Libby DAVIES

DAVIES, Libby

Personal Data

Party
New Democratic Party
Constituency
Vancouver East (British Columbia)
Birth Date
February 27, 1953
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Davies
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=8edb5e32-fc50-4216-bbe1-b112eada513c&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
human resources co-ordinator

Parliamentary Career

June 2, 1997 - October 22, 2000
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • Deputy Whip of the N.D.P. (February 1, 2000 - February 5, 2003)
November 27, 2000 - May 23, 2004
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • Deputy Whip of the N.D.P. (February 1, 2000 - February 5, 2003)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)
June 28, 2004 - November 29, 2005
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)
January 23, 2006 - September 7, 2008
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)
October 14, 2008 - March 26, 2011
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)
May 2, 2011 - August 2, 2015
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)
May 2, 2011 -
NDP
  Vancouver East (British Columbia)
  • N.D.P. House Leader (February 6, 2003 - May 25, 2011)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 467)


June 5, 2015

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise in the House today and present hundreds of petitions from the Association for the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals.

The petitioners point out to Parliament that every year hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats are brutally slaughtered for their fur in a number of regions. They say that Canada should join the U.S., Australia and the European Union in banning the import and sale of dog and cat fur. They point out that we are the only developed country without such a ban.

I congratulate and thank this group for its hard work and diligence in collecting the thousands of petitions, which I have presented over a number of years in the House. I hope Parliament will pay attention to this issue and take action.

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Petitions
Full View Permalink

June 5, 2015

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, having listened to the minister's comments, I want him to know that he is completely incorrect when he says that the entire legislature of Yukon supported this bill. I was up there a few weeks ago and spoke on this bill. I met with many people, and I can say that there are members of the legislative assembly in Whitehorse who are very opposed to this bill. They reflected first nations and community concerns, because people believe that this bill would undermine agreements that are already in place.

I would like to ask the minister to withdraw his comment that this bill is supported by, I think he said, the whole legislative assembly. That is simply not true. He can check the record. It is not true.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act
Full View Permalink

June 2, 2015

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised to hear the Minister of Health today in the House defend a report that is so clearly biased.

The report that we are debating today only looked at health risks and harms. If the minister has read the testimony, she will know that approximately 50% of people who use medical marijuana do so to relieve chronic pain, according to Dr. Perry Kendall, who is a medical health officer in B.C. The research on medical marijuana is very limited because of prohibition and yet when we look at the government report, none of the recommendations would allow, call for or urge the government to do research on medical marijuana.

I would like to ask the minister why she is taking such a biased political stance, because it is very clear it is not based on evidence, and why she is so opposed to legitimate research on medical marijuana that would actually give us the information that is required. Why is she so opposed to that?

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Committees of the House
Full View Permalink

June 2, 2015

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health has some very strongly held views, but I wonder if she could comment on whether or not this report was actually balanced in its views. As she knows, the name of the report was the “Marijuana's Health Risks and Harms”, so there was no intent from the beginning to actually look at, say, medical marijuana and what benefits there have been, what research needs to be done. I am sure she is aware that Veterans Affairs actually does dispense or allow medical marijuana as part of its program to help veterans.

I am curious to know the member's response as to why government members refused to include a recommendation that would have allowed research into medical marijuana. All of the research that the recommendations speak about are only associated to risk and harm, as opposed to any of the benefits that we believe have come about. I wonder if she could tell us why they were so biased that they refused to allow research on medical marijuana to be included in their government report.

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Committees of the House
Full View Permalink

June 2, 2015

Ms. Libby Davies

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the clarity with which my colleague has put forward this issue. He is quite right. There is a sense of desperation that we see from government members. They are clinging to the vestige of a criminalization and prohibitionist policy, even though they know that it was a failed policy many decades ago when it came to alcohol. There is a sort of blindness to what they are doing. That is very evident.

To answer the question, a number of witnesses came forward and made it very clear that we need to have more research. We have some evidence now about medical marijuana, but we need to have more evidence-based research. However, the problem is that it is not going to happen with this government, because it has already said in its report that it would only allow research based on risks and harms. Therefore, it is a completely one-sided debate.

We have to reject that, just as we hopefully will reject the government so that it will not be here any longer and we can actually move forward with an intelligent public health-based approach to marijuana and many other issues.

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Committees of the House
Full View Permalink