29/06/2020
Hi!
Thank you for giving me a moment to discuss my objections to the proposed Cannabis Licensing and Regulations Act 2020. I have fully read both documents issued by the Government of Bermuda for public consultation and have formulated my own opinions. If you have not yet done so, please find some time within the next few days to forward your opinion and/or recommendations to these documents directly to the Government through the portal forum.gov.bm, you have until THIS Friday 3rd July 2020.
There have already been many comments and suggestions published on this site but your voice and votes count! Please post your thoughts whether you agree or disagree, and like other’s thoughts you agree with.
It is my personal view that the government have not drafted the best framework allowing for unrestricted personal use, use in private residences, to provide a licensing structure for personal growth, allowing for the comfortable sale of cannabis and granting the undeniable call for complete legalization this plant.
It is safe to say that we do understand that there must be regulations and health and safety measures constructed in order to provide a barrier between the sale of cannabis and vulnerable and underage citizens, but that framework is already constituted for in the sale of alcohol on island.
With incarceration STILL being leveraged, only being “revised down” and used “economically” I CANNOT support this legislation.
Any new legislation that provides for the legal sale and cultivation of cannabis should also allow for amnesty of the current cultivation and sales already established on island. Allowing those currently persecuted, prosecuted, and marginalized to legitimize their businesses under these new laws. These individuals, in addition to those persons previously convicted of cannabis infractions under The Misuse of Drugs Act, in my opinion, should be given first preference when applying for Cannabis Licensing.
The creation of the Cannabis Advisory Authority is fiscally irresponsible and administratively redundant. Legislatively financing this authority removes necessary public funds from our already stretched budget. Even stating that this authority will become “self-sustaining” through generated cannabis revenue is annoying in respect of the general public’s view that cannabis revenues should enhance the public purse, not be used to constrict and over-regulate an industry that in all intents an purposes is deemed a savior to our economy.
From my understanding, the main functions of the Cannabis Advisory Authority is already legislatively conducted by the Ministry Of Health and the Department of Environmental Health and Safety. This government body already ensures the regulation, storage, transport and sale of harmful and addictive substances such as alcohol and to***co in addition to enforcing health and safety standards and performing inspections on restaurants, bars, refreshment shops and any establishments engaged in the public sale of edible substances.
The Authority must seek an individual to fill the position of “Executive Director” charged with the daily functions of the authority and allowed to fill the necessary administrative positions upon his approval. The Executive Director can also delegate any of his direct responsibilities to any other individual deemed fit, except the responsibility of delegation itself. Meaning that the individual hired to fill this position can in earnest, never fully fill his own responsibilities yet his salary remain fully compensated through public and or cannabis revenues.
The ex-officio members of the Authority are to be the Attorney General, The Collector of Customs and the Director of National Drug Control, yet we are to believe that our government has evolved its stance on the historic overregulation and criminalization of Cannabis? It is my strong suggestion that the Government first stipulate its current view of the personal use, cultivation and sale of cannabis BEFORE producing half-baked draft legislation to a well informed citizenship.
All matters deemed to be in contravention of the proposed Act and any appeals to be lodged will be seen in Supreme Court, further instituting that this Act is in no way a legalization of Cannabis, rather a legal loophole that will continue to marginalize those already ill effected by an outdated view of cannabis whilst grossly benefiting those individuals whom have already profited from a societal ‘leg-up’.
The fee structure for the 7 Cannabis Licenses are nominally reduced when compared to other jurisdictions, however these fees are due annually for a two year license, are to be paid upfront, are non-refundable even if a license is not granted and are just too damn high. When costing out the capital needed to apply for, provide a security, be granted, operate, maintain legal funds for, and generate necessary profits, the operation of a “legal” cannabis operation will be priced out of the market of those who MUST be allowed to find their footing in this industry. As we look to other jurisdictions for guidance on how to formulate our revised cannabis laws, I hope that we also take into consideration the data proving that new cannabis laws still directly disenfranchise Blacks and other persons of colour. I don’t see this draft of legislation straying too far from that precedent.
Applying for licenses is a tedious journey through ‘red tape’ and holds applicants at the behest of governmental and corrections officials/agencies that previous to this Act were charged with enforcing criminal offenses on persons engaging in any cannabis related practices. Although “Persons with prior Cannabis convictions are not automatically barred from participation in the marketplace” these persons having had been previously convicted, marginalized, financially penalized or otherwise completely disenfranchised will have the hardest of roads to traverse when attempting to apply for licenses, raise capital or investments, or find suitable locations for operations.
Location, Location, Location. The biggest and most ridiculous flaw in the “Cannabis (Licensing and Regulation) Act 2020” is the application of “increased penalty zones”. Cannabis sales and/or cultivation cannot take place within a one mile radius if a religious or educational building. As we all know, this excludes nearly 90% of the island. If you are fortunate enough to own a building or receive permission from a building owner in the few zoned areas, the building must be stand alone, sharing no exits or entrances with any other building.
Again, if you are fortunate enough to jump through that hoop, your $5000 cultivation license or your $20-30,000 manufacturing license does NOT allow for the sale of your product. Sale of locally produced cannabis and cannabis products are allowed for only through the “express permission” of the Minister and will be “strictly controlled” by him through the Authority. Pricing for cannabis will be set by the Minister and all detailed sales, storage and transportation records must be submitted to the Minister though the Authority.
Cannabis Retail Shops will be allowed to sell Cannabis and Cannabis products ONLY, relinquishing the ability of established business owners to incorporate cannabis sales into their current products and services.
The Act bars persons from holding multiple cannabis retail licenses and investors from holding interests in more than one cannabis operation. It is my opinion that this Act should also mandate that Public Officials, Authority Appointees and Ministers of Parliament must publicly disclose their interests in or ownership of cannabis licenses. Within the bold “enforcement” powers of the Minister, public officer(s) may be deputized in order to “carry out comparable functions” to that of enforcement officers. A publicly accessible ledger of ALL persons awarded cannabis licenses will equip the public with the knowledge of ownership, the ability to direct their purchasing powers and allow for the assumption that all deputized public servants will be operating “in good faith” instead of for personal surveillance and profit.
Cannabis retail shops will be automatically provided with an importation license. This means that persons awarded a cultivation license, already not authorized to sell their crop, must wait for their crop to mature, also apply for ministerial permission to perform local sale and/or apply for an additional export license, source international customers, abide by government set prices and crop sizes, and also compete with international suppliers when looking to sell crops locally. This also applies to persons awarded costly manufacturing licenses. We have yet to be informed of any customs tariffs or embargoes to be levied on the importation of cannabis and cannabis products.
This Act restricts the sale of Cannabis to “Bricks and Mortar” establishments only. In this present era, not allowing for the development of e-commerce sales is archaic. We are already behind in the global movement toward the legalization of cannabis, therefore our implementation of new laws must include modern capacities of commerce.
I again, state that I am not in support of this draft of the bill. I do not believe that it encompasses the requests and best interest of the people. I do believe that this bill is egregiously flawed by over regulation, high operational costs and the continuation of convict-able offenses. My personal recommendation will be for the government to first decide its own view on cannabis, to then implement the legalization of cannabis, allow for personal use and cultivation, release and expunge the records of any persons currently incarcerated for cannabis offenses then provide for the structured sale, commercial cultivation, import and export of cannabis and cannabis products.
Wether you agree with me or not, once passed the new Act will become law, therefor making changes even more difficult to implement. We have been given the opportunity to voice our concerns and to make recommendations during this drafting stage and we must take this opportunity to do so.
