DRUG SCHEME FULL OF MIXED MESSAGES

OTTAWA - For anyone looking for symptoms of the political bipolar disorder
which has seized the national capital in the dying days of the Chretien era,
a good place to start is the confused federal Drug Strategy unveiled
yesterday in Parliament.

Rarely have so many conflicting messages managed to find their way into a
single government initiative.

The result is not pretty.

The strategy purports to achieve zero-tolerance for marijuana with one hand
while setting in motion the long overdue decriminalization of the same
substance with the other.

It aims to severely curtail the supply and demand of illicit drugs in
general throughout Canada.

Yet it proposes to lure police forces into devoting more energy exacting
fines from small users and growers of marijuana, often at the expense of
other drug-fighting activities on the criminal front.

It is meant to ensure the equal application of the marijuana statutes across
the land by providing more sensible guidance to a justice system
increasingly reluctant to saddle young people with criminal records for the
mere possession of a few joints. But it opens the door to arbitrary witch
hunts and police harassment by turning marijuana users into potential cash
cows on par with parking offenders.

Any driver caught with a small amount of marijuana would be fined $250 to
$400 for possession while operating a vehicle, more than double the average
fine. There would be no requirement on the system to demonstrate that
possession without consumption has any impact on the operation of the said
vehicle. The bill would also treat possession of small amounts of marijuana
in the undefined vicinity of a school as an aggravating circumstance leading
to higher fines.

A key part of the strategy involves encouraging young people to leave
marijuana alone. But the bill sets much lower fines for underage offenders
than for adults ($100 vs. $150 for possession of 15 grams or less), making
it more attractive for drug dealers to use minors to peddle small amounts of
marijuana to their peers.

It purports to free up police forces to deal with large-scale producers of
marijuana. But rather than allow users of the garden-type variety to bypass
the organized-crime drug black market by providing for themselves, the new
bill contemplates fines up to $5,000 for anyone caught growing a single
plant of marijuana.

In Quebec, government inspectors are paid to determine compliance with the
language laws by measuring the size of the lettering on commercial signs.
Across Canada, anti-drug forces would have to do a head count of marijuana
plants to determine whether they are dealing with a summary conviction
offence (one to three plants), a so-called hybrid offence which could be
treated either as a minor infraction or as a Criminal Code violation (four
to 25 plants) or a full-fledged criminal offence warranting either a maximum
10-year jail sentence (26 to 50 plants) or a maximum 14-year sentence
(50-plus.)

One can only wonder what constituency the federal government had in mind
when it drafted this bill and its oddly-matched companion strategy.

It cannot have been the advocates of looser marijuana laws. Although they
will be glad to be free of the risk of a criminal record, many will be
troubled by the prospect of the police declaring open season on tens of
thousands of small-time users of marijuana through the collection of fines.
On the other hand, those who fear a relaxation of the rules could lead to a
more permissive drug environment are unlikely to be swayed by the promise of
more enforcement.

That leaves the White House, where plans for looser Canadian marijuana laws
are known to be wildly unpopular.

Yesterday, a trio of federal ministers insisted the proposed regime would be
less permissive than that of many other jurisdictions, notably in Europe.
But they did not explain why Canada had opted for a stricter regimen, except
to maintain an appearance of symmetry with the United States. Presumably the
message to Washington is that, with different means, we are still fighting
the same (phoney) war on marijuana.

Whether this bill ever becomes law is an open question.

The House of Commons is about to adjourn for the summer. While Justice
Minister Martin Cauchon says he hopes to have the bill passed before the end
of the year, time is running out on Prime Minister Jean Chretien whose
successor will be formally appointed in the fall.

The bill faces stiff opposition from the Liberal caucus as well as from
across the Commons.

It also falls well short of a recent Senate committee recommendation to
legalize marijuana while undoubtedly going too far for other more
conservative members of the Upper House.

Indeed, not since the abortion debate has a government glass run so high a
risk of being found both half-full and half-empty by a majority of its
critics inside and outside Parliament.

On marijuana as in the case of abortion, the ultimate outcome of this
needlessly tortured process could be a legal vacuum.