Bill C-289, the proposed Stopping Supply to Save Lives Act, would amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Criminal Code. The title presents its goal as stopping supply to save lives; the changes would set severe penalties for specified synthetic-opioid offences. The supplied material does not establish that the bill has passed or when it would start, so these are proposed changes, not provisions shown to be in force.
For trafficking or possessing for the purpose of trafficking a Schedule I synthetic opioid, more than 40 mg would require a life sentence. For 20 mg to 40 mg, the bill would set a 15-year minimum and allow a life sentence. Other Schedule I or II substances, including synthetic opioids below 20 mg on the wording provided, would carry possible life imprisonment, with no new minimum stated in that paragraph.
For importing, exporting or producing a Schedule I synthetic opioid, more than 40 mg would require a life sentence. Other Schedule I or II substances, including synthetic opioids at or below 40 mg, would carry possible life imprisonment, but the bill does not set a minimum sentence for those cases.
For offences involving a Schedule I synthetic opioid, sentencing courts would have to treat specified locations or amounts as aggravating factors (factors that make an offence more serious). The locations include within 300 metres of a treatment centre, school, child care facility, or another location designated by regulation to protect vulnerable people.
For the location-related offences, the amount-related aggravating factor would apply at 2 mg or more for the substance listed in item 16 of Schedule I, or at an amount reasonably expected to cause death if consumed for any other synthetic opioid.
Someone convicted of the specified offences involving more than 40 mg would be ineligible for parole until serving 25 years. Reaching that point would make the person eligible to seek parole, not guarantee release.
People charged with the named offences: The proposed mandatory sentences apply to the offence and amount categories listed above. “Liable to imprisonment for life” allows a life sentence; it does not make one mandatory.
Sentencing courts: Courts would have to consider the listed location and amount factors when sentencing for a designated substance offence involving a Schedule I synthetic opioid.
People and organizations near the named locations: The bill does not create a new service or direct rule for them. It would make proximity to listed or regulation-designated locations relevant to sentencing.
People who use, possess or receive drugs outside the specified offences: The supplied text does not directly change rules for them.
The bill gives no estimate for public spending or savings. The proposed longer and life sentences could affect incarceration costs, but the amount is not stated.
The text provides no funding, staffing, fee or fine changes.
A possible argument for the bill is that very large quantities of synthetic opioids would trigger mandatory life sentences, and the specified offences would carry a long period before parole eligibility.
Requiring courts to consider proximity to treatment centres, schools, child care facilities and other designated locations could recognize risks linked to offences near places serving or protecting vulnerable people.
The amount-related aggravating factor could direct courts to consider especially dangerous quantities when sentencing.
Mandatory life sentences for the specified offences leave no sentencing choice about whether to impose life imprisonment once the amount threshold is met.
The bill sets a 15-year minimum for trafficking or possessing for the purpose of trafficking 20 mg to 40 mg, but the supplied text does not explain how the threshold would be applied in different cases.
Key terms and the test for an amount reasonably expected to cause death are not defined in the supplied text.
The bill does not provide cost estimates or explain how the new rules would affect incarceration spending.