Welcome to the 1950s, that post-war period when, if an Ontarian wanted to legally purchase alcohol, he or she entered a bland warehouse, filled out and signed a written order form, then handed it to a dour clerk behind a counter who disappeared into a back room and eventually emerged with a limited amount of booze for purchase.

That sounds a lot like what Kathleen Wynne’s government has just proposed as a 21st-century approach to cannabis, which is to be legalized nationally as early as next July (assuming Wynne’s federal counterparts have their way).

Under the province’s plan, you won’t be able to buy cannabis from private entrepreneurs, or at an LCBO. Instead, the Ontario government will set up an independent subsidiary of the liquor control board to peddle pot in separate stores and, eventually, online. Advertising will be limited, there will be no self-service, the products will be kept behind the counter, and you’d better be able to prove you are 19 or older.

This approach, we submit, is rubbish. It disrespects the spirit of the yet-to-be-passed federal legalization legislation, which, though reluctantly, recognizes that individuals have the right to make choices about what they consume. Ontario seems to feel that if it must allow citizens to smoke pot, it will at least make this as difficult as possible.

Beyond ignoring the fundamental principle of free choice, Ontario’s approach is bad for other reasons:

— It will create more government bureaucracy. Yet another provincial agency is poised to spring from the drab imagination of the nanny state, this time to run a retail business. There is absolutely no reason for governments to sell stuff.

— The province will have to make guesses about the right pricing, since it wishes to shut down the black market in drugs. But the best way to get prices right is to let private entrepreneurs determine what they wish to charge and take the associated economic risks. The cannabis control board, or whatever it will be called, will also have to figure out which pot products it wants to market. That, too, is a risk best left to private entrepreneurs.

— While the current batch of pop-up pot shops is illegal, these outlets nonetheless offer the beginnings of a private-sector model for selling marijuana. They have supply chains, a certain expertise and a client base. If made legal, they would obviously require careful regulation (being currently illicit, they aren’t subject to any rules – just to police raids), a robust regime of health inspections, and would need to adhere to zoning and other local rules. But all businesses that sell consumables (or hazardous goods) are subject to such oversight. Further, governments could still tax pot products, just as they tax cigarettes, gasoline and other goods.

We have long argued that if a pot shop is illegal, it should face charges. But we believe the ultimate answer is to legalize them, not to throw more police resources into charging 20-something clerks.

In retrospect, no one should be surprised that the province has taken a school-marm approach to marijuana. There’s a provincial election next year, and it is natural the Liberals would want to keep this new area of legal commercial activity under tight control, at least until then. The government’s “safe and sensible approach,” as it dubs its pot policy, is indeed that – for the governing party.

But it does not make a good deal of sense for consumers. Just as it didn’t in the 1950s.

— Ottawa Citizen

. . . .

Do you have an opinion about this topic? Send it to sud.letters@sunmedia.ca