The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

le customs olficials are turning back greater [5 of the pornographic material which flows nada from the United States, direct citizen in- ent has been the key factor in efl‘ecting imâ€" ents with respect to the display of pornograâ€" terial." EMERGENCY RESOLUTIONS GUELPl-l AREA 3 Ontario Government to reconsider the to close hospitals. Hon. Frank Miller am sure you are aware. the costs of health car: no have been escalating at an ever-increasing contain these cost increases. the Ministry has lied on a program of constraint in spending. It is wever, our intention to cause hardship to neither is or providers of health care in the province. are ensuring that the utmost co-operation of cemed is achieved. Providing high, quality care services with the financial resources we ,ailable to us is an increasingly difficult task to much thought must be given." HAMILTON AREA ng the Ontario Government to enact legisa . quake it mandatory, within a reasonable length fer companies responsible for dumping .dis- _ to to find safer and more satisfactory methods " - and disposing in a manner that can be guar-= Hon. Geo Kerr . Cambrian Disposals Ltd. _ ou are no doubt aware, the company which ' posing to construct the disposal well has with! ts application and the project will, therefore. ’ eed. i nfortunate that the Environmental Hearing e held, as I am confident that the evidence at the Hearing would have allayedthc fears eep well waste disposal.” b HASTINGS NORTH DlSTRiCT se of the development of nuclear energy, eon- s expressed about the storage of waste. the dot: effects of radiation on future generations and of developth of alternative sourcesâ€"the " ents of Ontario and Canada were requested to ,an educational program to acquaint the public e hazards, benefits of nuclear. , ' Atomic Energy of Canada and the Minister of the Hon. James Taylor. both were sent copies esolution, and both have indicated just how . ly they are attempting to cope with this prob- . ere is one point in the resolution. however, that I take issue withâ€"namely. the assertion that the '6 00vcrnment is “neglecting the development ative sources such as renewable resources and searchâ€"is already pursuing the development of te energy sources. such as solar heating and the crns shared by many people about the con- I peopomic utilization of methanol as an alternative ue. Resource Material availableâ€"Nuclear Power in Ontario: Ontario’s Energy Future; Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning;â€"ask your member of parliament for these. Nuclear Power in Canada avail- able from Canadian Nuclear Association. 65 Queen W, Toronto. MSH 2M5. Queensland's MEI-lasting! North the FWlllopposetl the legislati- asakiag the possession of Marijuana no longer a criminal ofleace. Min'ster at Health and Welfare. . Hon. Monique Begin The Government sponsnred the introduction of cannabis (marijuana and hashish) legislation in the Senate on November 26, I974. This bill (known as Bill Sâ€"l9) was designed torremove cannabis from the Nar- cotic Control Act and to place its control under the Food and Drugs Act. Bill S-l9 would have reduced the maximum penal- ties for cannabis ofl'ences, but only to the extent that these were in excess of the vast majority of sentences being handed down by the courts. The bill wouid not have removed criminal penalties for unauthorized cannabis possession. On the contrary, cannabis users found in possession of the drug would have continued to-be subject to arrest and prosecution. as under the Narcotic Control Act. ‘ Bill 5-19 was passed by the Senate on June 18, [975 and received first reading in the House of Com- rrions on June 19. l‘975. However, owing to arnu'mber of other pressing matters the House was unable to de- vote further attention to the bill before the end of the 1974-76 Session of the Thirtieth Parliament. Thus. cannabis remains subject today to the criminal proce- ’ dures and penalties under the Narcotic Control Act. The Government has exprsed its opposition to the-legalization of cannabis production and distribu- ' tion on. a number of occasions. Such an approach would signal approval or encouragement or cannabis use and is. thus, considered an inappropriate alterna- tive to current legislative policy in this respect. While the Government remains convinced that there are individual and public health risks associated ' with cannabis. it has to acknowledge that there is also a growing concern over the personal and social impact of penal laws intended to discourage its use. There were. for example. over 125,000 convictions for simple possession of cannabis between 1970 and I976. half of which involved persons under the age of 2i. The Government’s mandate to protect the health of 'Canadians- from hazardous substances must be tem- pered by its awareness of the consequences of pre- ventive measures enacted for that purpose. It is with this object in mind, that is. to strike the appropriate legislative balance between concerns over the health risks of cannabis and concerns over the impact of pe- nal l'awsintended to discourage its use. that oflicials of this Department. the Department of Justice and the Ministry of the Solicitor General are reviewing the provisions of Bill 5-19. At the same time, howpver, the Government does not intend to waver in its commit- ment to 'a policy of discouragement of cannabis use or to fail to remind Canadians of the physical and psy- chological hazards of this drug. l5 ‘â€"