Merci, Monsieur le President.
Motion 8: To amend clause 11 of Schedule A to develop a two-tier, age-based possession framework
This motion was developed by the Member for Frame Lake. It proposed to maintain the proposed 30-gram possession limit for those aged 25 and over, but to establish a 10-gram possession limit for those aged 19 to 24. This enables the choice of consumption for all those of legal age, while also establishing a model of limited consumption for younger adults.
This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.
Motion 9: To amend Schedule A to expand plebiscite options
This motion was proposed by the Member for Frame Lake. Under the bill, plebiscites will not be permitted in any community with an operating cannabis store. This motion proposed to allow plebiscites in a community with an operating cannabis store, if the store has been in operation for two or more years, if at least 20 per cent of the voters in the community petition the Minister to hold a plebiscite, and if the plebiscite proposes only sales restrictions, not a prohibition-based system.
This motion was not carried. As such, the bill was not amended.
Motion 10: To delete section 23 of Schedule A
This motion deleted the provision enabling the Minister of Finance to form a committee to advise him or her on territorial cannabis industry operations. We believe that public involvement in cannabis regulation is essential, but feel that the proposed advisory committee could unfairly prejudice such involvement. First, the GNWT has stated that it does not intend to strike such a committee in the foreseeable future. Second, we consider that as elected representatives of the people of the Northwest Territories, Members of the Legislative Assembly already have a mandate to consult residents on the operation of the Cannabis Products Act and the cannabis industry. We were also concerned that this provision has the potential to provide a non-elected body, without required qualifications, with an unfettered ability to influence the administration of the act.
Motions 11 and 14: To amend sections 29 and 71 of Schedule A to create regulation-making authority respecting cannabis cultivation
These motions were developed by the Department of Justice to create regulation-making authority respecting the growing, cultivation, propagation, and harvesting of cannabis.
Motion 12: To amend subsection 42(3) of Schedule A to clarify rules for individuals accompanying inspectors under the act
In its original form, Bill 6 would have allowed an inspector to be accompanied in their duties by "any other individual that the inspector believes is necessary," providing an overly broad scope. The amending motion defined clear parameters for such accompaniment. This will ensure that inspectors may be appropriately supported in their work while also assuring the general public that inspectors' powers are limited to the fulfillment of their duties under the act.
Motion 13: To amend section 52 of Schedule A to clarify rules for court-ordered forfeiture of property
This motion defined clear parameters for the forfeiture of seized property where a person has not been convicted of an offence under the act. Bill 6 had proposed to allow the Minister to apply for a judicial order requesting the forfeiture of seized cannabis, as well as "any other property" seized, where a person charged with an offence is not convicted. While we understand that there may be situations where forfeiture is appropriate, as when the property's owner is not known, we found this power overly broad. We were concerned about the potential for infringement on residents' civil liberties and noted that a similar provision in the Liquor Act is not as broad.
Motions 15 and 17: To amend Schedules A and B to create new sections addressing transitional rules for cannabis cultivation and smoking in rental properties and condominium corporations
This motion addresses transitional rules for existing leases on rental properties and existing condominium bylaws following cannabis legalization. Where a rental agreement or condominium bylaw addresses tobacco smoking, the same rules will apply to cannabis smoking. Additionally, cannabis cultivation will be permitted in rental properties where permitted under the rental agreement. If the rental agreement is silent on this matter, cultivation will be permitted unless the landlord notifies the tenant in writing that it is prohibited.
Motion 16: To amend subsection 8(3) of Schedule B to correct a drafting error
This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a drafting error. It ensures that the Cannabis Products Act is referenced correctly, using its full title.
Motion 18: To amend subsection 8(3) of Schedule B to correct a drafting error
This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a drafting error. It ensures that inspectors fulfilling their duties under the act may submit any lawfully collected sample of a substance for analysis.
Motion 19: To amend section 20 of Schedule B to establish regulation-making authority respecting restriction or prohibition of cannabis smoking areas adjacent to public places
This motion established authority for the Minister to consider the future development of rules for cannabis smoking in areas adjacent to public places, such as school grounds and business establishments.
Motion 20: To amend paragraph 13(3)(a) of Schedule C to correct a drafting error
This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to ensure that all references to "drinking and driving" offences in the Motor Vehicles Act would be identified as "alcohol and drug related" driving offences. Previously, one reference had been missed.
Motion 21: To amend subsection 1(4) of Bill 6 to address a drafting error in the bill's coming-into-force schedule
This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a technical transitional error. It ensures that the community engagement required before the Minister may designate a cannabis vendor will occur after the bill receives assent, but before cannabis is formally legalized.
Motion 22: To amend Bill 6 to establish a mandatory one-time review of territorial cannabis legislation
In rare instances, such as in the Official Languages Act, legislation requires the Legislative Assembly to review a statute on a regular basis. Past experience reveals that recurring reviews can be costly and time consuming and may not result in legislative change. However, we feel that there is value in this motion, which amended the bill to ensure that there will be a review of the territory's cannabis legislation after it has been in effect for a few years.
We stress that this does not preclude future reviews of the legislation created by Bill 6. As legislators, Members of the Legislative Assembly retain the right to review and reconsider existing legislation at their prerogative, provided it is done in accordance with the Rules of the Legislative Assembly.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the Member for Kam Lake. Mahsi.