses.

I have the sad duty to report that in British Columbia the leading cause of death now for men and women between the ages of 30 and 44 is actually from drug overdoses. In fact, in 1998 the number of people who died from drug overdoses was 371, which is an astounding number when one thinks about it.

I thought a lot about this issue and about what we needed to do to come to grips with a very serious health problem. Our local Vancouver-Richmond Health Board was so concerned about the issue of HIV, AIDS and hepatitis C infection among injection drug users that in October 1997 it actually declared a state of health emergency in the community on the downtown east side. This has caused me to bring the issue forward to the House of Commons.

I met with the Minister of Health on several occasions and have raised this previously in the House. I wanted to bring this motion forward to draw attention to the tragedy of what takes place in too many communities in Canada where, because we have had an emphasis on the criminalization of illicit drug use, we have seen many people become further marginalized in society.

The purpose in bringing this motion forward today is to have a debate in the House of Commons on the importance of what is called a harm reduction approach when it comes to drugs. The purpose of Motion No. 454 is to reduce the harm associated with obtaining drugs on the street. The purpose of the motion is to look at how we can protect the community, reduce crime and also save lives because too many people are dying.

In bringing forward this motion, I really wanted to make it clear that the motion simply states that a medical approach to heroin maintenance is one alternative that should be explored. The motion is clearly not about the legalization of drugs or heroin. The motion does not encourage condoning heroin use. It is aimed toward facilitating the research needed to implement an effective alternative regulated treatment option for heroin addicts.

The research I have done has led me to the conclusion that we need to have health intervention. We need to focus on harm reduction. We need to have a medicalization of addiction that allows us as a society to say that the answer is not just to throw people in jail or to criminalize them. We need to provide support, treatment, education and, in some instances, help to people who are facing a chronic addiction because treatment may have failed.

We are now learning from other models, particularly in Europe, where they have been very successful in enrolling volunteers, hard core addicts, who become part of a heroin maintenance program. It is a very well controlled, scientific program which has actually reduced the amount of criminal activity taking place. It has actually reduced the amount of activity that takes place in terms of buying drugs on the black market. It has improved peoples' health status. In some cases, it has allowed people to go back to work, find jobs, be in better housing and basically put their lives together.

This motion is about opening up a debate and saying that our approach to illicit drug laws in the past has been based on views that do not make sense today. If we are really serious about saving lives, protecting the community and reducing the crime that comes about as a result of obtaining drugs on the street, then we need this kind of medical intervention.

There is no question that there is a growing number of health care professionals, people in the justice system and recently the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, who have been calling for the decriminalization of small amounts of illicit drugs, and for better treatment, better support and better education. The list is growing of people who recognize that the approaches we have had in the past simply are not working.

I would like to detail some of the support that is out there. The most notable one is the Canadian Medical Association. At its board meeting last December 1998, it passed the following resolution:

The CMA recommends to the federal Minister of Health that the investigation of prescription of heroin for opiate-dependent individuals follow the same approval protocol in practice for the use of any therapeutic drug in Canada; and that the CMA recommend that methadone maintenance and counselling programs be more widely available across the country with appropriate education and remuneration of professional delivering such programs. This recommendation applies also to correctional institutions.

That is from the Canadian Medical Association.

The former B.C. provincial health officer, Mr. Millar, in his 1998 report “HIV, Hepatitis and Injection Drug Use in British Columbia—Pay Now or Pay Later”, also recommended that controlled legal availability of heroin, in a tightly controlled system of medical prescription, should be pilot tested as an option, as part of a comprehensive harm reduction program.

In 1997 there was a federally funded national task force on HIV, AIDS and injection drug use. It included representatives from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Canadian Bar Association and the Canadian AIDS Society, among others. The task force recommended a continuum of treatment options and also called on the federal government to conduct clinical trials of prescription morphine, heroin and cocaine as alternative approaches, such as is being done in other countries.

Even a high ranking Health Canada official, Mr. Rowsell of the Bureau of Drug Surveillance of Health Canada, has been reported in the media as saying:

—an initiative to gather evidence looking at the benefits and risks of heroin maintenance will be helpful.

The list goes on. We had a chief coroner's report in 1994 in B.C. that came to the same conclusion. The Canadian Psychiatric Association has encouraged Health Canada and the government to look in this direction. The Canadian Addiction Research Foundation is on the list.

Organizations around the world are beginning to recognize that this kind of approach is something that will produce an overall benefit, not just in terms of individual users who are leading very desperate lives and are very marginalized, but in terms of the benefit to the community and to society as a whole.

This is a controversial issue. I have had people come up to me and say “You are just talking about legalizing drugs”, or “This is something that we could not do”. I believe that if the federal government and the Minister of Health were committed to working with some of these organizations, like the Canadian Medical Association, then we could set up the appropriate protocols that are actually being developed by the Canadian Addiction Research Foundation in consultation with other professionals and scientists. The protocols are now being developed, but it requires leadership from the health minister and from the Canadian government in co-operation with the provinces to say that this is a pilot program.

The notion of multi-centre clinical trials for a heroin maintenance program is something which we should set up as there would be a great benefit. We can learn from other countries which have already done this. We would not be carving out new ground.

Information from the Swiss program, for example, has told us that when nationwide heroin trials were implemented in 1994 there was overwhelming support for the program. Criminal offences and the number of criminal offenders dropped 60%. The percentage of income from illegal and semi-legal activities fell from 69% to 10%. Illegal heroin and cocaine use declined dramatically. Stable employment increased from 14% to 32%. The physical health of people dramatically improved and most participants greatly reduced their contact with the drug scene.

By making contact with people who are marginalized, who are living on the edge of society because we force them to do so by our laws, we can bring them into an appropriate model of health care, into an appropriate setting for social support, for housing and for counselling. People can then begin to put together the pieces and make choices in their lives.

I have been very honoured in my riding to meet quite frequently with drug users. Perhaps not many members of parliament have been able to do that. These individuals have their own organization in the downtown east side called the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users, or VANDU. These people are trying to assert their own rights. They are trying to find their own voice to tell those of us in positions of responsibility and authority that they matter. Their lives matter. Because they have such difficulty in accessing the health care system, many of them live in slum housing, inappropriate housing, and most of them do not have access to adequate and proper services.

The injection drug users are calling on us to take responsible action. They have done a huge amount of very important work in my community in bringing forward to our local health board and to other bodies the fact that they have rights and that, in many ways, the health care system has failed them.

This issue generates a lot of debate. It deals with our mindset around illicit drugs. However, my interest is to bring forward the desperation and the urgency that exists, not just in my community in the downtown east side, but in many urban centres. People are dying on the streets from drug overdoses because they cannot get the help they need, the housing they need or the medical support they need.

We have a responsibility to look at this issue seriously. I encourage members of the House to be supportive of modernizing and updating Canada's drug laws. I encourage members to promote harm reduction strategies. I encourage members to continue that work and to impress upon the Minister of Health that we will support any initiative he takes to bring this forward. The minister will have support from the medical community. He will have support from the association of Canadian police chiefs and he will have support from the coroners who see the bodies that come in as a result of drug overdoses.

There comes a time when we have to have the courage to stand and say that we have to have change, that what we have done in the past is not working, and that we need a new approach.

I ask members of the House to look at the evidence. Look at what happened in Switzerland. Look at what happened in Europe. Look at our communities and see the people who are suffering and consider this motion as a way of bringing forward a program that will save lives, protect the community and deal with this very urgent health matter.

[Aboriginal Affairs, April 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago the minister of Indian affairs told this House that she understands the historical significance of the Nisga'a treaty, but it will mean nothing unless the federal government makes it clear that it is willing to live up to its commitment to approve and ratify this agreement.

I ask the minister, when will the legislation be brought forward? There should be no stalling, no excuses and no delays. The Nisga'a have waited far too long for justice. We want a clear answer from the minister. When will the legislation come to the House?

[Hepatitis C, April 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, thousands of my constituents in Vancouver East still face terrible financial and personal losses as a result of leaky condos. Sadly it is a crisis made worse by Liberal inaction at the federal level.

The Liberals continued inaction and lack of concern are unacceptable. Is it any wonder that people in B.C. feel alienated from Ottawa? Apparently there is no help, no care and no real support forthcoming.

I am here today to say that we will not stand for it. Nor will we let up on our demand that the federal government do right by the thousands of people in B.C. affected by this crisis. It is something for which we have been fighting for a long time.

Back in July 1998 and again in December 1998 I wrote to the minister urgently asking the government to support recommendations from both the Barrett commission and the Condominium Owners Association of B.C. for tax relief and GST rebates. To date the federal government has rejected these recommendations.

In March of this year the B.C. municipal affairs minister visited Ottawa to pressure the federal government to participate in the B.C. reconstruction loan program. The answer from the feds was no.

On March 17, I questioned the minister of public of works in the House and asked why on earth the federal government would offer federal loans to B.C. with interest rates so high that the province would be better off accessing them on the open market. Instead of admitting that the offer was hypocritical at best, the federal minister's response was that the issue required further study.

Despite all these efforts and despite the heartfelt need of thousands of desperate homeowners, the Liberal government has yet to act. Empty expressions of concern do not contribute one bit to the repairs that are needed to get these homeowners back on a secure footing. The feds have even refused to partner with the province in assisting housing co-ops that are facing the same problems, many of which were built under federal housing programs.

On April 24, the Government of British Columbia announced that housing co-ops could apply for provincial assistance. Clearly the Government of B.C. is helping resolve this terrible situation, but the question remains where is the federal government.

The Liberal government in Ottawa has turned its back on thousands of leaky condo owners in B.C. left stranded as their assets literally drain away. It is a shameful ploy that once again shuffles the interest of western Canadians to the bottom of the deck.

Once and for all I ask the federal government to provide support and to participate responsibly in the program to help desperate B.C. owners of leaky condos.

[Poverty In Canada, April 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on April 14 the finance minister had the audacity to tell the House that he was “delighted to say that the number of children living in poor or low income families has declined by 100,000”.

A day later, the Caledon Institute reported the real facts which showed that cuts to UI and welfare offset any employment gains by women living in poverty in the last year. Indeed, transfer payments to the poorest families fell by 3% in 1997. The poverty rate has not improved in 20 years. The poverty rate for families headed by persons under 25 has doubled from 20.9% in 1980 to 43.6% in 1997.

The evidence is very clear. The gap between the rich and the poor is growing. It is the Liberal government policies that are to blame.

I would like to tell the finance minister, rather than taking credit for something he did not do, he needs to set real targets to reduce poverty in Canada.

[Criminal Code, April 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the terrible impact of drugs on young people and the local communities. He even mentioned the downtown area of my own riding of Vancouver East.

I would like to pursue this a bit further. There is no question that the impact of illegal drugs is overpowering in terms of death and destruction, not just on individual lives but on whole communities. As he has pointed out, this does have a relationship to crime. It marginalizes people and involves them in taking on a criminal lifestyle.

Does the member's party agree that in order to deal with the issue of reducing the harm of obtaining drugs illegally on the street that we have to provide a social and medical response?

I have, for example, a motion coming up that will look at providing a heroin maintenance program. This will enable us to put chronic addicts into the medical system. They should not be out on the street leading very desperate lives and causing harm not only to themselves but to the whole community.

We have heard two members speak about the impact of drugs and the drug trade. Does the Reform Party recognize that there are victims and to continue with a criminalized approach does not really solve anything?

The member also mentioned growing poverty which, I agree, has been a tragedy in the country. I saw a letter the other day from a Reform member suggesting that housing and homelessness were not a national responsibility but a responsibility that should be left to the provinces. I am curious as to the Reform Party's position as articulated by the member today. Growing poverty also impacts on victims of crime and on the people involved in crime. The provision of housing as a basic human need is something that is very critical.

I would also like to know whether the Reform Party supports the provision of housing? Does it feel there is a role for the federal government to play in ensuring that there is no homelessness in Canada?

[Kosovo, April 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Vatican, churches throughout Europe and churches in Russia have appealed to NATO, to the Serbs and to the Albanian Kosovars to stop the military action and to engage in dialogue immediately. Now, as we have heard, they are joined by the Canadian Council of Churches.

To advance this diplomatic dialogue, is Canada prepared to pursue a uniting for peace resolution at the United Nations? Will Canada do that?

[Kosovo, April 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Council of Churches met today with the Prime Minister to urge a diplomatic solution to the Kosovo crisis. Let me read from its letter:

Canada needs to take advantage of its hard-won position on the security council, calling on it to perform a central overseeing role in the diplomatic and humanitarian response to the crisis.

My question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Why will Canada not lead the call to move for a diplomatic solution at the UN?

[Legalization Of Marijuana For Health And Medical Purposes, April 14th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, every day people in my riding of Vancouver East come to me with their hopes and their concerns for their families and their community. Lately the concerns that I hear very often centre on the issue of safety. People are concerned for their own personal safety. They are concerned about keeping their children out of harm's way and they are concerned that their neighbourhoods are becoming less secure.

On two recent occasions in the House of Commons I raised the issue of safety and asked the government to respond. On February 16, I asked the government what it would do to support B.C.'s request to keep people safe in their homes as there is a huge concern about home invasions. I also called on the government to support the initiative of the Vancouver Safety Coalition for a community based crime prevention program funded under the national crime prevention strategy. Unfortunately the response from the government has been very inadequate.

As I pointed out in the House on March 2, in order to be effective the recently announced $5 million revitalization program for the downtown east side must be directed toward programs and social supports that will benefit residents and improve safety. So far we have been told that the funds will be used to open an office to study ways to bring people together.

Instead of providing jobs for social facilitators we need to ensure that these funds are used to help stabilize our communities. We need to improve social conditions. We need to improve housing and addiction treatment programs. These are the types of programs that will make our neighbours and our neighbourhoods safe.

Committing to a sane approach to the drug crisis is also a crucial step in securing safe communities. We know that drug treatment programs are capable of reducing crimes by 80%. Research shows that for every dollar we spend on drug treatment services $7 can be saved in medical, social and criminal enforcement costs. Reducing the harm of obtaining illicit drugs on the street is critical to saving lives and improving safety for all of us.

Toward that goal I have worked for accessible detox and treatment services, better housing conditions, a safe resource centre for drug users so they can get away from the desperate life on the street, and for clinical trials for a national heroin maintenance program modelled on successful programs in Europe.

At the same time I have called on the government to show leadership in providing adequate funding for the establishment of community policing and neighbourhood safety.

The federal government must have the courage to support a comprehensive strategy for increasing community security that includes commitments to social supports and community policing. The people of Vancouver East are demanding some assurance that safe and healthy communities are achievable goals, not just catch phrases of a political public relations campaign.

Keeping our families and our neighbourhoods safe is something that concerns us all. That is why I will continue to fight for the resources and the commitment necessary to address this important issue.