Wednesday’s Ottawa City Council meeting saw a heated debate take place on a motion introduced by Coun. Stephanie Plante (Rideau-Vanier), which calls on the City to endorse provincial regulatory amendments under the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act, 2025.
In practical terms, this legislation will give greater authority to OC Transpo special constables to act in situations where public consumption of illegal substances is taking place.
Coun. Tim Tierney (Beacon Hill-Cyrville) made it clear he was in favour of giving greater authority to OC Transpo special constables. “Why would we vote against making it safer for our transit riders?” he asked.
Coun. Glen Gower (Stitsville), on the other hand, expressed some hesitation around the process. “It seems like there’s some nuance around this… [and] asking council to endorse this right now might be premature.
Hesitations in passing the legislation, as is, were echoed by Couns. Jeff Leiper (Kitchissippi), and Cathy Curry (Kanata North).
“I don’t think we’ve had the opportunity to hear enough from the public and stakeholders,” said Leiper. “We know that the legislation that has created the conditions under which the province is contemplating this regulation-making is fraught with issues. . . I’m not sure that every citizen of Ottawa would be fully onboard with undertaking anything under that legislation.”
Curry noted that there has been a lack of discussion with the Ottawa Police Services Board. “I don’t know that the Ottawa Police Services Board is fully aware of what’s going on here,” she said. “I just think we might need some more time before we just endorse something.”
Coun. Shawn Menard (Capital) highlighted greater structural issues related to public consumption of illegal substances, which, he said, is “not something we’re going to criminalize our way out of.”
“I’m always concerned when we’re looking for even more enforcement. . . on something when we already have a lot of the tools to deal with this,” said Menard. “It’s happening at a time in the province where supervised consumption sites are being shuttered as well.”
There was indeed confusion amongst councillors regarding how this new legislation would differ from existing protocols on addressing this issue.
Troy Charter, Interim General Manager of Transit Services for OC Transpo, clarified: “Currently our officers have the ability to lay charges under a federal offense. . . This would make it a provincial offense.”
“It wouldn’t just be a federal offense for use of or consumption of illicit drugs on our system, it would also be a provincial offense as well. . . Presently we can issue criminal charges. Under the provincial legislation we could also be looking at fines in addition to that — that’s the key difference.”
A city staff member added additional clarification: “The benefit of this tool, and I suspect this is why the province implemented it, is it’s trying to take certain things out of the criminal courts and put it into the provincial offenses court.”
Ariel Troster (Somerset) stated several concerns with the legislation. “I’m very concerned about the scope creep associated with this motion, and I’m also really concerned about the fact that we’re discussing this without delegations,” she said. “This should go somewhere, either to Transit Committee or the Police Board.”
“It is very rare that we discuss something that is this significant in terms of the scope without a due committee process. This feels very rushed … This is a major decision,” she said.
Plante explained to the committee that the deadline for endorsing the provincial legislation was March 1st, to which Troster answered that she wasn’t overly concerned about the deadline.
A point of order was then raised by Tierney: “I’m unsure what that comment was, I think you asked a question, now you’ve imputed the mover of the motion. Do you wish to recall that? Because it seemed like she provided you with the information you wanted.”
“There’s no insult there,” answered Troster. “I’m simply saying that [the deadline] is not of concern to me.”
“What’s of concern to me is rushing a major decision about enforcement powers for special constables. This is a serious issue that I think we should take seriously, and it demands not just debate, but careful consideration and the opportunity to delegate. . . And I don’t think it’s impugning the mover or anyone else to say: the province is putting pressure on us to endorse a piece of legislation which has been absolutely slammed by public health authorities. It was not something that people who deal with people with addictions supported.”
Plante concluded the debate with some points of clarification, noting that her motion was published in early January. “Nobody brought this forward to Transit Committee, nobody brought this forward to the Plice Services Board,” she said.
“So I did it in consultation with the Mayor’s office, with the Chief of Police, and with Ryan Perreault [General Manager, Emergency and Protective Services Department], all of whom support this motion,” she continued.
“Right now, if a special constable is called to a situation where drugs are being consumed, they cannot enforce. . . They have to wait for police to arrive,” said Plante. “This means the train is held at the station, and a bus is sitting in place while they are waiting for police to arrive. Riders are delayed while they navigate a technical gap in their authority. This is not efficient and it does not restore rider confidence.”
Debate ended there, and the motion passed with 17 yays and 7 nays. The City of Ottawa therefore endorsed the proposed regulatory amendments under the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act, 2025, put forward by the Province of Ontario.
The motion now calls on the Mayor to write to the Solicitor General of Ontario in support of the proposal and for the Clerk to share this motion with other Ontario municipalities by March 1.
