PdP finds ‘grey areas’ in medical marijuana bill

The Opposition People’s Party for Democracy and Development (PdP) has called on Government to tighten up what it perceives to be dangerous ambiguities in the Medicinal Cannabis Industry Bill.

Delivering the first presentation when hearings of Parliament’s Joint Select Committee on the draft legislation continued at Lloyd Erskine Sandiford Centre this morning, pharmacist Paul Gibson – the PdP’s spokesman on Health and Wellness – suggested that the allowances in the bill for “therapeutic facilities” could be a loophole for improper dispensation of the drug.

Gibson said: “Under this bill, the term ‘therapeutic facility’ appears.

“It is an ambiguous term and we are suggesting that serious consideration should be given to the elimination of this term from the Medical Cannabis Bill.

“The challenge with the term ‘therapeutic facility’ is its direct conflict with the Pharmacy Act 372D ‘Section 31 (1) and (2), whereby dispensing can only be executed by a pharmacist according to Barbadian law.”

He further cited from the Pharmacy Act: “No person shall, unless he is registered as a pharmacist, display on any premises; any sign, title, emblem or representation that includes the description drug store, drug dispensary, pharmacy or any other sign, title, emblem or representation that implies or from which the public may reasonably infer that those premises are registered as a pharmacy.”

Gibson demanded that the Government provide clarity on the clientele to be catered for in these therapeutic rooms, as the current forms of dispensation listed in the bill do not require a special room for administration.

He added: “The reason for our position on this matter is that we are cognizant of the specificity of dosage forms listed in the bill and none of these requires a therapeutic room to be admnistered.”

This was a concern that was echoed later in the afternoon session by the national representative of Gibson’s fellow druggists, the Barbados Pharmaceutical Society.

The PdP spokesman further argued that this could be an issue of life and death as there is a real danger of cannabis-based pharmaceuticals interaction with other drugs.

“We would like to bring to the consciousness of the committee, another critical public health consideration in respect to the bill and the importance of ensuring the management by doctors and pharmacists of medical cannabis patients.

“There may be clinically significant interaction when medical cannabis is taken at the same time as central nervous system depressants, including alcohol and sedative-hypnotics.

“There may also be risk of adverse effects when consuming cannabis in conjunction with opioids and anti-psychotic medications.”

But Attorney General Dale Marshall rebutted the PdP’s argument by pointing out that Clause 29 of the bill requires that these therapeutic facilities have several control measures in place, including the oversight of a pharmacist.

Marshall said: “If you look at Clause 29, it makes it quite clear that whatever is dispensed as medicinal cannabis in therapeutic facilities must supervised or administered by a pharmacist.

“So, I am wondering if this shouldn’t be a level of control that satisfies your concern.”