Saint-Ouen: results of the public meeting on the legalization of cannabis

On Wednesday evening, Saint-Ouen hosted a public meeting on the theme of «Legalization, prohibition, decriminalization, punishment? What do we say? What do we do? The evening debate, hosted in a town often regarded as the «Parisian cannabis »supermarket and regularly hit by settling of scores, saw Bruno Le Roux, the district's deputy, and Daniel Vaillant, his neighbor from the 18th arrondissement, take the floor on this subject, which is always very controversial in France. What can we learn from it?

The speakers

Bruno Le Roux, the first to speak, began by saying that there was not one debate, but several:

• a debate on the state apparatus, with its anti-drug mission and the resources it puts into it, but also the age of legislation
• one around public order: the consequences of the ban, and unequal tolerance of consumption by social category
• public finances: the sale of cannabis is currently not subject to taxation due to the prohibition of cannabis.
• public health

The once-local cannabis trade in Saint-Ouen is today has become a global business. Bruno Le Roux jokes that Paris consumers should be able to buy in Paris. Saint-Ouen has indeed become a «cannabis supermarket», long known for the quality of its products. In the past, the drug trade was synonymous with quiet neighborhoods. Nowadays, it's synonymous with danger - for consumers, sellers and the surrounding neighborhood.

Karim Bouamrane,National Secretary of the Socialist Party, reminded us of his desire to debate the issues without dividing lines or political agendas.

Daniel Vaillant, whom we profiled in our article « 6 French people in favor of legalizing cannabis »I've changed. «I've changed». 15 years ago, Mr. Vaillant applied repression without questioning how France got to this point.

His thinking began in 2003, when Sarkozy and Raffarin propose contraventionalisation. This proposal to punish customers with fines, mainly at the point of purchase, was synonymous with discrimination against neighborhoods, while consumers in «nice neighborhoods» could have continued to consume without worrying too much about the possible legal consequences.

Mr Vaillant then studied the potential solutions. He refuses the decriminalization which doesn't solve the problems of cannabis production and importation. Why not do what alcohol has done? Legalization would :

• control the import and production of cannabis, by stepping up the fight against traffickers
• dealing with dangerous or risky behavior
• prevention through education policies in schools and workplaces

In addition to a national debate, it also proposes a European statement on the subject. Germany launches into medical cannabis. Switzerland too. And France is making no headway.

On the other hand, he's not sure about the future of current dealers the day cannabis is legalized, but feels guilty about the status quo of the subject.

Philippe Batel, a doctor specializing in addictions, begins his speech by talking about the difficulty of assessing the dangerousness of a drug, and the gap between knowledge of drug use and reality. Over the past 20 years, public policies on drugs have produced few results. Since the 1970s, France has allowed a population of drug addicts to develop, without any real policy of harm reduction.

The French and their associations have caught up with this situation. Mr Batel appeals to the French people's ability to change the legislation. He also stresses the parliamentarians' lack of knowledge on the subject.

Questions from the public

The audience could then ask questions. With so many questions and so much to say, the speakers didn't really have time to answer them all. So here are the questions we felt were the most pertinent:

• Can decriminalization be a stepping stone to legalization?
• What are the economic opportunities for the State, with the hemp industry for construction, textiles, automobiles, etc. on the one hand, and the marketing system that can be set up on the other?
• How can citizens move the political agenda forward?
• How will the parallel industry be supported during legalization?
• Is cannabis the cause of the 30,000 high school dropouts? With a link to saliva testing in middle and high school
• How can we change the «cool» cultural aspect of the joint? Compared with the danger of a shot
• The State is responsible for the development of trafficking in the suburbs. Why not launch a major «Marshall Plan» for the suburbs?
• Why not experiment with the legalization of cannabis in Saint-Ouen?
• How do you ensure product traceability?
• Hashish or weed: what's the best product to fight cholesterol? > it was obviously a joke, but the question deserves to be asked 🙂

Balance sheet

What can we take away from these two hours of debate?

1/ The population of Saint-Ouen is fed up with the traffic. The constant parade of buyers and arrests is undermining the town's tranquillity. The settling of scores also shocked most of those present.

2/ even if the volume is low, we're starting to hear politicians speak out in favor of changing the law. No big announcement on the 8 o'clock news, but all the speakers present are in favor of the law. legalization of cannabis in France, This is the only way to reduce consumption, combat trafficking and promote real prevention.

3/ the subject of cannabis is largely unknown. Beyond the personal experiences of the people who asked questions (or Google searches), we were able to realize the global ignorance about cannabis. Only Farid Ghehiouèche, who represented Chanvre & Libertés - NORML France along with Dr Olivier Bertrand, and Kshoo from IARC, seemed to have really mastered the subject from start to finish.

4/ In spite of Mrs. Le Roux's and Mrs. Vaillant's willingness, the political debate is stymied, notably by electoral deadlines. It's a pity we didn't get a response from these gentlemen on the means available to citizens to shake up the political agenda.

5/ public interest in the subject. Even if it's not widely discussed, people are thirsty for information, whether it's about dangers of cannabis or on economic and medical opportunities.