Bill No. 108 - Cannabis Control Act.
MS. CLAUDIA CHENDER « » : I'm honoured to rise and say a few words about Bill No. 108. This is obviously a contentious bill. I think we can all agree that it wasn't a bill that any of us, the government included, decided to put forward. It's something that has come down from on high so to speak, and we're all struggling to make sense of it. We're doing our best.
It's the NDP's position that this bill does in fact do an adequate job of contemplating the various issues involved in legalization. Cannabis is here. We know that cannabis is widely used right now in Nova Scotia in all age groups, and it will soon be legal.
As my colleague pointed out, we may differ on many issues, but we agree on the fact that this bill will pass. Our questions are less about the legislation and the legislative gaps but much more about the implementation and the planning, or what I would call the serious lack thereof, at least in terms of the evidence we've seen, for appropriate implementation.
Whether or not it was introduced of its own volition, this government has known since 2017, that legalization was going to be a reality, and in that time, Madam Speaker - about a year of which I've been paying pretty close attention - it's been crickets. I mean, we haven't heard anything until very recently in this sitting about the plans.
As far as we can tell, based on what we've heard, the government has not done the work that it needs to do to be as ready as it needs to be for legalization. This is an enormous change. The minister has spoken to that, I think we all acknowledge that, that this legislative change is going to be huge in terms of its implications on so many aspects of the work that this government does. That carries with it, obviously, a number of risks, and we've been focused on those risks, but it also carries with it opportunities, and it's our position, Madam Speaker, that this government has not prepared appropriately for either.
We do support the distribution of cannabis through the NSLC, but as we've said before, and we'll say now, we think that co-location is a terrible idea. The federal task force pointed out that this was a bad idea, they specifically advised against it, and I agree with my colleague, the member for Pictou West, that this is clearly a cost-saving measure. Bottle your own wine didn't work, so let's try cannabis.
So, while I understand that if you're looking at how to save money, that this is one way that seems like it makes a ton of sense. We happen to have these nine locations, we have a product idea that's not doing well, let's stick cannabis in there instead. Madam Speaker, to me this is emblematic of the level of planning and thoughtfulness that we've seen on this file. We've talked about the survey, and this is another example that's very in line with that, of doing the bare-minimum to figure out how to dot the i's and cross the t's to implement, again, what will be a huge change.
Madam Speaker, this government has repeatedly said that public safety is foremost in the minds of the government and the minister when it comes to this sweeping change. Co-location flies in the face of that assertion. Again, the federal task force has said, do not co-locate, it's a bad idea. We have a number of groups that have come out and said that as well. The experts in the area have all said this, and not only has this decision been made, but we have no assurance that the government is going to be monitoring the public health impacts of co-location, and that the government's going to be ready to move quickly.
It's clear that this is a pilot. We're all finger-painting here, we don't know what legalized cannabis is going to look like. This government is presumably doing it's best to figure out how to put these Jenga blocks together in a way that makes sense, but it's not at all clear to us, Madam Speaker, that this particular decision, to put marijuana retailers in nine random NSLCs across the province - again, I'll point out that our neighbours in New Brunswick will have 20 - and that they just happened to be the ones that have failed Bottle Your Own Wine operations. To me, that's not the hallmark of a thoughtful decision.
Furthermore, as we've discussed before in this House, one of the reasons that we support legalization is because we know what an active black market there is. We've all joked about the different cannabis derivatives and other things that are for sale under the heading of cannabis and marijuana in Nova Scotia, but the reality is, it's true. It's an unregulated supply, there is a black market, and nine locations across the province will not combat that black market, Madam Speaker, I'm sorry. We've heard now a couple of times that people can order it online and I'll say again that here's the sales process right now for buying cannabis on the black market - you call a guy and you go see a guy or you call a guy and a guy comes and sees you and it's cheap.
So the new sales process for everyone who doesn't live close to one of those nine locations is either use your home computer, if you have a computer and you have access to the Internet, which we know is a challenge for many Nova Scotians. If you don't have a computer or access to the Internet, the assertion is that you are going to get in your car, you are going to drive to a public access computer, you are going to order it online in a public place in a public access computer. Again, the online sales we've been told are to diminish a stigma that people may not want to walk into a store and yet they're going to sit at a public access computer in a library and then they are going to plan that they might want to take some cannabis in a couple of weeks or whenever Canada Post is going to deliver it. Frankly it's absurd, Madam Speaker.
So, again, we have real issues on whether this preliminary foot forward into legalization is going to do anything to combat the black market. We've been hearing especially in the last few days, a lot of concerns from our municipal partners. While I recognize the challenge that the federal government has placed on this government in offloading a number of the thorny questions about how legalization will occur, I would submit that this government is offloading a number of those thorny questions, again, onto our municipal partners.
The UNSM has now come out with big questions about this legislation because in the end they are going to be the ones left holding the bag for a lot of the enforcement and it's not at all clear how they are going to do that. I think that the government seems to be violating this maxim of treating others how you'd like to be treated. My sense from speaking to municipal officials in the last week is that they are certainly very unhappy with the number of unanswered questions they have about the implementation of this legalization.
Madam Speaker, we were also hoping to see something from this government signalling their intention to work with federal counterparts on the issue of previous convictions. We support the principle that Nova Scotians previously convicted of something that is now legal should not continue to be negatively impacted by that conviction. We submit that the government should be looking at opportunities for individuals with convictions for possession at or below the now legal limit to be able to apply for a pardon. We'll be asking government about that and looking forward, particularly because we know that often those charges disproportionately fall on some of the most vulnerable folks in our society.
On the matter of impaired driving, it's important to note that this is not a new problem. Again, I'll say that thousands of Nova Scotians already consume cannabis; many of them drive and it's a problem right now. Madam Speaker, this is one of the opportunities. Legalization gives Nova Scotia the opportunity to do a better job at limiting cannabis-impaired driving, but the government is moving too slowly. We need to see a police force trained and ready with accurate tests to give Nova Scotians the confidence that there will be legal consequences to driving while high.
Madam Speaker, this is another area and another reason why we support legalization: people drive high and there's much less of a stigma amongst consumers of cannabis around driving high than there is around driving drunk. Part of that is because, well from a public health perspective, we've been very quiet on cannabis because it's not legal. Now that it's legal, we have the opportunity to have a robust education campaign. It's not just about enforcement, it's about education. But again, crickets, we've heard nothing about education other than we can't talk about it because there's an RFP going out.
We are months away from legalization but we haven't gotten any clarity from the government about their approach to education, especially a public health education campaign. I'm sorry, Madam Speaker, I don't want to prejudice an RFP but I am more concerned about there not being a robust public education and health campaign and driving campaign than I am about the government having to spend a few thousand extra dollars on an RFP because the cat's out of the bag that we're going to have an education campaign.
Young people need to learn the facts about cannabis consumption. We need a public education campaign that promotes harm minimization, is based on evidence, and includes coordinated messaging with the federal government. This government has provided no budget, no plans, and no specifics.
We're hearing from medical cannabis users. I asked the minister about this in Question Period the other day. There is a lot of concern about the lack of clarity of what legalization will mean for them. Medical cannabis is still regulated by the federal government and sold by the federal government. These users need to know that their access to their prescription will not be negatively impacted by the recreational market.
The changes to the Smoke-free Places Act, while we support them, in many ways don't adequately provide for people who have a prescription for medical cannabis, particularly those who would use a vaporizer or a device like that, which shouldn't be a problem in a dwelling. That would be a very simple fix that this government could make to ensure that people who have already been accessing cannabis legally through the medical stream would continue to be able to do so, again, knowing that individuals with disabilities are often very limited already in their housing options. The whole idea that you can get out of your lease if you consume cannabis and your landlord says it's not okay, for many of the people I'm talking about, that's just not going to be an option.
There are risks. We have been talking about risks, but there are opportunities. The federal Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation highlighted that there will be a supply shortage for the first few years of legalization. Each time I have asked the government about how they will support local cannabis production, crickets. The silence has been deafening. In Budget Estimates, I could not get a single answer from the Minister of Business about any incentive or economic development initiative aimed at the production of cannabis. This is an opportunity. When I asked the Minister of Justice about this in Question Period, he said we're not pursuing economic development because the safety of our children is too important. What does that even mean?
There are federally regulated facilities across this country that are producing cannabis that will make a lot of money, many of them in rural areas with a high knowledge of agriculture. Ding ding - we have those. Empty facilities that can be had for cheap, we have those too. None of our supply, when this legalization happens, will be local, and that's a real shame.
We have a government that's focused on imports and exports. What about producing what we need here in Nova Scotia? As far as I can tell, nobody has even put their mind to this. I asked about the tourism file. I'm sure this is a controversial issue. Nonetheless, the reality is that we have a whole raft of states to the south of us in the United States where cannabis will continue not to be legal. We will have people, I tell you, who will come here because cannabis is legal. We have seen it in every jurisdiction that has legalized. If we want that to be an opportunity rather than a challenge for us, then let's do some planning. Again, I have not gotten a single answer to the question that indicates that anyone has even thought about this question, and that's a concern.
We need to be considering measures similar to those in place for the Nova Scotia wine industry and craft brewing. Edibles are coming. We have discussed this. Cannabis will be legal like wine and beer, and we need to treat it that way. We need to be thinking beyond whether or not we want it to be legal and about how we're going to manage it once it is.
To that end, the government should be supporting cannabis research. St. Thomas University in Fredericton has established a new research chair on cannabis funded by Shoppers Drug Mart and the New Brunswick Health Research Foundation. We have heard nothing from this government about support for research in what will be an area where we will need more and more current data. I have heard this government say so many times now that they only make decisions based on evidence, but from the original survey to the lack of research now to the lack of information that we have been provided, for the life of me, I cannot figure out what evidence it is that those decisions are being based on.
What we have here, in terms of legislation, is the bare minimum. We have a government that has dragged its heels and has reluctantly complied with the federal government decision. We have a government that is more concerned about the bottom line than about adequately managing risks or taking advantage of opportunities. This legislation checks some of the necessary boxes without showing the support or the vision needed to successfully manage the transition.
While we will support this legislation, because we support legalization, I believe it's a missed opportunity. We remain very skeptical of and concerned about this government's lack of preparedness. We are not managing the risks, and we are not taking advantage of the opportunities, and that's a shame.
Published by Order of the Legislature by Hansard Reporting Services and printed by the Queen's Printer.
Available on INTERNET at http://nslegislature.ca/legislative-business/hansard-debates/