Health Committee on Sept. 12th, 2017

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Your time is up.

Ms. Sidhu.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to correct the record. Washington has medical homegrown.

My question is for Mr. Freedman. You have been quoted as saying that the looseness of the homegrown laws in Colorado can cause an access point for the illicit market. The Bill C-45 limit is four plants of no more than one metre in height. Could you comment on how this regulation would prevent a diversion to the legal market from home-based production?

[Andrew Freedman]

Thank you, because it's a very important distinction. It is important to note that in Colorado it's pretty easy to get to 99 plants. It was, by the way; we cleaned up the legislation to 12 plants. It's hard for me to say, but I would say there's a lot less evidence that something like four plants, especially if there are very clear guidelines, there are not ways to co-op those plants together, and law enforcement has very clear guidelines.... I don't have the information to tell you that it would be a problem.

I do have the information to tell you that 99 plants is a huge problem and, especially, that I would look carefully at all the ways in which laws can be mixed and moulded together such that they can both create confusion for law enforcement and give people a larger plant ground-count gross than what you initially wanted.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

You have often spoken to the importance of setting up cannabis tracking systems from seed to sale. In jurisdictions that legalize and regulate its use, could you explain how this was established and what benefit it has brought for public safety?

[Andrew Freedman]

In Colorado, seed-to-sale tracking is a radio frequency identifier tag on every marijuana plant in the regulated market once it's over six inches tall, the primary purpose being that it gives regulators a way to ensure you're not shipping it out of state. That's why it exists. It's so that at every point in the process you have to tell an internal database how many plants are there. If you're lying or if it doesn't match at any point, you're in violation of your licence agreement.

The system went up. It actually has done.... I mean, we've found people violating it, but we have found them, and that means we are finding good compliance rates and that it is preventing massive out-of-state diversion operations. I would say also the part that we could use it better for is that we should be lining it up with public health and public safety information. If we could have quickly seen that edibles were being sold more in tourist towns than they were in other towns, we could have gotten out a point-of-sale education system in a much shorter period of time, which could have prevented hospitalization increases.

Not only do I think it's an effective law enforcement tool, but I think it's giving us amazing data. If we can figure out how to use it better, it will help us govern marijuana better.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Vasquez, I wonder if you could also comment on how data collection through a tracking system might support the work of law enforcement.

[Marco Vasquez]

Again, the lack of data collection has been very problematic for us here in Colorado. To get some baseline information is really critical to be able to measure increases and trends, to really be able to talk about how marijuana legalization is impacting us from a public safety standpoint.

As Mr. Freedman just mentioned, the seed-to-sale tracking system within the commercial market works well to be able to track the inventory from the seed or from the clone all the way to the product being sold in a dispensary. Again, the difficulty we have in Colorado is that we only have that for the commercial side of the marijuana industry. For the caregivers, the co-op grows, and the home-grows, we don't have any ability to track those plants at all. I have some statistics here that show the number of marijuana plants in the commercial industry in 2016, and that's very helpful data for us, but again, it would be very helpful to have the additional piece about the non-commercial grows as well.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

Ms. Weeks, you said in your statement that Washington has three types of training programs for consultation certificates for retailers. Can you explain a little bit about that?

[Kristi Weeks]

The legislature asked us to approve training programs for consultants, so private schools have submitted their curricula to us for approval, to make sure that they are teaching consultants what they are supposed to do or not do within the confines of the law. It's much like a nursing school or a massage therapist school. We have three different training programs for these consultants.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Freedman, how does the quality of marijuana sold on the black market compare with the product sold in the legal market?

[Andrew Freedman]

It's hard to say because we don't always see the product in the black market, but we have instituted pretty rigorous pesticide controls and homogeneity controls on edibles, and contaminant testing, which have, over time, really increased the quality and consistency of what's inside the regulated market.

We don't do this kind of testing because it's all illegally seized property. My guess is that there's quite a bit of what's called myclobutanil being used on homegrown plants, which we don't allow inside the regulated market, that is known to cleave off hydrogen cyanide when heated to over 400 degrees Fahrenheit. So there are significant advances being made in quality control on marijuana.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

That's good. That's our seven-minute round.

We're going to go to our five-minute round, starting with Dr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses, and again, what great witnesses we have.

It's unfortunate that the government really wants to cram everything into one week because they want to get this done.

For me, it's an eye-opener. With the American experience it seems it was the people moving up to look at these issues about decriminalization and small quantities, whereas in Canada this really came about from a poorly thought-out political promise that was made, and we're seeing that the federal government is trying to force a timeline down on the provinces and territories. We've heard from provinces that aren't happy and police forces that aren't happy with it, and what really bothers me is the narrative from the government saying we have to rush. There is no rush here.

Since they say the status quo isn't working, I'm going to read this into the record. “The World Health Organization and the Public Health Agency of Canada”—okay, it's an agency of Canada—“have released the results of the latest survey of nearly 30,000 children in 377 schools across Canada, first administered in 1990.” Now, these are 2014 numbers, but it says:

Cannabis use is now at its lowest level since 1990. About 23 per cent of boys and girls aged 15 and 16 report having tried the drug, which is down by half from its peaks in 2002, when 50 per cent of boys said they smoked, and...40 per cent of girls had tried [it].

This whole rush about it really makes me uncomfortable. We have such a short period of time to jam this in. We're not listening to the lessons that you gentlemen and you witnesses are bringing forward, and what really concerns us is our youth.

Mr. Sabet, I think you used the term “normalization” and referred to the worry about that. In this legislation, the bill would allow young persons—which is defined as between the ages of 12 and 17—to have up to five grams of marijuana, and from my understanding in talking to people, that can be 10 to 15 joints. I think that's enough for somebody for a day, but I want to ask you these questions.

Do you think it should be illegal for those under the legal age to possess marijuana? Do you think a 12-year-old or a 17-year-old possessing five grams at one time would likely share it or sell it to others, and what does this do to normalize marijuana?

[Dr. Kevin Sabet]

When I read that provision, I was surprised that we would allow it for a 12-year-old. However, again, I don't think we have to fall into the dichotomy of either leaving it there, letting the messages be misinterpreted online and in other places, and giving young people the message that this is all fine and dandy, or of cracking down, expelling them from school, not giving them health services, and treating them in an enforcement way. I would hope that it could be rewritten in a way that we want to help....

There is no reason that a 12-year-old, or a 17-year-old, should be smoking marijuana. The issue is that we want to be able to help them. We want to get them mental health services. If a 12-year-old is smoking marijuana regularly, I'm guessing that they're probably using alcohol regularly. If you look at it, they're complements for young people. What help do they need? I don't think they should be expelled from school. We don't want to lay the hammer on them, but I think there are health interventions.

I do worry about the message it might send, even if it's caveated with “we don't want you to use”, if it's written like that in the law without saying that, “Under a certain amount, we're not just going to allow you to possess it. That's not the point. The point is that we're not going to give you a criminal record, but we are going to connect you to health and social services in school and in your community.”

That would be a positive step. I think that would be very good. Again, though, that takes investment. All of these things—Can we enforce the seed to sale? Can we make sure with regard to the driving issue and the testing? Can we make sure that people don't use in public?—need to come with an investment. I think there are still so many unanswered questions about that.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Freedman, what would you think about that?

[Andrew Freedman]

I'm not sure I have much to add over Dr. Sabet's analysis. Honestly, I don't have expertise on what criminalization with regard to 12- to 17-year-olds would do to consumption patterns. I just don't have that much to add, expertise-wise.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

One of the concerns is more around whether this helps normalize it. As I think Dr. Sabet was saying, maybe we should, before going down this path.... There may be other options, but that's what we have. We have the bill in front of us.

I also wanted to talk to you about this. I live in a border town, and I'm worried about jobs. A lot of jobs in Canada depend on trade. With these three treaties, even if the government is going down this route, they're supposed to let the other countries know that we are going to be withdrawing. I don't know what their solution is. What do you think will happen to jobs in Canada, where one in five jobs relies on trade, or I think more than that, if we're so out of sync with our biggest trading partners?

[Dr. Kevin Sabet]

I don't know what has been discussed in terms of what happens when someone crosses the border and they're asked questions: Have they used, are they using, are they in the business or are they not, and what do they have on their person? I'm not privy to those conversations. I think it's definitely a concern. I think jobs are a concern not only for the issue about trading partners but even just internally, whether you're in a border town or not. Does marijuana help people get to work on time and do their jobs in a safe and responsible manner? I don't think so.

If the issue is that we're going to be testing more, which you may want to do, THC does stay in your system a little bit longer than alcohol. Alcohol isn't metabolized in your fat the way THC is. Depending on the person, it could be three days. In some cases it could be up to 30 days. What happens if that the person has an accident and they're saying it's because of the working conditions? If you say, “Actually, you tested positive for marijuana,” they could say, “I used it legally three days ago. It was on the weekend, boss. You can't penalize. It's legal now.” I think there are a lot of those complications. Frankly, it's a lawyer's dream in terms of the lawsuit and liability issues. We've seen insurance claims in some of these jurisdictions be affected by this, because all of these other implications on accidents are happening.

There are, understandably, just so many questions that need to be looked at and confronted. Otherwise, to use a term I like, which I think Andrew has used before, you'll be building and flying the plane at the same time. We did that in the U.S., and I would say not so much because all the people wanted to do it but because there was a cash infusion by a few very rich billionaires, and people who wanted to get richer, pushing messages for years about marijuana's harmlessness, that it was safer than alcohol, and all these things. They were able to push the ballot initiative. Most people probably thought they were voting on decriminalization, not on a pot shop on Main Street.

Nevertheless, they passed it. Folks were left with building the plane and flying it at the same time. Obviously, you are trying to build the plane before it takes off. That's better, but let's make sure we look at all the parts as opposed to neglecting a lot of the parts and saying we'll deal with them after takeoff. We don't want to deal with them after takeoff.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Time's up.

Mr. Oliver.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for your testimony.

Ms. Weeks, in particular, thank you to you. You're on a vacation in Hawaii and spending time with us in Ottawa. I think that's quite unique, so thank you very much for that.

I want to just say a quick piece here. In Canada we've had legalized medical marijuana now for over a decade. We're not new to this particular field. The government was clear during the election in 2015 that this would be a priority. In June 2016 a task force was launched. It met with doctors, lawyers, researchers, law enforcement, and multiple stakeholder groups in different jurisdictions.

There were 20,000 submissions to the expert task force that eventually, with those recommendations, came about to produce this legislation. The legislation is more conservative. We've heard both from the chair and the vice-chair and from others, that the legislation itself is more conservative than the recommendations that were brought forward from the task force. It was introduced in April, and we're here today. We still have nine months to the point when it would probably become legalized, so I think this has been a very careful, very thoughtful process.

We have a problem in Canada. As much as I keep hearing numbers from other members on the committee, the bottom line is that 21% of youth in Canada acknowledged using marijuana in the last year, and 30% of young adults said they used marijuana in the last year. A recent UNICEF study has Canada as the worst. These are children, 11-, 13-, and 15-year-olds, who reported using cannabis in the last 12 months. We're at the bottom of 29 nations. Our children are the heaviest users of marijuana among 29 industrialized nations, so we have to go somewhere with this.

Mr. Sabet, I was quite confused by your testimony. I heard you say what we know, that use of marijuana is not healthy for young people. There are uncertain longer-term psychiatric potential risks, but I don't know that they're proven yet. I heard you say, “Don't legalize it”, but then I heard you say, “Don't charge people for possession of it.”

[Dr. Kevin Sabet]

Yes.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

My conclusion, then, would be that decriminalizing is the recommendation you're bringing to this group.

[Dr. Kevin Sabet]

That's only part of it. I think partly, if you're worried about criminal records for young people and enforcement resources, that's one way to do it, but I wouldn't just say leave it alone and decriminalize it. I would say, if you're going to remove criminal sanctions, and that really gets out there and people see that and know that.... By the way, decriminalization and legalization are used so often interchangeably. They're obviously—