Pubdate: Wed, 11 Mar 2015
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Copyright: 2015 The Globe and Mail Company
Contact:  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168
Author: Mike Hager
Page: S3

FIRE CHIEFS DIFFER ON SAFETY RISKS OF HOME-GROWN MEDICINAL MARIJUANA

Fire chiefs testifying on opposite sides of a constitutional 
challenge to Canada's medical-marijuana laws disagree on whether 
growing medicinal pot at home poses an increased fire or safety risk, 
a federal court in Vancouver heard Tuesday.

Surrey Fire Chief Len Garis's affidavit said that more than half his 
city's illegal and licensed operations posed a "high or extreme" 
electrical risk, and about a quarter of both illicit and licensed 
operations had observable mould, according to his report on 1,800 
inspections by a joint municipal-RCMP team over the last decade. 
Nearly all (98 per cent) licensed growers had modified their 
structure without a permit, Chief Garis's affidavit stated.

However, the chief's report did not mention any fires at a legal 
medical-marijuana facility, and during cross-examination Monday he 
told a lawyer for four British Columbia plaintiffs that licensed 
operations posed a significant, but unquantifiable, risk to public safety.

Tim Moen, acting battalion chief with the fire department in Fort 
McMurray, Alta., said in his affidavit that Chief Garis's report made 
the facts fit the chief's preconceptions and did not consider other 
possible risks, such as home renovations. Mr. Moen said the report 
"contains numerous methodological and analytical issues and contains 
a number of assertions of fact that directly contradict my experience 
as a fire safety professional."

Concerns about fire and electrical safety formed part of the 
rationale that led Health Canada to overhaul its medical-marijuana 
system last year to strictly license only industrial-scale production 
in secure commercial facilities. Last week, an RCMP expert told the 
court during cross-examination that Mounties had no data on how many 
of the roughly 28,000 people authorized to grow their own pot, or 
have another licensee do it for them, were subverting or abusing the 
old system.

The case involves the constitutional challenge by four plaintiffs 
alleging that their Section 7 Charter rights were violated when the 
federal government enacted the new system that outlawed their 
personal grow operations. They say they can't afford marijuana under 
the new system, which also doesn't give them control over the 
specific strains they use. They are asking the court to force the 
government to allow patients to grow their own marijuana, which many 
licensed Canadians kept doing after the Federal Court judge granted 
an injunction to the four plaintiffs in March, 2014, pending the 
outcome of this legal challenge.

Scott Wilkins, an Abbotsford insurance broker specializing in 
covering licensed medical-marijuana producers, told government 
lawyers Tuesday that only six of his roughly 300 clients had 
registered claims over the past four years, and that none of the 
damage to their buildings was attributed to grow-ops.

Mr. Wilkins said potential clients are required to have their sites 
inspected by licensed electricians.

Closing arguments in the challenge are expected some time in May.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom