Marijuana regulations discussed

Times Contributor  

 

Voices throughout Canada are questioning aspects of the medical marijuana production regulations that go into effect April 1.

In discussions at Strathmore town council Councillor Denise Peterson said, “Colorado and Washington have had considerable experience in the last few years in legalizing legal marijuana. They have had very mixed experiences, and we can learn from them. I would encourage that we use those databases.”

Many health studies indicate the benefits of medical marijuana for treatment of various health problems. Health Canada (HC) and many supporters of the new regulations say the rigorous registration and monitoring system will make the industry safer. For a good summary of their considerations for the new program check www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2012/2012-12-15/html/reg4-eng.html. 

Police and fire officials support the new regulations, indicating the closure of home-grow operations replaced with inspected commercial sites would increase safety.

Studies indicate uninspected home grow operations have 24 times greater risk for fire than the average home. There is also a higher increase of guns on site and high rates of young children exposed to toxins in grow areas. 

Critics counter the new regulations will just push previously legal home grows back underground, creating more safety and enforcement concerns.

“…this will not stop illegal grow-ops, on contrary this will produce more people that are breaking the law, these same people that are abiding by the law right now,” stated medical user Awesomesound on cannibisculture.com

“We at Health Canada cannot speculate what people may or may not do in response to the regulations,” said Sean Upton HC spokesperson, qualifying adhering to the new system is the safest choice.

There are currently over 40,000 people licensed to use medical marijuana. It is expected to grow to 400,000 by 2024. Seventy per cent of current users, or their small licensed suppliers, have 25 or more marijuana plants in home environments that must be destroyed by April 1. There is no designated plan to ensure the plants are destroyed. 

“After March 31, 2014, Health Canada will not have the legislative authority to conduct inspections of homes used in the cultivation of marihuana for medical purposes.” HC website.

Users say the new system is inconvenient and more expensive. Several licensed producer websites indicate new authorization for product transfer could take three to six weeks, due in part to processing backlogs at Health Canada. 

Users indicate they would have to revert to street corner purchases because of delivery delays and they can’t afford the higher prices charged by new production facilities. Illegal trade prices are down due to the competition, bringing the lower income buyers to illegal purchase sites. 

All laws and penalties surrounding the illegal possession and sales of marijuana remain in effect.

“Law Enforcement will have limited ability to ensure compliance, as to enter onto a property or into a residence as a judicially authorized warrant is required,” said Sergeant Dwayne Karpo of K division RCMP drug enforcement unit. 

He advises users not to gamble on whether homes will be inspected.

“I will say that locations that have been identified over the years as having residential (MMAR) marihuana grows within their residences; as of April 1, 2014 they will now be illegal and will be treated as such. Locations identified by law enforcement agencies will treat all marihuana grow operations within residences, that were originally authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations as now being invalid licenses. These identified residences will be treated no different than any other illegal marihuana grow operation.” 

Shipping receipts and product labels are the new authorization for possession. Police must check with producers to see if those suspected of illegal possession are registered clients. There is no central registry. The checks and balances in delivery systems, preventing illegal label possession and preventing opportunities for forgery, haven’t been locked down.

“As with any type of criminal activity involving forged documents or permits of any kind, it does create a significant challenge for law enforcement. If law enforcement identifies or becomes aware of any type of forgeries this will be investigated just as any other type of criminal investigation,” said Karpo.

Medical associations object to the new rules, as it puts prescribing doctors in the position of gatekeeper for marijuana use. 

“Members will know that many medical organizations, including the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and the Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada (FMRAC) strongly oppose the new regulations, said Dr. Trevor Theman of the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons.

The more lenient prescription parameters are opening some questionable medical assessment doors as well. The www.canadamedicalmarijuana.org  website is offering Skype physical exams that could provide necessary medical authorization. The practise has been banned in Montana.

There are provincial police reports that show licensed marijuana suppliers have currently supplied illegal markets across the country. Whether illegal activity infiltrates import/export mechanisms remains a concern for border monitoring agencies. Under the new rules there is an opportunity for licenced producers to import and export product to and from foreign producers, but they must meet current narcotic regulations, good manufacturing practises and the extensive regulations for natural health product guidelines. A lawyer Ron Martel (a Reuter’s source) who is currently retained by Uruguay producer, anticipates supplying 20,000 kilos of product moving into Canadian medical markets next year.

In Canada, HC is responsible for all enforcement and inspection of the new licensed production facilities. They currently only have 15 inspectors for all of Canada, so critics are saying with increased numbers it will be impossible to monitor safety infractions and illicit sales. 

Some Canadians say loosened regulations and supporting production sites in their communities brings us one step closer to legalization. 

If, as Denise Peterson suggests, we should look to our southern neighbours for lessons learned; we can listen to the debates in the United States Senate over legalizing marijuana. Their data shows improvements in some areas, but legalization does not remove all the safety problems. WordPress had Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama stating, “These legalization efforts sound good to people…They say, ‘We could just end the problem of drugs if we could just make it legal.’ But any country that’s tried that, Alaska and other places have tried it, have failed. It does not work.” 

A random sample of Canadians by Forum research indicated 76 per cent supported legalized personal use and a 2012 Liberal policy paper recommends the legalization of all marijuana use in Canada. It contends it is a major employment industry and could supply tax dollars to government. 

Some proponents are suggesting if prices on product go up with licensing, a tax should be levied to return a significant part of the increase back to government coffers to support health care programs and supplement low income medical marijuana users. It is speculated it could generate billion dollar returns in tax revenue.