Since the Supreme Court of Canada ruling last February making physician-assisted death legal, there has been much discussion about what will happen next.
But politicians have largely shied away from the topic, especially on the election campaign trail.
A new poll, coupled with the main parties' written statements laying out their positions on assisted death, offers some interesting insight.
The poll, conducted by Forum Research, asked the question: "Are you in favour or opposed to making physician-assisted suicide legal in Canada for the terminally ill?"
It's a bit of an odd question, given that it is legal, but the survey nevertheless gives us a sense of the public mood: 77 per cent in favour, 12 per cent opposed and 11 per cent undecided. Support is 10 percentage points higher than four years ago, a dramatic shift in thinking.
The Forum poll also provides a breakdown by party affiliation:
- Conservatives: 67 per cent in favour, 22 per cent opposed and 12 per cent undecided.
- Liberals: 75 per cent for, 9 per cent against, 16 per cent undecided;
- New Democrats: 84 per cent in favour, 9 per cent opposed, and 7 per cent undecided;
- Greens: 88 per cent for, 8 per cent against, 4 per cent undecided;
- Bloc Québécois: 88 per cent in favour, 6 per cent opposed and 7 per cent undecided.
- Other parties: 60 per cent for, 23 per cent against, 17 per cent undecided.
There are no real surprises here.
The Conservatives, who fought tooth and nail to maintain the law making physician-assisted death illegal, have a significant minority of supporters who are opposed.
That helps explain why, in the six months since the ruling, they opted to sit on their hands rather than draft legislation that is constitutional. (The Supreme Court made it pretty clear what, if anything, needs to be included in such a law, but also left legislators with a fair bit of leeway, and a lot of work to do, in setting boundaries.)
Then, just before the election call, the Conservatives appointed a panel to study the issue and make recommendations on what a law should look like. But the government was widely condemned for stacking that panel with opponents of assisted death and for decreeing there could be no public consultations during the election campaign.
The advocacy group Dying With Dignity Canada asked each of the parties what their policies were on assisted death, and posted the responses on their website.
The Conservatives did not respond.
The NDP promises to "implement the Supreme Court of Canada's historic and unanimous Carter decision swiftly with balance, respect and sensitivity." The Liberals promise to "act quickly but thoughtfully." The Greens simply state that they will support legislation that respects the court ruling.
In other words, none of the parties really say anything substantive.
To a certain extent, that is understandable. Assisted death is one of those "no-win" topics for politicians. It has broad support – 77 to 84 per cent in recent opinion polls – but supporters tend to show their support quietly and opponents tend to express their opposition loudly.
For example, the NDP has nothing to gain by talking about the issue. The vast majority of its supporters, 84 per cent, are already on side, and it risks alienating them if it lays out a position in too much detail.
And the reality is that what remains to be resolved are uncomfortable details: For instance, will assisted death be available only to those with terminal physical illnesses such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and cancer, or will it be open to those with conditions such as dementia? Will a lethal cocktail have to be administered by a physician, or can an eligible patient get a prescription from a pharmacist?
Not the kind of discussion party leaders want to have while making a campaign stop at a nursing home.
Similarly, the Conservatives are avoiding this issue like the plague because they have the most to lose. A small but not negligible minority of its supporters would like party leader Stephen Harper to ignore the court ruling – to invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and leave the prohibition on assisted suicide in the Criminal Code. This would be a field day for the opposition.
The Supreme Court suspended the ruling for one year to allow replacement legislation, but when the time is up, there is no law any more.
The Conservatives have said that, if re-elected, they would be unlikely to have time to introduce new legislation before the Feb. 6 deadline, hinting that they could ask for an extension from the court, but there is no precedent for that.
Interestingly, both the Liberals and NDP cite Quebec's approach – where an all-party committee came up with a law that had broad support across political lines – as the way to go.
But the Quebec process was slow and painstaking. It took 18 months, plus a whole other year to prepare for implementation.
Between the federal election on Oct. 19 and Feb. 6, there is less than four months, and Parliament will not sit for a good chunk of that time, what with post-election adjustments and the holiday break.
Whoever ends up as the prime minister will have to act swiftly and decisively on new assisted-death legislation because of a timeline that gives a whole new meaning to the word deadline.
This story corrects an earlier version that incorrectly stated the Green Party's support for assisted death at 80 per cent
André Picard