I had numbered it wrong in my own notes. It's that Bill C-10, in clause 41, be amended by deleting lines 21 to 24 on page 24.
Mr. Chairman, I believe Mr. Harris has previously addressed this. I will just restate the rationale for it, from the Canadian Bar Association:
For example, clause 3(1)(b) would impose escalating MMS for production of marijuana geared to the number of plants produced. If less than 201 and for the purpose of trafficking, the MMS would be six months. If less than 201, for the purpose of trafficking and any of the aggravating factors apply, the MMS would be nine months. If more than 200 but less than 501, the MMS would be one year. In the same case, if any of the aggravating factors apply, the MMS would be eighteen months. If the plants exceed 500, the MMS would be two years. If any of the aggravating factors apply, the MMS would be three years.
Now, the whole point of the amendment, Mr. Chairman, is that it is somewhat
...contrary to common sense for someone responsible for a 200-plant grow operation to receive a six-month MMS, while someone responsible for 201 plants to be subject to twice that sentence.
That's the rationale for the amendment.