Bill C-45 (Historical)

Cannabis Act

An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts

This enactment enacts the Cannabis Act to provide legal access to cannabis and to control and regulate its production, distribution and sale.
The objectives of the Act are to prevent young persons from accessing cannabis, to protect public health and public safety by establishing strict product safety and product quality requirements and to deter criminal activity by imposing serious criminal penalties for those operating outside the legal framework. The Act is also intended to reduce the burden on the criminal justice system in relation to cannabis.
The Act
(a) establishes criminal prohibitions such as the unlawful sale or distribution of cannabis, including its sale or distribution to young persons, and the unlawful possession, production, importation and exportation of cannabis;
(b) enables the Minister to authorize the possession, production, distribution, sale, importation and exportation of cannabis, as well as to suspend, amend or revoke those authorizations when warranted;
(c) authorizes persons to possess, sell or distribute cannabis if they are authorized to sell cannabis under a provincial Act that contains certain legislative measures;
(d) prohibits any promotion, packaging and labelling of cannabis that could be appealing to young persons or encourage its consumption, while allowing consumers to have access to information with which they can make informed decisions about the consumption of cannabis;
(e) provides for inspection powers, the authority to impose administrative monetary penalties and the ability to commence proceedings for certain offences by means of a ticket;
(f) includes mechanisms to deal with seized cannabis and other property;
(g) authorizes the Minister to make orders in relation to matters such as product recalls, the provision of information, the conduct of tests or studies, and the taking of measures to prevent non-compliance with the Act;
(h) permits the establishment of a cannabis tracking system for the purposes of the enforcement and administration of the Act;
(i) authorizes the Minister to fix, by order, fees related to the administration of the Act; and
(j) authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting such matters as quality, testing, composition, packaging and labelling of cannabis, security clearances and the collection and disclosure of information in respect of cannabis as well as to make regulations exempting certain persons or classes of cannabis from the application of the Act.
This enactment also amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to, among other things, increase the maximum penalties for certain offences and to authorize the Minister to engage persons having technical or specialized knowledge to provide advice. It repeals item 1 of Schedule II and makes consequential amendments to that Act as the result of that repeal.
In addition, it repeals Part XII.‍1 of the Criminal Code, which deals with instruments and literature for illicit drug use, and makes consequential amendments to that Act.
It amends the Non-smokers’ Health Act to prohibit the smoking and vaping of cannabis in federally regulated places and conveyances.
Finally, it makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Bill C-45—Time Allocation Motion

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have taken on the task of legalizing, strictly regulating, and restricting access to cannabis in order to achieve our public policy objectives of keeping it out of the hands of children and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals.

We have engaged in a substantive way on this, putting together a high-level task force that provided us with substantive recommendations. As well, on an ongoing basis, we have been engaging with the provinces and territories to ensure we put in place the comprehensive, complex regime that is necessary to legalize cannabis.

I very much look forward to the ongoing debate and discussion around this issue as it goes to committee, and as it hears from more and more experts beyond the 30,000 from the general public who responded to the task force report.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in 2016, The New York Times did a study and found that the average joint contains 0.32 grams of marijuana. According to this legislation, it will be legal and there will be no criminal penalties for someone 12 to 17 years old to possess up to five grams of marijuana. According to that New York Times estimate, that is up to 15 joints.

It would be legal for a minor to possess up to 15 joints, and not to sell but to distribute them. Because they are not going to smoke it all themselves right away, how does allowing someone to carry that much marijuana, allowing 12-year-olds to have with them up to 15 joints of marijuana, consistent with the government's stated objectives?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as I stated before, but will say it again, there is nothing in the legislation that provides a legal means for young people to obtain cannabis. With respect to the realities and taking a public health approach, we have to draw the distinction to ensure we have information, education, and public awareness around the health impacts on young people, while also balancing the reality that young people more than any other people are smoking cannabis right now. We need to balance those two objectives and ensure we put forward the smartest approach.

We have been holding discussions with the provinces and territories and, as with alcohol, they will provide provincial offences to regulate and monitor cannabis intake and possession by—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, even though the NDP agrees with the legislation in principle, we have to realize that it is a monumental and revolutionary change to Canada's drug laws. Cannabis has been illegal in our country since 1923.

For such a far-reaching change to our laws, every member of Parliament deserves to have a say on the bill. I deplore the fact that the government is using time allocation to force this through. Every member of Parliament has raised some serious concerns in the House and I do not agree with them being shut out of this debate.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the hon. member across the way agrees with the bill. It is a monumental shift and a monumental change. That is why we have taken a substantive amount of time engaging with the task force, engaging with experts in the areas of public health, safety, and justice to ensure we get substantive feedback.

This debate is going to continue. The status quo simply is not working in terms of criminal prohibitions with respect to cannabis. We need to change the status quo in order to ensure we achieve the objectives of keeping it out of the hands of children and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals. Bill C-45 would do this. That is why we are actively pursing a comprehensive regulatory approach.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is positively negligent that the government is shutting down debate on this topic. We have already established that this legislation would put marijuana in the hands of children, not just with the 15 joints that 12-year-olds can have but with the four plants per household, so little Johnny can put some in the toaster oven and smoke it up.

We know from Colorado that there is a 32% increase in drug-impaired driving and that has not been addressed. Issues have been raised about treaties and about inadequate resources in the provinces and municipalities.

Why does the minister not care about the safety of Canadians and Canadian children?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I completely reject that accusation. Of course we care about the health and safety of Canadians. That is the whole premise and the basis upon which we are putting forward this legislation to legalize cannabis, to strictly regulate it, and to restrict access it to ensure we keep it out of the hands of children and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals. There is nothing in the legislation that makes it legal for a young person to gain access to marijuana.

With respect to drug-impaired driving, I am very proud that we have introduced, as a companion piece, Bill C-46, which is, and will amount to if passed through Parliament, one of the strictest impaired driving regimes with respect to drugs and alcohol.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to speak to this legislation on Friday.

I am a parent of five. We are less than 13 months away from cannabis becoming legal for all Canadians. The minister says that the bill will keep cannabis out of the hands of young people, but we know that with homegrown marijuana, and with 18-years-old going to school with children who are 14-years-old, there are going to be great opportunities for children to have access to it.

We do not have the education in place, and I will look at this. Why are we putting the cart before the horse? Why do we not have all the information out there for parents, teachers, and children, so we can ensure we are safeguarding them and giving them the knowledge about cannabis and its effects on the brain?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be working with my colleagues the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Health to address the exact issues that are being raised in creating a public awareness campaign about the impacts of cannabis smoking on the developing brain. We are not hiding this. We continue to pursue, acknowledge, and invest in a public education campaign.

With respect to the four plants referenced by the previous hon. member in her question, this comes from a recommendation of the task force. Four plants are allowed in one household and those plants can be no more than one metre high. It is incumbent upon the adults in those houses to ensure they restrict access to those plants if they choose to home grow cannabis themselves.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for her speech, but I am completely surprised to hear that the government would impose time allocation on a bill that, as my colleague said, is so important.

This is an unusual situation because today, and over the past few days, Quebec has been saying that it needs more time to implement the bill. Right now, the bill is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2018. Quebec is saying that it is not ready to implement the bill that quickly and that it cannot meet the current deadline set by the federal government. The province has also said that it does not feel reassured by the lack of consultation throughout the process to date. The government makes a change to the Criminal Code, and then it washes its hands of the situation, leaving the provinces to deal with all the problems.

Can the minister respond to the Government of Quebec, which is asking for more time today?

Can she explain why she is trying to ram this bill through when the provinces are asking for more time to study it before implementing it?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have done substantive consultation in this regard. Substantial consultation was conducted through a task force that received over 30,000 responses. This task force of very learned members in the area of public safety, health, and justice submitted a report with 80 recommendations.

The federal government is not washing its hands of cannabis. We are ensuring that we work collaboratively with the provinces and territories, at the ministerial level and ongoing at the official level with all provinces and territories, to ensure we are ready to have a complex regime in place, hopefully, in July of 2018. However, there will always be a federal backstop if a province does not enter the space of strictly regulating in its jurisdiction.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as we all know, prohibition did not work with alcohol. Prohibition is not working with cannabis. We have some of the highest rates of youth in the world consuming cannabis. What is happening today is not working. What makes it even worse is that we have no control over the composition of the cannabis being consumed today.

Not only have we consulted enough on the issue, we have debated it enough. It is time to take control out of the hands of criminals and pass legislation that will protect our children. How will this legislation protect our children from the unregulated market that exists today?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer this question with respect to our objectives around the legalization of cannabis, its strict regulation, and restricting its access to achieve the objectives of keeping it out of the hands of children and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals. In proceeding this way, we are recognizing that the status quo is simply not working.

We are working very diligently. We are working with our counterparts in the provinces and territories with respect to this federal legislation to ensure we are mindful and leave space for the provinces to regulate and restrict access in accordance with the needs of their jurisdiction and to provide a minimum framework for how one can access cannabis legally in our country.

This is a complex issue. That is why we have been working very diligently over the last 18 months to ensure we can meet the deadline of July 2018.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a Conservative member of the opposition, I guess I should be glad that this is the most ineffective majority government in the history of Canada's Parliament. It has only passed 19 pieces of legislation. To do that, it has introduced closure 23 times, more than it has passed, and here we are again. The minister should be embarrassed that she is stifling debate on such a transformative bill.

The government is failing public health. The CMA is critical of what the government is rushing into. It is failing our provincial partners. Quebec has told it to slow down. It is failing public safety. Chiefs of police and Attorneys General are saying that there is no test for roadside impairment.

The government is failing public safety, public health, and stifling debate on all subjects.

When provinces, physicians, and Canadians are complaining, how can the minister stand before the House and say that the government is limiting debate and that it is over?