Skip to main content

How Cindy Lamoureux and the Manitoba Liberals fought against Pallister's trap for 18 year olds - high fines and imprisonment when they possess or consume cannabis

Bill 11, the THE SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE RETAILING OF CANNABIS ACT (LIQUOR AND GAMING CONTROL ACT AND MANITOBA LIQUOR AND LOTTERIES CORPORATION ACT AMENDED) passed third reading in the Manitoba Legislature on May 31, and received Royal Assent yesterday, Monday June 4.   The Liquor and Gaming Control Act will now include provisions such that a young person (under age 19 years old) is prohibited from possessing or consuming cannabis.  When a young person is age 18 they can be subject to a fine of up to $100,000 or imprisonment of up to one year for possessing or consuming cannabis.  For those who are under 18 years of age, they will be dealt with under the provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act so that severe fines and imprisonment are unlikely.   For those who are 18 years of age and have not yet reached their 19th birthday, they are subject to a fine of up to $100,000 or imprisonment of up to one year for possessing or consuming cannabis.  The size of the fine and the length of imprisonment are unduly harsh for an 18 year old, particularly when at age 19 it will be legal to possess or consume cannabis.  Cindy Lamoureux, Liberal MLA for Burrows, supported by our Liberal caucus, spoke up in the Manitoba Legislature to address and change the terms of Bill 11.   As part of this effort whe brought in an amendment to eliminate the Pallister trap and the unduly harsh punishments.  The Pallister government did not listen and so now 18 years olds will be caught in the Pallister government's trap and can be subject to very high fines or imprisonment for possessing or using cannabis.  It is important for all 18 years olds to know the potential severity of the Pallister trap for 18 year olds in Manitoba - the imposition of very high fines and imprisonment for possessing or consuming cannabis.   These penalties will come into force on a day yet to be determined, when the act is proclaimed.


The relevant provisions of the new Liquor and Gaming Control Act are:


"young person" means a person under the age of 19 years. (« jeune »)


No providing cannabis to young persons 101.17      A person must not give, sell or otherwise supply cannabis to a young person.
No possession or consumption by young persons 101.18      A young person must not possess or consume cannabis.


148         A person is guilty of an offence under this Act who
(a) contravenes a provision of this Act; or
(b) knowingly makes a false statement in an application for a licence, permit or approval or in any record, return or report required under this Act.
Penalties 149(1)      A person who is guilty of an offence is liable on summary conviction
(a) in the case of an individual, to a fine of not more than $100,000, imprisonment for up to one year, or both;

It is important to note that Cindy Lamoureux was not the only person who spoke with concern about the Pallistser trap for 18 year olds.  Manitoba's Children's Advocate said at Committee Stage:
      "The concern is that Bill 11 is creating an increased opportunity for criminalization of young persons 18 and under by including an outright prohibition on possession and consumption of cannabis. This concern is exasperated by the fact that Bill 11 and the act it amends, The Liquor and Gaming Control Act, do not set out specific penalties for young persons or minors who are found to be in violation of prohibitions set out in the act.
      Bill 11 has increased the penalties for violation of the act by removing the individuals, will be prosecuted on summary convictions, increasing the   maximum fine to $100,000 and maximum imprisonment for one year. Wording in Bill C-45 makes it discretionary on whether youth will be liable on an indictable or summary conviction for cannabis-related offences. Due to the varying levels of disposition associated with these types of convictions, young persons will require a clear understanding of when their possession of cannabis will be subject to criminal sanctions.
      The CCCYA supported the position that steps  should be taken to avoid criminalization of youth by allowing for non-criminal sanctions such as confiscation and ticketing. While it's perfectly reasonable to identify that only those persons 19 and older will be allowed to purchase cannabis, it needs  to be clearly identified how Manitoba law enforcement agencies will be enforcing possession of cannabis for those 18 and under. The federal government has identified the following objectives for cannabis legislation: restricting youth access to cannabis, protecting young people from the promotion or enticements to use cannabis, protecting public health and reducing the burden on the criminal justice system. With these objectives in mind, it becomes unclear why legislation would criminalize youth for consuming or being in possession of cannabis.
      Bill 11 also states that a person must not give or sell, otherwise supply cannabis to a young person, and Bill C-45 has created new criminal offences for adults who supply cannabis to minors.
      Law enforcement efforts should focus on who is supplying cannabis to children and youth and should not limit youth criminalization–and should limit youth criminalization through confiscation and by providing education and resources to youth who violate the cannabis prohibitions.
      Impact on indigenous youth and communities: Indigenous overrepresentation in the criminal justice  system is a recognized concern in Manitoba for both adult and youth populations. Without clear regulations on how Bill 11's prohibition of youth possession in cannabis will be applied, there are  concerns about how indigenous youth may be subject to increased criminalization over their non‑indigenous peers. Inequitable access to diversion programs, support programs, mental health and addiction services will influence the potential for indigenous youth to be criminalized at a higher rate for cannabis possession. Additionally, mitigating the mental health risk factors of cannabis use in youth will be compounded within indigenous communities, as there are recognized disparities in access to needed services. Without concrete action to address these disparities, indigenous communities may raise legitimate claims to violation of their Charter rights."

Daphne Penrose further stated in answer to a question:

Again, I am concerned about the prohibition piece because the data shows that children–not children, but youth are in fact engaging in the use of cannabis and having any cannabis on them at all up to the age of 19 is a criminal offence and when you are 18 and you get a possession charge, it is very different than when you are 16 years old and you get a possession charge, so–and that can follow you through your life in–you know, your friend is 19 in one day and they can have a number of grams on you, but you're 18, 11 months and two weeks and you're going to possibly get a criminal record, and so that disparity, I believe, needs to be addressed, and certainly we don't want to see more criminalization for children and youth and young people in the province.

Mr. Ariel Glinter also pointed out the problem at Committee, saying:  "under Bill 11, if that 19-year-old shares legally purchased cannabis with the 18-year-old in his or her own home, they are now both criminals and subject to criminal prosecution"






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparison between Manitoba and South Dakota shows dramatic impact of Physical Distancing

Manitoba implemented physical distancing measures in mid-March.  South Dakota has still not made physical distancing mandatory.   The result is a dramatic difference in the incidence of covid-19 viral infections between the two jurisdictions.   This graph shows the number of people with Covid-19 infections from March 27 to April 14.  Manitoba ( red line )  started leveling off about April 4 and has seen only a small increase in Covid-19 infections since then.   South Dakota ( blue line )   has seen a dramatic increase in Covid-19 infections since April 4.  Those who are skeptical of the impact of physical distancing in Manitoba should look at this graph! Data are from the Johns Hopkins daily tabulations

Karen Keppler 1953 - 2020

  Karen was an incredible person who helped so many people. She had a heart of gold. Back in 1994 to 1997 we worked closely together to help communities all over Manitoba get connected to the internet. In the years since she has done amazing things.   She has served as Chair of the Winnipeg Library Foundation and helped with raising money for the expansion of the Millenium Library.    She helped many people to get new opportunities through the Selkirk and District Learning Centre and through her activities at the University of Winnipeg and the Herzing College.   She was an entrepreneur who helped many people move forward and start successful businesses.  Karen was very concerned about her community.  In she was   the Manitoba Liberal Party candidate in Sekirk constituency.   When the COVID pandemic came, Karen was really helpful in an effort to get computers for kids in need so that they could learn at home. Even recently when I was working to understand lead pollution and lead effects

PCs hiding availability of volunteering benefits from EIA Recipients

More than I month ago, I was approached by Tara St. Laurent.  Because of her disability she is unable to work and is on EIA.  But she loves volunteering when she can with the Winnipeg Human Society.  When the Covid-19 pandemic hit and Manitoba went into lockdown, she was no longer able to volunteer as before.  She missed the $100 benefit which was critical for her to be able to purchase her food to eat.  She asked me if there was a possibility of seeing if she could still get the benefit.  I wrote a letter to Heather Stefanson the Minister of Families to make this request and she said yes.  However, actually getting the benefit took some time, and a direct intervention with Tara's worker to ensure she got the benefit, which she is now getting.  I had expected that Minister Stefanson would notify other EIA recipients who have been volunteering that they are eligible for the benefit.  Sadly, this did not happen, so the availability of this benefit has been largely unknown.   When I