Skip to main content

Tag: regulations

Updates to cannabis regulations expected March 12

Written by David Brown on . Posted in Business, Cannabis News, Government.

Details on updates to Canada’s cannabis regulations are expected on March 12, 2025, according to recently-published Orders in Council.

Documents that appear to show the details of those changes have also been shared online through unofficial sources. StratCann has shared them here for reference but it’s important to note this is not the official source.

The changes were first posted as Orders in Council on February 25, pointing to the March 12 date for publication. March 12 is the next bi-monthly publication date for Gazette II. The previous was February 26. However, several advanced copies of those changes have been circulating online since at least March 5.

In what appear to be potentially prematurely-released documents shared widely online on March 5, the new regulations, the result of a proposal package and feedback period first posted by Health Canada in June 2024, include several changes to how federal cannabis licence holders do business.

Some changes that consumers and retailers will notice are that cannabis products can now come in transparent immediate packaging, and dried cannabis packages will be able to have cut-out view-windows allowing consumers to better see what they are buying. Cannabis packaging and labelling will become a bit more colourful and will be easier to sell in multi-packs in some cases.

One significant change for micro cultivators, micro processors, and cannabis nurseries is a fourfold expansion of how much cannabis they can have on-site at any given time. 

Micro cultivators will be able to grow under a canopy of up to 800 square meters, up from 200. For micro processors, the new regulations will allow up to 2,400 kg on site per year, up from 600 kg a year previously. 

While cannabis nurseries already have no cap on how much cannabis they can grow for the purpose of mother plants, tissue culture, clones, and starts, they were previously capped at having a flowering space no larger than 50 square meters, keeping no more than 5 kg of cannabis flower on-site at any given time, and for a limited time. 

This allowance is for seed production, and nurseries are required to destroy the flower afterwards. 

Under the new changes, cannabis nurseries will be able to grow cannabis to flower in a space of up to 200 square meters and will be able to possess up to 20 kg of dried flower on hand. 

The new changes also make cannabis destruction for licence holders easier, with only one person witnessing the destruction instead of two. 

Cannabis pollen is now also added to the cannabis regulations, making it possible to buy and sell the product that was otherwise being used primarily for internal breeding purposes by nurseries and other cultivators. 

The changes are not exclusive to cannabis production, though. Those seeking to do non-human or animal research with cannabis will be able to do so with fewer regulatory hurdles, and licensed producers will be able to swap out alternative Quality Assurance Persons. 

Cannabis producers can also include more than one barcode on products and can include leaflets inside cannabis packaging. Internal packaging also now has more allowances for peelback or accordion labelling.

The changes were first posted as Orders in Council on February 25, pointing to the March 12 date for publication. The Canada Gazette is where regulatory updates are posted. Proposed regulatory changes are posted in the Canada Gazette I, which is where Health Canada first posted their proposed changes in June 2024, and final updates are posted in Gazette II. The final posting also includes a coming into force date, which can be the same day or at a later time. 

The process of posting these changes first as an Order in Council is most likely a reflection of some of the challenges facing the federal government currently, with Parliament prorogued and an election call expected any day now. 

By posting as an Order of Council, signed off by the Treasury Board—a federal Cabinet Committee with the authority to approve regulation changes—the February 25 publication helps solidify these changes, even if an election is called prior to their final publication in the Gazette, something a called election could otherwise potentially halt.

Once an election is called, most federal government work has to halt. Since there is much speculation that an election could be called as early as March 10, such a move could have helped ensure the pieces were in place to allow these changes to go through without a new election—and a potential new government—interfering with that timeline.

Related Articles

What could an early election mean for the cannabis industry and pending regulatory changes?

What could an early election mean for the cannabis industry and pending regulatory changes?

December 23, 2024
Health Canada proposes numerous, significant regulatory changes

Health Canada proposes numerous, significant regulatory changes

June 7, 2024
Industry: Cannabis rule changes a step in the right direction, but more is needed

Industry: Cannabis rule changes a step in the right direction, but more is needed

July 2, 2024

The Australian Capital Territory’s home grown cannabis laws are serving the community

Written by David Brown on . Posted in Cannabis News, International.

A recently released study from Australia looked into the cultivation, consumption, and analytical profiling of home-grown cannabis following decriminalization in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT).

The survey found that the decriminalization of cannabis cultivation and possession in the ACT supported the needs of the community with very few unintended consequences, while also lowering negative interactions with law enforcement. 

Respondents had various reasons for cultivating, including the belief that it was safer than purchasing from the illicit market and the enjoyment of the process.

The survey found that those growing cannabis at home in the ACT typically consumed about a gram a day (median) from a total of about four plants a year (median). Analysis of home-grown cannabis found most samples did not exceed contaminant guidelines for heavy metals or pesticides, with a mean THC total concentration of about 9%. 

Most samples had fairly low levels of CBD, while minor phytocannabinoids like CBG, CBN, and CBC were present in “low to negligible” concentrations.

Although the state government of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) decriminalized small-scale cannabis possession and cultivation in January 2020, many of the survey respondents said they were still concerned with some of the grey areas in the law, such as how to legally acquire starting material like clones or seeds, or even potential arrest under federal Australian law. 

Survey make-up

A total of 311 eligible respondents participated in the survey, out of 516 initial responses. The median age of respondents was 42, with most (69%) identified as male. Almost all of those self-identified as cultivators said they had used cannabis in their lifetime (98%), while 91% were currently using cannabis. 

Nearly half of these growers (42%) said they were growing for both medical and non-medical reasons, while 13% said they were medical-use only and 36% said non-medical-use only. 

Drilling down, 70% of respondents also said they were growing in order to provide themselves with cannabis for non-medical reasons. Nearly as many (65%) said they also grew cannabis because they enjoyed the process, while 61% said they did so to provide themselves with cannabis for medical purposes. Almost half (48%) said they were growing it themselves to avoid dealing with illegal suppliers and 37% said growing it themselves was less risky than buying it. 

The University of Sydney (Camperdown, NSW) administered the cross-sectional study between September 2022 and August 2023. Home growers were also given an opportunity to provide samples of their cannabis to test for cannabinoid levels as well as any potential contaminants like microbials, pesticides, and heavy metals.

Microbials, pesticides, and heavy metals

A total of 71 cannabis samples were analyzed for phytocannabinoid content, with most results falling around 5-12% total THC (THC and THCa). There were also 71 samples of cannabis were analyzed for heavy metals, 62 for mycotoxins, and 55 for pesticides. 

The majority of these (92%) fell under the contaminant thresholds for heavy metals, mycotoxins and pesticides (benchmarked against Australian TGO93 standards). 

Only five of the 55 samples showed pesticide levels above the TGO93 limits. Four were above the limit for fluvalinate—a chemical used to control mites in honey bee colonies—and one sample exceeded the limit for methamidophos—an organophosphate insecticide. 

Another single sample was above New Zealand’s limit for bifenthrin—an insecticide in the pyrethroid family—but this no longer appears on the Australian TGO93 list. 

Most submitted cannabis samples (64) contained trace levels of lead, and just under half contained very low levels of cadmium. Thirteen samples contained detectable levels of arsenic, with one sample at more than twice the allowable limit. Mercury was detected in six samples, but none were above the TGO93 limit.

Meanwhile, none of the submitted samples contained any of the mycotoxins tested: aflatoxin BI, B2, G1, G2 or ochratoxin A.

Grey areas in ACT’s rules

In addition to anxiety around sourcing legal starting materials and possible conflict with federal Australian law, respondents also told the researchers that the 50-gram possession limit (150 grams fresh) meant that even with only four legal plants, growers may be harvesting more than they are allowed to possess. This kind of anxiety was even higher for those in vulnerable communities who felt they could be more subject to legal scrutiny. 

Potentially due to these limits, 59% of cultivators in the survey said they illegally share their cannabis, while 76% convert plant matter into other forms.

While the study found few negative downsides to the ACT’s cannabis rules, it does suggest that the program could be refined to better serve its intended purposes. Namely, it suggests removing some restrictions on cultivation, such as providing access to starting materials, as well as more guidance on proper cultivation techniques.

AGLC makes several updates, clarifications to retail cannabis and cannabis representative policies

Written by David Brown on . Posted in Alberta, Cannabis News, Government, Retail.

The Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (AGLC) has made amendments to its Retail Cannabis Store Handbook and the Cannabis Representative Handbook.

In a November 28 bulletin, the provincial cannabis regulator noted several updates to the two relevant handbooks to cannabis retailers and registered cannabis representatives. AGLC is responsible for overseeing relationships among cannabis suppliers, cannabis representatives, and cannabis licensees.

One change allows cannabis retailers to now use their secure cannabis rooms for more than just the storage of cannabis, and another allows cannabis stores to now sell lighter fluid refills. The policy that previously didn’t allow the off-site sales of non-cannabis items has also been removed.

The rest of the changes are related to advertising and promotion, primarily to clarify existing policies. 

For example, cannabis suppliers, cannabis representatives, and licensees are now specifically responsible for ensuring their advertising, including any advertising conducted jointly or by a third party, complies with all legislation and these policies.

Other changes/clarifications include:

  • Advertising may not include content that displays or identifies a cannabis product or accessory.
  • The definition of “Product Promotion” now includes activities not only within licensed premises.
  • Clarification on how cannabis representatives and retail cannabis store licensees are permitted to promote cannabis products.
  • Promotion outside of places where persons under the age of 18 are prohibited from entering by law must: a) be directly communicated (i.e. mail-outs, email, etc.) to an individual, by name, who has been confirmed to be 18 years of age or older; or b) include reasonable steps in online promotion to ensure that persons under the age of 18 cannot access the promotion (i.e., age verification).
  • Free cannabis or cannabis accessories are now prohibited in the promotion of cannabis products and accessories (this does not apply to sampling to retailers).

Related Articles

AGLC announces several rule changes for cannabis producers, retailers

AGLC announces several rule changes for cannabis producers, retailers

October 13, 2023
AGLC delisting more than 500 cannabis SKUs

AGLC delisting more than 500 cannabis SKUs

May 24, 2024
AGLC launches Forget Bad Bud campaign

AGLC launches Forget Bad Bud campaign

November 7, 2024

Report calls for more cohesion, public health focus to US cannabis laws

Written by David Brown on . Posted in Business, Cannabis News, Government, International.

A new report from researchers in the US is calling on that country’s federal government to take the lead in more strictly regulating cannabis with an eye on public health. 

The report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in the United States was compiled by members of the NASEM’s Committee on the Public Health Consequences of Changes in the Cannabis Policy Landscape.

Looking at countries like Canada and Uruguay that took a stricter public health focus to legalization, researchers say the US federal government needs to bring more cohesion to the dozens of various state-legal models allowing some form of medical and/or non-medical adult-use access to cannabis.

The US approach to legalization has generally been more focused on revenue generation for various levels of government through taxation and regulatory fees, as well as private businesses. At the same time, both Canada and Uruguay put policies in place that emphasized public health concerns over private profits or even personal liberties. 

The report also calls on the US federal government to close hemp regulatory loopholes in the 2018 Farm Bill that have led to a proliferation of under-regulated semi-synthetic cannabinoids like delta-8THC.


“Existing state cannabis policies were developed without a public health strategy. State-to-state variations in regulations limit public health efforts to prevent harmful use. In contrast, some countries, such as Canada and Uruguay, have adopted more measured approaches with stricter government control over cannabis products and how they are sold or consumed. Such stricter regulatory frameworks may better protect public health.”

The committee was tasked with recommending a harm reduction approach to cannabis policy and setting a policy research agenda for the next five years.

“There is an urgent need for a coordinated public health approach to cannabis policy in the U.S.,” said Steven Teutsch, chair of the committee that wrote the report and senior fellow at the Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics at the University of Southern California. 

“Our report shows that cannabis policy often focuses on regulating sales and revenue first, and protecting public health second. Now is the time for the federal government to create guidance for states that have legalized cannabis in the interest of protecting the public’s health.”

Many of the recommendations mirror the approaches to legalizing and regulating cannabis taken by Canada and Uruguay, models the report explores in-depth as well. From the report:

“Existing state cannabis policies were developed without a public health strategy. State-to-state variations in regulations limit public health efforts to prevent harmful use. In contrast, some countries, such as Canada and Uruguay, have adopted more measured approaches with stricter government control over cannabis products and how they are sold or consumed. Such stricter regulatory frameworks may better protect public health.”

In contrast, the state-legal approach in the US has meant little oversight for things like age-gating or enforcing advertising restrictions. The report also expresses significant concern about how the current “ambiguous definition of hemp” in the 2018 Farm Bill has led to a largely unregulated market for semisynthetic intoxicating cannabinoids.

The report includes several recommendations:

  • Congress should refine the definition of “hemp” to clearly state that no form of tetrahydrocannabinol or semi-synthetic cannabinoid derived from hemp is exempt from the Controlled Substances Act.
  • In conjunction with other federal agencies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should conduct research on and develop best practices for protecting public health for states that have legalized cannabis, drawing from tobacco and alcohol policies. These best practices should encompass marketing restrictions (e.g., on advertising and packing), age restrictions, physical retail and retail operating restrictions, taxation, price restrictions, product design, and measures to limit youth access. Other strategies for protecting public health that warrant identification of best practices include reducing cannabis-impaired driving, promoting state retail monopoly, and encouraging cultivation practices that limit contamination of both products and the environment. The best practices should be reconsidered and updated periodically as new research emerges. 
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in conjunction with its federal, state, tribal, and territorial partners, should create an adaptable public health surveillance system for cannabis. This surveillance system should include, at a minimum, cannabis cultivation and product sales, use patterns, and health impacts. It should also include all the essential components of a public health surveillance system: a surveillance plan, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, data dissemination, a link to action, and regular evaluation.
  • The U.S. Pharmacopeia has established product quality and analytical standards for cannabis inflorescence (flower) and is developing standards for cannabis extracts incorporated into pills and edibles. As these standards are completed, state cannabis regulators should adopt and enforce them to ensure the safety and quality of all legal cannabis products.
  • State cannabis regulators should require training and certification for all staff at cannabis retail outlets who interact with customers. The training should address the effects of cannabis on humans, prevention of sales to minors, warnings about cannabis-impaired driving, cannabis use in pregnancy, high-concentration or high-potency products, and how to identify signs of impairment. The effectiveness of the training should be assessed, and the content updated as new scientific information about the positive and negative impacts of cannabis emerges.
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in coordination with other relevant agencies, should develop and evaluate targeted public health campaigns directed mainly toward parents and vulnerable populations (e.g., youth, those who are or are likely to become pregnant, adults over age 65) about the potential risks of cannabis; how to identify risky behaviour, such as the use of cannabis in combination with alcohol or prescription drugs; and risk mitigation strategies, such as lower-risk use guidelines and safe storage. These public health campaigns should include discouraging unhealthy use, such as the use of cannabis in combination with other substances (alcohol, tobacco, or drugs), and the increased risk associated with the use of high-concentration or high-potency products.
  • Congress should remove restrictions on the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) from studying the impacts of cannabis legalization. The ONDCP should be allowed to support research on the impacts of changes in cannabis policy.
  • Jurisdictions responsible for the enforcement of cannabis laws should endeavour to regularly gather and report detailed data concerning the use of criminal enforcement tools to enforce cannabis policies. 
  • State cannabis regulators should systematically evaluate and, if necessary, revise their cannabis social equity policies to ensure they meet their stated goals and minimize unintended consequences. Policymakers should meaningfully engage affected community members when developing or revising these policies.
  • Where states have legalized or decriminalized adult use and sales of cannabis, criminal justice reforms should be implemented, and records automatically expunged or sealed for low-level cannabis-related offences.
  • The National Institutes of Health; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; state, local, and tribal health authorities; and private entities should support a research agenda focused on:
    • public health outcomes of different approaches to cannabis regulation
    • efficacy of tests used to determine cannabis impairment
    • health effects of cannabis use (by product, amount, and frequency) by specific populations
    • health effects of emerging cannabis products, and • mitigation of the risks of cannabis use.

Industry: Cannabis rule changes a step in the right direction, but more is needed

Written by Dave Dormer on . Posted in Insight.

Proposed regulatory changes to the federal cannabis framework are a good step toward bolstering the industry, but some retailers, producers, and consultants say more needs to be done to help it grow and thrive.

Health Canada announced the proposed changes in early June, and a 30-day consultation period, which ends July 8, is now underway. (Note: Implementation of any proposed changes could take several months or more).

They cover everything from allowing cut-out windows and transparent packaging for dried and fresh cannabis products, plants, and seeds, to adjusting or removing some licencing requirements for producers, to quadrupling the threshold for micros from 200 m2 to 800 m2.

The proposed amendments also align with recommendations in the federal government’s expert panel’s final report on the Legislative Review of the Cannabis Act.

“For us, on a very functional level, it would be really nice to be able to tell the difference between one product and another without getting a magnifying glass out.”

Andrea Dobbs, Village Bloomery

“I think a lot of them are common sense, kind of much-needed for a very long time and it’s good to see that they are finally being implemented,” said consultant Deepak Anand, the principal with ASDA Consultancy Services.

“I wouldn’t say anything is bad. Definitely lots is missing.”

Two proposals Anand would recommend involve medical cannabis — allowing in-person access at pharmacies and removing the tax.

“We’ve had tax on medical cannabis for a very long time, cannabis is one of the only products, or the only product out there in Canada, that is a pharmaceutical product that is being taxed,” he said.

“The second, obviously, would be increased access, so certainly being able to both get this dispensed, but also received at a pharmacy would be another step in the right direction.”

The expert panel report calls for expanding the existing model, which permits online sales, to allow for in-person cannabis access at pharmacies.

Given that it has been nearly six years since legalization, Anand says the government needs to pick up the pace around some changes.

“It definitely is frustrating to see it moving so slowly,” he said. “If you think proactively and the way the government works, these things always take a very long time, but action was needed years ago. I think we are on the right path but it is a slow process.”

“That’s not to say it can’t be a step in the right direction, it’s just not something that will benefit who it is intended to benefit until those other pieces arrive as well.”

Walker Patton, Woody Nelson

The proposed changes to packaging — allowing cut-out windows on packaging for dried or fresh cannabis products and cannabis seeds, allowing transparent containers, and allowing lids to be a different colour than the container — will enable consumers to make more informed choices, says Andrea Dobbs, co-founder of Village Bloomery, a cannabis retailer in Vancouver.

“At least if you have three different cultivars, maybe the lid will be the difference. For us, on a very functional level, it would be really nice to be able to tell the difference between one product and another without getting a magnifying glass out,” Dobbs said.

“I think it’s going to be easier. When we start to talk to people about things that are quote, sativa, or equatorial, or whatever we want to call them … we’ll be able to talk about the shape of the bud. People will be able to see it in a more holistic way … it would be easy for me to say, ‘This is machine-trimmed and this is hand-trimmed, do you see the difference?’”

Dobbs says she would have liked to see the proposed changes crafted using more of an environmental lens.

Reducing some licensing requirements will allow for more product diversity.

“I like that they are not going to make people get a licence to process things like the stalk and the root,” said Dobbs. “This should be a completely closed-circle industry because every single piece of this plant is useful. I’m hoping to see a lot more products … paper, rope, canvas. I want to see more plastics, I want to see more fabrics, more paper, who knows, maybe the stalk will become the package one day. Let’s make it more accessible and not make someone get a Health Canada licence to do that.”

The changes are positive from a producer perspective, but more needs to be done, said Walker Patton, chief commercial officer at Woody Nelson, an LP in southeast British Columbia.

“One of the things that stood out to me which I thought was kind of neat was them (increasing) the canopy for micros, but then I quickly realized after talking to some folks on that side of things that that isn’t worth much when you don’t have the capital to expand. And the market price doesn’t exactly support the production of craft cannabis right now.”

“I think a lot of them are common sense, kind of much-needed for a very long time and it’s good to see that they are finally being implemented.”

Deepak Anand, ASDA Consultancy Services.

Ancillary supports are needed, he said.

“If there was capital available or the market price was higher and this was a more profitable industry, or the taxes were lower, there’s a few difference mechanisms that could be changed in order to make that a great policy. But without those other mechanisms, it kind of misses the mark,” he said

“But that’s not to say it can’t be a step in the right direction, it’s just not something that will benefit who it is intended to benefit until those other pieces arrive as well.”

As for his own recommendations, Patton would like to see the 30-gram limit raised to allow for bulk purchases for personal use.

He would also like to see a standardized methodology for cannabinoid and terpene testing.

“It doesn’t really matter if they want to develop their own or adopt something like SGS’s or ASTM’s, we just need consistency from one lab to the next,” he said. “There’s a reason why international labs aren’t generating the same inflated THC test results that we’re seeing in the Canadian marketplace.”

Health Canada estimates the proposed changes could result in $41 million annually in “administrative and compliance cost savings” for stakeholders.

Some of the proposed changes include: 

  • Increasing the threshold for micros from 200 m2 to 800 m2 and the micro processing licence possession threshold from 600 kg to 2,400 kg of dried cannabis or its equivalent.
  • Increasing Nurseries’ canopy size for seed production from 50 m2 to 200 m2, allowing them to harvest up to 20 kg of flowering cannabis for seed production.
  • Removing the requirement for actual THC and CBD on product labels, only total THC and CBD. 
  • Increasing the number of permitted alternate Quality Assurance Persons (QAPs) to “one or more” from the current allowance of “up to two”.
  • Licensed processors would no longer be required to provide printed copies of the consumer information document with every cannabis product package sent.
  • Formalizing COVID-19 era “flexibilities”.
  • Adding grounds for suspension of any licences held by the same licence holder, should they have unpaid fees or have failed to submit a required statement of cannabis revenue for a licence as required under the Cannabis Fees Order. 
  • Amending the Industrial Hemp Regulations to remove the maximum THC concentration of 10 parts per million for industrial hemp grain derivatives, as well as the testing requirement, labelling for wholesale, and import and export requirements.
  • Allowing for differentiation in colour between the lid or cap of a container and the container itself.
  • Permitting cut-out windows on packaging for dried or fresh cannabis products and cannabis seeds, while upholding the exclusion of cut-out windows for all other classes of cannabis.
  • Allowing dried or fresh cannabis products, in addition to cannabis plants and cannabis seeds, to be packaged in transparent containers while maintaining existing rules prescribing opaque or translucent packaging of all other classes of cannabis.
  • Removing the cumulative 10 mg THC limit for an outermost container of edible cannabis product to allow greater flexibility in packing multiple immediate containers, as long as the immediate containers do not have more than 10 mg of THC each.
  • Removing the requirement to file an NNCP to Health Canada for dried and fresh cannabis products.