CANADA: MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION BILL LOSING

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 002331

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CA PGOV PREL SNAR SOCI
SUBJECT: CANADA: MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION BILL LOSING
MOMENTUM?



1. (SBU) SUMMARY: The marijuana decriminalization bill
(C-17),which began the Parliamentary term as the potential
next big issue on the Liberal agenda, appears to have lost
steam. Opinion on C-17 is split between activists who
suggest it does not go far enough, and prohibitionists who
say it goes too far. Momentum on the bill slowed
considerably toward the end of the last session of
Parliament, and no federal leaders are giving any indication
they intend to support or push the bill. It appears now that
C-17 does not have the support of any significant interest
group, and without a champion, it does not seem likely
marijuana decriminalization will rush out of the gate in the
fall. END SUMMARY


2. (SBU) The Hill Times, a newspaper that covers political
news and activity on Parliament Hill reports there is little
support for C-17, and players on both sides of the issue are
actively criticizing the bill. Lobbyists have identified
serious flaws in the legislation, and groups that otherwise
have very little in common are agreeing the bill should be
killed. In its current form, C-17 would replace criminal
charges with fines for simple possession of up to 15 grams
and increase penalties for marijuana production.

Legislative History
--------------


3. (SBU) C-17, the Marijuana Decriminalization Bill, is
technically titled, "An Act to amend the Contraventions Act
and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make
Consequential Amendments to Other Acts." The Minister of
Justice, Irwin Cotler, introduced the bill on November 1,

2004. The bill was forwarded to the House of Commons
Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and
Emergency Preparedness on November 2, and has made no
progress since. This is the third decriminalization bill
introduced by the Liberal Government. The last attempt was
Bill C-38 of the 37th Parliament, Session 2. That bill was
introduced in May 2003 and died when that session ended in
November 2003.

The Current Problem
--------------


4. (SBU) C-17 received specific attention in the October 2004
Speech from the Throne that began the current session of
Parliament. Since that time there has been no leadership on
the issue from the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice or
any other Liberal Member of Parliament, save the occasional
solicited comment. At the Liberal Party Convention in March,
marijuana decriminalization was a hot topic, but unlike the
same-sex marriage issue, which was also highly emotional,
this attention did not carry through to activism in the House
of Commons.

Opponents make their cases
--------------


5. (SBU) Many interest groups from both sides of the argument
have come forward to point out why C-17 does not work.
Marijuana activists and prohibitionists are finding
themselves in agreement that they do not want to see the bill
pass. This does not bode well for a bill that is also
suffering from a distinct lack of political support from the
government. Some examples of public positions on the bill
include the following:

-- Canadians For Safe Access (CFSA) (Director, Phillipe
Lucas) a medicinal marijuana lobby group, believes the
provisions of the bill appear directed at young men and
complains it may be directed a poorer Canadians who cannot
afford to pay fines.

-- The Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy (CFDP)
(Executive Director, Eugene Oscapella) agrees the bill is
flawed, and suggests the Liberals may be planning to force it
through in order to put the issue behind them. If it is
allowed to die, Oscapella is hopeful the NDP and Bloc
Quebecois will force the Liberals to formulate yet another
attempt.

-- The Canadian Professional Police Association (CPPA)
(President, Tony Cannavino) is also happy the bill has
stalled. The CPPA notes the bill sends the wrong message
compared to other anti-drug strategies and questions the
15-gram figure the C-17 terms as simple possession.
Cannavino says that in discussions with MPs it is clear that
90-95% do not realize that 15 grams equals between 30 and 50
joints, an amount the police characterize as a trafficking
amount, not simple possession.

-- The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP)
(Chris McNeil - Halifax Regional Municipality Police, Drug
Committee Chair) objects to the bill in its current form, but
admits there is room for reform in marijuana laws. The CACP
says any new law must protect police discretion in laying
charges, and notes the anti-grow-op provisions of C-17 will
simply force organized crime to divide their operations into
smaller units.

-- The Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse (CCSA)
(Patricia Begin, Policy Director) is the one organization
known to be supporting the bill. Even the CCSA states the
government must be very careful with messaging any new law,
because they are already encountering young people who
believe the bill alone has made marijuana legal.

-- Alan Young, a marijuana reform advocate from Osgoode
Hall Law School points out that a key problem is the number
of interest groups who want to see lessening restrictions and
easier access to marijuana, medicinal or otherwise. He
points out that in the same-sex marriage debate, the gay
community was able to present a united and coordinated effort
that made their lobbying very effective and ultimately
successful. He says the pro-marijuana community has a long,
long way to go before it presents the same kind of unity. He
goes as far as to call their efforts "fairly inept." Young
says that until the marijuana movement can find a
spokesperson from the mainstream, he does not expect any
related legislation will make much progress.


6. (SBU) C-16 is considered by some to be companion
legislation to C-17. C-16 clarifies that impaired driving
laws cover drugs as well as alcohol consumption. C-16 is
making progress in the legislative system and some observers
point out that its provisions for taking blood samples and
detaining persons police believe may have or intend to
operate a vehicle while under the influence of drugs may
provide an effective counter balance to the perception of
lessening sanctions if C-17 passes.


7. (SBU) COMMENT: Given the number of diverse groups that
have come forward to note their objections to C-17 it seems
reasonable to expect that, if the Government decides to push
the bill in the fall, it will be in for a rough ride. The
law enforcement community is concerned that C-17's provisions
will reduce the discretionary power of police, and encourage
organized crime to simply change their production methods.
Marijuana activists suggest increased penalties for producing
marijuana will only reinforce the black market, and a fine
system for simple possession will unfairly target the poor.
In this minority Parliament it seems that only the truly
consensus bills are passed, and this government will not be
likely to expend too much capital on a controversial bill
without a strong constituency backing it up. END COMMENT

Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa

WILKINS