In the context of the Cannabis Act, what are “reasonable steps to ensure” a promotion cannot be accessed by a young person?

It’s important to figure out because communications by means of a telecommunication — of either informational promotion or brand-preference promotion — is just one of a few manners promotion is permitted.

Let’s start with telecommunication. This can include everything from TV to radio to internet promotions.

Since the passage of the Cannabis Act, Health Canada has been very mum about what actually constitutes “reasonable steps” in this case.

In 2019, and likely since the passage of the Cannabis Act, Health Canada (HC) has published a statement that “simple self-attestation” (ie simple age-gates) “may be easily circumvented by youth.”

I haven’t seen a similar published statement by them since that time on self-attestation/age-gates.

It’s likely this position that prompted the AGLC in Alberta to require that cannabis suppliers, representatives and retail store licensees must undertake “age verification” before an advertisement is shown in a place where people under 18 are not prohibited to enter.

At the time, I emailed the AGLC and stated my discontent; HC never said age-gates were non-compliant, and the price to verify someone who even just wishes to view a promotion would be $1 per consumer or more to use any third party services to actually verify the person is not a youth.

The AGLC was firm, and I was left wondering why HC would make such a wishy-washy statement when they knew that age-gates are widely in use. Either say it’s compliant or non-compliant, damnit!

When I pushed HC promotions department on this, they had little more to say on age-gates. When I brought up other so-called “reasonable steps” that some producers have used – using tech/demographics to make probabilistic determinations their digital ads weren’t being shown to youth — I got the response that HC is “technology neutral” and didn’t want to prescribe the technology that industry should use to meet the requirements.

But now, as of October 2023, the AGLC announced they have amended s. 4.14 of the CRS Handbook to enable retailers of online sales to use a simple-age gate for website and electronic communication originating from the licensee instead of age verification (curiously the prohibition on advertising without an age gate still applies in s. 6.1.3 – I will have to reach the AGLC to see how they reconcile that!).

Since legalization, pretty much every other provincial/territorial jurisdiction has both used self-attestation for their consumer point of sales website, and has tolerated their privately-run retail stores to do the same.

In fact, if I recall you used to have to obtain a PIN code you get from inside a Nova Scotia NLSC Cannabis Store in order to even access their cannabis point of sale website — and now, only a simple age-gate is what they use.

What do we think of how governments on both levels have handled this issue?