German cannabis legalization project described as unworkable by cannabis associations and industry insiders

Germany's long-awaited bill for the «first pillar» of its cannabis legalization plans has been widely criticized by industry insiders and potential Cannabis Clubs.

New proposals, officially published for the first time last week, In addition, the French authorities have been accused of extensive «over-regulation», making it virtually impossible for cannabis associations to operate.

An informal Cannabis Club told Business of Cannabis that its projects had been frozen following publication of the bill, calling the stipulations «crazy».

Cannabis lawyer and industry expert Kai-Friedrich Niermann commented on the bill: «The basic idea of the so-called first pillar is based exclusively on health aspects, namely the protection of children and young people. This aspect is placed above everything else and leads to outright alarmism in health policy.»

«All the provisions of the draft are unworkable, contradictory and considerably over-regulate the consumption and cultivation of cannabis in cultivation associations.»

Location, location, location

Adrian Schöpf is the co-founder and Managing Director of The Joint Venture, a cannabis association to be set up in Bremerhaven.

The Joint Venture was almost ready for launch, with Mr. Schöpf and his three co-founders planning to send in their application this week, after securing sponsors and recruiting a growing number of members.

However, following publication of the bill last week, the association's launch plans have been put on hold, as «none of these regulations make sense» from either a commercial or operational point of view.

The first of his many criticisms of the proposed regulations concerns the location of these cultivation sites.

According to the bill: «The property (i.e. land, area, greenhouse, building) of a consortium cannot be located, even partially, inside a dwelling or other residential building or property».

According to Schöpf, this makes it very difficult to operate in easily accessible cities where the majority of buildings are used for residential purposes.

Subsequently, this means that cannabis associations, due to regulations requiring all their operations to be located in one place, will need a relatively large space and will be relegated to «industrial estates», which are «super expensive to rent».

«These areas are not located in the heart of cities, but on the outskirts, so even for the people who go there, it's a real headache. Now, if you think about it, it's simply unmanageable for a non-profit association».

Another key question, which has been raised on several occasions, is even before the official publication of the bill, One of the most important aspects of the new «Culture» concept is the need for cultural associations to be located at least "200 meters from school entrances, children's and youth facilities and children's playgrounds".

This exclusion zone also applies to consumption, meaning that no cannabis can be consumed within 200 meters of schools, playgrounds, sports facilities or the entrance to cultivation associations.

As Mr Niermann points out, «in Berlin, this would easily amount to a total ban».

What's more, a total ban on advertising would make it virtually impossible to identify areas where consumption is permitted, exposing many people to criminal penalties.

The costs

In addition to the obvious difficulties associated with location, the costs associated with setting up and running a cannabis association mean that membership fees are likely to be so high that few will be tempted to move away from the illicit market.

Cannabis Club members can each receive a maximum of 50 grams of cannabis per month for their own consumption if they are over 21, and a maximum of 30 grams if they are between 18 and 21.

For associations with the maximum number of members, i.e. 500, this means they could grow up to 300 kg of cannabis a year.

According to Mr. Schöpf, on the basis of elementary calculations, the installation and construction costs of a plot capable of handling this quantity of production would come to around 15,000 euros, and monthly operating costs, excluding personnel, to around 4,000 euros.

The new draft stipulates that associations cannot charge by the gram, and that they must cover all their costs through membership fees, which they can determine according to their costs.

«No additional fees may be charged for the supply of cannabis. Cultivation associations must cover their own costs and may only charge statutory fees and, in the event of cannabis seeds being passed on to non-members and other cultivation associations, reimbursement of production costs».

Members are required to pay two months« membership fees in advance, to prevent them from regularly moving from one association to another, and »must actively participate in the culture".

It's not clear exactly how and to what extent the 500 members are expected to participate in the cultivation operation, but Mr. Schöpf says he's convinced that members «don't want to be part of a gardening club».

In addition to initial installation costs and energy and irrigation bills, other financial and time commitments are required.

Mr. Niermann explains: «Cultural associations have numerous documentation and reporting obligations, and must appoint a youth protection officer. Members are divided into two groups, 18-21 year-olds and older members. The 18-21 age group is only allowed to receive THC flowers up to a maximum of 10 %.»

«With 7 members, for example, all the obligations are rather daunting; with the maximum number of 500 members, we'll need at least two full-time employees in addition to the cultivation staff to meet all the obligations.»

«In addition to the investment for culture, which is not allowed to make a profit, there are then considerable operating costs for the clubs.»

«It's not a good policy».»

According to the German government, the law is being introduced to «contribute to better health protection, strengthen cannabis education and prevention, curb drug-related organized crime, and strengthen the protection of children and young people».

In its current form, Mr Niermann and Mr Schöpf argue that the bill will not achieve these objectives.

Mr. Schöpf expects members to travel regularly to the outskirts of a city, or outside a city, to participate actively in culture, and to pay a membership fee that could exceed the cost of their average daily consumption.

Mr. Niermann echoed this view, concluding, «It remains to be seen how many clubs will choose this option.»

«In collaboration with various associations, we are currently working to considerably simplify the project and the regulations it contains. This health-policy scaremongering and bureaucratic overkill could well prevent the objectives pursued by the law from becoming a reality. This is not good politics!»