Refresh Checked Unchecked Menu Search Shopping bag Geolocation Person Facebook Instagram Twitter YouTube Info Icon CBC Icon CBC Shape CBD Icon CBD Shape CBG Icon CBG Shape THC Icon THC Shape THCV Icon THCV Shape Loading…
Advertise on Leafly

Leaked Document Reveals Ontario’s Conflicted Path to Legalization

October 9, 2017
The House of Commons in Ottawa's Canadian Parliament Building (Steven_Kriemadis/iStock)
Across Canada, police used to arresting and jailing people for cannabis are puzzling over what their role will be in what the province of Ontario calls the “New Cannabis Landscape.”

Some, like former Toronto Police Chief and OPP commissioner Julian Fantino, are cashing in. Fantino— a lifetime opponent of cannabis who famously compared legalizing cannabis to legalizing murder—has joined former RCMP deputy commissioner and onetime undercover drug officer Raf Souccar on the board of Aleafia Inc., a for-profit medical cannabis company.


‘Exchanging Prohibition for Extreme Regulation’: Toronto Braces for New Cannabis Reality

Fantino and Souccar are both retired, and free to turn a profit in the industry. For active police, however, there remains the problem of how to enforce cannabis law under the new regime. Provincially proposed legalization plans are all restrictive of cannabis possession, growing, sharing, and refinement—which means police will still be very involved in policing the possession, sale, and consumption of cannabis once it becomes legal to have and use. How they will police those things is as yet uncertain.

Ontario’s plan isn’t what cannabis advocates hoped legalization would look like. It’s not even what the Ontario government thought legalization should look like.

Ontario announced its legal cannabis framework in early September, to a chorus of derision from critics. Selling dried marijuana to those over 19 for $10 per gram in government-run stores and criminalizing all divergence from that path—this isn’t what those who agitated for an end to prohibition hoped legalization would look like.

It turns out it’s not even what the government of Ontario thought legalization should like, according to a document from the Ontario Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS) leaked to Vice last week.

Titled “Impacts of Cannibis Legislation on Police,” the document takes the form of a slideshow presented to the Future of Policing Advisory Committee in early August, more than a month prior to the unveiling of the official framework.


Given a Monopoly on Ontario Store Product, Licensed Producers Push for Online Sales

Early on in the document, under the heading of “General Enforcement,” the MCSCS states flatly that they anticipate an “increase in enforcement capacity pressures due to cannabis legalization.” Simply put, legalization will (at least at the outset) increase funding to police departments, as they attempt to muddle their way through continuing to arrest cannabis users for having or growing too much cannabis, or selling cannabis, or using cannabis outside of their homes.

“The illegal market will not disappear once cannabis is legalized (e.g. Illegal dispensaries will continue to operate),” the document notes, prompting this question: If undercutting organized crime is the goal of legalization, why has Ontario resisted simply legalizing the already existing gray-market structure of dispensaries and taxing them heavily? Instead, as the document makes plain, Ontario’s multitude of dispensaries will remain illegal and continue to operate, flouting the law. Accordingly, policing budgets and hours will be funneled into shutting dispensaries down for selling a now-legal product the wrong way, rather than drawing them into a well-taxed legal economy from which Ontario could derive (rather than spend) tax dollars.

Policing hours will be funneled into shutting down dispensaries for selling a now-legal product the wrong way, rather than drawing them into a well-taxed legal economy from which Ontario could derive (rather than spend) tax dollars.

The MCSCS document is presented as a series of sections with data about Bills C-45 and C-46, followed by “Considerations for Police,” which include aims and desires for enforcing the law, and then “Discussion Questions” for Committee attendees. These include questions like “Do you think Ontario should consider lowering possession limits for youth?” and “Do you think Ontario should restrict where people can consume non-medical cannabis? If yes, in what public places should people not be able to use cannabis?”

The document is full of contradictions with Ontario policy—it notes that raising the minimum age “could lead to continued reliance on the illicit market by youth and young adults,” and that a minimum age above 18 would require “a provincial regulatory regime for youth between 18 and the age chosen, increasing the complexity in enforcing for police officers.” A month after the MCSCS made this presentation, Ontario decided to set the legal age for cannabis at 19.


‘It’s Impossible’: Canadian Police Challenge Legalization Deadline

Meanwhile, adults can legally possess up to 30g of dried cannabis, but the report ponders the “operational issues with trying to accurately measure 30 grams of dried cannabis or equivalent in public.” The other place the MCSCS expects to find “operational issues” is in deciding when “social sharing” of cannabis constitutes “a drug transaction.” No answers to that question are apparent—for the time being, it seems individual police officers will be left to decide themselves when consenting adults sharing a legal product become guilty of a crime.

Ontario will only allow the use of cannabis in private homes, which the report notes “could increase the risk of users turning to other mediums (e.g. edibles) which could lead to stronger impairment/effects.” And given that consuming edible cannabis products has few of the olfactory giveaways of smoking cannabis, the report acknowledges it would be difficult to enforce “restrictions on public consumption/impairment.”


Ontario Government Aims to Sell Cannabis for $10 a Gram

The report is especially uncertain about home-grown plants, noting how home-grows could provide unregulated cannabis to organized crime, and how the new law could increase criminalization of people growing a bit more than the limit for their own use. Either way, the report concludes, police don’t have the resources to enforce this part of the law.

Finally, the report considers cannabis-impaired driving, which is a real and legitimate concern. Cannabis is the second-most commonly detected intoxicant involved in fatal collisions, the report notes, and the public don’t yet have a broad understanding of the risk of cannabis-impaired driving. However, “drug screeners only test for presence of drug not impairment”—meaning while everyone wants to keep stoned drivers off the road, there’s no way at present to tell whether drivers are stoned. On this end, the report concludes, “There is a need to build up short- and long-term drug-impaired driving expertise/capacity and appropriate training approach.”

It’s hard not to read that last point as “We’re flying blind and we have no idea what to do with all this,” a theme that runs throughout the report. Police who worried that legalization would put them out of a job have nothing to fear. They’re going to continue arresting and jailing people for cannabis for years to come in Ontario, even if they don’t necessarily understand why or how, and probably won’t for a while.

Jesse B. Staniforth's Bio Image

Jesse B. Staniforth

Jesse B. Staniforth is the editor of the free cannabis-industry
newsletter WeedWeek Canada. He also reports on Indigenous issues,
cybersecurity, and food safety.

View Jesse B. Staniforth's articles

  • cinderabi

    So no vacation money of mine will ever reach ontario. British columbia is prettier & way more fun. Ontario is boring & provincial & totally unappealing to me.

    • emernel

      The Government is totally out to lunch. If they close the online shops and the current dispenceries then the illegal market will be the only way you will be able to get a decent price and probably better quality.

  • Rob Woodside

    This is what happens when the know nothing Reefer Madness crew are in charge of legalization. They realize that prohibition has failed and the black market is thriving. This is a very bad thing, so the nest step is to regulate and control with the silly hope of replacing the black market. Draconian controls won’t end the black market as this Reefer Madness bunch think. The more stupid restrictions that make them feel safe from the scourge of marijuana, the more support the black market will get.

    Why is the author so anti dope with statements like this, “Finally, the report considers cannabis-impaired driving, which is a real and legitimate concern. Cannabis is the second-most commonly detected intoxicant involved in fatal collisions…” I wonder what the most commonly found intoxicant in traffic corpses is? Could alcohol be responsible rather than dope? In places where legalization has occurred there is no increase in traffic fatalities. So why is this a real and legitimate concern? We’ve been driving stoned for 50 years. Obviously you don’t drive when you are totally wrecked. I’m surprised the Reefer Madness crew realize there’s a difference between impairment which is obvious to any one, including cops, and cannabis in the blood. Still we must have a dope breathalizer or society will self destruct and of course dope should never be legalized until such an impairment meter is invented, if ever. So maybe it is not so surprising that the Reefer Madness lot have moved from prohibition to regulate and control and delay as long as possible.

  • Bramael gnome

    I think the best way is to have police officers get mandatory “stoning” sessions, much like the army does with tear gas exposure for different reasons of course.

    While this doesn’t solve the issues, it increases awareness of the effects and hopefully eliminates some biases, of course this would also have to be on a voluntary basis, however at least one or more of the officers with “stone” experience could be present at roadblocks as a consult. I realize the this scenario is completely unrealistic, however there are no perfect worlds. Maybe they could train Dogs to ferret out impairment, if they can find cancer, how much further is biometrics?

    Cheers! For Canadian legalization, one more reason to medicate.