Evidence of meeting #23 for Justice and Human Rights in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was prevention.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
They will start to apply at three kilograms. This is found in schedule VII.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
I know that you are particularly abstemious, as am I, but how many “pot” plants would that correspond to, in your opinion?
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
When we were carrying out our study on the decriminalization of marijuana—which you may recall—the Americans were of the opinion that one plant equalled 100 grams. As a result, according to the American system, it would be approximately 30 plants. I had done some research on the Internet. I read there that a single plant could grow to up to 375 grams over a two- to three-month period, if everything went well.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
So if I understand correctly, the mandatory minimum sentence would apply in cases of 30 plants or more.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
No. The plants are another story altogether. When we talk about plants, we are talking about production. The mandatory minimums apply fully, even in the case of a single plant, if it is for the purpose of trafficking.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
That is the question I put to you. We must be clear. You would agree that for a young person in possession of one plant for his or her personal use, the bill allows for the enforcement mechanism of minimum sentences to be triggered.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
You're talking about a single plant for their own use?
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
If there's trafficking, yes, but the intent to traffic must be proven.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
Indeed, but if I was watching a hockey game with my colleague, Marc Lemay, and I passed him a “joint”, it would be considered trafficking. I want to clear Mr. Lemay's name right away; he is a teetotaler and devoid of any vice. Having said that, you can see that we have reason for concern.
Furthermore, we are talking about places frequented by youth, but this is not defined in the bill. Imagine, for example, that we are talking about two young people sitting side by side across from the University of Ottawa Law School, which is not the most liberal, I agree.
Am I correct in assuming that this situation could ultimately result in a two-year prison sentence?
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
There is trafficking. Are we discussing three kilograms of marijuana?
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
I am still talking about “pot” and sentencing. Let us say that after an exam, a youth offers a “joint” to one of his colleagues.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
In the case of marijuana, he would have to offer him three kilograms to trigger the process for minimum sentences. If he gave him one plant, it would be different. Whether it was grown for the purposes of trafficking would then have to be established.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
You are trafficking from the moment you give some marijuana to someone else.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
He would be found guilty of trafficking and not of production of marijuana.
Bloc
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Not if we are talking about less than three kilograms.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Then yes, certainly.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
All right. We are talking about three kilograms. We agree that equals 30 plants.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
No, we do not agree on that, Mr. Ménard. Plants are another story. People do not really traffic in plants. They grow them. In the case of the trafficking of marijuana, we are talking about joints, as we say in English.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
Before it becomes a “joint”, which will be passed around, it is cultivated. We do not find marijuana in cereal boxes when we get up in the morning.
My next question is to the Department of Health.
Ms. Line Beauchesne, a professor at the University of Ottawa, who specializes in drug issues, emphasized that out of the total budgets available to the Department of Health and other departments, there was only an amount equivalent to 10% of the National Anti-Drug Strategy's budget that was earmarked for prevention. Could you confirm that figure?
Director General, Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate, Department of Health
I don't know percentage-wise, to be frank. I know raw numbers, so maybe I can go over those and we can figure them out together. For prevention, overall the government announced $232 million over five years for the national anti-drug strategy, of which $30 million is going to the prevention action plan, which we can give more details on, if you would so like. The math for percentages is close.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
All the same, that is quite close to 10%. If we consider that it truly is a prevention strategy, one could say that the efforts made to fight the demand for drugs is disproportionate compared to what is proposed as real assistance, in terms of treatment and prevention.
I do not want to cause you trouble, but could we not agree with each other that the National Anti-Drug Strategy is unbalanced, as far as prevention goals are concerned?
Director General, Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate, Department of Health
When you add in the treatment aspect, it's $30 million plus another $85.5 million. So again, I don't have my calculator here—I'm a generalist, not a mathematician—but in any event, you put those two amounts together and it's about $116 million or so.