I’ve been pretty dismayed with the overall response to Bill C-45.
I’ve been pretty dismayed with the overall response to Bill C-45. While I wasn’t expecting mobs of joyous people cheering in the streets, I was anticipating some appreciation for the fact that this campaign promise had actually materialized into a history-making bill.
Instead, over and over, I am reading how the new cannabis legalization is lacking and doomed to failure.
• “The feds have dumped all responsibility for distribution and sale on to the provinces.”
No, it’s called the division of powers and it’s a fundamental tenet of Canadian federalism. Any attempt by the federal government to dictate how recreational cannabis should be sold at retail would infringe upon provincial powers.
• “The bill doesn’t give any specifics on how all of this will actually happen.”
Of course not. The purpose of the act is to set out a framework. The specifics will be found in the regulations to the act (which follow enactment of the bill).
• “The costs of enforcement are being downloaded on to the provinces.”
I don’t know how anyone could say this when there has not yet been a decision on how cannabis will be taxed and how those tax revenues will be shared.
• “I can still get arrested and face imprisonment for cannabis offences.” What Bill C-45 does is draw a great big circle. Everything inside the circle will be legal. The obvious corollary is that everything outside the circle remains illegal. Justin Trudeau didn’t promise a free-for-all. He promised a regulated industry which, by definition, will include offences for non-compliance.
• “I could go to jail for growing five cannabis plants in my house.” OR you could just get a ticket for $200 and have no criminal record. Plus you will now be able to grow four plants legally! The ability for police to issue tickets for minor offences should be applauded.
I do have my own critiques of the bill. While I agree that packaging should not appeal to kids, the creation of strong brands will encourage people to choose legal cannabis over illegal. I was disappointed that the bill essentially prohibits grey market participants from “going legal.” And as legal counsel to many frustrated applicants seek medical cannabis production licences, I was not happy to see provisions that purport to give administrative immunity to Health Canada vis--vis the licensing process.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m not opposed to a vigorous debate about specific provisions of C-45.
But let’s stop for a moment and really think about what has happened. Our federal government has introduced legislation that provides for the legal possession, production, extraction, distribution and sale of cannabis for recreational purposes. It has done so in the face of international treaties that require Canada to prohibit and criminalize cannabis. It has done so in the face of a new U.S. administration that has made some concerning statements about its intention to enforce federal drug laws re: cannabis. It has done so in the face of a not-insignificant segment of our population that, at best, is neutral toward cannabis legalization and, at worst, is against any steps that may be seen as “normalizing” cannabis use. And it has done so in the face of an extremely complicated web of legislation that involves every level of government.
Rome wasn’t built in a day. Can’t we all at least agree that, while it’s not perfect, it’s a step in the right direction? And it’s a MASSIVE step, by the way.
— Trina Fraser is a partner with Ottawa business law firm Brazeau Seller LLP (www.brazeauseller.com). A longer version of this column appears on lift.co: https://news.lift.co/always-look-bright-side-legalization/