LIBERALS PLAN POT LAW REFORMS

Government Source Says Bill Coming In June

OTTAWA--The Chretien government will bring in a new law in June to
decriminalize simple marijuana possession as part of a revamped National
Drug Strategy that will include more resources to combat drug trafficking,
the Star has learned.

The move has met serious objections around the cabinet table among senior
government members who fear it will further chill Canada-U.S. relations.
Others worry about potential effects on public health.

Still, Prime Minister Jean Chretien backs the bill, which is expected to
make possession of small amounts of marijuana a mere ticketing offence that
would not carry the stigma of a criminal record, said a senior government
source.

Chretien views the sporadic and inconsistent enforcement of the current law
against marijuana possession across the country as "a basic injustice"
which not only stigmatizes some Canadians, but also breeds disrespect for
the law, said the insider.

Now, some young Canadians convicted of pot possession, particularly in
rural areas, are saddled with a criminal record and even serve jail time,
while others get away with only a warning from police too busy to pursue
minor pot offences.

The plan is to devote more resources to fighting drug traffickers and give
new money to police and courts for that purpose.

No decision has been made on what amount of marijuana in a person's
possession would be considered "small" and for "personal use" under the
law; it could be as low as 10 grams (about 10 marijuana cigarettes) -- it
could go as high as 20 grams.

In the past, 30 grams has been used as the dividing line between offences
of simple possession and those of drug trafficking. But the source said the
government recognizes much of the marijuana sold today is more potent than
in the past.

The insider downplayed any possibility of a border backlash from the United
States, saying the bill will be a made-in-Canada initiative to reflect this
country's law enforcement priorities and concerns.

"We're a sovereign country and we make laws appropriate to Canadian
circumstances," the source said. "And the intention of the drug strategy is
to dedicate more resources to deal with the problem of trafficking, which
does speak to American concerns."

The government believes a strong argument can be made that a ticketing
regime that imposes a penalty "would do more to discourage the use of
marijuana than the current law."

John Walters, the White House director of U.S. drug control policy, has
repeatedly warned Canada against liberalizing its drug laws, blaming much
of the high-strength marijuana on U.S. streets on Canadian pot growers and
smugglers.

But the Canadian government has been emboldened by justice department
opinion polls showing the percentage of public support for
decriminalization "in the high 70s."

The move is also supported by the Canadian Medical Association and the
Canadian Chiefs of Police, and by the recommendations of two parliamentary
committees last year.

One, a special Commons committee, called for the decriminalization of
possession of small amounts of marijuana. The other, a Senate committee,
urged that possession of small amounts of pot be legalized.

Chretien, the source said, has long supported decriminalization, but in the
nearly 30 years since the Le Dain commission urged liberalization of
marijuana laws, has watched politicians avoid acting because of the
"political heat" the issue generates.

"Who better to tackle this issue now than this Prime Minister?"

Another government source said Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has faced an
uphill battle to persuade fellow cabinet ministers John Manley, who is
responsible for border concerns, Health Minister Anne McLellan, and
Solicitor-General Wayne Easter to support the initiative.

Sources acknowledge there is a public health perspective to the debate
inside cabinet.

"Marijuana is a harmful substance. (There are) the same concerns one has
with tobacco; the impairment of driving skills -- that's definitely a
concern," a source said. "But ... we're looking at taking steps that would
in fact discourage the use in a way where no discouragement occurs now,
except in cases where a penalty that is more severe than the harm is applied."