Canada can take the lead in marketing legal weed
Legislation should be bolder than task force suggests, writes
Spring has sprung and along with robins and crocus blooms, Canadians are eagerly awaiting the legislation to create and govern the recreational cannabis market. I hope that legislation is bolder and more practical than the cautious and naive recommendations issued nearly four months ago by the federal government’s task force on the issue.
The task force, with its emphasis on law enforcement, failed to imagine and embrace a legal, recreational market. Instead its approach is needlessly restricting and controlling. It seeks to create a market to sell cannabis but wants to sell the least amount possible, essentially trying to suck and blow at the same time.
The report cautiously categorizes marketing elements such as product packaging and advertising under the heading “minimizing harm.” They rightly belong under a heading akin to “responsibly developing the market.” The team treats cannabis in a slightly more restrictive way than tobacco. In summary, it calls for:
A dedicated retail outlet, but not the liquor store (including provincial ones) because a high-traffic location like that might encourage the purchase of cannabis and might promote co-usage with alcohol;
Plain packaging with only basic information (more restrictive than current tobacco regulations);
Restricted sponsorship, endorsement and branding similar to tobacco (i.e. none);
Limited promotion (advertising) to adult-only locations, similar to tobacco (i.e. virtually zero advertising, in-store signage only).
The task force misjudged the harm presented by cannabis use. Most evidence indicates that occasional, recreational use of cannabis by adults does no harm, particularly if the user avoids smoking it. Most experts agree it is quite a bit less harmful than alcohol and far less harmful and addicting than tobacco. Consider marijuana like enjoying a glass of wine. No one is talking about putting wine into plain packaging.
The recommendations also fail to consider the reality of the marketplace. The federal government invited people to risk their capital and start businesses as “licensed producers and sellers” of medical marijuana; roughly 40 companies now hold licences and hundreds of applicants are in the queue. These emerging brands and companies will almost certainly carry forward into the recreational market or suffer significant losses. How does the regulator justify depriving these investors of their corresponding right to build their brands through marketing and advertising? The government is naive to simultaneously exploit the invisible hand of capitalism and at the same time lock it in to highly restrictive handcuffs.
Of course, it is reasonable to have controls on promoting cannabis to minors, but the government’s own estimates indicate that one-third of all 18- to 24-year-olds consume cannabis at least once a year. They anticipate that 4.3 million Canadians over 18 will use cannabis upon legalization. There is no practical reason to deny these consumers their robust marketplace of brands; certainly, not the fear of attracting minors, which can be managed through simple guidelines as we do in other categories such as alcohol and condoms.
Roughly 70 per cent of Canadians support legalizing marijuana, in part to dampen organized crime, and also because of the wasted investment trying to prohibit it. Destroying the illegal market will be a considerable challenge. We sink ourselves when we try to eliminate the “plain brown envelope” by selling cannabis in a plain brown envelope. As always, desirable, legal cannabis brands will be built through investment in packaging design and promotional communication.
The task force sidestepped both its mandated responsibility and the economic opportunity presented by recreational marijuana. Instead it stuffed it into an ill-fitting package called “tobacco” and applied the maximum marketing restrictions available. It’s preposterous to do it under the banner of “minimizing harm” to youth.
Canada has a rare opportunity to be a global leader in the production, marketing and trade in cannabis. We have already begun exporting our products, skills and knowledge to other countries. To continue this windfall, our regulation needs to overcome the residual fear of prohibition. Canadians are ready to evolve; is their government?