Rona Ambrose

[Health, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, as a former RCMP officer, the member knows very well that dangerous and addictive drugs tear families apart, and they destroy lives.

Our government, and I as health minister, will continue to support treatment and recovery programs that get addicts off drugs and help them recover drug-free lives.

The Liberal leader's recent comments in support of opening heroin injection sites across Canada are shameful. We strongly disagree with his blind support for opening more heroin injection sites without public consultation.

As health minister, I will follow the Supreme Court ruling and make sure that communities have a voice.

[Health, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, that is a ridiculous assertion. The Prime Minister himself spoke loud and clear about the need for parents to vaccinate and the benefits of immunization, not just here at home but abroad, while at the same time announcing multi-millions of dollars for those in foreign countries where there are no public health systems.

Here in Canada basic immunizations are covered for all children. We have many, many campaigns and resources available to parents to educate them on the benefits of vaccination, and we encourage parents to vaccinate their children.

[Health, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the member is wrong. That is the bottom line. She is referring to estimates, and that is all they are: estimates. We will see an increase in Public Health Agency funding. In fact, our spending on public health security issues has doubled since 2010. The Public Health Agency is very active and engaged in the issue of hep C, particularly through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and research to support those who are suffering from hepatitis C.

[Health, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the member is just wrong. In fact, in terms of the Public Health Agency of Canada, our spending on health security has actually nearly doubled since 2010. Of course, this year we will see quite a bit of an increase coming through the Public Health Agency of Canada because of our numerous investments in Ebola preparedness, whether it is the unprecedented vaccine and treatment clinical trials we are funding all over the world, or supporting provinces in their community preparedness for Ebola, both in training and the equipment they needed, or the public awareness campaign we launched on Ebola to help fight stigma for health care workers.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, we have listened to experts. We have listened to the Supreme Court justices. We have listened to health experts, public safety experts, and police members. We have listened to many people since 2011, which is how we drafted the bill.

However, the nexus of all of this is that we also want to hear from regular Canadians about having the illicit use of drugs in a supervised way in their communities.

In terms of jurisdiction, this is an exemption. These establishments only exist because the Minister of Health is able to give them an exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and that is truly within federal jurisdiction. By all means, this is absolutely within federal jurisdiction.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the irony is that what this bill constitutes is a change, a major change, to the current process that is now in place. That change allows for public input.

It is ironic that members opposite do not support further consultation. That is what the Supreme Court ruled. It has been, frankly, the genesis of a lot of conflict around this issue, because people have not been allowed to have a voice. They have had no impact. There has been no application process in place where people could actually have input.

I get letters from Canadians all the time. I also get letters from groups that want the bill to pass, because they want to have a voice in this matter.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

I appreciate the member's comments, Mr. Speaker.

That is really the irony of this entire debate by members of the opposition. They opposed the bill right from the beginning, because they wanted the current rules to stay in place. In other words, any applicant could move forward with a supervised injection site, where we know illegal and harmful substances would be consumed by drug addicts, without any consultation with the local police, local health authorities, or local municipal leaders. We do not agree with that, and neither did the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2011. We have debated this for 12 days, for 20 hours. We have been to committee, both the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and I, and it is time for Canadians to have a voice in this matter.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, we have debated this now for 20 hours in the House. It has gone to committee. We are at third reading. However, there is nothing more democratic than hearing from the public on an issue. That is what this bill is about. This bill would provide the framework to consider what others believe, not just the applicant. The applicant would apply to the Minister of Health for an exemption to allow illegal, illicit, and dangerous drugs to be used in a supervised way, but what about those who live in the community? What about parents? What about homeowners? What about the local police? What about the local municipal leaders? Why do they not have a say? They have not had a say up to this point, and they will not until this legislation is passed.

That is why this is all about democracy. It is making sure that Canadians have a say.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I did hear from some of the opposition members about supervised injection sites. Let us remember that they are places for the supervised injection of illicit and illegal drugs, which are harmful to those who are addicted to those drugs and which have an impact on the health and public safety of that community.

We have heard from the opposition. What did the opposition say? It wants the current rules to stay in place. In other words, it wants an exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to proceed without any public consultation.

Our government heard the Supreme Court, but it heard even more loudly and clearly from Canadians who live in these neighbourhoods and who might have kids going to school next door to a supervised injection site. They want their voices heard, and they have a right to that. The Supreme Court agreed, and that is why we need this legislation to proceed. It is so we have a framework for those kinds of public consultations so that we can hear those in favour and those opposed.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I return to the substance of this bill. The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act puts in place very strict controls for dangerous and addictive drugs. The Supreme Court's ruling requires that the Minister of Health consider certain factors when reviewing an application for an exemption from these controls.

That is what we are talking about. I would be giving an exemption to an establishment where illegal and illicit drugs would then be used in a supervised manner. It is important that those who are impacted by this, whether it involves public safety or health, be considered.

At the end of the day, we are talking about people who are addicted to drugs. They are suffering. They need help. We want to know if there are going to be programs available. If these supervised injection sites are actually going to help these people who are addicted to drugs, will there be resources available to support them in terms of treatment and options for recovery?