Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Regulating Cannabis Use in Licensed Establishments

A regulatory framework for licensed establishments (e.g. "cannabis cafes" or "vape lounges") is outside the scope of the bill. This means that we could not amend the bill to explicitly allow such establishments immediately upon legalization. Still, we recognize that this subject is important to many residents.

Many witnesses, including the Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce, spoke of the economic benefits potentially associated with such establishments. Others, such as the Canadian Cancer Society, raised health concerns, believing "'cannabis cafes would be untenable if any worker were to be employed, [because] no worker should have to be exposed to any second-hand smoke, [and] especially to continuous high concentrations." A third point of view, from the Public Health Association, suggested that "allowance for the use of specified dwellings in communities where it could be a safe place for those 19 years and older to consume cannabis" could reduce harm by encouraging cannabis consumption outside the home. Similarly, Ms. Kim MacNearney wrote of her concern that highly restrictive rules for public consumption would "perpetuat[e] the stigma of 'cannabis use and users are bad and should not be within public view.'"

Recommendation 3 addressed this matter.

Workplace Use and Impairment

We heard many questions about cannabis use and impairment in the workplace, particularly where impairment could pose a risk to public safety (e.g. pilots, truck and bus drivers, et cetera). Witnesses also asked about rules for employers and tools for determining impairment.

In a public meeting on April 20, 2018, the Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission (WSCC) advised the committees that regulations and policy will be developed to address any changes arising from cannabis legalization. We trust that the WSCC will continue to provide all reasonable support to territorial employers, including legalization-specific training, materials, and other supports. We also note that employers are able to have their own policies related to drug use and/or impairment in the workplace, while the Mine Health and Safety Regulations already prohibit "impair[ment] by alcohol or drugs while at work."

Youth

Legal age

Bill 6 proposed that the minimum legal age for cannabis purchase, possession, and use will be 19 years, as it is for alcohol.

During our tour, we heard support for maintaining the proposed legal age, as well as raising it (for example, to 21 years or to 25 years) and lowering it (e.g. to 18 years). Students in Ulukhaktok and Tuktoyaktuk discussed a range of options, up to age 21. Other witnesses spoke to the impact of cannabis on brain development in children and youth, given that contemporary medical science suggests that parts of the brain continue to develop through age 25. We heard advocacy for a "harm-reduction" approach, although some citing this methodology felt that a higher legal age would not prevent consumption, but instead encourage illegal consumption, while others put forward an opposing view.

We also heard comparisons to the Northwest Territories' legal age for purchase and consumption of tobacco (18 years). The Canadian Cancer Society recommended "that the GNWT set the same legal for cannabis and tobacco [in its proposal, age 21], and ensure active enforcement of regulations prohibiting the sale of cannabis and tobacco products to minors is fully implemented." Students at Hay River's Diamond Jenness Secondary School made similar comparisons, noting that the GNWT's proposed legislation would incongruously allow northern teens to legally access cigarettes with "tonnes of chemicals" before they are able to legally access cannabis.

Our research shows that the decision to synchronize legal age for both alcohol and cannabis is consistent with those of all other Canadian jurisdictions except Manitoba's. Ongoing studies continue to assess the impacts of cannabis, which has generally increased in potency over the last 50 years, on the human brain. We encourage the GNWT, as both a cannabis regulator and healthcare provider, to monitor this research.

Purchase and Possession by Minors

Bill 6 proposed to prohibit minors from possessing any cannabis and to ticket for possession, with penalties consistent with those for youth possession of both alcohol and cigarettes. As set out in proposed federal legislation, minors will face criminal charges only if they are found to possess or distribute more than five grams.

Throughout our engagement, Northerners emphasized their belief that education at home, at school, and in the community is essential and that youth should not be criminalized. Students at Deninu School in Fort Resolution suggested that an appropriate enforcement response to youth possession under five grams would be the seizure of any cannabis and discussion with parents or guardians, not a monetary penalty.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the Member for Sahtu. Mahsi.

Masi. Member for Sahtu.

Other Issues

Community Control

The territorial plebiscite regime enables community control of alcohol (e.g. restrictions or prohibitions). Bill 6 proposed a similar model for cannabis. Many witnesses asked questions about plebiscites, when they would occur, how they would be organized, and were generally supportive of community control. For some, however, "community control" meant coordinating plebiscites and any subsequent restrictions, while for others this meant local options for retail and production, as we have discussed.

Some witnesses also questioned the overall reasonableness of the plebiscite system, suggesting that, if cannabis is legalized throughout Canada, then each Canadian has a right to consume it.

Although witnesses did not always agree, personal and community autonomy were consistent themes. In Deline, Mr. Morris Neyelle said, "We have to work together to deal with this issue. Marijuana will be with us until the end of the world. It is up to the community to decide... how to deal with it." Ms. Nora Wedzin of Behchoko added this advice: "Don't create what happened with alcohol. Don't impose on [the] community. Listen first."

Notably, the bill would prohibit plebiscites in any community where a cannabis store already operates. This means that communities face a potentially narrow window to exercise plebiscite options, as highlighted in a written submission from the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. It is critical that these timelines be communicated clearly to the public and that all communities be given reasonable opportunity to pursue a plebiscite if they so desire.

Motions 5, 6, 9, and 21 addressed this matter.

Jurisdiction

We heard questions about the regulation of cannabis on reserves and in communities with provisions for self-government:

"First Nations communities and Indigenous governments must have more input into how cannabis laws will be governed within their communities. They must have greater autonomy with how they want to go about legalization, especially in terms of taxation (they should get a cut of the profit, along with the territorial and federal governments), ownership of cannabis retail outlets, and the pricing of all cannabis products in stores that would exist within their communities."

Although these questions are outside of the scope of Bill 6 and are to be debated between negotiating parties, we recognize that they are very important to Indigenous governments. We understand that the territorial government is developing a negotiating mandate on cannabis, and we expect that as legalization proceeds, the GNWT will work more openly and directly with its inter-governmental partners. Members look forward to regular updates as the GNWT's work proceeds on these matters.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report to the Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Masi. Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Mandatory Review of Legislation

Not since the prohibition of alcohol was lifted in the majority of Canadian provinces in the 1920s has the country seen an initiative like the national legalization of cannabis. During our public engagement, many people voiced concerns about the "unknowns" associated with legalization. We expect that the GNWT and its federal/provincial/territorial counterparts will encounter issues and circumstances not fully anticipated when cannabis legislation was drafted.

At public hearings in Behchoko, Inuvik, and Tuktoyaktuk, some witnesses emphasized the need to revisit cannabis legislation after communities have firsthand experience of the results. The point was made that the government must respond promptly to public needs after enacting laws of this magnitude.

Motion 22 addressed this matter.

What We Did

To complete our review of Bill 6, we considered all public submissions and reviewed national best practices and other jurisdictions' proposed cannabis frameworks. In response, we developed 11 motions to amend the bill and eight broader recommendations to the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Clause-by-Clause Review of Bill 6

The clause-by-clause review of Bill 6 was held on May 28, 2018, at the Legislative Assembly building in Yellowknife. The Committees moved 22 motions, including nine developed by the Department of Justice and two developed by the Member for Frame Lake.

Motion 1: To amend subsection 1(1) of Schedule A to define "consume"

The terms "consume," "smoke," and "use" are used throughout the bill, but the distinction between them may be unclear to the average reader. This motion provided clarity by establishing that "consume" includes, but is not exclusive to, both smoking and the consumption of cannabis products ("edibles").

Motion 2: To amend subsection 1(1) of Schedule A to delete the definition of "public place"

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to correct a drafting error by deleting the definition for "public place" under the proposed Cannabis Products Act. Because this term is not used in the act, a definition was unnecessary.

Motion 3: To amend section 5 of Schedule A to revise the retail model for cannabis sales in the Northwest Territories

This motion ensured that private retailers, other than those operating liquor stores through consignment with the Liquor Commission, may be designated as cannabis vendors. The motion proposed to require the Minister of Finance to designate a cannabis vendor if the vendor met prescribed criteria. It also proposed that although cannabis vendors may also be liquor retailers, liquor retailer status will not be required.

This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.

Motion 4: To amend section 5 of Schedule A to prohibit co-location of cannabis and alcohol

This motion provided that where a cannabis store will be located in the same building as a liquor store, the two establishments must be entirely separate, including separate exterior doors. This reflects what we heard from Northerners, as well as national best practices.

This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.

Motions 5 and 6: To amend subsection 6(1) of Schedule A to clarify rules for community consultation prior to designating a cannabis vendor

Bill 6 initially proposed that where no cannabis store operated in a community, the Minister of Finance would be required to ascertain a community's views before designating a cannabis vendor. This motion expanded that requirement to ensure such notice will be given at any time a new cannabis vendor is considered. It also established that where the potential vendor would be the community's first, the Minister would be required to give notice of plebiscite rules, ensuring that sufficient time is available to hold a plebiscite as needed.

Motion 7: To amend section 11 of Schedule A to clarify limits on household possession of cannabis

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to explicitly provide that the 30-gram possession limit does not apply to cannabis held in a person's private residence.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report to the Member for Frame Lake. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Frame Lake.

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.

Masi. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recommendation 1

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop a fully costed implementation plan for Bill 6, including multi-demographic public education, enforcement planning, and expected cannabis revenues; that this plan be returned to the committees for review prior to legalization day; and that the final plan be made available to the public.

Overall, we found that the GNWT did not adequately provide citizens of the Northwest Territories with information about the proposed framework for cannabis regulation, resulting in uncertainty for communities and citizens. This placed the committees in the unenviable position of serving as a source of public information on a government bill while it was under our review. Throughout our tour, residents asked about the impacts of cannabis legalization on our communities and our economy, on existing services, and on the social challenges we already face. We heard questions about enforcement responsibilities and training, public education, healthcare (including mental health and addiction counselling), guidelines for entrepreneurs and producers, and rules for plebiscites. We also heard clearly that residents want public education that targets not only youth, but also adults and elders. Legalization will affect all Northerners, and they deserve to be informed.

The implementation of cannabis legalization is a monumental task. An implementation plan, outlining such things as targeted communication initiatives (e.g. campaigns for children, youth, parents, elders, et cetera), timelines for vendor designation, enforcement training initiatives, follow-up community engagement, and inter-departmental and inter-agency collaboration, would provide a clear and accessible public roadmap. This is a natural next step in the GNWT's "way forward" for cannabis legalization.

Recommendation 2

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop curricula to deliver evidence-based health and safety education respecting both cannabis and alcohol through the territorial education system.

Residents of all ages emphasized the importance of education, and both the Public Health Association and the Nurses Association spoke to the importance of legislation and policy founded in principles of harm reduction. We are under no illusions: we know that Northerners of all ages currently use cannabis, and we feel strongly that multi-demographic public education is essential. However, we also know that, as elsewhere in Canada, young people comprise a significant portion of active users and that targeted education programming works. Consider the Don't Be a Butthead anti-tobacco campaign, which saw interactive educational modules delivered through territorial schools and which was praised during our tour. It is necessary that territorial health curricula reflect the realities of cannabis legalization and provide young people growing up under legalization with evidence-based information on cannabis and poly-substance use.

Recommendation 3

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories form an inter-departmental working group to prepare for the future regulation of cannabis-based products, including high-potency cannabis products, and licensed establishments for cannabis consumption.

With legalization, an illegal substance will become legal and available for recreational use. Accordingly, Northerners will be looking for safe, recreational places to consume cannabis, comparable to bars and lounges for alcohol. We also know that high-potency products are already available illicitly, while the legalization of edibles is expected within the next two years. The development of regulatory frameworks to address these matters will be a large task. Beginning this work now will help to mitigate operational challenges in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the honourable Member for Nahendeh. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Nahendeh.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank all of the Members who are reading the report at this moment.

Recommendation 4

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories form an inter-agency working group to address cannabis-related enforcement planning.

Enforcement responsibilities were a recurring topic of discussion during our tour. Members of the public, representatives of community governments, and enforcement officials themselves raised questions and concerns. An inter-agency working group, potentially including GNWT inspectors and environmental health officers, municipal enforcement, the RCMP, the Northwest Territories Association of Communities, and other parties as needed, could ensure that the new laws are clearly communicated. Such a working group could also encourage discussion and information-sharing, and provide additional support to communities with limited resources.

Recommendation 5

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories work with the Government of Canada and other government partners to resolve outstanding questions on record suspensions for offences related to cannabis possession.

We recognize that the federal government is responsible for administering record suspension, but we feel strongly that the territorial government must engage its federal counterparts on this matter.

Recommendation 6

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop economic development programs to support northern entrepreneurship related to cannabis sale and production.

The GNWT administers several strong and successful programs to support entrepreneurs and community economic development, including the Support for Entrepreneurs and Economic Development (SEED) policy. We heard repeatedly that Northerners are eager to pursue the economic benefits of legalization. Targeted programs addressing cannabis-specific planning and programming would help local businesses, and the territorial economy, to grow and thrive.

Recommendation 7

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories consider specific spending targets for the distribution of cannabis-related revenues aimed at public education, public awareness, and public health research related to cannabis use; and that the Liquor Commission report on cannabis sales in its annual report.

To address the revenue-related concerns we heard during our tour, we investigated options to amend Bill 6 to specify that cannabis revenue be targeted to specific expenditures in a manner similar to the disposition of territorial lottery revenue. However, the committees' legal counsel advised that an amendment of this nature would be out of bounds because it is the government's exclusive privilege to propose how to spend its revenues.

Nevertheless, we hear and support residents' calls for targeted investment by the GNWT in matters of public concern related to cannabis use. With this recommendation, we urge the GNWT to take action.

Recommendation 8

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories provide a comprehensive response to this report within 120 days.

Conclusion

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development thank everyone involved in the review of this bill, with particular thanks to those who provided their input and recommendations. All committee reports and public submissions are available online at the Legislative Assembly website: www.assembly.gov.nt.ca.

This concludes our review of Bill 6. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Kam Lake, that the Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation and Implementation Act, be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration.

The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed?

---Carried

The Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act is received and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 100(4) and to have the Committee Report 7-18(3): Report on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 100(4) to have the Committee Report 7-18(3) Report on the Review of Bill 6 be received by Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration.

---Unanimous consent granted

We have unanimous consent to have Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act received by this Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration.

Reports of standing and special committees. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Item 7, acknowledgements. Member for Nahendeh.

I would like to recognize John and Louise Moreau, who will be celebrating their 50^th wedding anniversary on June 8^th. They met at the Giant Mine dance in Yellowknife while both being employed at the Giant Mine. After being married 10 months, they moved to Fort Simpson, where they still reside today. They are strong pillars of the community. They have five children; Brenda, Becky, James, Barbara, and Clayton; and eight grandchildren, Sidonie, Malorey, Victoria, Shelton, Tonya, Ethan, Laine, and Naren; and two great-grandchildren, Lillian and Greyer. They are both role models for all of us. Marriage is a huge commitment. I would like to congratulate them for this huge milestone. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Acknowledgements. Colleagues, before we proceed onto oral questions, I will call for a short break. Masi.

---SHORT RECESS

Okay, Members. The next item on our list was item 8, oral questions, before we took a break. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. In March, the Minister promised to consult women of the NWT about the new direction she is setting the Status of Women Council by conducting a survey. Where can women find that survey and respond to it? Thank you.

Masi. Minister responsible for the Status of Women.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I did promise to do a survey regarding voices of women. At this point, we have not got that developed yet. I think it is okay to say that my last women's advisor actually decided to move back to her home community about that time, so I just hired a new woman, Elizabeth. I can't think of her last name at this point. So we will be reinstating that work.