Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 2 of 2
2013-11-26 [p.208]
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Ambrose (Minister of Health), second...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Ambrose (Minister of Health), seconded by Mrs. Yelich (Minister of State (Foreign Affairs and Consular)), — That Bill C-2, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this house decline to give second reading to Bill C-2, an Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, because it:
(a) fails to reflect the dual purposes of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) to maintain and promote both public health and public safety;
(b) runs counter to the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Canada v. PHS Community Services Society, which states that a Minister should generally grant an exemption when there is proof that a supervised injection site will decrease the risk of death and disease, and when there is little or no evidence that it will have a negative impact on public safety;
(c) establishes onerous requirements for applicants that will create unjustified barriers for the establishment of safe injection sites, which are proven to save lives and increase health outcomes; and
(d) further advances the Minister's political tactics to divide communities and use the issue of supervised injection sites for political gain, in place of respecting the advice and opinion of public health experts.”.
The question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 16 -- Vote no 16) - View vote details.
YEAS: 125, NAYS: 147
Collapse
2011-06-22 [p.142]
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: (Division No. 16 -- Vote no 16)YEAS: ...
Expand
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 16 -- Vote no 16) - View vote details.
YEAS: 156, NAYS: 137
(See list under Division No. 14)
Accordingly, the Bill was concurred in at report stage.
Collapse
Results: 1 - 2 of 2

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data