An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis

This bill was last introduced in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2019.

Sponsor

Ralph Goodale  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment amends the Criminal Records Act to, among other things, allow persons who have been convicted under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Narcotic Control Act and the National Defence Act only of simple possession of cannabis offences committed before October 17, 2018 to apply for a record suspension without being subject to the period required by the Criminal Records Act for other offences or to the fee that is otherwise payable in applying for a suspension.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 3, 2019 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis
June 3, 2019 Failed Bill C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis (report stage amendment)
June 3, 2019 Passed Bill C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis (report stage amendment)
May 6, 2019 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis
April 11, 2019 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:05 p.m.


See context

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Madam Speaker, there were many witnesses who said the same thing, but I take the words of Solomon Friedman, who said that “better than nothing” is a mighty low bar for our Parliament, and that is what I believe.

The fact of the matter is that in my speech and throughout the study in committee, it was made clear that many barriers remain. In particular, the process that has been put in place will not be accessible to those who need it the most. We just need to look at Bill C-66, which had laudable objectives that we supported, with regard to the historical injustice committed to the LGBTQ community. Only seven people applied out of the 9,000-odd who could have.

New Democrats have asked these questions of officials and the minister in committee, with no one able to answer us in any kind of substantive or real way. What cause would any member of this House have to believe that it would be any different?

Quite frankly, and I say this with all due respect to those who were so wronged, I do not expect any more uptake on this particular measure than there was then. In some cases I expect even less, for a variety of the reasons I enumerated with respect to the barriers that still exist for many vulnerable Canadians.

I will say in closing—

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:05 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I want to allow for one more question. Perhaps the hon. member could hold on to that thought and add it to his next answer.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:05 p.m.


See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, this has been an interesting process, at the very least. We have seen a dramatic change in social policy, and it is a positive step forward. Providing pardons with this piece of legislation is going to assist a lot of individuals in being able to take further steps in employment and other aspects of life. Parties may disagree with regard to expungement versus pardons, but there is no doubt that it is a step forward, just like the legalization of cannabis itself. Would the member not agree?

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:05 p.m.


See context

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Madam Speaker, that is precisely the problem. Very few people will benefit from the system proposed under Bill C-93.

The Canadian Association of Black Lawyers said that it had a lot of clients who did not even know they had a criminal record. If a person does not know that they have a criminal record, how are they supposed to apply to have their record suspended?

There are so many inconsistencies and barriers. That is why I ran for the NDP in 2011 and that is why we are opposed to this bill. We did not come here to give a blank cheque to a self-proclaimed progressive government that proposes half-measures that do not go far enough. We want to truly improve people's lives.

If I thought that Bill C-93 was the best way to do that, the government would have my support. We could have done better. The hon. member for Victoria introduced a bill but the government voted it down.

The Liberals rejected a better solution so why should I give a blank cheque to a government that is not doing enough when I am here to represent people who need us?

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Resuming debate.

Is the House ready for the question?

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Question.

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

On division.

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed)

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House you would find unanimous consent to call it 5:30 p.m., so that we could begin Private Members' Business.

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Is that agreed?

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Criminal Records ActGovernment Orders

June 6th, 2019 / 5:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.