on the corporate cannabis question – recommend a diversity of producers
how to protect little players – diversity if an important value in relation to the producers. there will be means by which gov't going forward could ensure a certain degree of diversity. different kinds of market interventions that gov't could choose to adopt to ensure diversity. recommend that is something the government watches very carefully. the governent needs to understand the value of a diverse market with growers of different sizes/expertise. at the end of the day how that market develops is up to the government of Canada
legalization timeline – no recommendation; up to Federal government
storefront model – wholesale and resale distribution within jurisdiction of provinces and territories. final decisions in the form of retail up to provinces/territories
degree of support for legalisation – absolute
how much pressure on policy makers to get this right, where did you go most helpful to legalise – very important for gov't to get this right. provide most concrete, balanced recommendations around policy of public safety and public health. setup baseline measures to understand start points, constantly learning as you go along and build flexibility into framework that allows you to maneuver as you go
taxation suggesting revenue raised goes into law enforcement/health? – we are not quantifying where revenue should go. wide variety of nothing more than guesses and estimates. make the case clearly that all governments, revenue gained from new legal market, some substantial part should flow into public education, enforcement, inspection and for the gov't to license producers to apply in a timely fashion
police enforcement – drug impaired driving is already a challenge; not a new challenge created by legalisation. that is why science is catching up to challenge. not quite there yet, police are testing three roadside oral fluid testing devices to determine any of which three may be the breakthrough ppl hoping for. THC metabolizes differently in body, can't adopt a BAC approach to determining impairment.
difficult to set 18 as limit – challenge balance between risks between brain and adolescent health and risk of the black market. science is non-existent or contradictory; differences in interpretation in report. believe we've arrived at sensible point, critical piece is they're informed on their decisions, how we teach parents, children, public about risks when used at very early ages and thc quantity.
legal limit for impaired driving – yes if we had the science to backup the limit; the science is not quite there although catching up
how can you demonstrate to determine level of THC in blood constitutes impaired driving; science not there yet, so unable to make recommendation on something unproven. many scientists currently working to provide police with the tools they need. want roadside protection, want the possibility of assessing level in the blood
one suggestion we make is this issue is for future, continuing problem and recommendation that should be left in Criminal Code for the time being.
max potency for edible products – comes from experience with Colorado which did not label and warn public and saw public-health issues emerge. not appealing to children, plain packaging and labeled so consumers have access to standardized dose
current law – should be enforced until time that law is changed (good for LPs) (perspective as former Minister of Justice
what should gov't be most vigilante about? education; what is cannabis, it is a tool for doctors, patients; we need to education ourselves about this product. we are preparing the groundwork
compassion club visited BC we saw a holistic approach, where cannabis is part and parcel of a wellness approach. met people who run the club, patients, board of directors. We do have to be honest that presently that which is done there is illegal, at least part, some part of that which they are doing. They in fact are licensed under the City of Vancouver as other dispensaries have been licensed in that city. What we learned there is that there can be a holistic wellness based approach, street-level approach that serves highly marginalised populations and this is a model that the report references and suggests governments should look at going forward
edit: some quick notes I took during the presentation; hardly exhaustive and would recommend everyone read the full report