DOCSLIB.ORG

Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense & Perils

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense & Perils 2017 Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense & Perils Michael DeVillaer The Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research McMaster University St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton Hamilton Ontario Canada If justice perishes, human life on earth has lost its meaning. Immanuel Kant Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense and Perils examines the Canadian government’s campaign to legalize cannabis for recreational use. The government’s stated case is that the contraband trade poses a serious threat to cannabis users (including ‘kids’), and that a legal, regulated industry will provide protection. This report draws upon research on the contraband trade, our established legal drug industries (alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceutical), and government efforts to regulate these industries. This investigation concludes that the government’s case, on all counts, is weak. Its depiction of the contraband cannabis trade amounts to little more than unsubstantiated, vestigial reefer madness. Our legal drug industries engage in a relentless, indiscriminate, and sometimes illegal, pursuit of revenue with substantial harm to the public’s health and to the Canadian economy. Early indications warn that an ambitious cannabis industry is on a similar trajectory. These industries are enabled by permissive and ineffective regulatory oversight by government. Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense and Perils recommends immediate decriminalization of minor cannabis-related offences to curtail the criminalization of large numbers of mostly young Canadians. It also supports the legalization of cannabis for recreational use, but strongly asserts that the prevailing profit-driven, poorly- regulated paradigm is a dangerous one. The legalization of cannabis in Canada provides an opportunity to try a different approach – a not-for-profit cannabis authority – functioning with a genuine public health priority. 2 About Mike DeVillaer Mike DeVillaer is a part-time Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences at McMaster University and faculty member with the Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research in Hamilton Canada. Over his nearly four decades with The Addiction Research Foundation and The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Mike has enjoyed a varied career as a clinician, research/evaluation collaborator, educator, and policy advocate, playing a leadership role in the evolution of the addiction treatment system in Hamilton and Ontario. He also established and chaired CAMH’s Tobacco Policy Group. At McMaster University, he has made substantial contributions to addictions curriculum in undergraduate medical education and has played a leadership role in two province-wide medical school initiatives: Educating Future Physicians for Ontario (EFPO) and Project CREATE. He has been a recipient of the John C. Sibley Award for Excellence in Health Sciences Research and Education at McMaster. Mike’s current interests include epidemiology of drug problems and drug policy. 3 About The Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research The Mission of PBCAR is to conduct state-of-the-art research on the causes, consequences, and treatment of addiction. Addictive disorders, such as alcohol use disorder, nicotine dependence, illicit drug addiction and pathological gambling, are among the most widespread psychiatric disorders in Canada and around the world. Approximately one in five Canadians experience addiction over their lifetime. Addictive disorders commonly co-occur with other psychiatric disorders, such as mood disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder, and are major contributors to cardiovascular disease, cancer, sexually transmitted diseases and accidental injury and death. In economic terms, addiction has an estimated annual burden of 40 billion dollars. In human terms, the toll addiction takes on those who are afflicted and their loved ones is incalculable. The Peter Boris Center for Addictions Research is a joint collaboration between McMaster University and St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton (Ontario Canada) to advance the scientific understanding of addiction. Located at the St. Joseph's West 5th campus, the state-of-the-art Juravinski Centre for Integrated Healthcare, the Centre serves as a nexus for faculty in McMaster's Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences and collaborators at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and Homewood Health Centre. Although the interests in the Centre are diverse, the collective goal is to conduct innovative empirical research that pushes the boundaries of new knowledge and bridges the gap between science and practice. 4 Acknowledgements Several individuals made helpful suggestions at various stages in the development of this report. These include Patricia Erickson, Roberta Ferrence, Norman Giesbrecht, James McKillop, Robert Simpson, Paula Stanghetta, and Darryl Upfold. However, the author retains exclusive responsibility for the final content, including any errors or omissions. The cover photo is by Petr Brož from the Czech Republic. It was accessed from Wikimedia Commons, and adapted by the author. The perspectives and recommendations contained herein are those of the author and do not necessarily extend to the reviewers listed above or to the faculty affiliated with the Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research or serve as the official position statement of the Centre. In addition, the perspectives and recommendations do not constitute the official positions of either McMaster University or St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton. Suggested Citation: DeVillaer Michael. Cannabis Law Reform in Canada: Pretense & Perils. Hamilton Canada: McMaster University, The Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research. February 2017. Inquiries: Mike DeVillaer ([email protected]) 5 Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... 5 Preface ........................................................................................................................ 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 10 1. A Brief Orientation to Cannabis Law Reform ............................................................ 13 2. Decriminalization: A Humanitarian First Step ........................................................... 16 2.1 Definition ............................................................................................................. 16 2.2 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 16 2.3 Impact on Consumer Demand, Ease of Access, Use and Associated Problems 16 2.4 Impact on Public Safety & Propriety ................................................................... 17 2.5 Impact on Cannabis Product Safety ................................................................... 20 2.6 Impact on Social Justice ..................................................................................... 21 2.7 Improving the Traditional Model of Decriminalization ......................................... 22 2.7.1 Non-punitive Decriminalization ..................................................................... 22 2.7.2 De Facto Decriminalization .......................................................................... 23 2.8 The Impact of Delaying Decriminalization ........................................................... 24 2.9 Decriminalization: Beyond the Here and Now .................................................... 28 Recommendation #1 .................................................................................................. 29 3. A Legal, Government-Regulated, Commercial Cannabis Industry ........................... 30 3.1 Definition ............................................................................................................. 30 3.2 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 30 3.3 Harm and Costs of Products from Legal, Government-regulated, Commercial Drug Industries .......................................................................................................... 31 3.4 Impact on the Contraband Cannabis Trade ........................................................ 32 3.5 Impact on Demand, Access, Use and Problems ................................................. 33 3.5.1 Demand........................................................................................................ 33 3.5.2 Ease of Access ............................................................................................ 35 3.5.3 Increased Use and Associated Problems..................................................... 36 3.6 Impact on Cannabis Product Safety ................................................................... 37 3.7 Drug Industry Conduct and Regulatory Effectiveness ........................................ 41 3.7.1 The Alcohol Industry .................................................................................... 41 3.7.2 The Tobacco Industry .................................................................................. 46 3.7.3 The Pharmaceutical Industry ........................................................................ 49 3.7.4 The Cannabis Industry ................................................................................. 57 6 3.7.5 The Canadian Cannabis Industry in Transition: More Pretense & Perils ...... 60 3.7.5.1 The Promise and the Reality
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pioneering the Future of Global Cannabis June 2020
    Pioneering the Future of Global Cannabis June 2020 ©2020 TILRAY Disclaimer Investors and prospective investors should rely only on the information contained in the continuous expected; that adverse changes or developments affecting the Company’s main or planned facilities may Although management has attempted to identify important risk factors that could cause actual results to disclosure filings (the “Filings”) of Tilray Inc. (the “Company”). This presentation is qualified in its entirety have an adverse effect on the Company; that the medical cannabis industry and market may not continue differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking information in this presentation, there may by reference to, and must be read in conjunction with, the information contained in the Filings. An investor to exist or develop as anticipated or the Company may not be able to succeed in this market; that the be other risk factors not presently known to the Company or that the Company presently believes are not or prospective investor is not entitled to rely on parts of the information contained in this presentation to Company has a limited operating history and a history of net losses and that it may not achieve or maintain material that could also cause actual results or future events to differ materially from those expressed in the exclusion of others, and the Company is not authorized to provide different or additional information. profitability in the future; risks related to the Company’s current or proposed international operations; risks such forward-looking information in this presentation. There can be no assurance that such information Unless otherwise specified, all monetary amounts in this presentation are in United States dollars.
    [Show full text]
  • In Focus Cannabis Legalization 4
    IN FOCUS CANNABIS LEGALIZATION 4 2020 Developments in jurisdictions with measures regulating the non-medical use of cannabis of cannabis products for medical purposes had DEVELOPMENTS IN already been allowed in Canada as early as 1999. JURISDICTIONS WITH The objectives of the current cannabis legislation in MEASURES REGULATING Canada are to keep cannabis away from young people (under 18 years of age), to prevent criminals THE NON-MEDICAL USE from profiting from the distribution and sale of can- OF CANNABIS nabis and to safeguard public health and safety by allowing adults (aged 18 and older) legal access to As at December 2019, legal provisions had been cannabis.322 Under the constitutional division of approved in Canada, Uruguay and in 11 jurisdic- powers in Canada, the federal Government and pro- tions in the United States, including the District of vincial governments have different responsibilities.323 Columbia and the Northern Mariana Islands, to As the provinces historically developed their own allow the production and sale of cannabis products systems to regulate the sale of alcohol, a similar for non-medical use. The common feature of the approach has been applied to regulate the non-med- legislation in Canada and in the jurisdictions in the ical use of cannabis products. United States is that most of them allow for-profit To monitor the outcome of the new cannabis reg- industry to produce and sell cannabis products for ulations, the Government of Canada has invested non-medical use. There are some differences in the in a formal system that may eventually help to eval- level of regulation, its implementation and the con- uate their impact and support the further trol of the non-medical use of cannabis (see tables development of policies and programmes.
    [Show full text]
  • Selling Cannabis Regulation: Learning from Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012
    ISSN 2054-1910 Selling cannabis regulation: Learning From Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012 Emily Crick*, Mark Cooke¥ and Dave Bewley-Taylorp Policy Brief 6 | November 2014 Key Points • In November 2012, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon voted on ballot initiatives to establish legally regulated markets for the production, sale, use and taxation of cannabis.1 Washington and Colorado’s measures won by wide margins, while Oregon’s lost soundly. • A majority of voters view cannabis in a negative light, but also feel that prohibition for non-medical and non-scientific purposes is not working. As a result, they are more likely to support well-crafted reform policies that include strong regulations and direct tax revenue to worthy causes such as public health and education. • Ballot measures are not the ideal method for passing complicated pieces of legislation, but sometimes they are necessary for controversial issues. Other states often follow in their footsteps, including via the legislature. • The successful campaigns in Washington and Colorado relied on poll-driven messaging, were well organised, and had significant financing. The Oregon campaign lacked these elements. • The Washington and Colorado campaigns targeted key demographic groups, particularly 30-50 year old women, who were likely to be initially supportive of reform but then switch their allegiance to the ‘no’ vote. • Two key messages in Washington and Colorado were that legalisation, taxation and regulation will (i) free up scarce law enforcement resources to focus on more serious crimes and (ii) will create new tax revenue for worthy causes. • National attitudes on legalising cannabis are changing, with more and more people supporting reform.
    [Show full text]
  • The Opportunities Party Real Deal Cannabis Reform
    The Opportunities Party Real Deal Cannabis Reform PART 1: INTRODUCTION Our current drug law is outdated and not fit for purpose. The prohibition model set out under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 is a barrier for people seeking help if they need it. Drug addiction, like alcohol addiction tears families apart – but so does our drug law, which not only fails to protect people from harm, but actually adds to it.1 In overhauling this outdated Act The Opportunities Regular usage of cannabis is associated Party has developed an evidenced-based policy with health risk such as: that will more accurately reflect the internationally recognised intention of drug policy – to reduce harm. • problems with healthy brain development among youth; Assessing harm is an area that the current system • depression or anxiety injury; fails to effectively do. While the goal of the current • symptoms of chronic bronchitis;2 criminalisation policy is harm-minimisation based on the familiar strategies of controlling supply, However as with alcohol and cigarettes, reducing demand and limiting the problem – it fails abstinence is unrealistic. Prohibition flies in the to account for the effects of exposing users and face of popular demand and leads to illicit supply growers to gangs and to the criminal justice system. and usage.3 The evidence shows that criminalisation The evidence is mounting that these consequences of cannabis has had no significant statistical impact have greater detrimental impacts than those from on reducing use, nor is there any evidence that cannabis use itself. The criminalisation approach decriminalisation increases use.4, 5, 6, 7 The health also ties up criminal justice resources that could risks listed above are still prevalent with or without be more effectively directed elsewhere.
    [Show full text]
  • Alcohol, Cannabis and Impaired Driving
    ALCOHOL, CANNABIS AND IMPAIRED DRIVING July 11, 2018 R. Solomon, Distinguished University Professor, Faculty of Law, Western University; K. Mahdi, J.D. 2020, Faculty of Law, Western University; & A. Sohrevardi, J.D. 2020, Faculty of Law, Western University TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 5 ALCOHOL ............................................................................................................... 7 PART I: ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION .......................................................................... 7 Section 1: Global ................................................................................................................. 7 Section 2: Alcohol Consumption in Canada .................................................................... 8 (a) Background Information ......................................................................................... 8 (b) Rates and Patterns of Alcohol Consumption ......................................................... 10 PART II: IMPAIRED DRIVING IN CANADA ............................................................... 15 Section 1: Rates of Driving After Alcohol Consumption ................................................ 15 Section 2: Impaired Driving Crashes ............................................................................... 17 (a) A Note on the Impaired Driving Crash Data ......................................................... 17 (b) Alcohol-Related Crash Deaths and
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis in Canada: What the Upcoming Legalization of One of Canada’S Most Popular Drugs Means for Young People Braedon R
    LETTER Cannabis in Canada: What the upcoming legalization of one of Canada’s most popular drugs means for young people Braedon R. Paul1 Citation: UBCMJ. 2018: 9.2 (40-41) ith the Canadian legalization and regulation of cannabis slated term, some have shown residual effects lasting well beyond abstinence Wfor a debut no later than July 2018,1 many Canadians are eagerly of cannabis use,14 particularly if chronic and heavy use was initiated in awaiting the day when one of Canada’s most popular drugs2,3 can be earlier adolescence. Additionally, chronic use of smoked cannabis has legally purchased and consumed for recreational purposes. Bill C-45 been associated with symptoms of chronic bronchitis and large airway [the Cannabis Act], introduced to the House of Commons in early inflammation, while the links between smoking cannabis and lung 2017,4 is set to legalize and regulate the production, distribution, and cancer have been suggested by some but not conclusively determined.15 sale of recreational cannabis across Canada, fulfilling an election If the age limit is set too high, however, illicit sales from organized promise made by the Liberal Party of Canada [LPOC] in 2015.5 crime groups, which currently reap an estimated $7 billion annually Although many are in favour of the incoming legislation, an equally in Canada alone,16 will continue to supply the underage market—a vocal group has expressed concern over its pitfalls, particularly those substantial concern given that Canadian youth are understood to be regarding the potential impacts on Canadian youth. Given what is the highest young users of cannabis in the world3 and are more than currently understood about the effects of cannabis usage on adolescent double that of the general Canadian population.2 Inevitably, such high health, these concerns are not unwarranted.
    [Show full text]
  • Candidate General Scorecard.Xlsx
    Office Sought Ballot Name US SENATOR - R John Barrasso US SENATOR - D Gary Trauner A A A A B A A A A US REP - R Liz Cheney US REP - D Greg Hunter A A A A A A A A A 1) Industrial hemp (marijuana plants with no THC) should be moved off of the Schedule 1 drug list. 2) Medical marijuana should be an available choice for individuals with life-threatening conditions. 3) Medical marijuana should be available to individuals who have chronic conditions such as seizure disorders, chonic pain, GOVERNOR - R Mark Gordon and severe autism. 4) Decriminalization: Giving those caught with maijuana fines instead of jail time is a good idea. GOVERNOR - D Mary A. Throne B A A A D C A A A SECRETARY OF STATE - R Edward Buchanan B A A F F D A C B 5) Legalization: Marijuana should be legal to consume as long as the person is over 21. SECRETARY OF STATE - D James W. Byrd A A A A D D B B A STATE AUDITOR - R Kristi Racines STATE AUDITOR - D Jeff Dockter A A A A A B A A A Should be available period. 6) The extra money Wyoming would receive from taxing marijuana sales makes legalization a financially smart move. STATE TREASURER - R Curt Meier SUPT. OF SCHOOLS - R Jillian Balow STATE SENATOR 01 - R Ogden Driskill STATE SENATOR 03 - R Cheri E. Steinmetz Declined 7) Do you support medical marijuana? STATE SENATOR 03 - D Marci Shaver Declined STATE SENATOR 05 - R Lynn Hutchings B B B C F F C B B STATE SENATOR 07 - R Stephan A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition the History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options for Reform
    TRANSNATIONAL I N S T I T U T E THE RISE AND DECLINE OF CANNABIS PROHIBITION THE HISTORY OF CANNABIS IN THE UN DruG CONTROL SYSTEM AND OPTIONS FOR REFORM 3 The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition Authors Dave Bewley-Taylor Tom Blickman Martin Jelsma Copy editor David Aronson Design Guido Jelsma www.guidojelsma.nl Photo credits Hash Marihuana & Hemp Museum, Amsterdam/ Barcelona Floris Leeuwenberg Pien Metaal UNOG Library/League of Nations Archives UN Photo Printing Jubels, Amsterdam Contact Transnational Institute (TNI) De Wittenstraat 25 1052 AK Amsterdam Netherlands Tel: +31-(0)20-6626608 Fax: +31-(0)20-6757176 [email protected] www.tni.org/drugs www.undrugcontrol.info www.druglawreform.info Global Drug Policy Observatory (GDPO) Research Institute for Arts and Humanities Rooms 201-202 James Callaghan Building Swansea University Financial contributions Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP Tel: +44-(0)1792-604293 This report has been produced with the financial www.swansea.ac.uk/gdpo assistance of the Hash Marihuana & Hemp Museum, twitter: @gdpo_swan Amsterdam/Barcelona, the Open Society Foundations and the Drug Prevention and Information Programme This is an Open Access publication distributed under (DPIP) of the European Union. the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which of TNI and GDPO and can under no circumstances be permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction regarded as reflecting the position of the donors. in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. TNI would appreciate receiving a copy of the text in which this document is used or cited.
    [Show full text]
  • Americas Increasingly Being Used in Maritime Drug Trafficking
    E/INCB/2000/1 prevent the diversion of pharmaceuticals containing Organization of American States. At present, few narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, as well as regions have such a mechanism. chemicals, into illicit channels. At the same time, steps 231. It is hoped that the Multilateral Evaluation must be taken to ensure that essential narcotic drugs Mechanism will soon become an effective instrument and psychotropic substances are made available to for monitoring the progress of the individual and those who need them for medical purposes. collective efforts of Governments to combat illicit 227. The Board notes that there is a proposal to trafficking in and abuse of drugs. designate the port of Zanzibar as a “free port”. Given that the coastline of the United Republic of Tanzania is part of a key drug trafficking route, the Board stresses Central America and the Caribbean that measures to suppress illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursor Major developments chemicals in such “free ports” should be no less 232. Drug traffickers continue to take advantage of the stringent than those applied in other parts of the fact that the region of Central America and the country, as required under article 18 of the Caribbean is located between major drug-producing 1988 Convention. areas and significant illicit drug markets, that the 228. The Board has reviewed the follow-up by the Caribbean is comprised of hundreds of relatively small Government of Togo to the recommendations made by islands with myriads of cays and that the socio- the Board after its mission to that country in economic situation in most of the countries in the June 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • From the US Fentanyl Boom to the Mexican Opium Crisis
    Grandmaison, RL, et al. 2019. The Last Harvest? From the US Fentanyl Boom to the Mexican Opium Crisis. Journal of Illicit Economies and Development, 1(3): pp. 312–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31389/jied.45 RESEARCH The Last Harvest? From the US Fentanyl Boom to the Mexican Opium Crisis Romain Le Cour Grandmaison1, Nathaniel Morris2 and Benjamin Smith3 1 Paris-1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, FR 2 UCL, GB 3 University of Warwick, GB Corresponding author: Nathaniel Morris ([email protected]) For decades, farmers in the most marginalised regions of Mexico have depended for survival on the illicit cultivation of opium poppy for the US heroin market. In 2017 they could earn up to 20,000 pesos ($950–$1,050 dollars) per kilo of opium, which channelled around 19 billion pesos ($1 billion dollars) into the country’s poorest communities, sustaining regional economies, religious ceremonies, and intra-community relations while stemming out-migration to Mexican cities and the US. With the recent upsurge in fentanyl use in the US, however, the demand for Mexican heroin has fallen sharply, meaning that farmers are now being paid around 6000 to 8000 pesos ($315–415 dollars) per kilo of raw opium. Thus the total money being paid to opium producing villages has dropped to an unprecedented low of 7 billion pesos ($370 million dollars). Drawing on fieldwork conducted in two poppy-producing regions of Mexico – one in the State of Nayarit, one in the State of Guerrero – this article shows that today, farmers cannot make a profit from opium once fertilizers and other capital inputs have been taken into account; village economies are starting to dry up; and out-migration is on the up.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharing the Costs of Cannabis in Canada How the Federal and Provincial Governments Should Split Cannabis Tax Revenues by ERICH HARTMANN
    MOWAT RESEARCH #169 | AUGUST 2018 Sharing the Costs of Cannabis in Canada How the federal and provincial governments should split cannabis tax revenues BY ERICH HARTMANN MUNK SCHOOL OF GLOBAL AFFAIRS & PUBLIC POLICY Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Colin Busby, Luan Ngo and Adrienne Davidson for their valuable feedback on this report. The author would also like to thank Elaine Stam for her design work on this report as well as Reuven Shlozberg, Sunil Johal, and Andrew Parkin for their helpful contributions. All content and any remaining errors are the sole responsibility of the author. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of any other organization or agency. Author ERICH HARTMANN Practice Lead, Intergovernmental Affairs Erich Hartmann is the Mowat Centre’s Practice Lead for Intergovernmental Affairs. Erich has a deep knowledge of intergovernmental affairs and federal fiscal issues. Previously, Erich spent 13 years in the Ontario Public Service at the Ministry of Finance in a number of policy and management roles, most recently serving as Manager of Federal-Provincial Relations. Erich holds an MPA and a BA (Hons) from Queen’s University. MOWATCENTRE.CA @MOWATCENTRE 439 UNIVERSITY AVENUE The Mowat Centre is an independent public policy think tank SUITE 2200, TORONTO, ON located at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at M5G 1Y8 CANADA the University of Toronto. The Mowat Centre is Ontario’s non-partisan, evidence-based voice on public policy. It undertakes collaborative applied policy research, proposes innovative research-driven recommendations, and engages in public dialogue on Canada’s most important national issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis Industry and Edibles
    CANNABIS INDUSTRY AND EDIBLES LABOUR MARKET REPORT ABOUT US Food Processing Skills Canada (FPSC) is the food and beverage manufacturing industry’s workforce development organization. As a non-profit, located in Ottawa with representatives across Canada, we support food and beverage manufacturing businesses from coast to coast in developing skilled and professional employees and workplace environments. Our work directly and positively impacts industry talent attraction, workforce retention and employment culture. We care about assisting the industry in finding, training and retaining the very best people for the job. Through our partnerships with industry, associations, educators and all levels of This project was funded by the Government of Canada’s Sectoral Initiatives Program. governments in Canada, FPSC has developed exceptional resources for The opinions and interpretations in this publication are those of the author and do not the sector including the Food Skills Library™, Canadian Food Processors necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada. Institute™, FoodCert™ and Labour Market Information Reports. ISBN 978-1-989541-56-2 Copyright © 2020 Food Processing Skills Canada All rights reserved. The use of any part of this publication, whether it is reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (including electronic, mechanical, photographic, photocopying or recording), without the prior written permission of the Food Processing Skills Canada is an infringement of copyright law. Food Processing
    [Show full text]