|
BACK
TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORT BY THAT MAD SENATE COMMITTEE ON DRUGS
The Senate
Committee on Illegal Drugs released a report on September
4, 2002; that was even more insane than we had predicted.
The Committee did not even bother to recommend decriminalization
of marijuana, which would make possession no longer a serious
offence, but merely a minor one, much like a traffic infraction.
Instead, the Senate Report went all out and recommended full
legalization of the drug for those 16 years and older. Anyone
who thinks this report is an impartial analysis of the issue
must also believe in leprechauns and fairies! It is nothing
but a snow job, or a front to push for the legal and social
acceptance of this dangerous drug in Canada.
Questions
Concerning the Senate Committee Report
The
Committee
Even
before the report was made public, eyebrows were raised about
the Committee itself.
In the
first place, why, suddenly, did Conservative Senator Pierre
Nolan decide to request the establishment of the Senate Committee
which became a reality in April 2000? Although the Committee
is supposed to consist of nine senators, in fact only Chairman
Senator Nolan and his Liberal side kick, and Deputy Chairman,
Senator Colin Kenny, actually showed up for the Committee
hearings. Even with the well-earned reputation of senators
putting in only occasional appearances to collect their pay,
this lack of participation on the part of the Committee was
astonishing. In regard to Senator Kenny, it is bizarre that
he has been a key figure in the anti-tobacco campaign - especially
in regard to adolescents - yet, he brazenly recommends in
this report that 16-year-olds should be permitted access to
marijuana.
What
gives? What lies behind his enthusiasm for marijuana use in
Canada?
The
Witnesses
The
Senate report makes much of the fact that a total of 235 witnesses
testified before it. However, apart from members of various
police organizations, REAL Women, Focus on the Family, and
some drug treatment centres, the vast majority (80%) of witnesses
were in support of a liberal law on marijuana. These witnesses
included a representative from the New York based Lindesmith
Centre, funded by US billionaire George Soros, who is funding
a world-wide campaign for liberalized drug use. Also, drug
"experts" from Switzerland and the Netherlands (both
countries have very liberal drug laws) were invited to appear
before the Committee. No drug experts from Sweden were asked
to appear. The latter country has a tough and successful anti-drug
law resulting in the lowest drug use in all of Europe. Also,
representatives of marijuana Compassion Clubs, the Marijuana
Party of Canada, and representatives from the National Organization
for Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) appeared before the Committee
in droves. There were 87 "individuals" who also
appeared before the Committee - all pot users who naturally
believe that it is their God-given right to smoke marijuana.
Other witnesses included lawyer advocates for the liberalization
of drugs, such as Allan Young, an Osgoode Hall law professor,
who has brought a legal challenge to declare prohibition of
marijuana for medical use to be unconstitutional. (One can
only speculate as to who is funding his case.) Ottawa lawyer,
Eugene Oscapella, also testified before the Committee on behalf
of his own organization, Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy.
(One may well speculate over who is funding his organization.)
Finally, the witnesses included a wide assortment of university
professors, from Canada and abroad, all of whom purport to
have the answers to make a better world for mankind, which
includes the need to provide marijuana.
In short,
fewer than 20% of the witnesses invited to appear before the
Committee opposed the liberalization of the marijuana law.
This was hardly a balanced hearing.
Timing
of the Senate Report
Senators Nolin and Kenny heard the last witnesses on June
10, 2002. Yet, they somehow managed to produce a four-volume,
600-page report, researched, written, translated into our
two official languages, and printed and bound in fewer than
three months. It is obvious that, during the hearings, the
report was a work-in-progress with a pre-determined conclusion.
The hearings were only window dressing to give the appearance
of democratically based public consultations.
The
Committee Recommendations
In addition
to the recommendation that marijuana use be legalized for
those 16 years and older, the Committee produced some other
gems. These included a recommendation that an office, with
staff, be created, attached to the Privy Council. The head
would be called the National Advisor on Psychoacative Substances
and Dependency. The cost is estimated to be $15 million
annually. (Read: with an increased budget at regular intervals,
the cost will soon reach $30 million each year.)
The
first duty of this drug official, according to the recommendations,
is to call a meeting of the provinces, territories and municipalities
"to set goals and priorities" for drug use in Canada.
Another
recommendation is that the estimated 20,000 Canadians who
are charged annually with marijuana possession, and who do
not, therefore, "enjoy the same constitutional protections
of their rights as others," should be granted an amnesty
if convicted under either current or past legislation. The
report also recommends that marijuana should be available
without restriction for "medical" use, despite a
serious lack of any studies that prove smoking the drug has
any medical value. In this regard, the views of the Canadian
Medical Association, obviously alarmed by the Senate report,
published in a letter to The Globe and Mail on September
7, 2002, stated:
The
safety and long-term effects of marijuana use are not fully
understood. However, what we do know causes concern. We
therefore urge the government to first implement a comprehensive
national drug strategy before moving ahead with any changes
to marijuana's legal status.
Another
major recommendation is that Canadians should "temporarily
withdraw from all the UN Conventions and Treaties which prohibit
cannabis use until the international community accedes to
Canada's request to amend them." Now, why did we not
think of that? As if the 190 member nations comprising the
UN (most of which have ratified the conventions and treaties
on drugs), have got it all wrong, and await Canada's noble
leadership on the matter. The Senate report emphatically stated:
"Canada can, and indeed should, provide leadership on
drug policy." To satisfy whom, and to what end?
The
Liberal Government's Game Plan
The
Senate report is so extreme that even pro-marijuana newspapers
such as The Globe and Mail (Editorial, Sept. 7, 2002),
have backed away from the recommendations, as has the supposedly
more conservative National Post (Editorial, Sept. 7,
2002). Both publications are recommending a "compromise"
of only decriminalizing marijuana use so that the offence
of possession would be roughly on the same level as receiving
a traffic ticket. Without strong legal restrictions against
marijuana use, however, just watch its use instantly escalate.
The
House of Commons Committee chaired by feminist Liberal MP,
Paddy Tornsey (Burlington, Ontario), will table its report
in November. We can safely assume that this report will recommend,
at the very least, the decriminalization of marijuana. This
House of Commons report will be followed shortly thereafter
by the court decision on marijuana for medical use.
In effect,
the Canadian taxpayers have been set up for an orchestrated
one-two-three punch leading to the "reasonable"
conclusion that marijuana use should be decriminalized in
Canada.
These
developments will then present the perfect backdrop for Minister
of Justice, Martin Cauchon, to solemnly step forward and declare
that, based on a "thorough" (sic) investigation
by the two government committees and the decision of the Supreme
Court of Canada, he believes he has "no choice"
but to table legislation to decriminalize marijuana use in
Canada.
That
should make everyone happy - everyone but the public, that
is. The brazen Senate Committee, in its report, felt obliged
to acknowledge that the public was not totally onside on the
subject. It stated:
We
are aware, as much now as we were at the start of our work
that there is no-pro-established consensus in Canadian society
on public policy choices in the area of drugs.
The purpose
of the Senate report and that of the House of Commons Committee
on Drugs is to stifle debate and promote acceptance of the
proposed, outrageous changes in our drug laws. Who gains from
these changes? Certainly not Canadian society and especially
not our children.
Many
Canadians are considering which individuals and political
parties are going to benefit from these proposed changes.
We do know that it will not be the Alliance party, which is
on record as opposing these proposed changes on marijuana
use, but what about the other parties and individuals?
Please
write to the following, letting them know, loudly and clearly,
that, as taxpayers and Canadian citizens, we are on to the
game plan, and deeply resent the attempt to manipulate us
on the issue of drug use. Please write to:
The Rt.
Hon. Jean Chrétien, PC, MP
Prime Minister's Office
80 Wellington St., 2nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2
Tel. (613) 992-4211
Fax: (613) 941-6900
The Hon.
Ms. Anne McLellan, PC, MP
Minister of Health
Brooke Claxton Bldg.
Address Locator 0916 A
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9
Tel: (613) 957-0200
Fax: (613) 952-1154
Mr. Stephen
Harper, CA, MP
Alliance Party Leader
Centre Block, Room 409S
111 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Tel: (613) 996-9740
Fax: (613) 947-0310
Your
MP
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
BACK
TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
