I will defer to the Member opposite. I will speak to it, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Bill 6, as it is currently drafted, provides for a secure retail regime that is ready to roll out across the territory on legalization day. If this motion was to be passed, most of the present liquor stores would have a struggle getting ready in time to begin operations when legalization occurs.
There would be engineering requirements, building permits, fire and building-code considerations, and a lot of money directed toward renovations, all during the very busy summer construction season. It certainly brings into question whether stores would be prepared to invest in hiring additional staff for separate areas and to undertake extensive restructuring of their buildings, especially given that it is anticipated that other cannabis vendors will be designated in the future.
We understand the concerns that exist around co-location of alcohol and cannabis and acknowledge that these are legitimate, but it is not expected that requiring a separate entrance would be the most effective way of addressing those concerns. Walking out of one door and into another just steps away is not much of a deterrent. Efforts would be better spent on increasing education around the risks of consuming alcohol and cannabis simultaneously, and it is planned that public information on this issue will be available at all retail locations.
Individuals who may have alcohol addiction issues and who wish to purchase cannabis without having to enter a liquor store will have the option of ordering cannabis through the mail or growing their own at home. It should also be noted that it is anticipated that vendors other than liquor stores will be designated in the future, providing yet another option.
We are committed to having a safe and secure retail regime in place by the time legalization occurs. We believe that, when considered alongside the options to legally obtain cannabis outside of liquor stores provided for in the legislation, along with planned publication around the risks, the retail regime is a reasonable approach.
I spoke earlier of the information we obtained in the report, "what we heard." There were several questions asked, "Do you favour sales controlled by a GNWT agency or more open system?" As I mentioned earlier, it was 563 to 528, with 563 saying a GNWT agency, such as the Liquor Commission, as opposed to an open system.
Among the retail model suggestions, there were many. I may have said earlier there was a majority in favour of the liquor retail model. I see when I'm looking at the stats, actually, it was by far the largest number, 419, and there were a variety of other possibilities, such as the tobacco model and pharmacy health centres. Our plans to initially sell through the liquor store, as I say, are reasonable. There may be other options in the future, and for these reasons, I and the Cabinet will not be supporting the Member's motion. Thank you.