紧急行动

请尽快填写上议院修改C45法案“调查问卷”

 上议院将于6月7日对委员会就C45大麻法案提出的修改建議进行三读。上议院各小組日前已完成研究,2018年7月大麻合法化关注組根据会议所讨論,提出7个核心问题,邀公众表达意见。如果上议院通過对C45法案作修改,法案將发回下议院再度辩论,到時或未能于7月前完成立法。 问卷到6月4日截止,6月5日会把结果呈上议会。此次全国性民調,冀有过万人填写,请大家積極参与,广 传家人及群組。 请按此处问卷链接: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Bill-C45 所有问题建议填YES!


第八项是一个开放问题,可以写上“I do not support C-45.” 

请粘贴复制此信至问卷调查第8项

Dear Senators,
I understand that a vote on Bill C-45 is forthcoming.  


I provide the attached document as evidence that each of you have been made fully aware of the risks and harms.

This Notice of Liability Memo and attached Affidavit of Harms gives formal notification to all addressees that they are morally, if not legally, liable in cases of harm caused by making toxic marijuana products legally available, or knowingly withholding accurate information about the multiple risks of hemp/marijuanaproducts to the Canadian consumer. 

This memo further gives notice that those elected, or appointed, as representatives of the people of Canada, by voting affirmatively for Bill C45, do so with the knowledge that they are breaching international treaties, conventions and law. They do so also with the knowledge that Canadian law enforcement have declared that they are not ready for implementation of marijuanalegalization, and as they will not be ready to protect the lives of Canadians, there may arise grounds for a Charter of Rights challenge as all Canadian citizens are afforded the right to security of self.

The attached affidavit cites statements made by Health Canada that are grounded in scientific evidence that documents many harms caused by smoking or ingesting marijuana.

As a very concerned citizen I implore you to do the right thing and oppose Bill C-45.  This legislation is extremely problematic and we are ill-prepared to deal with the fallout.

Respectfully,

在第8条中可以附上“责任说明备忘” Notice of Liability Memo

 To Canadian Parliamentarians, Canada Senators and  The Marijuana Industry. 


This Notice of Liability Memo and attached Affidavit of Harms give formal notification to all addressees that they are morally, if not legally liable in cases of harm caused by making toxic marijuana products legally available, or knowingly withholding accurate information about the multiple risks of hemp/marijuana products to the Canadian consumer. This memo further gives notice that those elected or appointed as representatives of the people of Canada, by voting affirmatively for Bill C45, do so with the knowledge that they are breaching international treaties, conventions and law. They do so also with the knowledge that Canadian law enforcement have declared that they are not ready for implementation of marijuana legalization, and as they will not be ready to protect the lives of Canadians, there may arise grounds for a Charter challenge as all Canadian citizens are afforded the right to security of self. 

Scientific researchers and health organizations raise serious questions about the safety of ingesting even small amounts of cannabinoids. Adverse effects include risk of harm to the cardio-vascular system, respiratory tract, immune system, reproductive and endocrine systems, gastrointestinal system and the liver, hyperemesis, cognition, psychomotor performance, psychiatric effects including depression, as well as acts of suicide, anxiety and bipolar disorder; schizophrenia and psychosis, including acts of violence; a-motivational syndrome; and addiction. The scientific literature also warns of teratogenicity (causing birth deformities) and epigenetic damage (affecting genetic development) and clearly establishes the need for further study. The attached affidavit cites statements made by Health Canada that are grounded in scientific evidence that documents many harms caused by smoking or ingesting marijuana.  

Putting innocent citizens in “harm’s way” can be a costly bureaucratic mistake, as evidenced by the 2015 Canadian government’s $168 million payout to victims of exposure to thalidomide. In 1961 thalidomide was allowed by the Canada government to be used to treat morning sickness in pregnant women but it caused catastrophic birth defects and death. The USA heeded the warnings and did not make the same terrible mistake. 

It would be instructive to reflect on "big tobacco" and their multi-billion-dollar liability in cases of misinformed sick and dead tobacco cigarette smokers. Litigants won lawsuits for harm done by smoking cigarettes even when it was the user’s own choice to obtain and smoke tobacco. In Minnesota during the 1930's and up to the 1970's tobacco cigarettes were given to generally healthy "juvenile delinquents' incarcerated in a facility run by the state.  One of the juveniles, now an adult, who received the state's tobacco cigarettes, sued the state for addicting him. He won.
 

The marijuana industry, in making public, unsubstantiated claims of marijuana safety, is placing itself in the same position, in terms of liability, as the tobacco companies.
In 1954, the tobacco industry published a statement that came to be known during Minnesota's tobacco trial as the "Frank Statement." Tobacco companies then formed an industry group for the purposes of deceiving and confusing the public.
 

In the Frank Statement, tobacco industry spokesmen asserted that experiments linking smoking with lung cancer were "inconclusive," and that there was no proof that cigarette smoking was one of the causes of lung cancer. They stated, "We believe the products we make are not injurious to health." Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick instructed the Minnesota jurors: "Jurors should assume in their deliberations that tobacco companies assumed a "special duty" by publishing the ad (Frank Statement), and that jurors will have to determine whether the industry fulfilled that duty." The verdict ruled against the tobacco industry.

Effective June 19, 2009, marijuana smoke was added to the California Prop 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer. The Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC) of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) “determined that marijuana smoke was clearly shown, through scientifically valid testing according to generally accepted principles, to cause cancer.”

Products liability and its application to marijuana businesses is a topic that was not discussed in the Senate committee hearings. Proposition 65, requires the State to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other types of reproductive harm. Proposition 65 requires businesses to provide their customers with notice of these cancerous causing chemicals when present in consumer products and provides for both a public and private right of action. On May 23, the Canadian Senate Social Affairs Committee heard testimony that marijuana is not carcinogenic.
 

The similarities between the tactics of "Big Tobacco" and the "Cannabis Trade Alliance of Canada" and individual marijuana producers would seem to demand very close scrutiny. 

The International Narcotics Control Board Report for 2017 reads: “Bill C-45, introduced by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada on 13 April 2017, would permit the non-medical use of cannabis. If the bill is enacted, adults aged 18 years or older will legally be allowed to possess up to 30 grams of dried cannabis or an equivalent amount in non-dried form. It will also become legal to grow a maximum of four cannabis plants, simultaneously for personal use, buy cannabis from licensed retailers, and produce edible cannabis products. The Board wishes to reiterate that article 4 (c) of the 1961 Convention restricts the use of controlled narcotic drugs to medical and scientific purposes and that legislative measures providing for non-medical use are in contravention of that Convention....

The situation pertaining to cannabis cultivation and trafficking in North America continues to be in flux owing to the widening scope of personal non-medical use schemes in force in certain constituent states of the United States. The decriminalization of cannabis has apparently led organized criminal groups to focus on manufacturing and trafficking other illegal drugs, such as heroin. This could explain why, for example, Canada saw a 32 per cent increase from 2015 to 2016 in criminal incidents involving heroin possession….The Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse issued “Lower-risk cannabis use guidelines” in 2017. The document is a health education and prevention tool that acknowledges that cannabis use carries both immediate and long-term health risks.”

https://www.incb.org/documents/Publications/AnnualReports/AR2017/Annual_Report_chapters/Chapter_3_Americas_2017.pdf

Upon receipt of this Memo and Affidavit, the addressees can no longer say they are ignorant or unaware that promoting and/or distributing marijuana cigarettes for recreational purposes is an endangerment to citizens. Receipt of this Memo and Affidavit removes from the addressees any claim of ignorance as a defense in potential, future litigation. 

Pamela McColl www.cleartheairnow.org

AFFIDAVIT May 27, 2018

I, Pamela McColl, wish to inform agencies and individuals of known and potential harm done/caused by the use of marijuana (especially marijuana cigarettes) and of the acknowledgement of the risk of harm as cited by Health Canada.  

Marijuana is a complex, unstable mixture of over four hundred chemicals that, when smoked, produces over two thousand chemicals.  Among those two thousand chemicals are many pollutants and cancer-causing substances.  Some cannabinoids are psychoactive, all are bioactive, and all may remain in the body's fatty tissues for long periods of times with unknown consequences. Marijuana smoke contains carcinogenic (cancer-causing) substances such as benzo(a)pyrene, benz(a)anthracene, and benzene in higher concentrations than are present in tobacco smoke.  The mechanism by which benzo(a)pyrene causes cancer in smokers was demonstrated scientifically by Denissenko MF et al. Science 274:430-432, 1996. 

Health Canada Consumer Information on Cannabis reads as follows: “The courts in Canada have ruled that the federal government must provide reasonable access to a legal source of marijuana for medical purposes.”.... “Cannabis is not an approved therapeutic product and the provision of this information should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes, or of marijuana generally, by Health Canada.” 

“Serious Warnings and Precautions: Cannabis (marihuana, marijuana) contains hundreds of substances, some of which can affect the proper functioning of the brain and central nervous system.”….The use of this product involves risks to health, some of which may not be known or fully understood. Studies supporting the safety and efficacy of cannabis for therapeutic purposes are limited and do not meet the standard required by the Food and Drug Regulations for marketed drugs in Canada.”

Health Canada – “When the product should not be used: Cannabis should not be used if you:-are under the age of 25 -are allergic to any cannabinoid or to smoke-have serious liver, kidney, heart or lung disease -have a personal or family history of serious mental disorders such as schizophrenia, psychosis, depression, or bipolar disorder-are pregnant, are planning to get pregnant, or are breast-feeding -are a man who wishes to start a family-have a history of alcohol or drug abuse or substance dependence Talk to your health care practitioner if you have any of these conditions. There may be other conditions where this product should not be used, but which are unknown due to limited scientific information.....Cannabis is not an approved therapeutic product and the provision of this information should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the use of this product, or cannabis generally, by Health Canada.” 

Prepared by Health Canada Date of latest version: February 2013, accessed May 2018. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medical-use-marijuana/information-medical-practitioners/information-health-care-professionals-cannabis-marihuana-marijuana-cannabinoids.html

See also: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medical-use-marijuana/information-medical-practitioners/information-health-care-professionals-cannabis-marihuana-marijuana-cannabinoids.html

A report published by survey company RIWI Corp. (RIWI.com) can be found at: https://riwi.com/case-study/measuringcanadians-awareness-of-marijuanas-health-effects-may-2018

The report measures Canadians’ awareness of marijuana’s health effects as determined by Health Canada and published on Health Canada’s website. RIWI data indicates: 1. More than 40% of those under age 25 are unaware that marijuana impacts safe driving. Further, 21% of respondents are not aware that marijuana can negatively impact one’s ability to drive safely. Health Canada: “Using cannabis can impair your concentration, your ability to make decisions, and your reaction time and coordination. This can affect your motor skills, including your ability to drive.” 2. One in five women aged 25-34 believes marijuana is safe during pregnancy, while trying to get pregnant, or breastfeeding. • RIWI: “For women of prime childbearing age (25-34), roughly one in five believe smoking marijuana is safe during pregnancy, planning to get pregnant, and breastfeeding.” • Health Canada: “Marijuana should not be used if you are pregnant, are planning to get pregnant, or are breastfeeding. … Long-term use may negatively impact the behavioural and cognitive development of children born to mothers who used cannabis during pregnancy.” 3. One in three Canadians do not think that marijuana is addictive. • Health Canada: “Long term use may result in psychological dependence (addiction).” 4. One in three Canadians believe marijuana aids mental health. • Health Canada: “Long term use may increase the risk of triggering or aggravating psychiatric and/or mood disorders (schizophrenia, psychosis, anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder).” 5. One in two males were unaware that marijuana could harm a man’s fertility • “Marijuana should not be used if you are a man who wishes to start a family.” ClearTheAirNow.org, a coalition of concerned Canadians commissioned the survey. 

Affiant is willing to provide further sources of information about the toxicity of marijuana.

Pamela McColl www.cleartheairnow.org 

家长气得胃疼肝疼:亲历C-45大麻合法化法案说明会

  • 大麻会,刚刚结束。被气的胃口疼。那个Richmond hill - Oak Ridge - Aurora 的联邦议员 Leona Alleslev来找我,给我解释这个大麻法如何如何的正确。我实在听不下去了。我最后告诉“我现在清晰的告诉你,从今天起,我的重要目标就是让你丫2019年从这个区滚蛋。”一会儿再谈细节吧。气的胃疼。

  • 在土豆和韦婆子的世界,我们小屁民最需要的是有个好的肝功能,随便参加个会,就伤肝儿。

  • 前几天刚刚参加了一个安省韦婆子搞的phobia 会,虽然当时很愤怒,但是我今天觉得应该庆幸,至少在那个phobia 会,我们持不同意见的人还是有机会被带到另一个屋子里表达抗议的。

  • 今天我又参加了自由党议员组织的大麻会,嗯,连抗议的机会都没有。在土豆和韦婆子的世界,屁民正经需要有个好的肝功能,每次开会都很伤肝儿。我在国内,在加拿大,年龄活了一大把,也经历了大大小小的事,但是我还是高估了我自己,今天才明白我还是太年轻,眼界太窄,从今天才领教什么是脸皮厚。千言万语慢慢的写,总之,这帮人不能再当选了,他们必须滚出政坛。否则,有一天你会发现,我们汉字里的“对”和“正确”都要倒过来写。

  • 4月28日下午,在Richmond Green High School 由现任国会自由党议员Leona Alleslev (她是Aurora- Oak Ridge - Richmond Hill 选区的议员)主持召开了一个大麻说明会。邀请了Bill Blair 他也是现任自由党国会议员,曾经是多伦多警察总长,家里生意参与大麻经营,他是大麻合法化C45的主要推手之一。同时Richmond Hill的市长和省级自由党议员也出席了会议。

  • 会议开场,这个女议员Leona就直接说,我们今天不讨论大麻should be legalized or not ,我们只讨论大麻为什么要合法,我们要居民充分的informed。刚刚开场,我就怒,发,冲,冠.....了。我这是来错地方了,我打算要讨论的问题,是完全不需要讨论的。强压住站起来直接离场的冲动。我,忍... ...很... ...内... ...伤... ... 

  • Leona 说,这个C45大麻合法化的法案的目标是“keep drug away from youth”。然后接下来的所有法案内容,没有一条跟这个这个目标是相符的。不仅不相符,实际情况是,完全的南辕北辙,风马牛不相及。我们华人所崇尚的“历经风雨,但是不负初心”在这里算个笑话。这个C45大麻法案是打着保护孩子的大旗,所有的措施全是下的猛药。初心只是一块遮羞布。她说,“在过去的30年里,15岁的孩子抽大麻的人数在加速上涨,加拿大是top2的位置。” 我自己想,如果开了政府的大麻店,15岁的孩子抽大麻的人数就会少了吗?有数据支持这个假设吗?当然了,这些问题一概不许问。我继续忍,很,内,伤......

  • 尤其当她说,LGBO里卖的酒肯定比邻居家自己酿的酒质量好吧,言外之意,政府的大麻店的大麻比黑市的大麻物美价廉,我,吐,血...... 然后她说,联邦合法之后,各省和各市都可以制定规则来管理大麻。比如,Richmond Hill就通过了动议,not a willing host of 大麻店,就是不情愿开大麻店。这个可以由市政府决定,此时Leona 目光望向Richmond hill 的市长又补充说,“你自己市内不开合法店,那么市民就会去买非法的。” 

  • 我心里此时......一万匹疯马奔腾......有你这么假设的吗?你有什么权利这样给我们市长施压?再忍下去,真是冒着生命危险在忍受,气炸了肺,忍伤了肝......还好,很快,她结束了这个大麻推广presentation。下面是,问答时间。

  • 我有幸第一个抢到话筒。我问“根据C45里面的8(1)(c), 年轻人携带5克以下大麻(相当于15个大麻卷)是不被禁止的,同时C45已经定义了“年轻人”的概念,即,“12至18岁”,那么对于C45的司法解释是,超过12岁的孩子携带5克以内的大麻是允许的。携带就可能会抽。C45把实际的大麻携带的合法年龄降低到12岁,根本不是你们宣传的18岁。然后那个Bill ,巴拉巴拉的说了好多,但是没有一句是回应我的问题,他就说我说的法条不对,是我误解。我当时在提问的时候,是拿着法条给他们念的,所有在场的人,都没看过法律原文,都附和说“那不可能...”。这个Bill曾经是警察长,最懂法条,但是竟然明目张胆的误导民众。

  • 我再次站了起来,我说,“因为你正在回答我的问题,所以我觉得我有权利暂停你的回答,因为你根本没有回答我的问题。” 此时,我气的已经在哆嗦,其实已经语无伦次了。我还理智尚存,还记打开手机,给自己这段对话录下来。一会儿发到网上。我说“我再重复一遍我的问题,根据C45,12岁以上携带5克以内的大麻是合法的,那么12岁的孩子们搞个大麻party在联邦的司法中是合法的。” 然后,就是全场的NO,NO,NO,都认为我看错了法条。然后,我就再也没有机会发言了。

  • 我坐下,我身边的白人老头探头过来跟我辩解,说那是不可能的,我给他看法条。他张大嘴很shock,然后他专门跑到场地旁边去找工作人员说,我说的是对的。

  • 后面的全场对话,真的没法听了。那个Bill 竟然说,根据他的调查,有超过50%的年轻人说,抽大麻实际上不影响开车……当场一片喧闹,西人同意大麻合法,但是大部分不同意麻驾。然后,Bill说,当然,我们还是禁止麻驾的,因为要保护大众嘛。人家抽大麻,我却正经的抽,筋,了......我的胃。


  • 这时,话筒交个了Richmond Hill的市长手中,他说,“我们Richmond Hill 在去年12月份通过的动议不允许开大麻店,我们不打算修改这个动议,尤其是现在各种措施规定和各种影响还没有明确之前,我们不打算改变这个立场。” 这时全场响起了响亮但是很孤独的掌声👏👏👏,那就是我。

  • 后来,又有两个华人邻居来参加会议了,带着问题来的,很想提问,但是很遗憾,华人脸,没机会说话了,尤其是又跟我坐一起,明显是踢场子的。

  • 散会以后,我找到Richmond Hill市长,我说“你今天干的漂亮,我太感激你说的话了,我就住在这个市,我希望你能顶住压力,坚持住。” 市长说“我今天很失望,你刚才说的是对的,你说的法律条文是对的,但是他们根本不谈这些。同时,每家种4棵大麻是个笑话,怎么检查?我努力坚持,尽最大努力吧。但是你今天看到了,来自联邦的压力很大。” 

  • 我很理解Richmond Hill市长的担心,这个女议员Leona 是加拿大健康部长,大麻法案的推手之一,在自己的选区Richmond Hill竟然禁止大麻店,这是很打脸。

  • 散会以后,我有机会给几个人看C45法条,他们带我又去找Bill理论,Bill承认12岁以上携带5克以下,不违法,不违反联邦法。但是会违法省里的法律。所以,他仍然说我说错了。这不是明目张胆的耍流氓嘛。我说,我们讨论的是C45联邦法律,你少提省级司法。联邦合法,然后你们让省里自行规定?然后,就没有然后了,这孙子不理我了……

  • 这时那个议员Leona 过来跟我解释,讲了一堆,非要给我举开车的合法性和超速罚单的违法性的区别。我说,“你别偷换概念,就只讲大麻问题”。她说,“我给你打个比方,道理是一样的”。哎呦,我说“打住,你先打住,我说的是12岁孩子携带大麻的问题,你说开车的例子,哪个12岁孩子可以开车,驾照最低16岁。你扯那些没用的干嘛?你也别说了,我就住在这个区,你在国会的职责是代表我们的声音,但是你没有。从今天起,我的生活中的一个重要任务就是,尽我最大的努力,让你明年get out of this riding area。句号了,我跟你没话可谈了。”

  • 此时,我已经不想再谈了。我的另外两位邻居,还在努力的跟那帮人交流,抗议。让他们也讲讲感受吧……

反大麻行动

上议员立法委征询市级政府意见的会议视频笔记

东婷


3月29日是上议员立法委征询市级政府意见的会议:

首先是各城市陈述:

1。哈利法克斯,蒙特利尔,滑铁卢,列治文,卡尔加里的代表分别讲话7分钟:内容概要是大约每个城市有17个部门都需要介入。大麻合法不仅需要初期的资本投入,还需要大量的长期的管理投入。每年对于一个城市初步估算会需要$800-$1000万元管理费用,比如大楼管理,禁烟区域管理,防止黑市受到刺激进一步泛滥,医院,救护车,消防局,警察检测大麻仪器,公众教育等。作为一个小小的城市,这么高昂的费用,不是第一年政府投入就够的,是持续的费用。这些费用的持续负担是关键。联邦的大麻收益跟各级政府的revenue sharing, 是市政府不能妥协的要求。每个城市分别要求联邦政府的33%-50%的大麻收益拨款。


2。列治文的华裔议员又额外提出了5大问题,第一,家庭养殖,警察不可能挨家的敲门检查。这个带来的风险已经背离的当初C45立法所讲的初衷“就是减少风险,尤其是减少对未成年的风险。” 第二,小朋友就可以携带5克,相当于15个大麻卷,这给孩子们传达的什么信息?第三,城市在条例规定和管理上,完全没有准备好。所以基于这三点,我们城市强烈反对这个法案。第四,大麻种植是工业范畴,不是农业领域,所以禁止用农田种植大麻。第五,如果合法,我要求联邦给50%的大麻收入。现在这个法案是”Trial and error” ,在各个级别都没有全套制度的情况下,先实施,再实验中修补错误,这是不对的。



然后是委员和各城市问答:

1。立法委员问,市政府的参与。列治文说,各级政府都在等着其他政府的指示,现在是到处May be this, may be that,谁也不清楚自己到底干什么。现在跟我们商讨如何实施,但如果这个法案本身有缺陷,根本实行不了。


2。立法委员问,关于学校外多远距离允许大麻店你们觉得合适,有人说在校外100米以外,在大专院校附近的怎么建议。蒙特利尔说,当然是离学校越远越好。但是蒙特利尔是人口非常集中的地区,远离大专院校看似不现实。


3。 立法委员问,你们要求33%联邦大麻收入的,够吗?哈利法克斯回答,当然不够,但是我们在现阶段也不能准确的知道费用。


4。立法委员问,他听到很多担心,是否应该推迟合法化。哈利法克斯说,我们尊重联邦立法,如果合法,我们就自己解决自己的问题。列治文举手抢着说“哈利法克斯的意思是如果你决定必须合法,那我们也没办法,只能照做。但是如果你问我是否可以合法,我说要推迟。比如,我们市有很多大楼,都有至少100户,每户种植4株,就是400株,这些警察怎么管理?” 卡尔加里抢答,他们已有计划全面管理合法。


5。 立法委员问,家庭种植需要额外的灯火等,会不会提高火灾的风险?保险公司如何处理?蒙特利尔回答,我们省禁止家庭种植,消防局预测至少需要100万额外费用。列治文抢答,当然增加风险,魁省和曼省都是禁止家庭种植的,BC省现在也在考虑禁止家庭种植,但是可能会面对各种司法的问题。医用大麻10年前合法,然后就已经刺激了家庭种植,现在都没有人能准确统计。保险公司会大幅提高报费,甚至不保。


6。立法委问,大麻合法是为了防止青少年抽大麻,但是我们反向思维一下,你们现在需要多少额外的青少年买大麻抽大麻才能负担额外的城市管理费用?如此好问题,但是很遗憾被主持人分配给了兜圈子的,问题没有能够被正面回答的,就时间到掐断了。


7。立法委问,对于12-17孩子的管理。蒙特利尔说,我们也在努力研究但是目前不确定。列治文说,立法的目的是让年轻人拿不到大麻,现在的法案是12岁以上就可以携带15个大麻卷,立法本身就自相矛盾,能不能先把法案说清楚呀?


8。立法委员问,是否应该只允许有执照的人并在指定地点种植,并推迟家庭种植?滑铁卢,列治文,蒙特利尔都明确说“是”。卡尔加里说推迟可以但是禁止家庭种植不现实。同时说,禁止家庭种植和不禁止都不容易。立法委员继续问,那既然禁止和不禁止都不容易,那你告诉我允许家庭种植的好处是什么?卡尔加里好像没有正面回答,就是说跟家庭酿酒类似。滑铁卢说,没啥好处。害处远大于好处。


9。立法委员说,现在仍然可以修正法案。你们说说哪些你要修正的。哈利法克斯说了一堆政治官话。列治文说,不可以家庭种植。蒙特利尔说,我们要求省政府赋予我们自己制定法规的权利。

10。立法委员又问,你们的警察是否ready了。所有城市都说“没有”。


11。立法委问,他感觉没有人喜欢大麻店靠近自己的家,你们怎么解决?哈利法克斯说,所有的店都在大的商业中心。列治文说,先不谈怎么卖,先说怎么抽。大麻的味道太重了,邻居抽的话,太影响其他人。


12。立法委问,联邦政府说会进行公众教育。但是你们各城市有对公众的教育吗?教育民众详细了解法律吗?列治文说,他们现在有个对孩子的教育项目,远离大麻的。


13。听了这么多,都是反对的声音。到会议尾声,现在竟然有一个叫Tony Dean 的立法委做了总结式的发言“看来大家都有很高的readyness啦”。这人是耳朵聋了吗?晕死。


14。立法委问,关于年龄是否应该跟酒一样?列治文直接抢答,我们建议21岁,但是好像BC省现在只考虑19岁。然后不管主持人是否同意,直接讲了我们的调查,他说在过去5天的调查结果显示,87%的人强烈反对支持禁止家庭种植大麻。97%的人强烈的同意未成年人不可以携带大麻。95%的人强烈同意推迟大麻合法。


最后,我以一个听众的角度,看完视频,给列治文华裔议员100个👍👍。



上議会开会视频http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2?fk=480904&globalStreamId=3&useragent=Mozilla/5.0%20(Macintosh;%20Intel%20Mac%20OS%20X%2010_13_3)%20AppleWebKit/537.36%20(KHTML,%20like%20Gecko)%20Chrome/43.0.2357.130%20Safari/537.36


Zenbia


在短短的5-6天时间,我们有近9300人填写调查!我们也沒有预期到这结果!谢谢大家的努力,如果没有大家支持及广传,是絶对不可能发生!雖然立法没法避免,可是法䅁有可能有重大修改,如果我们争取到在几点富争议的提案能作出修改,这也是非常重要!大家继续努力加油,不要灰心!

三讀前仍未定案 區澤光抵渥京游說 晤6參議員籲嚴管大麻

星岛日报記者报道


列治文市議員區澤光乘受邀出席參議院聽證會之便,自周二抵達渥太華後,與6位參議員就C-45法案交流。作為「關注2018年7月大麻合法化小組」發起人之一,區澤光把關注小組所收集的民意轉交參議員,並表達小組反對休閒用大麻合法化的立場,以及以保護青少年為前提大幅收緊法案的建議。他強調,與不同背景參議員交流所獲得的信息,是法案仍有可能作出重大修改,相信市民積整發聲的努力不會白費。

與區澤光會面的參議員,包括胡元豹、胡子修、馬丁(Yonah Martin)、格里芬(Diane Griffin)、薛文(Judith Seidman)、杜飛(Michael Duffy) 。

區澤光表示,與參議院獨立參議員領袖胡元豹有坦率的交流,胡元豹表示支持立法,但贊成收緊法案的建議,包括修改家種大麻的條款及提高合法管有大麻年齡至21歲。胡元豹承諾會提出修改動議,並主動建議待返回溫哥華後與關注人士交流。

另一位參議員胡子修則指出,在二讀辯論期間,多位參議員都對法案提出尖銳的問題,但在投票卻投下贊成票,令法案獲得二讀通過。他表示,這可能因為與聯邦自由黨有淵源的參議員,受到鞭察。

C-45法案於3月22日,在參議院以44票對29票通過二讀,所有28名保守黨參議員都投反對票,幾乎所有獨立參議員,其中大多數由總理杜魯多所任命,都投下贊成票。

急推大麻合法化或引國際難題

胡子修又說,參議員關注的主要問題包括青少年合法擁有大麻的年齡、在家中種植大麻及執法機關未有能力在今年7月開始執法,這些都與關注小組的立場一致。

他還透露,一旦通過大麻法案,加拿大必須給予一年的通知才可以退出一些國際公約,如果聯邦政府強行在今年推行大麻合法化,或會在國際上引起一些麻煩,尤其是與美國的關係。他估計到時很多加拿大人因為加美的法律差異而在美國觸犯當地刑法。

目前有一個參議院委員會正研究大麻合法化對國際關係的影響。

城鎮政府承受最大衝擊

區澤光表示,當他指出聯邦政府只在去年11月向市府進行過一次諮詢時,曾擔任市議員的格里芬感到驚訝,認為一旦大麻合法化,城鎮政府將受最大衝擊,但卻沒有被充分諮詢。

格里芬對關注小組所提出,法案中容讓家中大麻的條款與保護年輕人的目標背道而馳。

區澤光又稱,當他向形象地指出,容許18歲以下青少年管有5克大麻,等於容許隨身攜帶5支大麻煙時,多位參議員嘩然。

他強調,從這兩天與不同背景參議員交流所獲得的信息,是C-45法案在參議會三讀之前,還是有可能作出重大修改,相信市民積整發聲的努力不會白費。

今遞交10,000簽名

關注小組所發起「帶1萬個民意到渥京」行動,除了把自去年底所收集反對大麻合法化的10,000個簽名遞交參議院外,也會把關注小組的民調呈上。

區澤光周四將以列市議員身分,在一參議院委員會上發言,屆時會把簽名和民調結果遞交。公眾可到網站www.surveymonkey.com/r/R7ZBG53,填寫只有3個問題的民調。該民調於周末發起,至截稿前,有近8,000人參予。


原文地址

http://www.singtao.ca/vancouver/1657091/2018-03-29/post-%e4%b8%89%e8%ae%80%e5%89%8d%e4%bb%8d%e6%9c%aa%e5%ae%9a%e6%a1%88-%e5%8d%80%e6%be%a4%e5%85%89%e6%8a%b5%e6%b8%a5%e4%ba%ac%e6%b8%b8%e8%aa%aa-

欢迎投稿

投稿请联系info@letsvote.ca

欢迎投稿

投稿请联系info@letsvote.ca

欢迎投稿

投稿请联系info@letsvote.ca

欢迎投稿

投稿请联系info@letsvote.ca