Public Safety committee  To start, no, it's absolutely clear that the minister's discretion is not absolute, and it must be exercised within the constraints imposed by the law and the charter. But it may also be worth noting that the Supreme Court did say, at paragraph 151, that their decision “...does n

Public Safety committee  Yes, that is correct. It is a three-pronged strategy: prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Certainly through any of those pillars you can see that they would have an impact in the ultimate objective of preventing drug abuse and treating those who fall victim to it.

Public Safety committee  As the minister said, views of community support or opposition are one of the five factors that the minister must consider. I don't think it's possible for us to say that any one factor is more important than another or any one criterion is more important than another. It's about

Public Safety committee  As the member mentioned, the purpose of the act is public health and public safety and balancing of those two, as acknowledged and supported by the Supreme Court. When you look at the 27 criteria and actually try to divide them between public health and public safety—and a few ar

Public Safety committee  That's correct.

Public Safety committee  Some of the hard evidence that you talk about comes through in some of the other criteria that are required. The word “opinion” was chosen because the people from whom it's requested are in positions to well understand the local conditions that would either require or not require

Public Safety committee  I would simply say that it's at the discretion of the minister. Based on the application that's put in front of him or her at the time and based on the need for such a consultation beyond what would have been received in the application, it would totally be at the minister's disc

Public Safety committee  In terms of what a minister would base the decision on, relevance is obviously a key factor.

Public Safety committee  That's correct. There's nothing that says that it must be approved or it must be rejected. There's nothing that fetters the discretion.

Public Safety committee  It's just a legal principle in terms of decision-making in a discretionary scenario so relevance would be important. How one would define relevance would depend on the circumstances of a particular site at a particular time.

Public Safety committee  I'm afraid I can't speak to health facilities or health services because it's more a provincial jurisdiction. I'm not involved in those sorts of decisions. Mr. Chair, I'm just wondering, with your permission, if my colleague could comment. She feels she needs to add a point to s

Public Safety committee  I can run through some of the 27 criteria, if that would be helpful.

Public Safety committee  All right, just cut me off. I'll see where I get. On the public health side there is scientific evidence demonstrating that there is a medical benefit; a letter from the provincial minister responsible for health outlining his or her opinion, and also describing how the activit

Public Safety committee  The expectation is that once the bill receives royal assent, the process would apply to any applicant, including InSite. In terms of renewal, there are two additional criteria: evidence, if any, of any variation in crime rates in the vicinity of the site during the period that

Public Safety committee  I will do my best to give you the Coles Notes version.