Evidence of meeting #72 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cannabis.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
May we have a recorded vote, Mr. Chair?
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 200 agreed to)
(Clauses 201 to 215 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 216)
Liberal
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is the very last provision of the act that deals with incarceration for up to five years or more. My amendment would substitute for that imprisonment a term of not more than two years less a day. It would also delete lines 8 and 9 on page 118 entirely as well.
Again, it's just in keeping with trying to have proportionate sentencing in this bill and to eliminate as far as possible the criminalization of cannabis.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Seeing no other members on the speakers list, I will call for a vote on amendment NDP-35.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Let's have a recorded vote, Mr. Chair.
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 216 agreed to)
(Clauses 217 to 223 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 224)
Liberal
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I said that other one was the final one, but this is the final provision of the act that contains a criminal penalty with a period of incarceration, of imprisonment, for five years. This would change that reference to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day.
Liberal
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I'd like a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 224 agreed to)
(Clause 225 agreed to)
(On clause 226)
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
I think this is me again. This is the companion piece. We added edibles to the schedule, so this is the clause language that brings it into force 12 months after the act is brought into force.
Liberal
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
Could we have a recorded vote?
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 226 as amended agreed to)
Liberal
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
Mr. Chair, thank you very much for steering the committee through clause-by-clause as efficiently as you did.
I also want to commend Mr. Davies. An incredible amount of work went into his thoughts and his amendments. He clearly listened to the witnesses and took time to ponder their testimony. A lot of thought went into his work, so I just want to acknowledge that. Hopefully, in time, as this progresses, his concerns will be addressed, and we'll see less criminalization of some of these issues.
I do also want to say that the House sent this to us to work on to improve it for all Canadians, and it's unfortunate that not all members of the committee took that on. I understand that they may not be in support of it in principle, but there was still a lot of evidence and testimony provided that could have been worked on to improve the bill.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I just want to say that we're not done yet, but I think it's a good time—and I'm going to take advantage of your comments—to say too that I think we've done a good job. We've made this a living document. We've made it a requirement that in one year, edibles be included, and at three years, it's going to be reviewed, so I think we've made some improvements in it. I want to compliment everybody for the role they played.
Mr. Van Kesteren.
Conservative
Dave Van Kesteren Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but I still have my motion. My motion, of course, hasn't been voted on. It was just set side. My motion was that because this is a flawed piece of legislation—
Liberal
Conservative
Dave Van Kesteren Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
It's a bad idea based on a false premise.
First of all, it's supposed to protect youth, but I think we've seen enough evidence that tells us that it's easier for youth to get this drug. It says that this would keep the drug out of the hands of criminals. I would suggest that the person who is going to sell it is just going to change. It used to be the criminals; now it's going to be the government. I don't know what that makes the government.
We've heard that 2018 is much too early, much too quick to have as an entry date, and we haven't dealt with that. We've heard that from doctors and specialists.
There are many unintended consequences that I don't think have been addressed. Police have warned us about impaired driving. Just this past August, in my riding, on the 401, there were a mother and a daughter. You can check it up on the CBC. A report just came out: alcohol and cannabis, both were found present in the driver. I've mentioned before that my sons are repeatedly telling me, “Dad, we're running into this more and more”—impaired driving because of marijuana. They are not prepared to do the test that will help curb that, let alone stop it.
I wonder about the workforce. What's going to happen if we don't have legislation that protects employers? What if an employee is allowed to smoke marijuana, and he has a job that requires his full attention? He takes his break in the afternoon, or at lunch, and an accident happens, or something. There are all these things we haven't talked about.
Then, I touched on lessons from history. I just can't emphasize that enough. I encourage members of this committee, when they have the time, to read about what happened in China, the Boxer revolution, the continual downgrading of that great society. The Chinese call it “the century of humiliation”. I remember visiting China. They show their great civilization, and how it advanced, on these little figurines. I don't know if anybody has been on that funky tower in Shanghai. They show the progression, and all of a sudden they show these pictures of the rickshaws, and the western women walking along the Bund. That's what they talk about, the humiliation. It was an invasion because of what happened to a drug-scourged society. Then they show how they managed to change that. It's interesting to note that today, in China, they shoot drug dealers. They don't mess around, these people. They recognize the dangers in drugs.
I know, in my heart, that we are entering dangerous territory. At the very least, we should pause and take some time to think about this, look at more evidence, and speak to more people. We should give Canadians the opportunity to weigh in on this. I don't believe they have done so. We've heard testimony that they have, but I know that my constituents back home don't feel that way. They keep coming to me and saying, “Dave, what's going on with this? What's happening? Why aren't we hearing about this?”
I am very concerned, and I encourage my colleagues in this House not to make that mistake—and it is a mistake. This is something that will have serious ramifications for your kids and my kids, for our grandkids, and for future generations. Oftentimes, we don't look into the future as we ought to. That's the type of western society that we have. We don't consider our acts today, and how they will affect future generations.
That motion is still on the floor. I am asking that we stop this whole process at this point. I open it to conversation, or at the very least, a vote.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Thank you.
Is there any comment?
There is no debate. I call the vote on the motion.
Conservative
Dave Van Kesteren Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Can I have it recorded?
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 3)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I declare the motion defeated.
Now we have to complete this, so we have to complete the schedules.
(Schedules 1 to 3 inclusive agreed to)
Now we have amendment NDP-37.