We're now, of course, not limited by time here, so we'll be able to be a little bit more expansive in expressing our concerns, not only about the specific clause or amendment, but about the aspects of the bill in general.
The first amendment proposes that Bill C-10, in clause 39, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 22 with the following:
in Schedule I, is guilty of an indictable
First of all, I should say that these amendments deal with provisions of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and on page 22, clause 39 replaces paragraph 5(3)(a) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act with a new paragraph.
We are seeking to change the first part of that, which is
(a) subject to paragraph (a.1), if the subject matter of the offence is a substance included in Schedule I or II, is guilty of an...offence and liable to imprisonment for life
Then we go on to talk about mandatory minimum sentences.
The first amendment relates to the deletion of schedule II, so that the paragraph would deal with substances included in schedule I but would leave out schedule II. The reason for that is that schedule II relates to cannabis and its derivatives, and we feel that by including all of these in the one section, we are treating drugs that are less serious and less harmful and less subject to the concerns that are raised often in society, in terms of addictions and harm to society and harm to individuals, along with the other more serious drugs or narcotics that are contained in schedule I. That's actually a concern in a lot of the provisions, because when we read down through the entirety of clause 39, there are significant penalties for possession and for what's called trafficking, and the definition thereof, along with all of the consequences in terms of mandatory minimum sentences.
It may make more sense to perhaps put all these amendments on the table, Mr. Chair. Is that a possibility for one section?