On December 3, 2009 the Senate committee put forth amendments to Bill C-15.  The Senate votes on whether to accept these amendments, and if passed the whole Bill moves on to a third vote.  This third vote is the final vote at the Senate, if the bill passes this vote it moves on to the Governor General for Royal Assent, where it becomes official law. A date for this vote has not been set yet.  This is despite countless warnings from witnesses that the evidence shows mandatory minimum sentences DO NOT deter drug crime or drug criminals.  The Senate committee's own press release features three quotes speaking to the evidence and against mandatory minimums, and one lonely quote from the Conservative Justice Minister supporting the bill.

There is still a chance that this bill can be defeated at the third vote.  Canadians must contact their senators and tell them to stand up, be courageous, and defeat Bill C-15, in order to protect our youth.  Stop Bill C-15 and Start a Sensible Drug Policy!

The Senate committee made only a few amendments to this flawed bill.  

CSSDP's Summary of the Amendments:

- removing the clause that would implement a six month mandatory sentence for growing between 5 and 200 marijuana plants.  However, the Senate kept the provision calling for 9 month mandatory sentence for 1 to 200 plants if an aggravating factor applies.  One of these factors, 'potential public safety hazard in a residential neighbourhood', is vague and overbroad, and potentially captures persons growing one plant in an urban or sub-urban area.  If we want to get serious about removing the threat of dangerous grow-ops, we need to stop driving the sensible growers further underground and start talking about how to operate safe personal grow operations.  The bill also calls for a 9 month mandatory minimum sentence for growing one plant in a rental property.

- changing the wording in a particular clause so that in order to trigger a mandatory minimum sentence, the offender would have had to spent one year in prison for a drug offence, as opposed to merely having a drug offence within the previous ten years.  While this will help lessen the number of 'low-level' players caught in the bill, it does not change the evidence that shows mandatory minimum sentences do not deter drug crime, or drug use.  Bill C-15 continues the needless unbalance of resources towards criminal enforcement and away from treatment, education, and harm reduction programs

- adding an additional cost-benefit review after five years, as well as two years.  However, as witnesses testified the financial and social costs will only begin to be recognized at five years.  The true costs of this policy will take much longer to fully ascertain.  The committee also discussed that completing these reviews tends to get 'overlooked' by parliament when it is time to undertake them. 

- allowing judicial discretion in the case of aboriginal offenders.  The judge is not required to impose the minimum sentence if: the offender is aboriginal, the sentence would be "extremely harsh" because of the offender's circumstances", and another sanction is available and reasonable.  The judge must provide a reason for not imposing the sentence. This amendment reflects a current provision of the criminal code.