Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 148
  1. #101
    Flowering Member nohibition's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Manitoba
    Posts
    1,722
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,036/0
    Given: 1,031/0
    Rep Power
    13

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    $$$$$$$$$ is the life blood of everything now-a-days. The only thing more important than $$$$$$$ is water.

    N
    I fall upon the earth, and I am embraced. Water gives me life, and I spring forth into the light. My roots run deep into the earth, and I am nourished. With wind and water, light and earth, I conspire to ease your pain and heal your wounds, to bring you peace and calm your mind, to give you wisdom and truth of heart.
    I return to the earth and I am embraced.I am Cannabis
    Nohibition

  2. #102
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Hi Friends

    It seems that the exemptions of those who still had a valid MMAR exemption last September 30th 2013 will be saved.

    Peace,

    Marc

  3. #103
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default April 1, 2014 medical marijuana patient revolt in ottawa

    Received by email from Alison Myrden


    APRIL 1, 2014 MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT REVOLT IN OTTAWA


    March 25th, 2014


    PRESS RELEASE MARCH 25 2014

    For Immediate Release
    Tues March 25, 2014


    Victoria, B.C.: One week from today cannabis activists from across Canada will gather in Ottawa to protest the federal government's new medical regulations because they do not allow patients to grow their own. On April 1, 2014, the new Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations come into full effect and the old Marijuana Medical Access Regulations become null, save a recent court injunction giving patients with a licence at least a temporary reprieve. A press conference will be held in the morning inside the Parliament Buildings in the Charles Lynch Room, followed by a large rally at noon on the front lawn.

    Among those traveling to Ottawa will be John Conroy, lead counsel for the four BC plaintiffs in the successful injunction. That decision essentially grandfathered those with licences to grow or possess cannabis under the MMAR, allowing them to continue doing so until such time as a full Federal Court trial can determine whether patients with a right to use cannabis for medicine also have a right to grow it. Patients have been unable to obtain a licence to grow cannabis since last Oct, when under the MMPR patients could begin mail-order purchasing from new Licensed Producers, who under that program are the only legal source for cannabis.

    From the east coast, Debbie Stultz-Giffin from Maritimers United for Medical Marijuana, will be present to explain how important it is for patients to be able to grow their own cannabis and make derivatives.

    Another patient Alison Myrden, from Toronto, will also be available to express how severe the loss of her garden would be. Adam Greenblatt from the Medical Cannabis Access Society in Montreal will also be at the press conference to discuss how all this affects dispensaries and answer any questions that French media or protesters may have.

    This rally has been organized by the International Hempology 101 Society with the funding coming from the Vancouver Pain Management Society and WEEDS Dispensary. General manager of the International Hempology 101 Society, Ted Smith, is the publisher of the Cannabis Digest newspaper, founder of the Victoria Cannabis Buyers Club and author of HEMPOLOGY 101: THE HISTORY AND USES OF CANNABIS SATIVA.

    For more information call 250-381-4220 or email hempo101@gmail.com.
    http://fightthemmpr.ca/

    Please Join us on Tuesday, April 1st, 2014 on Parliament Hill and PLEASE Share EVERYWHERE!!!

    Thank U.
    Love and a Squish,

    Alison Myrden
    xx

    Federal Medical Marijuana Exemptee in Canada Ontario Representative for the MMAR Coalition Lawsuit

    MMAR Coalition Against Repeal Lawsuit in Canada

    http://www.mmarcoalitionagainstrepeal.com/

  4. #104
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default Harper government not respecting federal court Injunction order?

    Seems like 'Hellth' Canada decided to ignore the Federal Court injunction order, and their threats are still going on!

    ---------------------

    Canada Gazette

    Vol. 148, No. 7 — March 26, 2014


    Registration
    SOR/2014-51 March 7, 2014

    CONTROLLED DRUGS AND SUBSTANCES ACT


    Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Relating to Marihuana for Medical Purposes

    P.C. 2014-249 March 6, 2014

    His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Health, pursuant to subsection 55(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (see footnote a), makes the annexed Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Relating to Marihuana for Medical Purposes.

    REGULATIONS AMENDING CERTAIN REGULATIONS RELATING TO MARIHUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES NARCOTIC CONTROL REGULATIONS

    1. Subsection 31(4) of the Narcotic Control Regulations (see footnote 1) is replaced by the following:

    (4) If authorized by the person in charge of the hospital, a pharmacist practising in a hospital may sell, provide or return dried marihuana in accordance with subsection 65(2.1) or (3.1) or section 65.3.

    2. Subsection 65(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    65. (1) No person in charge of a hospital shall permit a narcotic to be sold, provided or administered except in accordance with this section or section 65.3.

    3. The portion of subsection 65.1(1) of the English version of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

    65.1 (1) The person in charge of a hospital who permits dried marihuana to be sold or provided under subsection 65(2.1) to an out-patient or an individual responsible for that patient shall ensure that

    MARIHUANA MEDICAL ACCESS REGULATIONS

    4. Sections 65 and 66 of the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (see footnote 2) are repealed.

    MARIHUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES REGULATIONS

    5. Subsection 1(1) of the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (see footnote 3) is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

    “pest control product”

    « produit antiparasitaire »

    “pest control product” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Pest Control Products Act.

    6. Subsection 6(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    Definition of “additive”

    (2) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(a), “additive” means anything other than dried marihuana but does not include any residue of a pest control product or its components or derivatives unless the amount of the residue exceeds any maximum residue limit specified for the product, component or derivative under section 9 or 10 of the Pest Control Products Act.

    7. Section 54 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    Pest control product

    54. Marihuana must not be treated — before, during or after the drying process — with a pest control product unless the product is registered for use on marihuana under the Pest Control Products Act or is otherwise authorized for use under that Act.

    8. (1) Paragraph 66(a) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    (a) the name of that licensed producer and a telephone number and email address that can be used to contact them;

    (2) Paragraph 66(d) of the English version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    (d) the symbol “N” set out in the upper left quarter of the label in a colour contrasting with the rest of the label or in type not less than half the size of any other letters used on the label;

    9. Subparagraph 92(b)(iv) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    (iv) est ou a été associé * une personne physique qui est connue pour sa participation ou sa contribution — ou * l’égard de laquelle il y a des motifs raisonnables de soupçonner sa participation ou sa contribution — * des activités visées au sous-alinéa (i), ou est membre d’une organisation visée * l’un des sous-alinéas (ii) ou (iii);

    10. The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 259:

    Destruction and Notice Obligations — Marihuana Obtained or Produced Under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations

    Applicable period

    259.1 Sections 259.2 and 259.3 apply until September 30, 2014.

    Obligation to destroy

    259.2 (1) When an authorization to possess expires without being renewed or is revoked, the person who held the authorization must immediately destroy any marihuana that they are no longer authorized to possess as a result of the expiry or revocation.

    Production licences

    (2) When a personal-use production licence or a designated-person production licence expires without being renewed or is revoked, the person who held the licence must immediately

    (a) discontinue production of marihuana that was authorized under the licence; and
    (b) subject to subsection (3), destroy any marihuana that they are no longer authorized to possess as a result of the expiry or revocation.

    Exception — designated-person production licence

    (3) If a designated-person production licence expires without being renewed but the authorization to possess on the basis of which the licence was issued remains valid, the person who held the licence may, before destroying marihuana, immediately transport, transfer, give or deliver, directly to the holder of the authorization, not more than a quantity of dried marihuana that results in the holder of the authorization being in possession of the maximum quantity permitted under the authorization.

    Exception — March 31, 2014

    (4) Despite subsections (1) to (3), when an authorization to possess, a personal-use production licence or a designated-person production licence expires on March 31, 2014, the holder of the authorization or licence must, by the end of that day,

    (a) destroy any marihuana that they are not authorized to possess or produce, as the case may be, under these Regulations; and
    (b) in the case of a licence, discontinue production of marihuana that was authorized under the licence.

    Application of subsection (4)

    (5) For greater certainty, for the purposes of subsection (4), every authorization or licence that is valid on March 31, 2014 expires on that day.

    Obligation to send notice

    259.3 (1) When an authorization to possess, a personal-use production licence or a designated-person production licence expires without being renewed or is revoked, the person who held the authorization or licence must send the Minister a notice, in writing, no later than 30 days after the day the authorization or licence expired or was revoked.

    Content of notice

    (2) The notice must include the following information:

    (a) the person’s given name, surname and date of birth;
    (b) in the case of an authorization to possess,
    (i) the amount of dried marihuana, if any, that has been destroyed in accordance with subsection 259.2(1) or (4), and
    (ii) the authorization number;
    (c) in the case of a personal-use production licence, the amount of dried marihuana and the number of marihuana plants, if any, that have been destroyed in accordance with subsection 259.2(2) or (4); and
    (d) in the case of a designated-person production licence,
    (i) the amount of dried marihuana and the number of marihuana plants, if any, that have been destroyed in accordance with subsection 259.2(2) or (4), and
    (ii) the given name and surname of the person who holds or held the authorization to possess on the basis of which the licence was issued.

    Statement

    (3) The notice must include a statement that

    (a) in the case of an authorization to possess, other than the case described in paragraph (b), the person no longer possesses any dried marihuana that was obtained under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations;
    (b) in the case of an authorization to possess when the person remains the holder of a valid designated-person production licence, the person no longer possesses any dried marihuana that was obtained under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations except dried marihuana that they are authorized to produce or possess under the licence;
    (c) in the case of a personal-use production licence when the person remains the holder of a valid authorization to possess, the person
    (i) has discontinued production of marihuana that was authorized under the licence, and
    (ii) no longer possesses any dried marihuana or marihuana plants produced under the licence except dried marihuana that they are authorized to possess under the authorization; and
    (d) in the case of any other personal-use production licence or a designated-person production licence, the person
    (i) has discontinued production of marihuana that was authorized under the licence, and
    (ii) no longer possesses any dried marihuana or marihuana plants produced under the licence.

    Attestation

    (4) The notice must be signed and dated by the person and must attest that it is correct and complete.

    Application of this section

    (5) For greater certainty, for the purposes of this section,

    (a) every authorization or licence that is valid on March 31, 2014 expires on that day;
    (b) a notice must be sent even if the person who held the authorization or licence has no marihuana that must be destroyed under section 259.2; and
    (c) when a person is required to send a notice in relation to an authorization and one or more licences, or in relation to more than one licence, they may send a single notice that includes all of the required information and statements.

    Non-compliance with this section

    (6) If there is significant evidence of noncompliance with the obligations imposed by this section,

    (a) the Minister is, for greater certainty, authorized to use his or her full authority under the Act to achieve compliance; and
    (b) the Governor in Council is prepared to consider, on an urgent basis, on the recommendation of the Minister, amendments to these Regulations to deter such non-compliance.

    11. Paragraph 263(2)(d) of the English version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    (d) specifies that the notice is valid only if the licences referred to in paragraph (1)(a) are valid at the time of the sale or provision; and

    12. Paragraph 266(2)(d) of the English version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    (d) specifies that the notice is valid only if the licences referred to in paragraph (1)(a) are valid at the time of the sale or provision; and

    COMING INTO FORCE

    13. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

    REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

    (This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

    Issues

    The current Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR), which will be repealed on March 31, 2014, require participants in the Marihuana Medical Access Program (the Program) to cease production of (if applicable) and destroy marihuana in their possession when their authorization to possess (ATP) or licence to produce marihuana for medical purposes expires without being renewed, or is revoked. Within 10 days of the destruction, a Program participant must notify the Minister of Health, in writing, of the amount of marihuana that was destroyed. This notice is intended to confirm that an individual who is no longer authorized to possess or licensed to produce marihuana is not in violation of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), which prohibits possession or activities with controlled substances, including marihuana for medical purposes, unless there is valid authorization to do so.

    On March 31, 2014, the MMAR will be repealed, and all authorizations to possess and licences to produce under the MMAR will expire.

    The Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR), which were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on June 19, 2013, do not contain an obligation to notify Health Canada of the destruction of marihuana obtained under the MMAR. As of November 2013, there were over 30 000 licences to produce marihuana under the MMAR issued by Health Canada. By extending the notification requirements under the MMPR, Health Canada improves its capacity to monitor compliance and take the necessary compliance and enforcement actions respecting the participants who do not comply with the requirements to destroy marihuana and notify the Minister.

    In addition, under section 66 of the MMPR, licensed producers are required to state their “site address” on the label on the immediate container for dried marihuana. Some licensed producers have pointed out that this requirement forces them to disclose the location of their operations to clients and members of the general public which, they believe, exposes their facilities to increased security risks. While the requirement to state the address of the licensed producer on the label is consistent with labelling practices for other controlled substances, such as morphine, these substances are typically dispensed from a pharmacy and show the address of the retailer (i.e. the pharmacy) and not that of the manufacturer or wholesale distributor. Despite the fact that licensed producers have similar security requirements as those licensed to produce other narcotics, there is concern that the illegal widespread use of marihuana for recreational purposes may increase the risk that a licensed producer would be the target of crime if the production location is more generally disclosed. The Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Relating to Marihuana for Medical Purposes (the Amending Regulations) remove the obligation for licensed producers to state their site address on the label and allow licensed producers discretion in determining how their location information is disseminated.

    In addition, section 54 of the MMPR restricts the use of pest control products on marihuana only to products that were “registered” under the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA). Under the PCPA, products undergo a premarket approval process to minimize the associated risks. Pest control products must be either registered or otherwise authorized in accordance with the Act. The Amending Regulations harmonize the regulation of the use of pest control products on marihuana for medical purposes with the regulation of pest control products generally in the PCPA. All pest control products that are available for use on marihuana must be in compliance with the PCPA.

    Finally, grammatical errors and inconsistencies in language regarding certain provisions in the MMPR and the Narcotic Control Regulations (NCR) relating to marihuana have been corrected.

    Background

    The MMPR, which were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on June 19, 2013, implement three key changes to the production and supply of marihuana for medical purposes in Canada:

    the production and distribution of quality-controlled, dried marihuana for medical purposes by fully regulated and inspected licensed producers;
    the end to Health Canada’s role in processing applications for authorizations to possess, licences for personal-use and designated-person production, and supplying marihuana for medical purposes under the Program by March 31, 2014; and
    the repeal of the MMAR and the elimination of personal-use and designated-person production licences of marihuana on March 31, 2014.

    The MMAR will be repealed on March 31, 2014, and the Program will end. On that date, all valid licences and authorizations issued under the MMAR will expire. The expiration of all authorizations and licences under the MMAR requires that all marihuana (including plants) in the possession of Program participants be destroyed. While the MMAR are still in force, marihuana that is destroyed must be reported to the Minister of Health within 10 days of destruction. When the MMAR are repealed, this provision will also be repealed, and, in the absence of these amendments, Health Canada’s ability to monitor compliance with the requirement for Program participants to destroy marihuana and notify the Minister of Health would be limited. Though ongoing compliance promotion activities, including reminder letters and Web notices, may be useful in encouraging destruction of unauthorized marihuana, the effectiveness of these activities may be limited by the lack of information about the extent of non-compliance to determine where enforcement may be appropriate.

    Moreover, some law enforcement agencies and other stakeholders, such as municipalities and provinces, have expressed concern about the accountability of the large number of licence holders obligated to destroy their marihuana on March 31, 2014. Some law enforcement agencies, in particular, have an interest in the transition from the MMAR to the MMPR.

    Health Canada may refer cases of non-compliance to law enforcement. This is consistent with other compliance actions taken by Health Canada. For example, over the past two years, from January 1, 2012, to December 2013, Health Canada issued 81 warning letters and referred five cases of non-compliance with other regulations under the CDSA to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

    Program participants have been kept informed of the repeal date of the MMAR and the end of personal-use and designated-person production licences. The date of the repeal of the MMAR was made public for comment during the publication of the MMPR in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on December 15, 2012. (see footnote 4) At that time, comments received from Program participants generally opposed the elimination of personal production. However, other comments were also received from stakeholders who expressed support for the repeal.

    Health Canada provided responses to these comments in the final Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement published on June 19, 2013.

    (see footnote 5) Since then, Health Canada has also publicized the changes under the MMPR on its Web site as part of its overall communication to stakeholders during the transition period and beyond. (see footnote 6) After the MMPR came into force, Health Canada communicated the changes to be implemented, including the elimination of personal production licences, and reminded Program participants through a letter of their obligations when the MMAR is repealed.

    Objectives

    The main objectives of the Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Relating to Marihuana for Medical Purposes are to

    enhance Health Canada’s ability to monitor compliance and support the enforcement of obligations arising from the repeal of the MMAR;
    allow for licensed producers who do not wish to state their site address on their product labels to be able to do so; and
    better align the wording in the MMPR in respect of pest control products that will be permitted for use on marihuana for medical purposes with the provisions of the PCPA.

    The Amending Regulations also include minor non-substantive changes to the MMPR to correct minor typographical and grammar errors and certain technical inconsistencies in the MMPR and the Narcotic Control Regulations (NCR) in relation to marihuana that have been identified since the publication of the MMPR.

    Description

    Consistent with the objectives, the Amending Regulations implement the following changes to the MMPR.

    Section 259.2: The amendment clarifies the existing obligation to destroy marihuana upon the expiry (without renewal) or revocation of an authorization or licence issued under the MMAR. This new amended provision is similar to subsections 65(1) and (2) and section 66 of the MMAR, which are repealed. This section clarifies the existing rules for a person who held an authorization to possess or a licence to produce marihuana for medical purposes under the MMAR, in terms of the obligation to cease production of (as applicable) and immediately destroy marihuana (including plants) which the person is no longer authorized to possess or produce as a result of the expiry or revocation of the authorization or licence. This is a new section which will remain in force until September 30, 2014.
    Section 259.3: This section is new and principally extends the existing notification obligation past March 31, 2014, when the MMAR are repealed. Even though this section will be in force until September 30, 2014, all individuals who have an Authorization to Possess (ATP), Personal-Use Production Licence or Designated-Person Production Licence (DPPL), whose authorization or licence expires (without renewal) or is revoked, must send a written notice to the Minister within 30 days of the expiry or revocation or April 30, 2014, whichever is earlier. The notice must contain

    the given name and date of birth of the authorization or licence holder;
    the authorization number;
    the quantity of dried marihuana and number of plants destroyed (as applicable);
    a statement indicating that the sender of the notice does not possess any marihuana he or she is not authorized to possess, and as applicable, has ceased production that was authorized under the MMAR;
    in the case of a DPPL holder, the given name and surname of the person who holds or held the authorization for which the expired or revoked licence was issued; and
    signature and date attesting that the information provided is correct and complete.

    A notice must be sent by all individuals whose authorization or licence under the MMAR expires without being renewed or is revoked up to and including on March 31, 2014, even if they do not have any marihuana to destroy. Program participants have 30 days following the date of expiration or revocation or until April 30, 2014, whichever is earlier, to send the notice. A participant who held an authorization and a licence may send a single notice containing all the requested information.

    Sections 259.2 and 259.3 replace sections 65 and 66 of the MMAR, which are repealed.

    Section 66: Paragraph 66(a) under the section is amended to remove the requirement to state the site address on the label of the immediate container for dried marihuana. Instead licensed producers are required to state a telephone number and email address with which they can be contacted. The amendment does not prohibit licensed producers from stating their address on the product label for business or other reasons, if they see merit in doing so.

    Section 1: A definition of pest control product has been added to this section of the MMPR to align with the definition of “pest control product” under the PCPA.

    Section 6: Subsection 6(2) is amended to indicate that the prohibition against the sale or provision of marihuana with “additives” in subsection 6(1) of the MMPR excludes a residue of a pest control product unless a maximum residue limit is specified for the product and that limit is exceeded. This change replaces the previous provision on maximum residue limits and is better aligned with the relevant sections of the PCPA in respect of maximum residue limits.

    Section 54: This section is amended to indicate that pest control products that are not registered but otherwise authorized under the PCPA may be used on marihuana for medical purposes in addition to those which are registered. The change ensures that pest control products which are otherwise compliant with the PCPA are available for use.

    Paragraph 66(d) of the English version contained the phrase “upper left corner” and was inconsistent with the French version of the same paragraph. The word “corner” is replaced by “quarter” to correct the error and be consistent with the French version.

    Section 92: Subparagraph 92(b)(iv) of the French version contains a use of the masculine when the feminine should be used. The word “duquel” is replaced with “de laquelle” to correct the grammatical error.

    Section 263: Paragraphs 263(2)(d) and 266(2)(d) both contained grammatical errors and are corrected by adding “in” immediately before “paragraph (1)(a)”.

    Finally, the NCR are amended to correct technical inconsistencies in certain requirements relating to marihuana under subsections 31(4), 65(1) and 65.1(1).

    Benefits and costs

    The Amending Regulations are an important measure towards a successful transition to the new MMPR and the end of personal production.

    These Regulations, for the most part, affect Program participants and licensed producers and have a low overall impact on Canadians.

    Health Canada will incur incremental costs to implement the Amending Regulations. Program participants may also incur costs. Licensed producers will not incur any incremental costs when the Amending Regulations are implemented but may benefit from some of the changes.

    The greatest benefit, however, would accrue in terms of health and safety effects from the destruction and removal of unauthorized marihuana from the homes of individuals who are no longer permitted to possess or licensed to grow under the repealed MMAR.

    Health Canada’s incremental implementation costs will be up to approximately $400,000. This includes contract costs involved in mailing approximately 42 000 letters to Program participants. It also includes salary and operational costs associated with the retention of staff who would be primarily responsible for data entry and processing of returned notices. This staff will also be responsible for tracking, follow-up, compliance monitoring and reporting information for enforcement activities that may be undertaken.

    Program participants are required to send a notice to Health Canada after the Amending Regulations are promulgated. These notices may be sent in a variety of ways, including mail. The costs incurred by the Program participants would be dependent on the method of notification chosen. For example, registered mail would incur a cost; however, email would not. The cost of destruction of marihuana, if any, exists under the status quo and is not incremental to the Amending Regulations.

    There are no incremental costs associated with the administrative changes to remove the obligation for licensed producers to state their site address on product labels or with the amendments to the use of pest control products. These changes are likely to have a zero net effect on licensed producer costs. On the contrary, access to approved pest control products may have potential benefits by reducing the chances of crop failure due to pests.

    In summary, the total cost of implementation is not expected to exceed $500,000.

    “One-for-One” Rule

    The “One-for-One” Rule does not apply to these amendments, as there is no change in administrative costs to business.

    Small business lens

    The small business lens is not applicable as there are no costs to small business.

    Consultation

    The changes to the MMPR made by the Amending Regulations are mostly in response to feedback received from stakeholders representing law enforcement and municipalities after the MMPR came into force. As part of the transition to the MMPR, Health Canada conducted a series of outreach activities with stakeholders including licensed producer applicants. The amendment to the information required on the product label was in response to feedback from both applicants to become licensed producers and recently licensed producers. As well, during the application process, many licensed producer applicants and licensed producers indicated to Health Canada that they need to be able to use pesticides to deal with pests in order to mitigate the significant risk of crop failure. The changes to the requirements for the use of pest control products on marihuana are in response to this request and inconsistencies with the PCPA noted after the MMPR came into force.

    Finally, the amendment extending the notification requirement addresses feedback from other levels of government, including municipalities, as well as law enforcement agencies across Canada. In particular, during briefings with law enforcement on the transition from the MMAR to the MMPR, police forces told Health Canada that there should be transition measures to further enhance the elimination of personal production when the MMAR is repealed.

    In developing the Amending Regulations, Health Canada consulted externally and expanded its internal consultations to involve a more active role by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).

    Rationale

    The extension of the notification obligation will expand Health Canada’s ability to monitor compliance and aid enforcement, as necessary. These amendments help ensure that those who are currently authorized to possess or licensed to produce marihuana under the MMAR are in compliance with the law after March 31, 2014. Without these amendments, Health Canada would have more limited tools to verify that Program participants no longer have marihuana obtained under the MMAR and follow up with any required compliance and enforcement actions.

    The removal of the requirement to disclose the location on the label and instead allow for different contact information may provide additional security without imposing any additional security measures. Consistent with the original regulatory intent, it may enhance the security of licensed producer sites by not broadly sharing their physical address while still ensuring that patients, health care professionals and law enforcement agencies have multiple channels to reach the licensed producers using other label information. As well, the Amending Regulations will align the wording in the MMPR in respect of pest control products that will be permitted for use on marihuana for medical purposes under the MMPR with existing provisions of the PCPA. Limiting Health Canada’s options to approve products only through “Registration” and not via authorization could have meant that very few pest control products would have been available to licensed producers in the foreseeable future. The Amending Regulations will ensure that pest control products which are otherwise compliant with the PCPA are available for use on marihuana.

    Implementation, enforcement and service standards

    Since the MMPR were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on June 19, 2013, Health Canada has been communicating with all Program participants to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities as the repeal of the MMAR approaches. A mail-out sent to all participants in November 2013 included a reminder of the obligation to destroy any marihuana in their possession, under the MMAR, on or before March 31, 2014. There will be additional mail-outs sent in the coming months.

    In March, all Program participants will be provided with information on effective methods for destroying marihuana, as well as a standard attestation form to assist participants in the notification process. In April, a final reminder of the requirement to destroy and notify will be sent in addition to the information regarding methods of destruction and the standard attestation form.

    In terms of compliance and enforcement, Health Canada will take a graduated approach by emphasizing compliance promotion efforts prior to the end of the notification period.

    Health Canada will track receipt of notifications from Program participants and disclose a list of those who fail to comply with the notification requirement to the RCMP. The RCMP will address this information as appropriate, for example, by prioritizing which non-compliant licensees to investigate.

    Federal, provincial and local law enforcement agencies are responsible for taking enforcement action in response to contraventions of the CDSA or its regulations. Criminal prosecution for offences under the CDSA may involve the application of a fine and/or a term of imprisonment. This is an ongoing responsibility of the criminal justice system.

    Contact

    Office of Controlled Substances
    Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate
    Health Canada
    Telephone: 1-866-337-7705
    Email: OCS_regulatorypolicy-BSC_politiquere...re@hc-sc.gc.ca

    Footnote a
    S.C. 1996, c. 19
    Footnote 1
    C.R.C., c. 1041
    Footnote 2
    SOR/2001-227
    Footnote 3
    SOR/2013-119
    Footnote 4
    http://gazette.gc.ca...df/g1-14650.pdf, p. 3422
    Footnote 5
    http://gazette.gc.ca...df/g2-14713.pdf, p. 1720
    Footnote 6
    www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2013/2013-79fs-eng.php

    Date modified: 2014-03-26

  5. #105
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    But, don't despair my Friends, so please read the following quoted Facebook post below from lawyer Kirk Tousaw:

    Kirk Tousaw

    Just a crazy day in BCSC today. Begins with the Crown seeking to adjourn my clients' injunction application. They have filed an application seeking to stay my three clients cases pending a decision at trial in Allard (the MMAR Coalition case in Federal Court).

    I got the Court honed in on a key issue - if other cases are being stayed will the Crown concede that the Allard injunction applies to all MMAR patients and not just the Allard plaintiffs.

    Shockingly, the Crown said that Canada will not make that concession and is considering its position. This goes against what everyone believed when Allard was argued and decided.

    The Judge was troubled by this and said so. He adjourns for a couple hours to give the Crown lawyers a chance to talk to Ottawa and report back.

    When we reconvene the Crown still won't confirm Allard has broader effect. The lawyers tell the Judge that discussions are ongoing at the highest level - the Ministerial level - but that they can't predict the timing or outcome of those discussions.

    I strongly object to any adjournment if my clients are not protected. I explain the irreparable harm they will suffer, the destruction of plants, genetics and medicine. The harm to health and risk to life. And I argue that even the Allard injunctions don't go far enough because of the 150g possession limit which effectively renders my clients home bound.

    The Crown makes no submissions on the substance, relying instead on arguments about not having enough time to properly respond and their pending stay application.

    Ultimately, the Judge grants the Crown adjournment request delaying hearings on my clients' requested injunctions until after the Crown argues for a stay. But to do so he rules that the Allard injunction does protect my clients and by implication all other similarly situated patients. He does not rule on the 150g issue.

    What a day. I'm very pleased that we were able to box in the government and confirm that the Allard injunction applies to more than just the individual plaintiffs in that case.

    Hearing on the Crowns stay application is set for a half day on April 7 in BCSC Vancouver.

  6. #106
    Flowering Member nohibition's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Manitoba
    Posts
    1,722
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,036/0
    Given: 1,031/0
    Rep Power
    13

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Thanx Marc

    Too much to try and comprehend...can you nutshell this.
    Edit: Got it, you beat me to he punch
    N
    Last edited by nohibition; 03-26-2014 at 08:11 PM.
    I fall upon the earth, and I am embraced. Water gives me life, and I spring forth into the light. My roots run deep into the earth, and I am nourished. With wind and water, light and earth, I conspire to ease your pain and heal your wounds, to bring you peace and calm your mind, to give you wisdom and truth of heart.
    I return to the earth and I am embraced.I am Cannabis
    Nohibition

  7. #107
    Flowering Member MidnightToker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,715
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 212/0
    Given: 1/0
    Rep Power
    14

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    wow...
    Currently hording the following elite genetics;

    Grape Escape x Afghani Kush, Iranian Land Race x Pre-98 Bubba Kush, Florida Skunk Ape x Purple Kush, Green Crack BX, Grape Escape x Green Crack.
    Tranquil Elephantizer, Blue Dream Lotus, Orange SunShine.
    OG Ghost Train haze #1.
    Blue Cheese.
    MK Ultra, The Hog, Wreckage.
    Nevilles Haze, Critical Mass, SSH, Black Widow, Shark Shock, Medicine Man, G13 Widow, Ortega, Angels Breath.
    Petrolia Head Stash, Willie Nelson, Golden Temple Kush.

  8. #108
    Flowering Member MidnightToker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,715
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 212/0
    Given: 1/0
    Rep Power
    14

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    An interpretation would be , focusing on the following section: "Consistent with the objectives, the Amending Regulations implement the following changes to the MMPR.

    Section 259.2: The amendment clarifies the existing obligation to destroy marihuana upon the expiry (without renewal) or revocation of an authorization or licence issued under the MMAR. This new amended provision is similar to subsections 65(1) and (2) and section 66 of the MMAR, which are repealed. This section clarifies the existing rules for a person who held an authorization to possess or a licence to produce marihuana for medical purposes under the MMAR, in terms of the obligation to cease production of (as applicable) and immediately destroy marihuana (including plants) which the person is no longer authorized to possess or produce as a result of the expiry or revocation of the authorization or licence. This is a new section which will remain in force until September 30, 2014.
    Section 259.3: This section is new and principally extends the existing notification obligation past March 31, 2014, when the MMAR are repealed. Even though this section will be in force until September 30, 2014, all individuals who have an Authorization to Possess (ATP), Personal-Use Production Licence or Designated-Person Production Licence (DPPL), whose authorization or licence expires (without renewal) or is revoked, must send a written notice to the Minister within 30 days of the expiry or revocation or April 30, 2014, whichever is earlier. The notice must contain

    the given name and date of birth of the authorization or licence holder;
    the authorization number;
    the quantity of dried marihuana and number of plants destroyed (as applicable);
    a statement indicating that the sender of the notice does not possess any marihuana he or she is not authorized to possess, and as applicable, has ceased production that was authorized under the MMAR;
    in the case of a DPPL holder, the given name and surname of the person who holds or held the authorization for which the expired or revoked licence was issued; and
    signature and date attesting that the information provided is correct and complete.

    A notice must be sent by all individuals whose authorization or licence under the MMAR expires without being renewed or is revoked up to and including on March 31, 2014, even if they do not have any marihuana to destroy. Program participants have 30 days following the date of expiration or revocation or until April 30, 2014, whichever is earlier, to send the notice. A participant who held an authorization and a licence may send a single notice containing all the requested information."


    I posted this response via social media to get the word out: Because it is my interpretation that the government is going to attempt to ignore this injunction, based on the fact that Health Canada has not issued any bulletin to-date and Monday is the deadline for closure of operations/production.

    There seems to be some confusion today regarding the new marijuana laws MPR and the original MMAR. the marijuana prescription and usage is governed by a FEDERAL statute. A Federal Court in BC , on Friday, ruled in favour of an injunction to preserve the patients existing rights to grow their own medicine under the current/past law until the issue can be heard at Trial(a date not yet established). This meant, in a public statement by the legal council for the plaintiff and documented on CBC that Friday, that growers and smokers with valid licences within a certain time period are allowed to continue growing until the issue can be addressed legally by a court of competent jurisdiction. The Harper government's response is to continue to bully and harass sick and poor individuals. How you ask? They are demanding that all grows(despite the FEDERAL COURT INJUNCTION) terminate immediately and if they do not send writing they will be subject to RCMP raids with dogs and rifles (this has already been done to several key individuals in order to "get the message out"). I only ask that you(my colleagues and peers) be aware that , once again, your politicians are trying ignore what a court of competent jurisdiction has ruled on. I feel badly for my peers who have received court vindication, but sleep uneasy knowing that the government is potentially planning to raid their houses at dawn with rifles and dogs and body armor. I encourage you to follow and track the developments of this issue and of the changing paradigm towards holistic rather than pharmaceutically processed medications.
    Currently hording the following elite genetics;

    Grape Escape x Afghani Kush, Iranian Land Race x Pre-98 Bubba Kush, Florida Skunk Ape x Purple Kush, Green Crack BX, Grape Escape x Green Crack.
    Tranquil Elephantizer, Blue Dream Lotus, Orange SunShine.
    OG Ghost Train haze #1.
    Blue Cheese.
    MK Ultra, The Hog, Wreckage.
    Nevilles Haze, Critical Mass, SSH, Black Widow, Shark Shock, Medicine Man, G13 Widow, Ortega, Angels Breath.
    Petrolia Head Stash, Willie Nelson, Golden Temple Kush.

  9. #109
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default The objective of the 'MMAR PPL/DPL Coalition AGAINST Repeal'

    Hi my Friends:


    The injunction should have protected the rights of ALL those who still had a valid MMAR exemption (or a constitutionally re-granted exemption under the MMAR) until a FINAL court decision, so in a way, the MMAR should still have been alive after March 31st, but suspended for ANY new applications.

    Let's not forget that the only system which permitted permanently ill and dying Canadians to grow their own medical cannabis or have someone licensed to grow it for them was the MMAR, and the MMAR ONLY!

    The name of the 'MMAR PPL/DPL Coalition AGAINST Repeal' was confusing, as it may have lead some to believe that the coalition wanted to prevent the repeal of the MMAR and also the growing rights of PPL's (Personal Production Licenses) and DPL's (Designated Production Licenses) by March 31st, 2014.

    Unfortunately, the objective of the MMAR PPL/DPL Coalition AGAINST Repeal had nothing to do with avoiding the repeal of the MMAR by March 31st, 2014.

    Their objective is to protect the growing rights of those who used to have a MMAR PPL 'ONLY', but legislated under the MMPR.

    The MMPR were not conceived to protect the rights of patients...just the rights of corporate companies, Revenue Canada with it's 13% HST tax (or equivalent taxes) on medical 'marihuana', plus Canada Post with it's costly and risky transport.

    When the injunction was granted on March 21st, many media articles, television and radio newscasts followed, and it lead MANY Canadians to believe that the injunction protected the repeal of the MMAR and the rights of ALL it's licensed growers by March 31st, 2014.

    Some MMAR designated growers who donated some money to the 'MMAR PPL/DPL Coalition AGAINST Repeal' by believing that the coalation wanted to protect their rights as well must be real upset.

    I am VERY upset, because I'm too ill to grow my own, and without my designated grower that I have since 4 years, like many others, I'll be forced to buy very little MMPR medical 'marihuana' at a high price - 'if' my doctor wants to sign a MMPR medical 'marihuana' prescription.

    The actual percentage of Canadian doctors who are willing to sign some MMPR medical 'marihuana' prescriptions in Canada is very low, so I foresee many other medical 'marihuana' federal court challenges against 'Hellth' Canada in the near future!

    Now, 'Hellth' Canada's threats against permanently ill and dying Canadians are back alive, while their stress continues to exacerbate their conditions.

    We have to thank Mr Harper and Mrs Ambrose for that!

    These politicians are not responsible for their actions, so why should they care?

    For 'Christian Reformist Conservatives' they are good 'Christians'...aren't they?

    Marc

  10. #110
    Vegetative Member DoobieDuck's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Where my disabilities allow me to be...
    Posts
    735
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 122/0
    Given: 59/0
    Rep Power
    15

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by airedog View Post
    You need to rea'ise DD, our MJ policies are federal law and apply nationally. ...
    Thanks aierdog, I am quite aware of that, sorry if my statement confused you. When I spoke of ".... In this day and age, with all the real facts about the safety of the plant your Gov is still in the dark ages. Best wishes all of you..DD" ..your Federal Gov are exactly who I was refering too as "Gov"..

    May I clarify, we are very similar with our Gov, the Feds, yet our States are coming around little by little, as each falls the attitude with the Feds seems to be turning as well. People like you aierdog are making a difference..Again..best wishes to all of you..DD
    Please join me in my Fall 2012 Cannabis Flowers Pix thread..
    DoobieDuck the Macro Pix
    Don't forget, your comments and "likes" may be the only recognition Breeders, Photographers and Growers receive after putting in the hard work that they do to share theirs here with you. That appreciation goes a long way towards inspiring them to continue sharing it, Respect....DD

  11. #111
    Flowering Member JohnnyMan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Weeding with Weed
    Posts
    2,208
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 367/0
    Given: 254/0
    Rep Power
    13

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    I hope the Federal Liberals can generate enough support to remove Harper and his draconian weed laws.
    I wish it was bong time

    I'm up to 15 strains, and lovin' it:

    1. Black Diamond OG Kush
    2. Cannatonic
    3. Purple Kush
    4
    . Hippie Headband (2 phenotypes but not sure what to label them)
    5. Skunk Berry (both Skunk and Blueberry phenotypes)
    6. LA Confidential
    7. OG Kush
    8. Rockstar
    9. OG Ghost Train x Haze #1
    10. Sunshine Daydream
    11. Temple
    12. Pure Kush X Uzbek Hash
    13. C99
    14. Purps
    15. Rockstar Kush

  12. #112
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyMan View Post
    I hope the Federal Liberals can generate enough support to remove Harper and his draconian weed laws.
    Hi JohnnyMan

    Harper's government could be overthrown if the Liberals and NDP would join together and form '1' political party, but unfortunately, the Liberals and NDP don't agree with each other on too many points (including marijuana or cannabis), so it cannot happen this way for now.

    Every other time the opposition agreed to fire the Harper government, Harper prorogued Parliament.

    There's also an other way to overthrow the Harper government before the next federal elections in October 2015, and it would be with a national petition at Parliament, and if the petition has more names than the number of voters the Harper government had in the last federal elections....

    Harper's sneaky (and sometimes illegal) ways to stay in power can't last for ever!

    Marc

  13. #113
    Vegetative Member HopaLong's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    875
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/6
    Given: 7/2
    Rep Power
    18

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    [h="How is Health Canada notifying participants of this new requirement to provide an attestation?]3[/h] Participants will be sent a letter explaining the requirement for attestation, as well as a form that can be returned to Health Canada to fulfil the requirement. Additionally, information will be provided on the Health Canada website."

    Anybody get the letter yet? I didn't get one. I believe they will be silent until after their stay attempt on the 7th and if they win the letters will go out as if our injunction never happened.

    peace and pot
    Peace Hoppy




    "Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope." --the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers



  14. #114
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HopaLong View Post
    [h="How is Health Canada notifying participants of this new requirement to provide an attestation?]3[/h] Participants will be sent a letter explaining the requirement for attestation, as well as a form that can be returned to Health Canada to fulfil the requirement. Additionally, information will be provided on the Health Canada website."

    Anybody get the letter yet? I didn't get one. I believe they will be silent until after their stay attempt on the 7th and if they win the letters will go out as if our injunction never happened.

    peace and pot
    'Hellth' Canada's THREATS registered on March 7, 2014 (14 days before the injunction was granted) became official and enacted anyway on March 26.

    Their THREATS are still alive, and it's exacerbating the health conditions of thousands of permanently ill and dying Canadians

    Parliament can overrule our justice system and any court decision in Canada, but it would cause quite a public outrage (Parliament's opposition as well) if the Harper government would decide to ignore the injunction and implement their THREATS.

    Our medias are still saying that some under the MMAR will be protected with the injunction, but, as per the following article I'll post below, their is no author name and the source of information isn't mentioned.

    Peace,

    Marc


  15. #115
    Flowering Member nohibition's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Manitoba
    Posts
    1,722
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,036/0
    Given: 1,031/0
    Rep Power
    13

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Time and patience at this point...

    N
    I fall upon the earth, and I am embraced. Water gives me life, and I spring forth into the light. My roots run deep into the earth, and I am nourished. With wind and water, light and earth, I conspire to ease your pain and heal your wounds, to bring you peace and calm your mind, to give you wisdom and truth of heart.
    I return to the earth and I am embraced.I am Cannabis
    Nohibition

  16. #116
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default Who will the new medical marijuana laws and regulations affect?

    The StarPhoenix (SK)


    Who will the new medical marijuana laws and regulations affect?


    The Starphoenix March 28, 2014


    The patient

    Patients no longer have to apply to Health Canada for a licence - once they have a doctor's prescription, they can buy marijuana from an approved producer. Current patients are exempt from the new regulations while a court challenge works its way to trial. They can still grow their own medical marijuana, or they can adhere to the new regulations starting April 1 and purchase it from Health Canada-approved companies. Before the injunction, Health Canada told patients they must destroy their existing supply before April 1 or risk getting arrested by police. Under new rules, patients are allowed to possess up to 150 grams of dried marijuana or 30 times their daily prescription. Also, the new rules don't allow companies to produce or patients to possess edibles such as pot cookies.

    The police

    "We will not be going and seeking them out. We have larger concerns - heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine," Saskatoon city police Insp. Jerome Engele said last week, before the court injunction allowing current patients to keep growing marijuana. "If they don't destroy (the product), that's a chance they'll take. We're not naive. I'm sure most people won't destroy their product." Now that there is an exemption from new rules, it's status quo for city police. Engele welcomed the new rules because the old system "was set up where it could be abused" by people looking to make a quick buck.

    The doctors

    Saskatchewan doctors must keep meticulous records of medical marijuana prescriptions. They have to turn over the records once a year or, if they prescribe to more than 20 patients, every six months. Doctors can't simultaneously prescribe and sell marijuana, and they are banned from investing in medical marijuana ventures. The new system, first proposed late last year, should prevent any one person from becoming "Dr. Feelgood," said the lawyer for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan.

    THE OTHER GOVERNMENTS

    For the provincial government, the regulations won't change much in the way of policy or legislation. "I don't think crop insurance will be underwriting the risk there anytime soon," a cabinet spokesperson said. Zoning is a municipal issue, and crime and health matters are left to police and the federal government. Needless to say, the province hasn't studied the potential economic spinoffs or tax revenue earned from Saskatchewan grow operations. To date, the City of Saskatoon has not received any zoning applications or inquiries from potential medical marijuana producers.


    © Copyright © The StarPhoenix

  17. #117
    Vegetative Member DoobieDuck's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Where my disabilities allow me to be...
    Posts
    735
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 122/0
    Given: 59/0
    Rep Power
    15

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    You do good work medpot, thanks for keeping us informed. This> "We will not be going and seeking them out. We have larger concerns "..I doubt very much. The boys down here have said the same thing years ago but are still breaking down doors..DD
    Please join me in my Fall 2012 Cannabis Flowers Pix thread..
    DoobieDuck the Macro Pix
    Don't forget, your comments and "likes" may be the only recognition Breeders, Photographers and Growers receive after putting in the hard work that they do to share theirs here with you. That appreciation goes a long way towards inspiring them to continue sharing it, Respect....DD

  18. #118
    Shadbot 4.20 Shadimar's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cannaba
    Posts
    7,763
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 884/0
    Given: 475/1
    Rep Power
    27


    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Engele welcomed the new rules because the old system "was set up where it could be abused" by people looking to make a quick buck.


    How does he feel about the new system, set up for a select few to become Marijuana Multi-Millionaires (or Billionaires. That's Billions and Billions with a B. Thanks, Carl ) by picking the pockets of the sick and dying? Some of which grew with borrowed or donated hardware and beans and still could not afford to grow their own and now are expected to afford to go back to paying to going street rate, which is essentially what is being demanded here
    ♪♫♪♫♪♪♫♪
    Ceci n'est pas une signature du forum.
    Thank You for using S.h.a.d.i.m.a.r.: the world's most poorly coded chatbot.
    Substantially Humanlike Application Determined Insufficient Mediocre And Relatively annoying.

  19. #119
    Vegetative Member HopaLong's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    875
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/6
    Given: 7/2
    Rep Power
    18

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by medpot View Post


    'Hellth' Canada's THREATS registered on March 7, 2014 (14 days before the injunction was granted) became official and enacted anyway on March 26.

    Their THREATS are still alive, and it's exacerbating the health conditions of thousands of permanently ill and dying Canadians

    Parliament can overrule our justice system and any court decision in Canada, but it would cause quite a public outrage (Parliament's opposition as well) if the Harper government would decide to ignore the injunction and implement their THREATS.

    Our medias are still saying that some under the MMAR will be protected with the injunction, but, as per the following article I'll post below, their is no author name and the source of information isn't mentioned.

    Peace,

    Marc

    Health Canada has changed their website and added this:

    As a result of ongoing litigation and uncertainty arising from court decisions, Health Canada will treat the following Authorizations to Possess, Personal-Use Production Licences, and Designated-Person Production Licences as extending beyond March 31, 2014 until a decision in Allard is rendered. As per the Federal Court interim injunction, the following criteria must be met:

    • Individuals must have held a valid Authorizations to Possess under the MMAR on March 21, 2014.
    • Individuals must have held a valid Personal-Use Production Licence or Designated-Person Production Licence under the MMAR on, or after, September 30, 2013, where there is also an associated valid ATP as of March 21, 2014.
    Peace Hoppy




    "Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope." --the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers



  20. #120
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HopaLong View Post
    Health Canada has changed their website and added this:

    As a result of ongoing litigation and uncertainty arising from court decisions, Health Canada will treat the following Authorizations to Possess, Personal-Use Production Licences, and Designated-Person Production Licences as extending beyond March 31, 2014 until a decision in Allard is rendered. As per the Federal Court interim injunction, the following criteria must be met:

    • Individuals must have held a valid Authorizations to Possess under the MMAR on March 21, 2014.
    • Individuals must have held a valid Personal-Use Production Licence or Designated-Person Production Licence under the MMAR on, or after, September 30, 2013, where there is also an associated valid ATP as of March 21, 2014.


    Thanks DoobieDuck

    Thanks for the new information HopaLong


    Marc

  21. #121
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default Departmental Statement on Court Injunction and Medical Marijuana

    http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?...&crtr.tp1D=980

    http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/marih...access-eng.php

    Departmental Statement on Court Injunction and Medical Marijuana


    March 31, 2014


    OTTAWA - The Government of Canada intends to appeal the Federal Court's order in the Allard case.

    As a result of the court's injunction, the persons who were previously authorized to grow marijuana under the old Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR), who meet the terms of the Court order, will be able to continue to do so on an interim basis until the Court issues a final decision.

    After April 1st, Health Canada will no longer be in the business of providing marijuana. We will not be issuing further licenses to individuals, and we will no longer be subsidizing marijuana use.

    We want to remind Canadians that marijuana is not an approved drug or medicine in Canada. Health Canada does not endorse its use.

    Canadians with questions can contact Health Canada at 1-866-337-7705 or mmap-pamm@hc-sc.gc.ca

    Associated link:

    Statement: Medical Marihuana Access Regulations Update

    -30-

    Media Enquiries:

    Health Canada
    (613) 957-2983
    Public Enquiries:
    1-866-337-7705


    Date Modified:

    2014-03-31

  22. #122
    Flowering Member nohibition's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Manitoba
    Posts
    1,722
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,036/0
    Given: 1,031/0
    Rep Power
    13

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Well thanks to the hard work of MedPot and others we know we can relax for awhile.
    Thanx guys for keeping us clued in.

    N
    I fall upon the earth, and I am embraced. Water gives me life, and I spring forth into the light. My roots run deep into the earth, and I am nourished. With wind and water, light and earth, I conspire to ease your pain and heal your wounds, to bring you peace and calm your mind, to give you wisdom and truth of heart.
    I return to the earth and I am embraced.I am Cannabis
    Nohibition

  23. #123
    Finally Resting In Peace medpot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 28/0
    Given: 5/0
    Rep Power
    19

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nohibition View Post
    Well thanks to the hard work of MedPot and others we know we can relax for awhile.
    Thanx guys for keeping us clued in.

    N
    You're welcome nohibition

    Hopefully, the injunction will work until the end of trial my friend, but the Harper government is appealing it.

    Marc


    CTV news


    Ottawa to appeal medical marijuana injunction



    A dried cannabis plant is trimmed at the Farmacy in south-west Quebec on Tuesday,
    Oct. 8, 2013. (Justin Tang / THE CANADIAN PRESS)


    CTVNews.ca Staff
    Published Monday, March 31, 2014 10:08AM EDT
    Last Updated Monday, March 31, 2014 11:08AM EDT


    The federal government has announced it intends to appeal a recent Federal Court order that allows thousands of patients to continue growing their own marijuana while patients challenge the government's plan to change the system.

    Health Canada said in a brief statement Monday that it disagrees with the injunction the court issued earlier this month and will challenge it.

    The injunction allows patients who are licensed to possess or grow medical marijuana to continue to grow their own pot while patients take the government to court over plans to overhaul the marijuana system.

    That proceeding is expected to be scheduled within the next year.

    Canada's medical marijuana system has allowed licensed patients to grow their own pot since 2001. But Health Canada has repeatedly said it does not endorse the use of marijuana.

    It's also suggested that federal officials have only been running a medical pot program because the courts have said there must be reasonable access to the drug.

    Health Canada says the medical marijuana program has been open to serious abuse and that the risks related to marijuana grow-ops, such as fires and crime, outweigh the patients' rights to grow their own pot.

    Health Canada wants to bring in a new system to restrict medical marijuana production to licensed commercial producers only.

    Patients are contesting those plans because they say the marijuana will become more expensive and they won't have as much control over which strains of the drug they use.

  24. #124
    Flowering Member Guy_In_Pain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,155
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 65/0
    Given: 136/1
    Rep Power
    13

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Trimming dried pot, who da thunk that?

    I'm guessing if HC is successful with their appeal someone on Conroy's team will hear about it? Would it also be known if their (HC) appeal is not heard or turned down? Would also be interesting if the judges names were known and how they might fit in with Harper and his minions of crusaders.
    Help me stop DSS delicate soul syndrome. We need volunteers to hug and hold all the delicate souls until we can heal them. Help us today! You can make a difference in someone's life. Tell them the truth.

  25. #125
    Vegetative Member airedog's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    East of the sun and west of the moon.
    Posts
    994
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 271/0
    Given: 68/1
    Rep Power
    12

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Trimming dried pot, who da thunk that?
    I'll take fan leaves off while wet, but sugar leaves come off dry. For me, my efforts to make hash from wet trim are always far less than when i use dry. That's the major reason i don't use my TrimPro as much as i thought i would.

    The 'scissor hash' from the TrimPro is truly outstanding though.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •