Evidence of meeting #66 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was youth.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
My understanding is that in the current legislation we're talking about pot and growing of plants. Edibles are not mentioned.
11:55 a.m.
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
My concern is that we need to make sure that this issue around young children having accidental ingestions with edibles is up there, that people know about this risk so that it's not lost.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Yes. Well, Colorado has done that and we've heard evidence about this. You're absolutely correct about that, about making sure that they're single servings, that they're in childproof containers, that there's no marketing to children, that the product itself is stamped so that you can tell what it's going to be. All these conditions have been implemented in Colorado. Would it be your testimony that if we do that, edibles should be legalized?
I'm going to run out of time, so I'm just going to get my context out here. The reason I ask is because of your testimony on aligning the age with alcohol and tobacco. You felt that it was preferable to get access to regulated products of known quantity and avoid high-risk behaviour. If you don't legalize edibles, you are leaving edibles to the complete black market where it's totally unregulated, and high-risk behaviour in young people who will continue to have access with no regulation whatsoever will continue. I want you to square that circle for me.
I'm putting to you that we should regulate edibles, because if we don't, the exact same problems will occur that you described occurring by not legalizing cannabis at a proper age.
Noon
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
I'm not saying that edibles should be legalized. I am saying there are a lot of concerns about young people and toddlers ingesting edibles if they're around in the household. Even though those childproofing measures you mentioned might prevent harm, having them around is a concern. The edibles are a concern and that has not been discussed.
Noon
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Chair.
I'd like to talk about education. One of the public policy objectives here, of course, is to reduce access or use, at least, among youth. Key to that, as we've heard from many people, is education.
What kind of education actually works for this? We've heard allusions to the fried egg on concrete example. I remember, way back, a movie called Reefer Madness, which was promoted in the sixties as a means of keeping kids off drugs, and frankly, it was universally scorned because it was so bizarre.
What works? I'd ask Mr. Culbert, perhaps, to start.
Noon
Executive Director, Canadian Public Health Association
As I referred to earlier, it is about having conversations and normalizing the conversation about substance use and not limiting it just to cannabis. As a society, we are very uncomfortable. We don't like talking about sex, we're not great talking about alcohol, and we have a significant paradigm shift going here when it comes to currently illegal psychoactive substances. It's making sure that parents, teachers, social services, and health professionals all have tools to help them have that conversation.
Do I want to see a national campaign that is the Government of Canada telling you how to smoke pot? No. I don't think that is a legitimate way forward. A national campaign that directs all Canadians to vetted resources that are going to help them have that conversation in different contexts is the way forward.
It's simply having honest conversations and trying to leave personal biases or the myths that you've carried from your childhood out of the conversation. It's having an open mind when you're talking to kids or family members about this, and then being able to have an honest conversation about why you want to use these substances. If it appears that there's problematic use happening, it's being able to have that conversation as well.
Noon
Liberal
Noon
Executive Director, Educators for Sensible Drug Policy
What's important here is having the three levels of government involved. We need to ask for municipal opinions. They feel they've been left out of the discussion. We need to talk to the provincial ministries of education. Teachers have felt they have been muzzled, that they haven't been able to talk about this issue. They have feared for their jobs—it goes that far—and have left the discussion of cannabis to law enforcement officers, in particular, the DARE program.
Since l982 the DARE program has literally taken over the classroom on discussing the issue of cannabis, and it's usually with a zero tolerance and “just say no” message, which has left the children frustrated and unsafe because they stop listening. While the teachers are in the staff room, asking, “What do we do here? We haven't been given the responsibility to teach this”, we have now asked for a moratorium on law officers in the classroom, so that we can return to educators the responsibility for delivering evidence-based drug education in a holistic manner.
The federal government needs to talk to the provincial ministries of education across Canada. We need to get the values of families discussed without fear or judgment. Until we do that, none of the governments are talking back and forth. Parents are feeling that they have to take matters into their own hands. If they do, educators must reflect those families. Right now we don't see that. If we can really get the dialogue going and have the discussion without the fear, the federal government can actually help move that forward.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
What I'm hearing is somewhat my own predilection in this matter, which is that we need to avoid the preachy and condescending, patronizing sort of message, right?
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
The comment was made by someone that we must not talk about recreational cannabis. They advised that we not talk about recreational cannabis in the act, just about cannabis.
Would you like to respond to the point on education as well, Mr. Renaud?
12:05 p.m.
Communications Director, Educators for Sensible Drug Policy
I agree with Judith that there has been a real dearth of good information available, especially to young people. If they feel they're being lied to, the tendency is to turn off and not listen. Now that we'll actually be able to have credible studies done in a legal environment, we'll all be able to find out exactly where things are going and what information is relevant. The main thing is to be truthful and honest, and not to have a predetermined agenda that needs to be supported, as has been the case in the past.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Thank you.
Mr. Culbert, we've heard testimony that strict marketing and plain packaging could make it difficult for the new legal market to compete with the existing illicit market. Would you share your rationale for recommending plain packaging?
We've also heard testimony that branding can be important, still within the context of plain packaging. Could you respond?
12:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Public Health Association
Branding can be important to the bottom line of the private sector, plain and simple. It's why you make something look attractive, so that people know, “I want the product in the red package because that's the one my dad uses”, whatever that product may be.
Nothing about plain packaging prohibits the provision of clear information about potency, outcomes, and potential side effects of use of the product. We need to not glamorize cannabis consumption the way we previously glamorized tobacco and continue to glamorize alcohol. This is not an industry that needs help selling its product, so it's a complete red herring that the poor industry isn't going to be viable if they don't have these rights given to them. They want to be able to market as strongly as any other industry wants to market itself, but there is no need for it. We have a proven marketplace in Canada already.
As far as competitiveness with the illegal market, which won't disappear overnight, the studies in Washington state and in Colorado have shown that when they have the option, people prefer to go to the legal option. Even if it's not exactly the same product they're used to, and even if it's slightly more expensive, they would rather not risk a criminal fine by purchasing an illegal product.
Once again, legalizing and regulating is helping the legitimate industry, and we will eventually see a reduction in the illegal market.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
That completes our seven-minute round. We'll go to five-minute questions now, starting with Dr. Carrie.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Again, this is another great panel. I wish I had more time to ask questions, but I have a very short period of time.
I want to start by picking up on a point that I think Mr. Howlett made, that with our youth there's a diminished understanding of risk. The CMA was here with very credible witnesses. Dr. Grant, thank you for updating us on the science, about the structural and functional effects, the problems with psychosis, with schizophrenia. I have a person close to me for whom it has been linked.
My concern is still, are we doing enough to help our young people? Talking to parents in my community, some of the comments were that this is a big experiment that Canada is conducting and that very few countries have gone this way. There are a lot of concerns. We can always get easier, but it's tough to get tougher.
You mentioned something that I thought was interesting. Not too many people have brought this up. You talked about higher THC levels and something of known potency. How would you see that being implemented? Should a certain amount of THC concentration be prohibited for those under the age of 25? We've heard that age mentioned a lot. How would you do that?
12:10 p.m.
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
One of the recommendations from the Canadian Paediatric Society is that one way to mitigate some of the risks, because we know that youth and young adults are going to continue to experiment, would be to allow only lower-potency cannabis to be available legally to those under the age of 25. That was our recommendation.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
12:10 p.m.
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
Yes, a lower concentration of THC, because THC is the psychoactive ingredient.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
The Liberals were very clear that they want to take it out of the hands of organized crime, but we've heard from witnesses from other jurisdictions that organized crime is not going to go away. In terms of decreasing the use by kids, again from the Colorado experiment, and we had Washington here yesterday, as Mr. Culbert said, it hasn't gone up but it certainly hasn't gone down any further.
I like this whole idea of education and implementing something. I'm disappointed that the Liberals have had two years and have done nothing yet, and this is rolling out in 290 days.
I want your opinion. We've had witnesses here who claim to be experts, and they're commenting, for example, that cannabis is not even as harmful as alcohol. I think the science, especially for our youth—and we should be concentrating on our youth—is very clear that it is worse.
With this bill, 12- to 17-year-olds are able to have, for personal use, up to five grams. You're on the record as saying that you don't like the ticketable offence. Twelve-year-olds, that is grade 6. You deal with kids; I don't, as a politician. What would you do with these kids? We've heard the government talk about harm reduction and that philosophy moving forward, but not a lot about the prevention and the treatment side of things.
A 12-year-old, who is the big kid in public school, who the younger kids are looking up to, can have up to five grams for personal use in this bill. If a teacher catches one of these kids, what do they do with them?
12:10 p.m.
Member of the Adolescent Health Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
Just to be clear, as I said in my opening statements, there is no safe age for cannabis use. Right?