One year ago, in November, I became executive chairperson of the Authority for Responsible Use of Cannabis (ARUC) with a precise mandate. I took up the challenge to diligently execute the legislative reforms that paved the way for the establishment of cannabis associations.
While this decision generated significant controversy and scepticism, I was determined to see it through. From the outset, I was committed to facilitating the transition of cannabis users away from the risks of the illicit market to a secure, quality-tested source, all without promoting an increase in cannabis use or the initiation of new users like a free-for-all commercial market would.
The endeavour to establish the regulatory framework guiding the associations’ operations started with the invaluable
assistance of experts. With the political guidance of Parliamentary Secretary Rebecca Buttigieg and unwavering support from the board of directors, I remained committed to the core principles of the legislation, emphasising the not-for-profit model and the critical aspect of harm reduction.
The primary goal was to bring about positive change for cannabis users. The authority has a dual role as regulator and educational hub. We provide essential information to adults who use cannabis, promote less risky practices, advocate for delayed initiation of cannabis use and educate on the potential health risks when combining cannabis with other substances, including prescribed medications.
Our commitment to harm reduction acknowledges that the risks associated with cannabis use also emanate from the criminal consequences and socio-economic barriers as a result of criminalisation policies.
Adopting a holistic harm reduction understanding, we recognise the pivotal dimension of social justice. It entails the rectification of stigmatising policies, the redress of unfair employment and social regulations and the eradication of judgmental language and policies.
In the debate surrounding cannabis regulation and harm reduction, one point made is that advocating for harm reduction might not be compatible with responsible use. I beg to differ. The compatibility of these two goals hinges on the specific model chosen for implementation. Cannabis regulation goes beyond a simple choice between prohibition and full commercialisation.
In this context, it is important not to view cannabis as a mere commodity. As proponents of responsible cannabis policy, we champion a not-for-profit sector. We believe commercialisation and harm reduction are fundamentally incompatible. The pursuit of profit should not overshadow the paramount goal of reducing the risks associated with cannabis use.
Undeniably, the commercialisation of associations would be a detrimental move. A commercialised model similar to the gaming, alcohol and tobacco industries relies on high and escalating sales volumes. This inherent focus on boosting sales inevitably promotes increased consumption and aggressive marketing campaigns.
All these elements may only be achieved with a grassroots community-based approach, where the associations are led by, and belong to, the members themselves rather than a small cohort of individuals, a big
foreign cannabis company or some private local monopolies.
As I have stated repeatedly, we are committed to avoiding the pitfalls of a business-driven cannabis industry, which often targets young and daily users, glamorises use and plays down health risks. Therefore, individuals with a business mindset have not found, and will not find, an open door.
The following are a few of the concepts that regulate the operations, in practice, of cannabis harm reduction:
Firstly, the sole purpose of the associations is to cultivate and distribute cannabis, to avoid having them used as a front for other activities.
Associations are mandated to oversee the complete seed-to-distribution process, from planting seeds to distributing to members, without relying on third-party involvement. This safeguards the fundamental principle of maintaining small-scale operations and prevents the emergence of monopolies.
Individuals with a business mindset have not found an open door- Leonid McKay
It ensures production remains strictly in line with the authority’s guidelines.
Associations must hold annual elections in which the administrators are confirmed or new ones chosen. This ensures a democratic and transparent process while encouraging people who use cannabis to take an active role within their closed, members-only community. Surplus generated from the operation may only be reinvested in additional resources within the association and not channelled for any private interests.
Wages for the administrators and employees must be in line with market rates and outsourcing, which could be a potential loophole to divert surplus, is only allowed for non-core operations unfeasible to do in-house.
Any form of marketing and sales to non-members, including tourists, is strictly prohibited. This rests on the belief that Cannabis Harm Reduction Associations should comprise adult cannabis users already familiar with the effects of THC and who comprehend the potential risks both to themselves and others.
Lastly, founders and administrators must have been residents of Malta for the past five years, underscoring their genuine connection with the local cannabis user community. This criterion ensures their selfless commitment to transition from a prohibited to a regulated cannabis framework, with their primary goal of providing a ‘safe source’ for the existing community of cannabis users, free from ulterior motives.
Initially, the regulatory framework faced criticism for being excessively stringent. Stakeholder consultations were conducted with all relevant parties, particularly with prospective associations. Valuable constructive feedback was considered, leading to adjustments in the technical requirements to alleviate the financial challenges, particularly for small scale associations.
Prospective applicants genuinely committed to the cause received comprehensive administrative support to ensure their compliance with the legislation. At the same time, those primarily motivated by profit were discreetly guided towards the exit door.
In February, we opened the door for applications. About two months later, the first wave of applications were officially submitted, initiating the meticulous evaluation process. The next milestone was in July when the first in-principle licences were issued, signifying a significant step in the registration and licensing procedure.
Recently, we proudly announced the issuance of the first operating permits. We now anticipate the imminent issuance of several other operating permits, which are at an advanced stage within the rigorous regulatory framework.
We have made significant strides in one year. However, the journey for the authority has only just started. Our focus will soon shift to compliance and enforcement, as setting rules and regulations is insufficient without diligent follow-up to ensure adherence.
Aware of the challenges ahead, my commitment to fundamental values such as harm reduction, safeguarding at-risk groups, promoting public health and advocating for social justice remains firm.
While I am delighted with our achievements, they are not the end goal. Our objective is to guide existing cannabis users away from the perils of the illicit market towards a secure, quality-tested source of cannabis, while preventing the transition to a profit-driven commercialised cannabis market.
Leonid McKayThe battle against the illicit market is an ongoing effort, as demonstrated by recent studies in Canada. The transition from the illicit to the regulated sector will not happen overnight. Nonetheless, providing a secure, well-regulated alternative benefits everyone.
Leonid McKay is executive chairperson of the Authority for Responsible Use of Cannabis (ARUC).