Pubdate: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 Source: Chilliwack Progress (CN BC) Copyright: 2003 The Chilliwack Progress Contact: http://www.theprogress.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/562 Author: Margaret Evans SECOND-HAND SMOKE So the U.S. is grumbling at Canada again. Apparently, Tom Riley, public affairs director for the White House office of drug control policy is upset that our Federal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon hasn't consulted with the Americans about his plans to introduce legislation to the House of Commons later this spring to relax Canada's marijuana laws. Now Mr. Riley's all riled up. His mutterings have included less than veiled threats that should Canada go ahead to decriminalize possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana, it would trigger greater security checks for border-crossing Canadians. Stern words also spewed from the Center for International and Strategic Studies in Washington where a spokesperson alluded to the fact that there's no room for persuasion down there and that it would be "very damaging" if Canada chose to go ahead. According to newswire reports, the rant in Washington is that the passage of this legislation would be akin to Canada unilaterally establishing "open air toxic waste sites" along the border. Mr. Riley doesn't explain that leap of logic and Justice Minister Cauchon hasn't sidetracked south to check it out. In September 2002, the Canadian Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs recommended legalizing the use of marijuana by adults. The report, the result of a two-year study of public policy on the use of the drug, stated that the current system of prohibition in Canada does not work and should be replaced by a regulated system. The 600-page report based its findings on thorough research, analysis and extensive public hearings with input from experts and citizens. From that study came the justice minister's cautious step forward in a new direction to introduce legislation that would decriminalize small amounts of pot for personal use. Washington tore it's hair out and now, apparently, wants to threaten our heads too. But this issue isn't just about marijuana. It's bigger than this. It's the notion that Washington assumes the need, even the right, to be consulted by Canada about pending legislation that affects our sovereign laws. How this sits with many Canadians is far from comfortable. Like any country, we've got our fair share of no-brainer laws. How we choose to deal with them, change them, dump them out or improve them is a matter for Canadians and our law-makers. Not foreigners. Perhaps, in more amicable times, it may have been useful to discuss changes to our laws with neighbours, or significant others. But regardless of outside opinion, once legislation is introduced, voted on, and passed or defeated, it is done so according to Canada's interests and the will of the Canadians. Not foreigners. Washington is a temperamental town with a history of nasty rivalries and less-than-patient egos. If it did once have more benign tolerance, the Iraq attack seems to have changed all that, setting political tolerance at an all-time zero. Sniping at anyone who doesn't agree with its linear thinking has become modus operandi as it shoots to re-shape the world in its own image. The problem with this is countries of the world have their own ideas about their own image. Especially Canada. The decision of the justice minister to move forward with new legislation will be controversial and will stir up heated debate, to say the least. But it will be a Canadian debate. It will be a step in a new direction to reflect what he believes to be good policy for Canadians. Mr. Riley and his Canada-bashing brigade will just have to deal with that. C'est la vie. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth