Can we really leave cannabis law reform to Eric Poulliat?

Edito. Last night, France 2 organized an evening debate on the French failure to deal with drugs. A consensual subject if ever there was one, The panel featured a variety of profiles, with a generally positive background. On the downside, the speech by Eric Poulliat, co-rapporteur of the bill to criminalize drug use. Between the tongue in cheek and fake news, the Gironde MP did not shine, to put it mildly.

1 question was enough

It didn't take long for Mr Poulliat to give us an insight into his knowledge of the subject. Julian Bugier's first question to him à 52’30 :

«How many communes, how many neighborhoods, how many inhabitants are affected by these neighborhoods in the hands of drug dealers?
Things are changing very quickly. You have to realize that drug trafficking is first and foremost a business. We can have mutation systems as well as products. I visited Lille, for example, a city where heroin is wreaking havoc. Heroin is now €20 a gram, and the estates that were selling cannabis 10 years ago are now selling heroin in the same way, with the same dealers, and the dealers are adapting, they're efficient and dynamic traders.»

A fine exercise in doublespeak, with not a hint of an answer in sight. Julian Bugier even took him up on it: «Well, I did come up with a figure [Poulliat nods in agreement], 1,500 neighborhoods affected by these problems of dealing, trafficking and land grabbing, 700 communes, 5.5 million people, that's absolutely considerable.»

So there's no shortage of figures, but Mr Poulliat doesn't know them.

No better on the second

Julian Bugier then turns to the hot topic of the moment: the contraventionnalisation, with a question that couldn't be clearer.

«How will this measure help combat trafficking?
Firstly, because it will redirect the resources of the police and gendarmerie towards trafficking, since today a lot of resources are devoted to repressing the consumer. I'm convinced that consumers are victims twice over: they are victims of the product they take, which is toxic, and they are victims of the trafficker, who is their source of income.»

So we put a 300 fine to the consumer in order to deal with the traffickers? By penalizing consumers more, since fines are systematically imposed and prison sentences are not ruled out, police and gendarmerie resources will be channelled more towards trafficking?

Won't the consumer then really be a victim twice over: of the immediate fine and of the criminal justice system afterwards? What difference will a fine make to the fact that he or she is a victim of the trafficker? By prohibiting cannabis, isn't the State pushing de facto consumers towards the black market? Will penalizing adult consumers reduce youth consumption?

Julian Bugier then asks an interesting question, which will unfortunately go unanswered as a mini video report is launched: »So why haven't we opened up the debate on decriminalisation, as many of our neighbors have done?»

Mr Poulliat continues alone:

«The problem is that we always approach the question of public drug policy from just one point of view. In my opinion, there are 3 angles to this subject. You have to look at the educational aspect, the health aspect and the repressive aspect. If you only look at one aspect, you'll always find someone who's right instead of the others.»

That's true, as Perceval would say. We looked hard for the educational and health aspects of the fine, but to no avail.

Julian Bugier: »France is one of the biggest consumers of cannabis among teenagers, and yet we have the strictest rules and legislation in Europe. How do you explain this?
_ Simply because it's not applied... in one sense. That is to say, if you like, the majority of prosecutions for cannabis use end up with a reminder of the law. [Stéphane Gatignon gets angry in his corner] It's called a total inefficiency of the penal system, of the penal response.»

Likewise, Mr. Poulliat's answer in no way explains the current state of cannabis consumption in France. If the law isn't applied «in a way», it's still the strictest in Europe. With the results we all know.

And we end on fake news

All we needed was a big, fat shot to finish off this wonderful intervention. We'll let you savor it:

«We each have our own patterns and our own prejudices. A lot of people, let's face it, people my age, who are in their forties, think that cannabis isn't really dangerous after all, that the cannabis we knew more or less 20 years ago, that we smoked it, it was cool, we listened to reggae, we listened to Bob Marley, and that was cool. But today it's not like that anymore.» Then follows a diatribe about rising THC levels, kids with schizophrenia at 16.... Mr Gatignon has his head between his knees after so much nonsense.

Julian Bugier tries to finish with an opening:

«Some people say that legalization would make it easier to control the industry.
It's not true. All the legalizations that have taken place in Colorado, Washington and Uruguay show exactly the opposite,» replies Mr. Poulliat, ending with a blatant lie.

While all cannabis legalization experiments can be improved upon, they do make it possible to de facto regulation of the industry, from seed to sale. Mr Poulliat undoubtedly has in mind one of the conclusions of Cannalex, In other words, the black market has not been completely eliminated, and continues to supply surrounding states that have not legalized. But does this mean that regulation is worse than prohibition? That decriminalization, let alone prohibition, doesn't give the black market a fair share?

So many questions, so few answers. And the non-reform of the 1970 law is partly in his hands... The Gironde vineyards will be safe.

What if?

In his defense, our (sad) hunch is that Mr. Poulliat is merely the front man for this reform, the framework of which was already given in advance. At the risk of making a fool of himself in front of his party and the whole of France, he can't get out of his position: «one more fine, no less».

To end on a hopeful note, the most interesting intervention of the show was that of Céline Burgos, a «simple» mother, at 54’25, 1h14’35 and 1h15’30.

And that was undoubtedly the conclusion of this show: the citizens present are already ready for a legalization of cannabis in France. Not political decision-makers.

We leave you watch the show here, available for 6 days on replay.