Evidence of meeting #64 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was medical.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jacqueline Bogden  Assistant Deputy Minister, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Branch, Department of Health
Carole Morency  Director General and Senior General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Kathy Thompson  Assistant Deputy Minister, Community Safety and Countering Crime Branch, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Commissioner Joanne Crampton  Federal Policing Criminal Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Diane Labelle  General Counsel, Health Canada Legal Services, Department of Justice
Eric Costen  Director General, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Branch, Department of Health
Anne McLellan  Senior Advisor, Bennett Jones LLP, As an Individual
Mark Ware  Associate Professor, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, As an Individual
Michael Spratt  Criminal Lawyer, Abergel Goldstein and Partners, As an Individual
David Johnston  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association for Pharmacy Distribution Management
Shelita Dattani  Director, Practice Development and Knowledge Translation, Canadian Pharmacists Association
Philippe Lucas  Executive Director, Canadian Medical Cannabis Council
Keith Jones  Chair, Government Relations, Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance
Dale Tesarowski  Executive Director, Corporate Initiatives, Performance and Planning, Saskatchewan Ministry of Justice
Sébastien St. Louis  Member of Board of Directors, Cannabis Canada Association
Colette Rivet  Executive Director, Cannabis Canada Association
Robert Rae  Director, Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance
Laurent Marcoux  President, Canadian Medical Association
Trevor Bhupsingh  Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Martin Bruce  Organized Crime Section, Vancouver Police Department
Jeff Blackmer  Vice-President, Medical Professionalism, Canadian Medical Association
Jennifer Lutfallah  Director General, Enforcement and Intelligence Programs, Canada Border Services Agency
Sergeant Bill Speam  Organized Crime Section, Vancouver Police Department

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Your time is up. Thanks very much. Now we move to the three-minute round.

Mr. Davies.

5:15 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Thank you.

Picking up on where my colleague Mr. Oliver was going, it strikes me as intuitive that you wouldn't want to damage your brain by taking anything that might alter your consciousness, and that as a young brain is developing it would be susceptible to more damage. That would be the thesis that I would have in my mind, but I want to test the science a bit on this.

Are there actually long-term longitudinal studies, peer reviewed, that show the impact of marijuana on developing brains? I'm curious as to how those studies would even have been conducted, given that marijuana has been illegal and given the ethical considerations. I mean, you can't have a control group of 15-year-olds that you're giving marijuana to—or not.

I'm just wondering about this. It's not that I doubt the intuition of it, but I am curious. As a health committee, we try to look at the science. How settled is the science on the score of the impact of cannabis on brains and brain development?

5:15 p.m.

Vice-President, Medical Professionalism, Canadian Medical Association

Dr. Jeff Blackmer

I would say that it's not entirely settled. There's no question that there's work left to be done.

To your point, I think a lot of the studies are really retrospective. They're about looking at people who have smoked in the past and looking at the impact that may have had. There are a lot of confounding variables there, such as socio-economic status and different types of educational opportunities, but in controlling for those, we do see a difference in terms of things like educational attainment, IQ, vocational attainment, and these types of things, and it does appear to be primarily related to cannabis consumption. The earlier the age, the higher the levels, and the greater the impact.

I agree that there is definitely further research that needs to be done. In states and in places where it's been legalized, I think we're at the beginning of that in a more prospective fashion and probably will gather more data over time.

5:15 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Thank you.

In terms of age, I think Mr. Oliver also described some of the competing issues we have. I'm not suggesting this at this point but just as a concept, this government has chosen age 18 as the floor, and I'm thinking that a number of factors would at least suggest that it should be 19.

It sounds to me like the later you can delay the onset of cannabis use, it's intuitively better for brain development. Seven out of 10 provinces already set the age for drinking at 19, and it strikes me that there are fewer 19-year-olds in high school generally, so you would limit legitimate legal cannabis possession in high schools. That's competing against the reality that 15- to 18-year-olds are getting cannabis no matter what we do or say.

I'm just wondering about it. Given all of those things, would you suggest that 19—I think you've mentioned 21—would be a more reasonable floor, or are we just being arbitrary?

5:20 p.m.

Vice-President, Medical Professionalism, Canadian Medical Association

Dr. Jeff Blackmer

I like it better than 18, but to an extent there is some arbitrariness to it, I think. I understand the argument about driving people into the black market. I see all that. Again, understand the lens that we're using, which is the health and safety lens primarily. We leave the enforcement angle up to other people. We would still like to see it later than 19, again for the protection of the developing brain. It's very straightforward, and everyone understands.

We understand that the government has to balance all of these competing priorities. We're trying to do what we can, on behalf of our physicians and their patients, to have the best protection and the best consideration possible of health and safety in the legislation.

5:20 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Thank you.

Do you have similar concerns with alcohol? Are the concepts the same?

5:20 p.m.

Vice-President, Medical Professionalism, Canadian Medical Association

Dr. Jeff Blackmer

They're very similar. As I alluded to earlier, a lot of people say, we'll make it 19 because that's what it is for alcohol, but in fact there's still debate and there's still controversy over that. I mean, that age limit was set a long time ago. A number of people who work in mental health services feel that this discussion should be reopened, and that perhaps a later age for alcohol as well would be appropriate. I'm not suggesting that we open that discussion today. I'm just saying that there is controversy around that as well in certain circles.

5:20 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

From a medical perspective...?

5:20 p.m.

Vice-President, Medical Professionalism, Canadian Medical Association

Dr. Jeff Blackmer

From a medical perspective.

5:20 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Thank you.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

That winds it up.

I want to say thank you very much on behalf of the committee for excellent information. You were excellent witnesses. You provided us with a lot of information.

Mr. Oliver mentioned the opioid study that we did. We had first responders from Vancouver. Some of the most compelling testimony we had in two years came from those responders. We thank you and the police department and your first responders from Vancouver for helping us understand your perspective.

Thank you very much to the Canadian Medical Association and the CBSA, our border services. I appreciate it very much.

With that, we end the meeting. We'll see you tomorrow morning.