Debates of June 13th, 2016

Opposition Motion—Decriminalization of Marijuana Possession

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member made a point about confusion, and that is a very fair point.

The question is on how one drafts the actual directive. That could be done by quantity, saying how many grams would be affected, and the circumstances could be laid out. All of that could be done as a matter of public policy by careful drafting.

The point about confusion is absolutely right. We live in a very confused state of the law, where something is essentially illegal in one province and wide open in another. It is time to fix that confusion once and for all.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Victoria for his very enlightening and rational speech.

We have been waiting a long time for the Liberals to move forward with decriminalization because we want to know how the government plans to do a better job of regulating cannabis. It is important to me to stand in the House today to talk about this motion on marijuana decriminalization, which is in response to the Minister of Justice's announcement about legalizing it in the spring of 2017.

During the election campaign, the Liberals made this one of the major planks in their platform. They went on and on about it, but ever since being elected, they have been all over the map. They make announcements, backpedal, then make more announcements with precious few details. We sort of have a deadline. What is the Liberal government's actual, specific plan for legalizing marijuana? We are still in the dark and floundering around.

They have announced that the drug will be legalized in about a year, but they have not said anything about how they are going to make that happen. Why is that? We know that it could take up to two years before the legalization process is implemented and really applied. We need a consistent approach. The legal process surrounding cannabis must be logical and applied consistently in every province. Right now, the process is not the same from province to province. The law is not being applied in a fair and equitable way. People are not being treated fairly right now.

Here are some statistics. A Canadian community health survey took a closer look at the use of marijuana in Canada. In 2012, approximately 12% or three million Canadians had used marijuana in the past year and 43% of Canadians had tried marijuana. However, there is a slight decline in the use of the drug.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice have said on several occasions that the current laws governing this drug are inadequate, and I completely agree with them. In that case, why not decriminalize it immediately? We all know that the current system is not working, and, what is worse, it is drain on justice system and police resources, as my colleague from Victoria pointed out. Approximately $4 million is spent every year on arrests and legal action.

That $4 million could be spent on education, awareness, and prevention, rather than on cracking down on the drug, as my colleague from Trois-Rivières said. I am also trained as a teacher and I taught young people. My riding is near the United States border, where the trafficking of a number of drugs, including marijuana, occurs. Young people are able to access this drug very easily and they use it without really knowing the consequences. I will talk more about that a little bit later, but many young adults were arrested and still have criminal records. A criminal record has very serious consequences. Right now, people with criminal records have to wait 10 years before they can apply for a pardon. They have to wait 10 years.

An 18-year-old who is arrested for simple possession of marijuana often has to wait 10 years before he or she can get a job. No one wants to hire these youth, because they have a criminal record. It is very hard for them to find housing, and it is impossible for them to cross the border into the U.S., even though many states, including Vermont, New York, and Maine, have already decriminalized marijuana. It is even legal in some states.

Why has Canada not yet brought in any measures to do the same? Why are our young people still being prosecuted? Why should our young people have to face roadblocks for 10 years and maybe the rest of their lives? A criminal record can have a lifelong impact. This is a very serious matter, and it is especially absurd given that we know that the Liberals plan to legalize cannabis. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that it cannot be decriminalized.

A third of young people between the ages of 18 and 24 reported using marijuana in 2011, and more than half have tried it at least once. Two-thirds, 67%, of offences committed by young adults are linked to marijuana possession. That amounts to thousands of cases every year. Every year in Canada, nearly 57,000 arrests are related to simple possession of marijuana.

If we have to wait two years for the Liberal government to finalize the legislation, nearly 120,000 people will be arrested for this. It makes no sense to waste so many resources to arrest people for an offence related to something that is about to become legal. What will happen to those who are left with a criminal record? Will it disappear? What will the Liberals do about those cases?

A criminal record also prevents people from getting involved in charities. Some people who would like to help out in their communities are unable do so. Community groups often ask people who want to volunteer for their organization to demonstrate that they do not have a criminal record, because the organizations need to protect themselves, and rightly so. Many communities organizations work with young people or people with mental health issues. This means that young people who have been arrested for simple possession of cannabis cannot get involved in their community because they have a criminal record.

People with a criminal record must disclose this fact for 10 years to their bank if they want to apply for a loan or to an insurer if they want to purchase home or car insurance. Even if they manage to find work, they may not even be able to purchase car insurance. They will therefore not be able to drive to work. This ultimately jeopardizes their careers and job searches. They will not be able to cross the border to visit friends or family members, either.

By refusing to move forward with decriminalizing marijuana, the government is making it even harder for young people to enter the job market and start their lives.

My office contacted organizations in my riding of Salaberry—Suroît, and these organizations are unanimous in their stance on implementing legalization directly and too quickly. We need an interim process, which would be decriminalization. This is a crucial step to help young people be healthy and to focus on prevention.

According to Claude Théorêt, the CEO of PACTE de rue and a member of the Association des travailleurs et travailleuses de rue du Québec, we need to be proactive about awareness and education, to help young people, especially those under 18, understand the legal implications of the legalization of marijuana.

He says that people who work with youth mainly worry that they are not aware, which could promote illegal behaviour. Young marijuana users believe that the potential legalization of marijuana, which the Liberals announced during the election campaign, effectively gives them permission to use in public.

He is not the only one who says so. The two other people I will quote said it was problematic that the government announced the legalization of marijuana without announcing other measures.

Young people now think that they have the right to consume marijuana because the Prime Minister said it would be legal. This is not true, but they do not realize it. If these young people are not made aware of the restrictions that could come with the legalization of marijuana, they could engage in illegal social behaviour, which could result in needless criminal records for these young offenders. This is what Claude Théorêt believes.

Alexandra Laliberté, the director of Le Tournant, an alternative resource that works with people with mental health challenges, says that most people who contact her service have their first psychotic episodes when they use drugs and that they are not equipped to use the drugs safely.

She also says that young adults frequently abuse drugs and end up in panic mode. According to her, front-line services are having a hard time meeting current demand. Front-line intervention groups need to be part of the government's consultations on legalizing marijuana. They say that they are not being consulted by the government on this type of public policy that will be put on the table.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry, but it is now time for questions and comments. The hon. member can say more during questions and comments.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, first, I want to thank the member opposite for her fine speech. All the facts that she quoted in her speech, with respect to the levels of charges and the numbers of charges being laid, I believe originated from 2012 and therefore are quite dated. I wonder if she has any more up-to-date information.

I can advise the House that, at least anecdotally, from speaking to law enforcement officials across the country, I understand the number of possession charges has been reduced very substantially from coast to coast. Certainly in the cities whose officials I have spoken to, those numbers are a small fraction of what they were in 2012.

I wonder if the member opposite has any more up-to-date information.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have the numbers from Statistics Canada for 2014. These numbers indicate that in 2014, there were 57,314 marijuana possession offences. That is not so long ago. I am not sure what numbers the hon. member for Scarborough Southwest has, but he could quote them to show how much that number has gone down.

In any case, this does not change the fact that the government specifically said that it was going to legalize marijuana. If it wants to legalize it, then it should do so. Even the Prime Minister said that the use or possession of marijuana should not lead to a criminal record. The Prime Minister admitted that he used marijuana and did not get a criminal record. He was lucky.

Currently young people, two-thirds of young people between 18 and 24, are the most affected. They are the ones who end up with a criminal record, which has very serious consequences for their work, housing, and the rest of their lives because their record will follow them for the rest of their lives.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, we have now heard two hon. members from the NDP speak about this issue. The reality is that it is still illegal in this land to possess marijuana, yet in both of the speeches, we have heard references to young people. Marijuana is illegal for everybody in this land.

Just to get away from any confusion that might exist in the absence of legislation, because we have no legislation at this point, although the Liberals are proposing it, what is the definition of “young people” in the context of what we have heard this morning in the speeches?

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, we are talking about young adults, people who are 18 and older. What the government is currently saying is that it is illegal for everyone at present. However, the people most affected, those who are arrested most often, and who have the most criminal records are young people between the ages of 18 and 24. We are talking about these young people because they will be affected for the rest of their lives.

It makes no sense because the Liberals want to decriminalize marijuana. If they want to do it within two years, it means that they want to get rid of criminal records. In the meantime, out on the street, people continue to be arrested. Police officers think this situation is hazy and confusing. They no longer know whether to charge people, or if they should continue to prosecute young people and anyone arrested for possession of marijuana.

I would like to remind the Conservatives that they voted for decriminalization at their last convention. They should listen to their delegates.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a very simple question. We are not hearing a very firm deadline from the Liberal benches. During the election campaign, they said it would happen rather quickly. Then they said it would take a few months, perhaps it would be in the spring, and some are saying that it might not even happen during this parliament.

If marijuana is to be legalized, there must be an agreement with the provinces on the distribution network. Therefore, is decriminalization not the only way to move forward?

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, at present it is a federal law. People are arrested for possession of cannabis and prosecuted under federal law, if they are prosecuted. However, enforcement is not consistent from province to province. Therefore, we have a problem.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the motion proposed by the hon. member for Victoria for the decriminalization of the offence of possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use.

I will be splitting my time with the member for Scarborough Southwest.

The government has been very clear with its platform commitment and in its statement to Canadians and through this Parliament of its intention to legalize, strictly regulate, and restrict access to marijuana.

Our government's objectives in doing so are to protect young Canadians by keeping marijuana out of the hands of children and youth. We also want to keep profits out of the hands of criminals, particularly organized crime. Through this process we want to ensure that Canadians are well informed through sustained and appropriate public health campaigns, for youth in particular, to ensure the risks are understood.

Let me be clear. The law with respect to marijuana is not in limbo. It is still in effect. Marijuana is currently a scheduled drug under schedule II of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The law is in force and it should be obeyed. The police have been enforcing this legislation and have the legal authority to do so until the law is changed.

As we are all well aware, marijuana is not always a benign substance. While many believe this substance to be harmless, its use presents a significant risk to certain segments of the Canadian population, notably children. Therefore, our first public interest priority is the protection of children.

Canada currently has the highest rates of marijuana usage of any developed country in the world, especially among youth. There is a significant body of scientific evidence that marijuana poses a significant health risk to the developing brain. Accordingly, we need to do a better job of protecting our youth. We also have to consider other public health and safety risks, such as the need to prevent drug-impaired driving and the need to promote safe and responsible production and distribution of marijuana.

In Canada, organized crime profits in the billions of dollars from the illegal trafficking of drugs generally and from marijuana in particular. Therefore, another very important public policy objective for our government, through the legalization and regulation of marijuana, is to take those profits away from organized crime, away from street gangs, and away from those who would victimize, and through violence, threaten so many of our communities.

The violence and victimization that takes place in communities as a direct result of the illegal activity around marijuana takes a terrible toll. We believe that a strictly controlled regulatory regime that is based on a public health model will better protect our communities and especially our children.

We believe that a public health approach will assure all Canadians that marijuana can be made available legally and safely to responsible adults. Our government will develop a regulatory scheme that will ensure that the production, distribution, retail sale, and consumption of marijuana will be controlled by regulation so as to ensure that we can achieve both our public safety aims and our public health aims.

The motion proposes that the government immediately decriminalize the simple possession of marijuana. While the motion does not define what is meant by “decriminalize”, one thing is certain: if decriminalization were to occur, it would mean that marijuana would remain an illegal substance and that it would continue to be grown and distributed by organized crime networks. Canadians, both adults and youth, would continue to purchase a product of unknown potency and quality, while fuelling the profits of organized crime.

Simply removing the criminal penalties for the possession of marijuana would do nothing to make it harder for young people to access it. In fact, decriminalization may actually make it easier to acquire. Decriminalization would also not ensure that the quality of the marijuana would be safe for consumption. Black market marijuana is often contaminated with pesticides, herbicides, and mould. Decriminalization would not improve this situation. Moreover, it would not address illegal trafficking, nor prevent criminal organizations from deriving enormous profits.

Decriminalizing possession of marijuana without ensuring the appropriate controls are in place for its safe production, distribution, and access would be giving a green light to dealers and criminal organizations to continue to sell unregulated and unsafe marijuana to Canadians, especially children and youth. The government believes that there is a better approach to control the production, distribution, and consumption of marijuana than is currently the case under existing law. Improving on the present situation is a complex task. It will take a great deal of work. There are important questions that need to be answered.

With these as our objectives, the government has undertaken to establish a task force on marijuana legalization and regulation. The task force will engage with provincial and territorial governments, indigenous governments and national organizations, youth, and experts in public health, substance abuse, policing and law enforcement, justice, and economics. Crucially, it will also provide opportunities for individual Canadians to provide input and share their views. The aim of this consultation is to develop a comprehensive and properly functioning regime for controlling the safe production, distribution, and consumption of cannabis products across Canada. This task force will be set up very shortly and will have an ambitious timeline so that it can inform the government on its progress and complete its review in a timely and responsible way.

As members are no doubt aware, my colleague, the Minister of Health, announced this past April at the United Nations General Assembly special session on the world drug problem, that the government would propose a new legislative framework for the legalization and strict regulation of marijuana in the spring of 2017. As members can see, it will take time to develop legislation and regulations to protect all Canadians. Rushing into an interim period of decriminalization, which would inject more unsafe and criminally grown and distributed drugs onto our streets and into our schools, is not in the best interests of Canadians, especially our youth. A properly designed and regulated system for the legal and safe production, sale, and possession of marijuana is the best answer to the concerns we all have about the current law.

We are confident that when the government bill is brought forward, members will appreciate why it is important to take the time needed to engage with experts and all Canadians in order to develop this important but complex legislative framework.

I appreciate being given the opportunity to speak to the motion. While I understand the good intentions of the proposed motion, I cannot support it. Decriminalization as the hon. member proposes would only deal with the demand side of marijuana and would not address its supply. It would leave the drug and its profits under the control of organized crime and do nothing to prevent young people from accessing it. The harms it would cause outweigh any possible benefits.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the speech of my colleague, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.

Earlier this afternoon, the minister's parliamentary secretary suggested that the Statistics Canada data that we cited about the number of simple possession charges in the country were somehow no longer reflecting current reality. Can the minister advise the House on how many thousands of Canadians have been given criminal records since the Liberals were elected in October 2015?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Madam Speaker, I do not have the exact number to answer the question. However, I am happy to endeavour to find that answer and bring it back to my hon. colleague.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the minister for her speech. Basically, I was back in my riding and one of these illegal dispensaries had popped up in Oshawa. I had a former teacher come up and talk to me about some of the edibles being diverted to kids.

The reason the Liberals brought this forward was that they said it was going to keep the profits out of organized crime and keep it safe for our kids. Unfortunately, because the Liberals have not thought this through and they put no money in budget 2016 for proper inspection and enforcement, the exact opposite is true. We are getting more of these kid-friendly products in kids' hands. As for the money in these dispensaries, I wonder where the minister actually thinks the marijuana is coming from.

I want to ask the minister this. If they are currently illegal, why are the Liberals not cracking down on the illegal dispensaries, and why was there no money put into the budget for this program that they are bringing forward?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for a question that addresses many different issues that we want to move forward.

As I mentioned in my remarks, we are moving forward and we will announce very shortly a task force that will look into and engage many experts in the area of health, in the area of law enforcement and justice, among other issues, to actually have conversations about products that are available. Our objective, as I have stated, is to keep harmful products out of the hands of children.

As the member quite rightly states, shops that are operating right now outside of the marijuana for medical purposes regulation are operating illegally, and we respect the role of local law enforcement agencies to do their job.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Madam Speaker, I have a 17-year-old daughter, like many people in Whitby, which is a bedroom community with a lot of families.

I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Justice what impact decriminalization would have on our young people in school. Alternatively, what is the impact of taking the cautious steps that she has outlined and waiting until it is legalized?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Madam Speaker, as I have stated, the ultimate objectives of our government in terms of the legalization of marijuana are to keep it out of the hands of children and keep the profits out of the hands of organized crime.

We want to proceed on this highly complex matter in terms of legalization in a cautious and orderly manner so we can ensure that we restrict access and we strictly regulate marijuana. We want to be mindful and have regard to the opinions of experts and to the contributions of Canadians when we engage in a task force, so we ensure that their voices are heard and we ensure that we achieve our ultimate objectives after we engage in a task force and after we put forward legislation that will achieve those objectives.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to rise this morning in response to the motion from the hon. member for Victoria.

I will begin my remarks by talking about some of the evidence that we have available to us about cannabis control and draw some conclusions from that.

Certainly, an examination of the evidence tells us that cannabis use carries significant health risks, especially for people who frequently use it or begin to use it at a very early age. The evidence also indicates that a public health approach focused on high-risk users and practices, similar to the approach favoured with alcohol and tobacco in Canada, allows for more control over the risk factors associated with cannabis-related harm. From this evidence, we can draw the conclusion that legalization, combined with strict health-focused regulation, would provide an opportunity to reduce the harms associated with cannabis use.

I do not want to repeat what the Minister of Justice has spoken about, the government's plans, because I think she has covered that more than adequately. However, I do want to take this opportunity to try to differentiate between our government's approach and what is proposed in the motion.

For example, on the issue of decriminalization, models of cannabis decriminalization vary greatly, but they generally involve removing possession of small amounts of cannabis from the sphere of criminal law. Prohibition remains the rule, but sanctions for possession and use of cannabis instead become civil violations, punishable by a small fine.

Unfortunately, this model fails to address several of the harms associated with the prohibition of cannabis use. Under decriminalization, cannabis remains unregulated and this means that users know little or nothing about the potency or the quality of what they are purchasing. Far too often, the source of production in this country has been organized crime, which is reckless in the extreme of the safety and health impacts it can have for Canadians.

As long as cannabis use is illegal, it is difficult for health care or educational professionals to effectively address and prevent problematic use. The law enforcement focus on prohibition drives cannabis users away from prevention, risk reduction, and treatment services.

Decriminalization may even encourage commercialization of cannabis production and distribution, creating a world of opportunity for organized crime without giving government any additional regulatory tools. These activities would remain under the control of criminal elements, and for the most part, users would still obtain cannabis in the illicit market where they are exposed to other drugs and criminal activity.

In addition, under the decriminalization model where the police are given the opportunity to issue tickets instead of proceeding with criminal charges, what we have seen in many other jurisdictions where such a practice has been followed is that there is a net widening and a far greater likelihood of people getting caught up in the enforcement net. In addition, fines have proven to be a regressive penalty in the sense that they place a disproportionate burden on low-income individuals.

In 2012, the hon. member for Outremont, the leader of the member's opposite party, was asked specifically if he would decriminalize marijuana. I will share with members his response. He said, “...No. I think that would be a mistake because the information that we have right now is that the marijuana that’s on the market is extremely potent and can actually cause mental illness.” He went on to suggest that we should get the best medical experts, the best legal experts, and the best law enforcement experts around the table to see what is realistic. This sounds remarkably like our plan to bring forward a task force to speak to the experts in science, health, justice, and law enforcement to get the best evidence and information from experts across the country to inform the government's development of a regulatory framework for the regulation and control of marijuana.

The member for Outremont said that to decide in advance that it should simply be open would be “a serious mistake”, and I agree with him.

Legalization removes the social harms and cost of prohibition. Removing criminal and civil penalties for possession of cannabis would eliminate the more than $1 billion Canada spends annually to enforce and prosecute marijuana possession laws. In a jurisdiction where Canada's production and distribution are legal and properly regulated, criminal involvement in these activities should shrink significantly and potentially disappear.

It is important to recognize that legalization alone does not reduce the health risks and the harms of cannabis. However, it presents governments with an opportunity to regulate cannabis to mitigate those risks, something that cannot effectively be done under prohibition or decriminalization.

We have also looked at the experience in other jurisdictions. A number of states in the United States have gone through the process of the legalization of recreation and medical markets, and they have shared some lessons with us that I would like to share with the House.

First, the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse did an analysis of lessons learned in Colorado and Washington state and its first recommendation in its report was as follows: “Take the time required to develop an effective framework for implementation and to prepare for a successful launch”. The interim measure that is proposed in this motion does none of those things.

The report urges us to do the following:

Develop the capacity to administer the regulatory framework, recognizing that a significant investment in staff and administration is required to process licenses, conduct comprehensive inspections and address violations;...

Invest proactively in a public health approach that builds capacity in prevention, education and treatment before implementation to minimize negative health and social impacts associated with cannabis use;...

Invest in research to establish the evidence base...; and

Conduct rigorous, ongoing data collection...

That is the Government of Canada's plan. Our plan is to develop a strict regulatory framework based on a public health approach that would mitigate the health and social harms of marijuana use. We are committed to taking the time to do this right. We are committed to bring forward evidence-based policy, based on the best evidence available to us in the fields of science, health, justice, and law enforcement. We are committed to consult across this country to bring that evidence before the House and ensure that the work we do in bringing forth a regulatory framework achieves our public policy aims.

Our public policy aims are clear. We intend to make Canada a safer place for our kids by protecting them from the harms that marijuana can have on the developing adolescent brain; to protect our communities from the damage, violence, and victimization brought about by organized crime through its involvement in the illegal drug trade, in particular the illegal marijuana trade; and to protect the health of Canadians by ensuring a strict regulatory framework for the production, distribution, and consumption of cannabis that works for the health and safety of all Canadians.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member, as the representative of the Minister of Justice, what I think is a very simple question.

As we know, federal prosecutors enforce marijuana possession laws from coast to coast. Apparently, in Kelowna, there are 251 charges per 100,000 people for marijuana possession, whereas in St. John's, Newfoundland, there are 11 per 100,000.

My question for the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada is this. Does this discrepancy seem just?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Speaker, we recognize that there is a disparity in the enforcement of these laws. Quite frankly, in the absence of other supportive evidence, it is difficult to determine whether that is a result of a different approach either by the police in the laying of charges or by the prosecutors in exercising their discretion—and I know that there are different approaches in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in both British Columbia and Newfoundland—or whether that disparity reflects a different pattern of use in those two jurisdictions.

In the absence of evidence, it is difficult to quantify, but we recognize that there is disparity in the enforcement of these regulations. It is one of the reasons we are committed to the legalization of marijuana, not merely to reduce that particular social harm but to also show health harms. This is an opportunity, as I have said, to bring in a strict and effective comprehensive regulatory framework that would enable us to address all of the harms associated with cannabis use.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to the member, as well as the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister. We have heard them all state that legalization is going to take it out of the hands of organized crime and keep our children safe. As we know, drug dealers are not interested in keeping any drugs out of the hands of our kids and continue to diversify.

My question would be this. The premise is that legalizing marijuana would keep kids safe, take drugs out of the hands of organized crime, and everything is going to be great. Extrapolating that, is there is an intention to also legalize street fentanyl, OxyContin, W-18, W series drugs, ecstasy and cocaine, which are on the rise and have been on the rise for quite some time?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Speaker, our commitment has been very clear and precise. Our intention is to legalize, regulate, and restrict marijuana in Canada, and we have not made any other comments.

This government is pursuing a public health approach with respect to all of our policies because of our commitment to keeping our communities safe and our citizens healthy. However, our commitment has been very clear. We are going to legalize, regulate, and restrict marijuana.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am proud to be part of a government that ran on a platform to legalize and regulate marijuana. As any expert will tell us, prohibition causes more problems than it proposes to solve. The answer is a regulatory framework based on evidence.

We are not moving toward legalization now. Rather, we are moving toward legalization a year from now. My question for the parliamentary secretary is this. We will be facing prohibition over this next year. Therefore, is decriminalization not a fair option, as a matter of scarce judicial resources and to not negatively affect the lives of young people for no reason at all when we are legalizing it within one year?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Speaker, let me be very clear. There are significant social and health harms associated with cannabis use. Currently, control of cannabis is exercised through an existing legislative framework that has been in place for over a century in this country. Through the best advice of experts from across the fields of science, health, justice, and law enforcement, we are proposing to bring forward a proper, effective, and comprehensive regulatory framework to replace the existing system of control.

In the interim, it would be reckless in the extreme, and perhaps create much greater risk for our communities, to remove all control of cannabis. It would create opportunities for organized crime and put our children at risk.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to start by saying that I will be sharing my time with the member for Durham.

I want to start by thanking the NDP for bringing this motion forward today. It is indeed an important issue that the Liberals are refusing to deal with. The Liberals continue to state that their plan to legalize marijuana is to “keep marijuana out of the hands of children, and the profits out of the hands of criminals”, but the exact opposite is true.

I have numerous concerns and questions about the lack of marijuana policy by the Liberals. I know that many Canadians across the country do as well. The Liberals are providing no direction, and they continue to avoid answering important questions when it comes to their inconsistent drug policies. For example, who is monitoring these illegal marijuana dispensaries that are popping up across the country by the hundreds? How do we know where these illegal dispensaries are getting their marijuana from? Who is ensuring that these illegal marijuana dispensaries are not producing laced marijuana?

How can we be sure that these dispensaries are not selling or diverting marijuana to children and that they are not targeting children by promoting kid-friendly edibles? How much marijuana will an individual be able to possess without consequences? If legalized or immediately decriminalized, will dispensaries be allowed to sell edibles, which are known to be harder to monitor for THC levels? Will they be allowed to advertise these kid-friendly edibles?

I could go on and on, which is why I believe that decriminalizing marijuana immediately is not the solution. As of right now, the distribution of marijuana is illegal unless a licence by Health Canada has been issued and the producer complies with the marijuana for medical purposes regulations.

Recently at the Standing Committee on Health, we learned from Health Canada officials that the Liberals have allocated no money, zero dollars, for the inspection of these illegal marijuana dispensaries. In my riding of Oshawa, an illegal marijuana dispensary has recently popped up. The issue is that it is illegal. Law enforcement agencies are unclear as to whether or not they should allow these dispensaries to continue to operate because the Liberals have announced an apparent plan to eventually legalize marijuana.

The fact of the matter is that the Liberals have been contradicting most of their campaign promises since forming government. They have said they were going to legalize marijuana, but they also said they would run modest $10-billion deficits. They said they would run an open and competitive process to replace the CF-18s. They said that they would lower the small business tax rate. They also promised $3 billion of an investment into palliative care, and that was nowhere to be found in the Liberals' budget.

Clearly, Liberal campaign promises are cheap. We do not even know if marijuana is going to become legal, so why would decriminalizing it immediately be the solution? At this time, the only responsible solution is to enforce the law.

On our side, our top priority needs to be the safety of all Canadians, especially our youth. The Liberals are doing a lot of talking, saying that marijuana is illegal until the Criminal Code is changed, yet they are doing absolutely nothing about the abundance of illegal marijuana dispensaries that are producing marijuana with zero oversight. This raises more questions that Canadians deserve to have answers to.

How are municipalities and law enforcement agencies across this country supposed to operate without any guidance from the Liberal government? Are the profits from these illegal marijuana dispensaries going to organized crime? We do not know because the Liberals do not seem to really care. They have failed to provide a responsible thought-out plan, and that is what is unacceptable about this current situation.

As elected officials, it is our job to represent our constituents as well as making sure that all Canadians are safe. Immediately decriminalizing marijuana does not solve the issue of illegal marijuana dispensaries. It does not ensure that Canadians will be responsible while using marijuana.

It is easy for former politicians to advocate for the decriminalization of marijuana when they have no responsibility to represent the good of their constituents. As an elected member of Parliament, I have a responsibility to ensure that my constituents are safe. Now that one of these illegal dispensaries is in my riding of Oshawa, I am concerned that it is operating illegally and that there are no inspections on what is being sold and to whom. I worry that marijuana products such as brownies and cookies might end up in the hands of Canadian kids.

I know that my constituents will have questions, and because of the lack of information from the Liberals, I will not have very many answers for them. This is why the immediate action that the Liberals must take is enforcing the law.

In my opinion, immediately decriminalizing the simple possession of marijuana for personal use does not take into consideration the implications this may have, one, for traffic and workplace safety; two, the health of Canadians, especially our adolescents and our youth; three, international treaty obligations; and, four, Canada's marijuana for medical purpose regime.

We realize that this issue is on the minds of Canadians. Recently at the Conservative Party convention, the following resolution was passed:

In order to expand the means which law enforcement authorities have at their disposal to combat drugs and their negative impacts, particularly among young people, and to reduce the volume of judicial proceedings, we recommend that peace officers be enabled to issue tickets for simple possession of small quantities of marijuana.

While there is so much in the NDP motion that the Conservatives could support, the motion calls to immediately decriminalize the simple possession of marijuana. As members can see, there are far too many unanswered questions by the Liberals, and for that reason I will not be able to support the motion. Just because the Liberals made an irresponsible campaign promise without considering the consequences does not justify the House approving an irresponsible solution.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it seems pretty clear in the debate we are having today that Liberals and Conservatives favour continuing to arrest Canadians for simple possession of pot.

Last year, Canadians were asked whether simple pot possession for individual use should be decriminalized. What is interesting is that 68% of Canadians said that they agree with the NDP motion and they believe in decriminalization. What I think is even more impressive for the member is that 70% of folks in Ontario also believe that simple possession of marijuana should be decriminalized, and 51% of folks who voted Conservative actually agree with the NDP motion and want to decriminalize marijuana.

Given that 68% of Canadians and 51% of Conservatives agree with us, why is the member voting the other way?