Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also travelled with the Members who travelled in the southern group. It was a very eye-opening experience, and we learned a lot.
This is a monumental undertaking, and I think that that really hit me as we were going to the communities. You only lift a prohibition on a substance less than once in a generation. I always like to strive for excellence in everything we do here, but with this being so important, it was very important to me that we get it right. Unfortunately, it looks like, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, "You legalize cannabis with the legislation you have, not the legislation you want." I think we could have done a much better job with this, and that was really borne out by our community visits.
A lot of what we heard wasn't contemplated by the legislation that was given to us. There was a strong desire in the communities for different methods of purchasing and selling cannabis that this bill just doesn't even consider and doesn't have the framework to undertake. There was a desire for licensed premises that this bill doesn't have the framework to undertake. If the department had gone out and done some more consultation the way the committee did, I think we could have gotten a much better bill, and this is something that we can use to learn in the future.
The highlights of the tour, I think, what I saw the most of was a desire for education. From the youth to the elders, people wanted to be educated about cannabis and its effects. I think, as other Members have commented, with it being legal now, we will be able to get some better education out there. When it's an illegal substance, I think the message is abstinence. "You abstain from this." I think, now that it is legal, there will be more of a focus on getting legitimate information out from a harm reduction perspective.
Education was one of the highlights. The other one was the desire to use this opportunity to create a legitimate economy, especially in places where there is not much of an economy. We heard that especially from young people, and that is really what hit me. There are young people in these communities who want to stay in the community and want some sort of a reason to stay, economically. Like I said, the legislation doesn't contemplate that.
This also highlighted to me some existing inadequacies of our system, especially in terms of mental healthcare and addictions treatment. I do appreciate what the government does when it comes to addictions treatment. One of the committees toured the treatment facilities in the south that the GNWT has contracts with, and I think they are fantastic and they do a great job, but there still is a desire for northern culturally-appropriate treatment options.
People were very concerned about abusing cannabis and abusing alcohol, and they are often lumped together, but I think that the issue isn't treating the addiction. The way I see it is: why do people feel like they need to get high or get drunk? Why do people need to feel like they need to get out of their head? There is something underlying that. Drugs aren't the problem; they are a symptom of a problem. In every community we went to, there was a sense that treating that underlying problem isn't easily done, because there aren't the resources for it.
I hope that this isn't just legalized and forgotten about. I hope that we remember that and use it as a chance to really put a focus on mental health. We talk a lot about infrastructure, but we have to focus on our human infrastructure as well, I think. Those are my takeaways from it, and I just wanted to make those points before we get into the details. Thank you, Mr. Chair.