44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 9, 2024 10:00AM
- May/9/24 11:19:28 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition said in his speech that the City of Montreal had voted in favour of decriminalizing drugs. If that is true, why does point (b) of the Conservative motion use the phrase “make...legal” instead? That is my first question.
My second question is as follows: Can the Leader of the Opposition explain to us, using neutral and objective language, the difference between legalization, decriminalization and diversion?
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:19:56 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is no real difference. It is just semantics for these extremists because they do not want to defend their record. Every time they introduce a measure that fails, they change its name. First they called it “safe supply”, and now they have changed it to “regulated supply”. They use the words “legalization” and “decriminalization” to make distinctions that do not exist in the real world. That is the reality.
In British Columbia, people were allowed to use methamphetamine, crack, heroin and other hard drugs in hospitals, public transit and children's parks. It was 100% legal. This is legalization, pure and simple, no matter what it is called.
The Bloc Québécois supports it because the Bloc and other lefties support all the radically ideological programs introduced by the government and the New Democrats.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:36:00 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, a bit earlier the leader of the Conservative Party refused to explain the difference between legalization and decriminalization. The latter does not allow people to consume drugs wherever they want. Rather, it ensures that people with a drug problem are not systematically dealt with by the prison system and can get the care they need. This all stems from the fact that drug dependency or addiction is a public health issue.
I would simply like to know—
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:36:53 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party leader refused to answer the question by one of my colleagues, who asked him to give us the definition for legalization as opposed to decriminalization. This is important in the debate we are currently having.
Decriminalization does not allow people to systematically consume drugs everywhere. It allows us to ensure, in cases substance abuse, that the person will not necessarily go to prison, but can receive adequate care. We consider drug addiction to be a public health issue.
My question for the member is simple: Does he consider drug addiction to be a public health issue?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:49:34 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the Conservative leader's response to one of my colleagues who was asking him to make the distinction between legalization, decriminalization and diversion. He said it was just semantics, that there was no real difference, that people just made up those distinctions depending on the context.
What does the minister think of the Conservative leader's ignorance?
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 1:20:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is because they believe in legalization. If they did not, they would have said that. If they did not, they would have said something about the applications on their desks from Toronto and Montreal.
People watching at home should know their ideological position on this. They want this to happen. The consensus is far, far gone from these Liberals. One used to not be able to smoke crack in a hospital or on a bus, or shoot up in a playground. That is a normal view. They are an extremist party that has brought this on to Canadians, and they are on the wrong side of history for it.
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 1:30:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this morning, I asked the leader of the official opposition if he could explain the difference between legalization, decriminalization and diversion. He answered, “There really is no difference. It is just semantics”.
I know that my colleague had an illustrious career in law. She is a trained lawyer. She even served as the parliamentary secretary to the justice minister.
Can she look into the camera and tell all of her bar association colleagues and others that she agrees with what the Leader of the Opposition said about how these three legal concepts all mean the same thing and how there is no real difference between them?
If not, can she explain to her leader what the difference is? That might come in handy for someone who wants to be prime minister.
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 3:41:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the situation is extremely serious, but today's motion paints a distorted and alarmist picture of it, and that is deplorable.
The facts matter when we are dealing with crisis situations. When MPs say that Toronto and Montreal want to legalize drugs, they are not being truthful.
I would like to give my colleague the opportunity to clarify her thoughts. Perhaps I can offer some guidance. What is the purpose of this motion? Does she really understand the difference between legalization, decriminalization and diversion? Does she agree that those three terms are very different?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 3:42:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think my colleague pointed out something that is really inconvenient for the Bloc Québécois, a party that seems to support the legalization of hard drugs in Canada.
The Conservative Party is very clear. We do not support the legalization of hard drugs, such as crack, heroin and morphine. We will continue to be clear about that.
I hope the Bloc Québécois will support our motion.
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 4:53:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is urging us to vote in favour of the Conservative motion. The problem is that the motion muddies the waters. Legalization is not decriminalization. Only Vancouver tried decriminalization. Toronto and Montreal have not done it, nor have they decided to do it. They are trying to set up diversion measures instead.
Here is the problem. My colleague may not be an expert, but he should at least be able to define these three concepts, these three tools, so that everyone understands what is happening and what measures are being implemented. I see why my colleague cannot do that: Even his own leader cannot do it. They member's colleague may well be a doctor, but that does not give the member the authority to say that his colleague's comments were accurate when they were not. That is my comment.
Is my colleague saying that Montreal wants to legalize hard drugs? Is that what he is saying?
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
