|
July 3, 2013
The clock starts ticking in September. If ten per cent of B.C. voters sign a
petition requesting a referendum on the decriminalization of marijuana, then a
vote on the referendum will take place next year.
It's no small task. There is only 90-day window to collect more than 400,000
signatures and an army of volunteers will be needed. With hard work and careful
planning, Dana Larsen is confident it can be done.
Larsen is leading the initiative, called Sensible BC. If the referendum is
passed, then according to the Referendum Act the government must introduce
legislation at the next sitting.
The draft Bill called the “Sensible Policing Act” is deceptively simple. It
would direct police not to pursue arrests for possession of small amounts of
marijuana. Like all provinces, B.C. controls the operations of it's police
although you wouldn't know it from looking at recent arrests.
While British Columbians want fewer marijuana arrests, police have been making
more. Arrests have doubled since 2005 even as 61 per cent of British Columbians
favour legalization of marijuana according to a 2012 Angus Reid poll.
The province, not the federal government, has the responsibility to direct the
priorities and spending of police under B.C.'s Police Act. It's hardly a radical
idea. Provinces have done just that in the past.
For example, in 2003, the government of B.C. joined seven other provinces in
directing police not to pursue arrests under the Long Gun Registry. B.C.'s
Attorney-General called the firearms registry is an “unmitigated disaster” and
directed police not to act unless extenuating circumstances demanded.
The prohibition of marijuana has been an unmitigated disaster; not because
marijuana is a harmless drug but because abuse of it, like abuse of all drugs,
is a matter of health not criminal law.
|
The provincial government realizes this even if the feds don't. The Harper
government tried to shut down Vancouver's safe injection site, InSite, and
lost in a Supreme Court ruling. Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote: "Insite
saves lives. Its benefits have been proven. There has been no discernible
negative impact on the public safety and health objectives of Canada during
its eight years of operation."
This federal government is more regressive than ones in the past not only
for their intention to build more jails in order to hold greater numbers
arrested for marijuana possession but for their failure to see drug abuse as
a medical, not legal, problem.
Federal opinions were more progressive in the 1970s when I helped establish
the Alberta Legalization of Cannabis Committee in Calgary.
At the time, it seemed to me that the legal consequences of marijuana arrest
were more damaging than the health risks from its use. Prime Minister
Trudeau agreed. In his letter to me (probably written by a staffer but his
intent nonetheless) said that his government wanted ". . . a proper balance
between concerns over potential health risks associated with cannabis and
concerns over the personal and social effects of penal laws at discouraging
its use (January 17,1978)."
Back when conservatives were progressive, Joe Clark wrote: "I do not feel
that Canadian law enforcement agencies should be burdened by this continuing
deluge of cases involving simple possession (May 17, 1978)."
Ed Broadbent wrote: "The New Democratic Party believes that Cannabis should
be taken out of the Criminal Code and placed under the Food and Drug Act
(May 5, 1977)."
I hope the future will be guided by the wisdom of the past.
David Charbonneau is the owner of Thompson Studio
He can be reached at
dcharbonneau13@shaw.ca
|
