…by Hanna Anderson…
In marijuana news, the government of Canada is looking to create and finalize a bill that will legalize marijuana in the spring of 2017. Some changes are already in motion.
Just recently, Minister of Justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould, announced the Task Force for Marijuana Legalization responsible for creating Canada’s drug policy on marijuana — and it will be a great undertaking. Thus far, the illicit drug isn’t legal for recreational use, and there are many reinforced misconceptions about the soft drug that make people see it as a hard drug. What regulations can be made that will allow Canadians to see the drug in a different light?
The Current State Of Marijuana
As a soft drug, marijuana is already used for medical purposes. The psychoactive substance in marijuana, THC, is widely used to treat the side effects of certain medical conditions, like nausea experienced by cancer patients.
Currently, only medical marijuana is legal in Canada under its Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR). This Health Canada program provides users with access 
to medical marijuana only through licensed producers with a medical document signed by an authorized healthcare practitioner.
Despite this, there are still many legal gray areas and confusion. Moreover, with only 33 licensed producers in the entire country and a policy mandating the substance be distributed only via registered mail, marijuana activists are upset by the inefficiency of the system. Marijuana entrepreneurs, on the other hand, are taking advantage of the marijuana mess.
The Gateway Overlap
In general, soft drugs like marijuana (which are usually illicit) don’t produce physical dependence and are less addictive than hard drugs (such as cocaine and heroin).
Yet it is interesting to note that some smokers may experience withdrawal 
symptoms that can cause a psychological dependence and use disorder. This is part of the reason why many think of marijuana as a gateway drug to harder drugs and so advocate its prohibition.
But does that indirect connection mean that strict law enforcement is needed? Does it mean strict laws and swift action will solve the problem?
In Canada, illegal dispensaries have been popping up to both establish a stake in the future market and to address the supply shortage. However, marijuana is still officially illegal. Consequently, vendors are being arrested and shut down on the basis of violating municipal zoning bylaws.
When access to medicinal marijuana is limited, drug policies and restrictions are themselves the gateway to hard drugs. Why? Because legal prohibition encourages users in need of medical marijuana to turn to the black market, opening them up to unmonitored marijuana supplies, harder drugs, and criminal charges.
Penalties On Hard Drugs And Marijuana
Currently, the penalties on hard drugs in Canada range from 7 years for possession of cocaine and heroin to life imprisonment for trafficking or possession for the purpose of trafficking the substances.
On the other hand, it takes over 3 kgs of marijuana or hashish to be considered trafficking or to be considered possession for the purpose of trafficking. The maximum penalty for both is life 
imprisonment. Possession of marijuana penalties range from a 6 month and $1000 fine (for up to 30 g) to 5 years less a day in prison.
The war on drugs in Canada is seen as ineffective. For example, drug-policy spending under the Conservative government (in power for the last eight years) went to apprehending, charging and defending users in possession of small amounts of marijuana! With the new Liberal government, the focus is on approaching marijuana policy with an emphasis on regulation, not prohibition.
What New Policies Should Canada Implement?
But what key areas in marijuana law and policy should Canada look at to ensure that the regulations are appropriate for a soft drug? To which countries can Canada refer?
The USA, Portugal and the Netherlands — countries that have legalized marijuana (or chosen to ignore it) — offer examples of what to expect regarding the implementation of a national framework. OMQ Law (the 
author’s law firm) has put together an infographic that takes a close, visual look at how these countries have legitimized marijuana use.
From the Netherlands, which allows users to smoke in openly accepted, though illegal, marijuana cafes, to Portugal, where all drugs were decriminalized and addiction treatment programs aggressively implemented, the infographic explores the nuances in soft drug policies. In the USA, though five states have legalized marijuana medically and recreationally, it still has yet to be fully legalized across the country.
Laws are constantly evolving to ensure that effective drug policies are in place. Part of the task will be to keep in mind how a legalized soft drug will impact other international drug policies, social acceptance, and the perception of hard drugs in general.
In Canada it seems likely that supply and production will be controlled at the federal level and the provinces will control distribution — in the same way that the provinces control distribution of alcohol. Some provinces are advocating or suggesting that their liquor distribution networks are an obvious choice for distribution.
Our position is that a distribution framework should be set up separately, and have room for both public and private avenues for sales. We expect there to be a phase-in period of several years, as current levels of supply will be completely inadequate to handle initial demand.
Informed by unparalleled neuroscientific insight and written with his usual flare, Marc Lewis’s The Biology of Desire effectively refutes the medical view of addiction as a brain disease. A bracing and informative corrective to the muddle that now characterizes public and professional discourse on this topic.” —Gabor Maté, M.D., author of In The Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters With Addiction
IMO, anyone using their head to make a living, or using their body to make a living would be stupid to use any drug. Maryjane make them stupid and dangerous. In some industries it is a firing offense now, and will be so after legalization in more places.
So then what do you do when someone is prescribed medicinal marijuana and has to use it on the job?
Fred: Your comment seems entirely based on preformed opinions, without acknowledging (even the possibility) that research and common sense contradict your views What is the basis of your opinion that marijuana makes people “dangerous”? And how can you be so sure what the future will bring?
Limited access to medical marijuana can also contribute to addiction and/or dependence on prescription or non-prescription pharmaceuticals, which can be more or just as damaging as illegal narcotics.
Medical marijuana, used accordingly can and will improve the lives of many people suffering from pain, illness, or disease. A naturally occurring plant medicine seems a healthier lifestyle choice then whatever comes out of those factory pill presses, for humans and the environment.
To some it would seem obvious to distribute marijuana alongside alcohol, but I think this is wrong. Not only does that promote marijuana as a recreational drug (instead of a medicine), but many people actually treat alcoholism with marijuana, and to throw them in the same bag is unfair. The doctor doesn’t send you to the liquor store for your pain meds! If marijuana is to be truly recognized as a medicine then it should be behind the pharmacy counter with the aloe vera gel and eucalyptus drops.
Marijuana as a recreational drug should have the same legislation as alcohol, but recreational weed and medicinal marijuana should not be treated as the same thing.
Totally agree that cannabis should not be sold in liquor or beer store. Could be drug store or pharmacy or some other store dedicated to its sale. Also think packaging and limits on marketing are important.
You make a great point. It’s essential to make that distinction between recreational and medicinal marijuana. We have yet to see how the Legalization Task Force will address that in the legislation, but we hope that it’s given the proper consideration.
I have seen the damage a high person can do, and I will not risk myself or others on allowing even slightly impaired person to operate equipment. It is just too dangerous. I do not care if you think it is ok, when you are dead, you are dead.
It is I that caries the liability if anything goes wrong. I do not care where the drug comes from, or how they get it. Anyone I see impaired will be tested, and fired if any impairment is found. If they act impaired, I cannot send them out, and they become useless that day. I have never yet seen anyone act impaired and not be. It is about life, not someones pleasure. Those who are not working can do as they like, but if they show up impaired Monday morning, they get take to the nurse, for a test. End of discussion.
That is a different story. Legalization does not mean people should be allowed to operate machinery when impaired. Alcohol is legal. But it is against the law to drive or “operate heavy machinery” when drunk.
the problem with the drug problem is finding the truth amongst the sensationalistic, usually media driven, hype that has distorted the picture such that the ordinary non drug using folk believe that something as innocuous as Pot is, according to some, dangerous. we laud Olympic athletes who are all driven addicts, the best addict in their chosen sport held aloft by media as heroes, when many are fully obsessed, power driven egomaniacs not unlike your downtrodden drug addict yet society gives the tick or the flick, often based on what media decides will best create the drama that results in better ratings or political gain. and now when it comes to trying to reform drug laws and attitudes we have to unravel the lies that drug users themselves clearly see. the problem is too that there are either soft drugs like Pot or heavy duty drugs like Meth and Heroin but little or nothing in between. there should be more allowed soft and medium drugs and then the problem with hard drugs might lessen. many people can’t handle heavy drugs. we are hearing in Australia that more people are dying from prescription opioid overdose than illicit drug overdoses and yet at the same time there are efforts to further restrict codeine sales, thus potentially ensuring more people have access to harder drugs to overdose on because they aren’t drug savvy. there’s an awful mess to be undone should legalization ever occur in my country and undoing attitudes and lies which have caused stigma and discrimination against drug users is a big part of the task ahead.
I actually hate pot. Clearly it has its uses, but the debate on its relative merits can go on without me. What I want to comment on is addiction, which has no merit. It is normal to create a habit, but what we call addictions are the bad habits that limit our freedom and get in the way of human flourishing. I was addicted to pot for many years and I had a hell of time quitting. Distinguishing between soft and hard drugs is pretty much meaningless to me, as is the categorization of gateway drugs and psychological versus physical addictiveness. These concepts indicate a misunderstanding of addictions.
.
You want to debate the merits of Tylenol versus Advil, that’s fine, but when you’re talking about pot and about government policies for control and distribution, addictions need to be considered. Why is the science of addictions, for example the plain language explanations offered in Marc’s last book, not now informing our decision-makers?
Take a look at the Canada Temperance Act of 1878, and you can see the empowerment of local community standards through referendums and regular reviews. It was for alcohol legislation,but if applied to marijuana today, the 1878 laws could actually still serve as in improvement over what’s currently being proposed, not to mention being a whole better than drug wars we’ve had for so many decades. Im serious: the 1878 legislation is better than what we’re getting now. That’s not good!
Thanks for sharing that reference. The government is undoubtedly taking all examples and possible reference points into consideration–from Canada and abroad. Putting together a logical and feasible set of laws for an entire country can’t be easy, and they have some hard decisions to make. However, we do believe they are making some headway in that respect. The government is already considering how laws from the US and other countries could and are working in those jurisdictions.
Thanks for your reply, Hanna. The virtue of the Canada Temperance Act was that it didn’t attempt to be feasible to the entire country, but rather that it empowered local jurisdictions. Every community could make its own legislation, within broad guidelines. Sometimes it just works better to be a closer to the ground.
I’m writing from Vancouver today, although I live in Toronto. These two cities should not have the same drug laws.
Thanks for this — great points to consider and thanks for the info on laws and regulations around Cannabis in US, Portugal and the Netherlands. It would be good to include Uruguay as they have officially legalized cannabis but their approach I think has a few extra wrinkles (government keeping a registry of users’ names and things like that).
A few points I would like to make. I think it is good to talk about the legalization of “cannabis” as marijuana is one form (it means “Bad Tobacco” in Spanish).
Also I don’t totally agree with calling it a “soft drug”. Marijuana with a moderate amount of THC (say below 10%) might be a “soft drug” but marijuana with THC above 20% and almost no CBD to buffer its effects may not exactly be “soft’ in its capacity to pack a mind altering punch. With modern breeding and selection techniques this is not uncommon. Besides so-called “Skunk” there are edibles where people can unknowingly consume a huge hit of THC. You can read numerous accounts of people who have had very very bad trips on edibles and some compare it to trips to hell and say the experience was worse than a bad acid trip. There have been many trips to the emergency departments in Colorado and Washington due to the ingestion of edibles. Also there are now variations of THC called “Shatter” where cannabis oil is refined through butane to the point where the little globs have upwards of 80 to 90% THC. I actually read where someone recently died while taking a hit of shatter – they got so high they passed out and fell backwards and smashed their head.
So cannabis is not just one drug – in some ways it can be many and I think it is important to acknowledge this.
The other point I would like to make is that PM Justin Trudeau and his government is very clear that legalizing recreational cannabis use is to protect young people from its harmful effects. Right now with marijuana illegal Canada has the highest level of use amongst young people in the developed world (UNICEF study 2009). So Prohibition does not work. It is easier right now for young people in Canada to get weed than alcohol.
So legalization and regulation can protect young people by controlling the potency and quality of the cannabis and also controlling accessibility.
Marijuana and Cannabis (particularly strains high in THC) is a very different drug for adults than it is for young people. There are many longitudinal studies looking at the long term effects of regular cannabis use for people who began young and the signs are not positive. We see lower academic success, lower levels of life satisfaction and perhaps over time possibly 8% reduction in IQ. Also many studies suggest that THC taken in regular doses can actually disrupt actual developmental processes within the brain and particularly within the executive area which is involved in higher level decision making.
I have worked with young people at risk and many in the criminal justice system and I and many of my colleagues have seen countless young people dealing with ongoing mental health issues that seemed to begin with regular marijuana use. I highly recommend people watch David Suzuki’s piece “The Downside of Pot” which tells the compelling stories of a few young people. In my community problematic pot use is the most common problem young people come to the Addiction Services for help with.
I believe the goal of the government in legalization and regulation should to eliminate and discourage the use of cannabis amongst young people and amongst adults to encourage safe and responsible use. I hope that that it will be marketed like cigarettes with plain packaging with warnings. Many other steps need to be taken but I think harm reduction should supersede commercialization and its siren call. I also am hopeful that the government will be engaging young people for input and support throughout the process of legalization.
Cannabis seems to me is a medicine and can be a tool to improve the lives of people when used wisely. I think wise use suggests use by adults who won’t be impacted as adversely as young people. And ongoing research to uncover its benefits.
Thanks for suggesting the inclusion of Uruguay. We’ll consider that in future pieces. With regards to marijuana amongst adults and youth, it would take some careful marketing and diligent educational methods on the government’s part to incite such a shift on a mass scale. But we do believe it’s possible. Yet, it’s also a difficult process. It will take time and support from communities to make that happen. Marketing and packaging, as you mention, will play an important part in shaping responsible views towards marijuana. In fact, the CMA (Canadian Medical Association) which represents over 80,000 physicians across Canada, just submitted their list of recommendations to the Legalization Task Force. Among those recommendations was setting the age limit to 21 (source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cma-doctors-marijuana-legalization-guidelines-1.3751618). So discussions are being presented to address the issue. Looking at marijuana by-products as categorically different drugs is an interesting approach and it makes sense to a certain degree when talking about medical strains and potency. It will be interesting to see how the government officially treats the issue of recreational edibles and if THC amounts will impact the way in how they control distribution.
Marijuana per say is relatively safe when good procedures are in place regarding sale and consumption. This requires a level of policy input by the state/local authorities. I used to think that I was addicted to mj but I had to relearn a lot of behaviours regarding consumption.
Stop the drug war with objective of shutting down the black market. The drug war has failed. Decriminalization/legalization is necessary, it needs to be backed up with public health announcements explaining exactly why it is needed. Its not in any way condoning the abuse of addictors, it is done bc the alternative, the drug war, has made things infinitely worse on almost every level, to include making drugs abundantly available to any & all that wants them.
We need to pull LE out of the drug biz – that will free up a lot of resources currently chasing their collective tails. When the laws create more harm and cause more damage than they prevent, its time to change the laws. The $1 TRILLION so-called war on drugs is a massive big government failure – on nearly every single level. Its way past time to put the cartels & black market drug dealers out of business. Mass incarceration has failed. We cant even keep drugs out of a contained & controlled environment like prison.
We need the science of addiction causation to guide prevention, treatment, recovery & public policies. Otherwise, things will inexorably just continue to worsen & no progress will be made. Addiction causation research has continued to show that some people (suffering with addiction) have a “hypo-active endogenous opioid/reward system.” This is the (real) brain disease, making addiction a symptom, not a disease itself. One disease, one pathology. Policy must be made reflecting addiction(s) as a health issue.
The war on drugs is an apotheosis of the largest & longest war failure in history. It actually exposes our children to more harm & risk and does not protect them whatsoever. In all actuality, the war on drugs is nothing more than an international projection of a domestic psychosis. It is not the “great child protection act,” its actually the complete opposite.
The lesson is clear: Drug laws do not stop people from harming themselves, but they do cause addicts to commit crimes and harm others. We need a new approach that decriminalizes the disease. We must protect society from the collateral damage of addiction and stop waging war on ourselves. We need common sense harm reduction approaches desperately. MAT (medication assisted treatment) and HAT (heroin assisted treatment) must be available options. Of course, MJ should not be a sched drug at all.
Hmm! Nice suggestion for a country to control a substance abuse in a country. It should be done by Government. But not looking in future.