Health Committee on Sept. 19th, 2017

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Well, not yet.

Michael Spratt testified that Bill C-45 leaves intact the criminalization of cannabis in many circumstances that will harm vulnerable Canadians. I want to quote from his testimony:

An adult who possesses 30 grams of marijuana in public is a criminal. A youth who possesses more than five grams of marijuana is a criminal. An 18-year old who passes a joint to their 17-year-old friend is a criminal. An adult who grows five marijuana plants is a criminal. An adult who lets his one-metre tall marijuana plant grow an extra centimetre is a criminal.

This continued criminalization is inconsistent with a rational and evidence-based criminal justice policy and will only serve to reduce some of the positive impacts of the bill.

...the asymmetrical criminalization of marijuana will only serve to perpetuate the disproportionate enforcement of laws on the young, marginalized, and racialized members of our society.

Minister, you know that indigenous, racialized, and marginalized people are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and are disproportionately harmed by a criminal approach to drug laws. By maintaining a criminalized approach to cannabis, Bill C-45 will perpetuate this discriminatory impact. Why have you done so?

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

First, we are proceeding on a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, targeted specifically to reduce the over-representation of indigenous and marginalized individuals in the criminal justice system.

What we've done with the proposed cannabis act in Bill C-45 is, as I said earlier in my comments, to put a diversity of sanctions within the act from ticketing to the more serious criminal prosecutions that could arise. There is an opportunity to proceed by way of ticketing for many of the offences that you've mentioned, for example, between 30 and 50 grams of possession for an adult. For youth there's the opportunity, when you go through the Youth Criminal Justice Act, to proceed in other manners that law enforcement officers can—

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

The question minister, with respect, is “Do you not agree that this act will continue to have a disproportionate effect on racialized and indigenous people?”

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

The purpose of this act, as you have quite rightly pointed out, is in section 7. The purpose is to ensure that we legalize and strictly regulate to keep cannabis out of the hands of young people and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Okay. I understand.

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

We have an obligation, and I am endeavouring to work extremely hard in the broader criminal justice system review to address the over-representation of indigenous peoples and marginalized individuals, which has resulted from many factors.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Okay.

After introducing Bill C-45, Prime Minister Trudeau told a VICE News town hall that:

...our focus is on making sure we’re changing the legislation to fix what’s broken [in] a system that is hurting Canadians…and then we’ll take steps to look at what we can do for those people who have criminal records for something that would no longer be criminal.

However, Kathy Thompson, assistant deputy minister for community safety and countering crime branch in the Department of Public Safety, told this committee that, “There are no plans at this time to introduce an automatic pardon”, as suggested, and there is zero in this bill to deal with pardons.

Minister, can you confirm that your government is considering plans to pardon criminal records for offences that will no longer be offences when the proposed legislation comes into force?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

We are examining the issue. We have not arrived at any conclusions yet, but obviously we are examining all of the options and ramifications to achieve the objective the Prime Minister referred to.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you.

I'll go back to the Minister of Justice. The McLellan task force said:

Canada’s governments, and many other organizations, will need to work quickly to prepare for the implementation of the new system, increasing or developing capacity in many areas relating to production, distribution and retail, quality control and enforcement, and research and surveillance.... Having all elements in place will be necessary for the proper functioning of the regime.

They also recommended that the federal government, “Take a leadership role to ensure that capacity is developed among all levels of government prior to the start of the regulatory regime”.

However, when asked if the federal government has been working with indigenous governments on a nation-to-nation basis to develop that capacity, Ontario Regional Chief Isadore Day told this committee:

No, they haven't....

The legislative process, the capacity, and the mutually agreed-upon processes as to how we're going to gel and work together to meet a collective outcome are going to be the challenge. That is simply not happening with this government.

Minister, given the task force's clear warning that intergovernmental co-operation is critical, and given the Prime Minister's repeated statements that his most important relationship is with indigenous people, why has your government ignored first nations' governments in building the capacity for BillC-45 to become law?

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

I would disagree with the statement that we have ignored indigenous peoples. We are firmly committed to engaging in a nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples right across this country.

I know that indigenous peoples, and communities and organizations, had the opportunity to speak with the task force in the production of their report. Likewise, I know that my colleagues and I will continue to engage with indigenous communities as we proceed towards July 2018. This is something we are committed to doing to ensure that we hear from as many indigenous communities as we can.

This is a broader discussion around indigenous governments and the ability of indigenous communities, whether they are under the Indian Act or have self-government agreements. We're aware of the ability of indigenous communities who are still living under the Indian Act who make bylaws around intoxicants on their reserves. As well, we are going to continue to understand and engage with indigenous communities who have self-government agreements and provide for their ability to move forward in this manner. I know my colleague Minister Petitpas Taylor is continuing to engage with respect to the health aspects and the realities in indigenous communities on an ongoing basis.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Thank you very much.

That brings to a close our normal round of questions. However, I seem to detect a desire to continue to ask some more questions, so we're going to go to another first round. We just barely have time, though. Please keep your questions and answers to five minutes. I'm going to try to shut you down at five minutes without interfering too much.

We're going to start with Mr. Ayoub.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Indeed, having more time to answer questions has always been our wish. When our colleagues opposite can't participate in the proceedings because they have to be absent, they still want to have time to ask questions. I wanted to point that out.

I would like to go back to price control. We have heard all sorts of things during testimony on this. There was talk of $35 for 3.5 grams, the price of medicinal cannabis, and the asking price of criminals on the street.

Would the government prefer that the provinces give responsibility for the sale of cannabis to the private sector or to a government or non-profit organization? How does the federal government want the provinces to align their responsibilities in this area?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Maybe my other colleagues will want to participate in this as well. Under the framework we're establishing, retailing is organized and managed at the provincial level. If a province chooses the route of a crown corporation in order to handle the retailing, the crown corporation would play a decisive role in establishing price. Other provinces may have a different approach in mind as to how a market would be established and how market forces would determine pricing.

The key role that government can and will play is on the fiscal side with respect to taxation. I'm sure that the ministers of finance—federally, provincially, and at the territorial level—will want to ensure that the fiscal regime they collectively agree with will accomplish the two fundamental objectives of the legislation, which are to keep marijuana out of the hands of kids, and to stop the flow of illegal cash to organized crime, which means eliminating the black market to the maximum extent that is humanly possible. They would not want to establish a price point that effectively perpetuates a black market. That's the fiscal decision that finance ministers will consider carefully.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thanks for sharing, Ramez. I have a question.

We invited most of the provinces and territories to present, but we only heard from Saskatchewan, which said they weren't ready for this legislation. In the event that the bill becomes law, Ontario and New Brunswick have some plans in place for remote and indigenous communities. How will people be able to access this material, or is the black market going to remain in place until the provinces and territories set their own rules for distribution and retail?

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

We recognize that jurisdictions may be in different places in terms of the work they've done on this. If a jurisdiction, a province, British Columbia, for example, is not ready when we hope that Bill C-45 becomes law, then there is a backstop. The federal government will provide safe distribution from a licensed producer that can be securitized through the mail.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

If a province or territory hasn't really addressed rural or indigenous communities, remote communities, will that continue to be in place parallel to the provincial distribution, or will you cease to have a federal e-commerce model?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

The federal government's intention is not to play a long-term retail role in this. It's really short term, but in the meantime, if provinces and territories are not prepared for the rollout, we will ensure that the process is in place for them.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

The last question was around plain packaging. We know with cigarettes there's a move to go to plain packaging. The bill as it's written does not say the material for retail and distribution of cannabis is to be plain packaging. It leaves it with colour and branding opportunities. Do you have any thoughts about applying plain packaging regulations to the selling of cannabis?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Strict regulation is certainly our objective. Very much like the tobacco products, I can certainly see that we could go in that direction. We really want to make sure that the packaging doesn't entice kids to want to use cannabis. That is certainly our intention moving forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We'll now move to Ms. Gladu.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a question for the Minister of Health.

With respect to growing marijuana in the home, in addition to the fact that it puts marijuana right where our children can have access to it, there were a number of concerns that we heard testimony about. The fact is that homes where marijuana is being grown are 24 times more likely to have a fire. There are numerous incidents of electricity theft, complaints about odour, and concerns about mould. It's most concerning that, in Ontario and Quebec, if you're a property owner and you are renting your property to somebody or had somebody renting your basement, you would not be able to prevent them from growing cannabis or consuming cannabis.

When we look at who did this the best, we saw that, in the Washington model, they took their medical marijuana system that was very closely controlled and regulated and they added in the recreational marijuana to that. They only allowed a home-grow for those who were medically fragile and who couldn't get out to a dispensary. As a result, they eliminated most of the black market. Statistically, we heard that 80% of what they're doing is legitimate.

With that in mind, will the government consider eliminating homegrown, except in the cases of those who are medically fragile?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

At this point in time, when we're talking about homegrown, we have to keep in mind that we're talking about four plants. We're not talking about a grow op in a home here. We look at the recommendations from the task force very seriously. The talk force is also making that recommendation. We will be moving forward, but we're looking forward to hearing from the recommendations of this committee. Again, I think we have to give credit to Canadians when they're home, as well. I trust that Canadians will take the appropriate measures to ensure that, in the best interest of their kids, this product is kept in a safe area and will be kept safe, like they would with all other products. When we're at home and we have alcohol and combustible products, we make sure that our kids are kept away from those types of products.

With respect to this as well, I see that parents and most Canadians will certainly do the right thing.

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

I think that's naive.

When it comes to the public awareness and education that is so important, we can see that in order to reduce the percentage of drunk drivers on the road, there was a huge public awareness campaign that was done. I think you were looking for statistics earlier. Out of traffic-related deaths, 18% had alcohol, 24% had drugs, and 16% had both, so it's definitely a concern.

With respect to the kind of campaigns that we need, we need something like what was done with tobacco. You mentioned that the government has announced $9.5 million, but I think that's over five years. If we look at what was done in Colorado and Washington, I think Washington said they spent $7 million a year for seven million people. With Colorado, I believe $10 million was the statistic for five million people. My concern is that there is not adequate funding applied and with 283 days left, none of these awareness campaigns have begun to roll out. You mentioned Facebook and social media, but I've not seen anything. If I'm not seeing anything and I've been looking, I'm just concerned that the $100,000 from the not-for-profit training for parents was the only thing that we really saw.

What is the plan to do some awareness to prevent the impaired drugged-driving increase we expect to see, based on the Colorado and Washington experience?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Perhaps I'll start off and my colleague can jump in, if he wishes.

Again, as indicated, the $9.6 million is an initial investment when it comes to awareness and prevention. That's key. Again, we have learned from other jurisdictions that we have to start with the awareness campaign before the actual rollout and that's exactly what we're doing. Having formerly been a social worker, I can tell you that awareness and prevention is key and it's really important to get the proper information, especially out to youth.

With respect to tools that are already out there, as I've said, the Drug Free Kids program is out there. Also, the rollouts of the social media campaigns have already started. We really want to make sure that we can ramp it up even more because we want to make sure that people get the appropriate information that they need.

As for the impaired driving, perhaps my colleague wants to jump in.