Profit-driven pot market starts to look unlikely

Referendum likely to propose strict rules on supply and possession

The 2020 referendum to legalise cannabis looks likely to propose a tightly regulated framework, including strict rules on supply and possession, an age limit of at least 18, and a non-profit model where money from sales may be funnelled into health services.

And while it is widely accepted that legalising personal use would not eliminate harm or kill off a black market, a political consensus appears to be emerging that the status quo is broken, but a profit-driven legal market would be just as bad.

Justice Minister Andrew Little said the Government was still working on the referendum question, but he personally opposed a framework similar to alcohol if the public voted for legalisation in 2020.

“My general view would be, if there is an appetite for liberalisation in whatever form, to start with maximum regulation and control,” Little told the Weekend Herald.

“That’s the way you mitigate the risks, and then future generations can review what’s happening and whether further relaxation is needed.”

NZ First justice spokesman Darroch Ball said the level of cannabis-related harm in a black market dominated by gangs showed the current system was not working: “It’s just common sense to start at a more conservative, regulated market. Once you have no regulation, the horse has bolted and there’s no coming back.”

He added that the NZ First caucus was yet to make any decisions about the referendum question.

Green Party spokeswoman for drug law reform Chloe Swarbrick said a black market and a legal free market both “preyed on vulnerable people”.

She pointed to a report from the Global Commission on Drug Policy, which said both models were “extremes” that pursued profit without having to deal with social harms.

This week National Party deputy leader Paula Bennett was appointed its spokeswoman for drug reform, and she warned about the perils of a profit-driven model.

“They’re turning marijuana products into lollies and ice cream so that it attracts younger people and gets them hooked . . . We’re hearing about a major beer brewer also looking at a cannabis-based product. Those things frighten me.”

Drug Foundation executive director Ross Bell said an example of “maximum control” would be to select the strictest measures from jurisdictions that had legalised cannabis. That could translate to a Government monopoly on supply and a national register for all users (Uruguay), a ban on home cultivation and public consumption (Washington state), a purchase age of 21 (many US states, in line with the drinking age), a weekly purchase limit of 10g (Uruguay), a limit on the level of THC in the blood to be legally allowed to drive (Canada and Colorado), and a blanket ban on advertising.

But Bell said any controls had to consider whether they would create a legal vacuum that the black market could fill.

How to prevent young people accessing illegal cannabis was a major concern. Drug researcher and Massey University Associate Professor Chris Wilkins said teenagers were particularly at risk.

“There is a higher risk of dependency, educational underachievement, unemployment, and adverse effects on brain development and IQ, particularly around 14 or younger.”

Regulation was one way to mitigate that risk because it would control a market that could see “corporations pushing to promote cannabis to young people”.

Wilkins supported a non-profit model similar to gambling slot machines, where 40 per cent of all sales returned to the community.

Studies into the effects of legalisation on cannabis use have shown mixed results.

The US National Survey on Drug Use and Health showed that marijuana usage increased from 10 to 16 per cent among those aged 12 and over from 2008/09 to 2016/17 in Colorado, where recreational cannabis was legalised in 2013.

That increase came mostly from those aged over 18 (10 to 17 per cent), while usage among those aged 12 to 17 dropped (10 to 9 per cent).

A McMaster Health Forum paper called Examining the Impact of Decriminalizing or Legalizing Cannabis for Recreational Use, released in 2017, looked at reviews and studies of 35 jurisdictions.

It found a rise in cannabis use, but “the findings are not conclusive”.

“The evidence of increased cannabis use is less clear when the long-term trend is considered,” the paper said, noting that some studies showed an uptake in use by teenagers that dissipated after five years.

The paper also noted studies that found increased reports of cannabisinduced visits to emergency rooms.

One option Little is considering is to prepare a bill setting out a regulatory framework, and then framing the question around support for the bill.

That would allow for a select committee process and public consultation, before Parliament decided on the level of regulation to put to the public vote. It would only become law if a majority voted for legalisation.

This option is supported by the Drug Foundation, legal experts Andrew Geddis and Graeme Edgeler, and the Green Party.