Opposition Motions
Our first Motion for the week comes from Pierre Poilievre (Conservative Leader, Ontario, Carleton).
Given that,
- Canada is in the midst of an opioid crisis that has killed over 35,000 people since 2016
- Since 2017, the federal government has spent over $800 million on its failed Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy, including over $100 million in funding for hard-drug supply projects across Canada, and plans to spend an additional $74 million to “scale up” these projects over the next five years
- Since tax-funded drug supply was ramped up in 2020, opioid deaths have only gone up, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada
- In 2020, slightly less than 7,000 people died of opioid overdoses, while only 3,000 died of overdoses in 2016, according to the Library of Parliament
- In British Columbia alone, yearly drug overdose deaths have increased by 330% between 2015 and 2022
- Recently, a Global News reporter in East Vancouver was able to buy 26 hits for $30 in just 30 minutes of a dangerous and highly addictive opioid that is distributed in tax-funded drug supply programs and flooding our streets with cheap opioids
The House call on the government to immediately reverse its deadly policies and redirect all funds from taxpayer-funded, hard drug programs to addiction, treatment, and recovery programs.
Garnett Genuis (Conservative, Alberta, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan) proposed an amendment to this, adding to the end:
and to directly sue the companies responsible for causing and fueling the opioid crisis for all damages associated with the crisis and direct all funds recovered through such litigation to prevention, treatment, and recovery programs.
So first we’re going to talk about Garnett’s amendment. Taking a quick look on the numbers from the Public Health Agency of Canada the most recent numbers I could find say that between January and September of 2022 78% of the opioid-related deaths involved opioids that were only non-pharmaceutical. “Pharmaceutical origin” means the drug was made by a pharmaceutical company and approved for medical use in humans. So this amendment is just a lot of noise but won’t really accomplish anything.
The amendment failed with 114 voting in favour and 208 voting against.
| Party | For | Against | Paired |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberal | 0 | 150 | 0 |
| Conservative | 112 | 0 | 0 |
| Bloc Quebecois | 0 | 32 | 0 |
| NDP | 0 | 23 | 0 |
| Green Party | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Independent | 2 | 1 | 0 |
As for Pierre’s Motion, there’s a few things to note there.
First of all, the references to 2016 don’t have anything to do with the current government. (Though that seems to be the implication) The Public Health Agency of Canada only started tracking opioid deaths in 2016, so we don’t really have any numbers on a national level before that.
Second, the total number of deaths in 2022 between January and September in the report I found was 8% lower than the same period in 2021. The Public Health Agency recognizes that that isn’t a significant decrease in trend and that the rates are still high, but it’s something worth noting.
Finally we’re going to look at that Global News article he references. An article had been posted the day before Global ran the story Pierre is talking about, and it was updated after as well. First thing to note is that this particular program is being run by BC, not the federal government. In the article they mention several anonymous doctors talking about how fast the government-supplied opioids are being sold on the street, though the doctors willing to go on the record argue that the number of prescriptions that could be are a drop in the bucket of overall deaths. Global also says that 86% of opioid fatalities involved fentanyl, which suggests that the safe supply isn’t contributing to the deaths.
Pierre’s Motion then went up for its vote and failed with 113 in favour and 209 against.
| Party | For | Against | Paired |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberal | 0 | 151 | 0 |
| Conservative | 111 | 0 | 0 |
| Bloc Quebecois | 0 | 32 | 0 |
| NDP | 0 | 23 | 0 |
| Green Party | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Independent | 2 | 1 | 0 |
Our next Opposition Motion comes from Jenny Kwan (NDP, British Columbia, Vancouver East):
Given that:
- The House called on the government to launch a public inquiry into allegations of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic system, on March 23 and May 8, 2023
- The government did not heed this call, and instead appointed an independent special rapporteur who has recommended against holding a public inquiry, despite noting significant gaps and leaving many questions either unasked or unanswered
- Serious questions have been raised about the special rapporteur process, the counsel he retained in support of this work, his findings, and his conclusions
- Only a full public inquiry can fully restore the confidence of Canadians in the integrity of our democratic institutions
The House call on the Right Hon. David Johnston to step aside from his role as special rapporteur, and call on the government to urgently establish a public commission of inquiry which would be:
- Led by an individual selected with unanimous support from all recognized parties in the House
- Granted the power to review all aspects of foreign interference from all states, including, but not limited to, the actions of the Chinese, Indian, Iranian and Russian governments
- Asked to present its report and any recommendations in advance of the next dissolution of Parliament or, at the latest, at the fixed election date as set by the Canada Elections Act
and instruct the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to provide a report to the House as soon as possible with a recommendation on who could lead such a commission of inquiry and what its terms of reference should include.
The Motion passed, 174 in favour and 150 against.
| Party | For | Against | Paired |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberal | 0 | 149 | 0 |
| Conservative | 113 | 0 | 0 |
| Bloc Quebecois | 32 | 0 | 0 |
| NDP | 25 | 0 | 0 |
| Green Party | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Independent | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Not a lot to say here. Jenny isn’t wrong that the issue of election interference has become a big point, and it doesn’t look like David Johnston wasn’t enough to restore faith in our system, so more needs to be done. Maintaining faith in our democracy should definitely be a top priority, otherwise everything will start to fall apart.
Old Bills
C-281 – International Human Rights Act
C-281 came back from its committee reading with a few small changes to the wording in the French version. All parties agreed to the changes, and it is now waiting for its Third Reading.
C-244 – An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance, and repair)
C-244 came back from its committee reading with some changes. It no longer allows people to manufacture and sell devices that bypass copyright protections to let people diagnose/repair their devices, but now it clarifies that people who are repairing devices for someone else are also protected by C-244. Everyone voted in favour of adopting these changes.
Closing Fun
And that’s all for the week! I leave you with a fun exchange between Mark Gerretsen (Liberal, Ontario, Kingston and the Islands) and Clifford Small (Conservative, Newfoundland and Labrador, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame).
Mr. Speaker, I find it incredibly rich that, on the one hand, when I made a comment that was interpreted to mean that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills was not telling the truth, all hell broke loose on the Conservative side of-
Mr. Speaker, that was unparliamentary language by the member across the way.
Mr. Speaker, I will rephrase it. When I did that, the Conservatives lost their marbles, but when the member says-
Mr. Speaker, he is being derogatory to people who suffer from mental illness.
As a quick note, the Speaker ruled that Mark didn’t say anything unparliamentary.
Discover more from Commons Sense
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.