Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Hay River South, that Bill 6, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act, be read for the second time. This bill enacts two new statutes relating to the legalization and regulation of cannabis, the Cannabis Products Act, and the Cannabis Smoking Control Act. The bill also amends the Motor Vehicles Act to provide for prohibitions and enforcement measures related to persons who operate motor vehicles while their ability to do so is impaired by alcohol or drugs or by a combination of both, and to ensure consistency with the proposed amendments, to the Criminal Code included in the Federal Bill, C-46, an Act to Amend the Criminal Code for Offenses Relating to Conveyances. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. The motion is in order. To the principle of the bill. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased to see this legislation before us today. It's been a long time coming. Since the election of the federal government in 2015, it's been very clear that the agenda of this new national government has been to legalize cannabis. It's something that Members on this side of the House have raised a number of times, both on the floor and behind closed doors, that this was an important issue of public policy that needed to be taken with the utmost seriousness by this government. It took a long time to get there, Mr. Speaker. It took a very long time, and finally consultations were held. Just the other day on the floor of this House, we heard that there were concerns around these consultations. The government has said that the consultations were as good as they could be in the short time made available. I continue to hold the position that the shortness of time was a decision of this government. The consultations could have taken place farther, and now we have a bill before us that addresses many of the key issues that this legislation needs delivered, but it is also silent or unclear on a lot of areas that need to be addressed.
I want to talk briefly about the economics of cannabis in this country. In 2017, about 4.9 million Canadians aged 15 to 64 spent an estimated $5.7 billion on cannabis for medical and non-medical purposes, the equivalent to around $1,200 per cannabis consumer. The majority of household spending on cannabis, over 90 per cent was for non-medical purposes. By comparison, in 2016, household purchases of alcohol, beer, wine, and other spirits were $22.3 billion, and household purchases of tobacco were $16 billion.
Household spending on cannabis has increased since 1961, which is the recent subject of a study that tracked cannabis spending from 1961 to 2017. Spending on cannabis rose an average of 6 per cent per year while domestic product grew an average of over 7 per cent.
Mr. Speaker, these results or these early assessments speak to a growing industry that has developed while this product was prohibited, while it was illegal in this country. The results when you look at the share of consumption amongst Canadians is quite alarming, when you think of this being an illegal drug. Forty-two per cent of Canadians will consume cannabis in their lifetime.
Amongst young people, the results were quite alarming. Around 43 per cent of young men and young women are using cannabis. We know now that cannabis has significant effects on developing brains. This system of prohibition simply isn't working, and yet at the same time it continues to be a key economic issue for our economy. We're at an interesting place in between two public policy objectives; one, to provide enhanced public safety and community wellness, and another, to address the economic opportunities that are inherent to cannabis.
I've been to many of the consultations. I've spoken to many Northerners, my constituents, and it's very clear that this is a divisive issue. With the high rates of substance abuse in the Northwest Territories, many Northerners do not want to see another narcotic made into a recreational substance. That decision is not in the hands of this government, but our government has an obligation to respond to that in a holistic and comprehensive way.
This legislation brings us closer to that point. I want to commend the government for the hard work they've done producing a very lengthy document. Many of the areas are addressed, in my opinion, adequately. The age of consumption is set at 19. This is a key step in fighting the continued illegal markets where cannabis thrives and it supplies organized crime. If we raise the age limit too far, we're going to be in a situation where bootlegging will continue, or where the black market will thrive.
Again, to the economics. This is something I've heard from many, many people, obviously not too loudly. People are less vocal when it's an illegal product, but there's a sense of entrepreneurism that is emerging as more and more people get used to the idea of legal cannabis. It is a sense that we see reflected around the country. Cannabis stocks soared in the early days of the announcement that legalization was going to come about. Many people are seeing newfound economic opportunities and entrepreneurialism as they approach this issue. I think that's a good thing, and we need to be a government that supports that. We need to support economic diversification and more business opportunities for Northerners. This is, again, not a brand new substance rolling into the market that nobody's heard of. This is something that Canadians have been using openly for a very, very long time.
When this legislation does not clearly address that issue, it leaves me with concerns. It is currently formulated that the Minister of Finance will have an exception power to give one-off deals with retail stores as they arise. I think it sends a signal that, although this government may be open for business for cannabis retail, it is not coming anytime soon. I think, and I think many Northerners share my opinion, that we need to embrace that opportunity right away. We can't leave the economic opportunities solely in the hands of government. We need to expand those opportunities to entrepreneurs, to the private sector, and allow them the opportunity to open their own retail outlets and to become experts in this soon to be recreational product.
There is going to be a huge need for public education. My colleague the honourable Member from Yellowknife Centre spoke to that earlier today, but part of that public education is also how to safely use a recreational product. That is not the public health concerns that we have around young people smoking. This is about adults safely using a recreational product. The best people to provide that information are those in private retail, people who have an expertise with products. People who have a stake in that market, and we need to be able to empower them and work with them in that community. My fear is, if we do not contemplate it in the legislation on day 1, we will be in a situation where southern Canada develops rules, regulations, and business models that swallow the market whole, and the North will not be able to compete fairly. It won't be able to compete at all.
I know there is some hesitancy from people looking at the existing systems of regulation around liquor and tobacco, and how that works, and we should replicate that model, but those models are old, and we have already heard criticisms around our model for liquor regulation and enforcement. I don't understand why the approach and those models are being reviewed. Why is the approach to use those models instead of developing something from the ground up that is going to support the economic opportunities that cannabis represents? That is one of the areas this legislation needs to improve upon, Mr. Speaker.
The legislation that controls the public use of cannabis, the workplace, all those issues, I'm glad that there's a framework, but there are still some unanswered questions. We are not sure who will have the authority to actually do the investigations. We are not sure how those inspections will work. Who those inspectors will be? Those are details that need to be clarified, and perhaps they can be clarified in regulations, but it is a concern when you are looking at the legislation that there may be those unanswered questions at this stage. The way forward documents and talking guides that the government has produced have not answered those questions yet. That is something we need to understand because we need to understand how this is going to be regulated, how it is going to be enforced on the ground.
The most important thing: even though I just spent a great deal of time talking about economic opportunities, the public policy objective of this legislation and of the changes to the Criminal Code are to keep people safe. It is to keep cannabis products out of the hands of kids, to starve organized crime of a narcotic that they have been exploiting for generations, and to end a system of prohibition that simply doesn't work.
I will just comment that, even though those things will be happening in many communities, there is still the option in this legislation for communities that don't want cannabis to make that choice. I think it is important to be sensitive to those communities who want to make those choices, and to empower them to make those choices, and I support that that's something this legislation will create.
Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, although I have deep reservations around portions of this legislation, it is a step in the right direction. It is a necessary step, and it's the accumulation of a great deal of work on the part of this government, so I will be supporting this bill, and I look forward to its review by both Standing Committee of Social Development, and Standing Committee of Government Operations, and the coming consultations on the bill itself. I do support this bill, and I thank the Minister of Justice for bringing it forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. To the principle of the bill. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I will keep my remarks very short. I would like to encourage the Minister to put together a comprehensive set of cost estimates for the implementation of this bill. That is something that this side of the House has yet to see. We don't know the cost of putting together this robust public communication that's been promised, additional enforcement, and so on, the predicted revenues. We don't even know what the predicted revenues are going to be as a result of this bill. For this side of the House and the public to truly understand the implications of the bill, I want to encourage our Cabinet colleagues to put together that information so that we can have an informed debate. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. To the principle of the bill. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In regards to the principle of the bill, I guess the first thing that comes to mind is: where are we going to sell this product? Right now, we are putting it into the liquor stores, but that gives the liquor stores a step up. Who is going to cover these costs to do the renovations? The liquor stores that I've talked to, they have concerns about that, which then has an impact on the businesses, as well. I am concerned that we haven't reached out to the businesses that have already done the work to get licensing to grow the product. We haven't talked to them, nor have we reached out to the people who have the right to sell medical marijuana right now, who have done the work and done the homework, and we haven't done that. My concern is in regard also to the black market. We have already put a price out of $10 per gram, but have we done a business case? Have we looked at what the actual costs are to make it? The black market, how are we going to stop the people from actually coming out and selling their product at a cheaper price? These are the concerns that I have heard, and I am looking forward to the consultation process that we are going to do. I would like to thank the Department of Justice for doing the work they did, but we need some work done on that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. To the principle of the bill. Minister of Justice.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is important to remember that the federal government only introduced the legislation changing the law last April. This omnibus bill is a very ambitious piece of legislation touching on several departments; Health, Justice, Infrastructure, and Finance, among others. There has been a large-scale public engagement, and I believe, with committee's help and input, we can craft a made-in-the-North response to this change in the law, so I look forward to hearing from standing committee. Thank you.
Masi. To the principle of the bill.
Question.
Question has been called. The motion is carried.
---Carried
