Evidence of meeting #26 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 ruling.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
All right, I'll call the question on amendment NDP-13.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We move on to amendment NDP-13.1, which is in order.
Ms. Davies.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
This amendment would decrease the mandatory minimum from nine months to six months, and we have a whole number of these, and you'll see more of them. It's for production of fewer than 201 plants for the purpose of trafficking, where aggravating factors apply. Again, we're just trying to move down the sentence so it isn't so severe.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Given that the previous one failed, we're trying another tack here.
This amendment would change the nine months to six months if it were over five plants and if it were commercial trafficking. Again, we're trying to minimize the impact of the bill here. It would be when the aggravating factors would apply, so we're getting back to saying it would apply only if there were more than five plants.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
May 27th, 2009 / 5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
This is a similar amendment in that again we are making it clear that we're talking about commercial trafficking. We're trying to move away from what we see some of the broad impacts of the bill being by making it clear that we're talking about commercial trafficking.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Amendment NDP-16 decreases the nine-month sentence to six months for the production of 200 to 500 plants.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
Is there any discussion?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Similar to the last amendment and the ones after as well, this amendment is looking to decrease the mandatory minimum from 18 months to six months for the production of more than 201 and fewer than 501 plants. I would add that this is another one where we're very concerned that groups like compassion clubs could be hit where they're actually growing, and they could suffer very severe consequences.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
Is there any discussion?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
This is a similar amendment, but it's dealing with the two-year provision and seeking to bring it down to six months for the same reasons I've just outlined.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Amendment NDP-19 is similar to the other ones in that it's bringing the sentence down to six months from three years in this case.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
Thank you.
Is there any debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
We had a number of witnesses who spoke on the subject of this particular amendment. This is the one that deals with a third party, when a person used real property that belonged to a third party in committing the offence.
One of the concerns that were put forward to us involved students who are renters. They would get hit by this and would receive a nine-month sentence simply because they were renting. For us, that seemed to be very over the top and unfair. I don't think it was intended, from what we heard at the beginning from the minister. This is another case of my not knowing why something's in there. It's going to hit people who just happen to be renting.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
I'd like to ask Monsieur Saint-Denis, because I don't remember this, about the question Ms. Davies asked. If the people in the rented apartment are growing 200 to 500 plants, or whatever nine months is triggered by, what difference does it make that they're renting the facility as opposed to owning it?
5:10 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
One of the problems we've had in the last few years, and in fact in the last several years, has been a tremendous increase in the phenomenon of indoor grow operations. Typically what happens is that rather than using one's own property, one will rent a property, thereby saving one's own money, and essentially will turn someone else's apartment or house into a grow operation. In the process, one will end up completely ruining, if it's an individual's house, the house itself, and if it's an apartment in an apartment block, this will definitely ruin the apartment and, quite possibly, apartments adjacent.