Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing the notion of "whether or not Thailand really needs to do any about "weed" or Cannabis here. This seems to have become something of a hot button issue and in my mind, it shouldn't be. I don't understand why there are so many people that are so overwrought about the legalization of Cannabis here in Thailand. Now let me be clear, not decriminalization, legalization. We've done the videos on that before. Meanwhile, okay there may be some interest I would note probably Big Alcohol, Big Pharma may be having some issues with respect to Cannabis being legal but for Thailand, for the people of Thailand, for the nation as a whole, is this something we need to really worry about expending political capital, time, resources worrying about needing to “do” something about it. Quite honestly, any time I see the government going out of its way to make statements that they need to “do” something about something - we saw this a lot in COVID which if the Government just would have done nothing - I think the country would be far better off than having had them do something. Anytime they talk about “needing to do” something, the hairs on the back of my neck go up. 

That being said, I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: What to do about weed? Quoting directly: "The legalization of Cannabis was recently back in the spotlight threatening to test the coalition Government's unity." Now it is my understanding those issues have pretty well been resolved, and I don't like getting political on this channel but it is my understanding whatever reshuffle has occurred or is about to occur imminently, those arrangements have been made. So at the time of this video it might have already happened or it is imminently to be endorsed and then will happen but it's my understanding all of that shaking out has already shaken out, for lack of a better term. Quoting further: "Mr Srettha gave an interview to France 24, a French state-owned news outlet, in which he disclosed the Government's policy to reign in the use of Cannabis which was decriminalized in 2022. He reportedly spoke in favour of reclassifying Cannabis as a narcotic." Notably at the same time, this Government also wants to decriminalize five pills of methamphetamine, so-called Ya-Ba, while at the same time reclassifying something that doesn't kill anybody into a narcotic. Pretty strange take to me. Quoting further: "Arguing the social ramifications of Cannabis legalization outweigh the economic gains from the plant being open to medical use and for research purposes." Again meanwhile saying "oh it's okay to legalize 5 pills of Ya-Ba” which again, to quote the movie The Gentleman, "this drug is the destroyer of worlds" to paraphrase that film, because the guy in there Matthew McConaughey is in the Cannabis business, albeit illicitly and he is talking to another drug dealer and he says: "What I do, what I sell, doesn't kill anybody. What you sell kills people." I think that's a pretty fair argument when we are talking about classification of a narcotic. I mean come on! Again a controlled substance like a controlled herb license like we are presently dealing with in the legal regime pertaining to Cannabis, I think that is a good way to handle it. Regulate it on that basis, from that paradigm. Don't regulate it from the paradigm of "this is something akin to methamphetamine". It just is not, that's not objectively the case. Then meanwhile this whole thing about well the economic benefits don't outweigh! Really? Let's do a thought experiment. I know it's one of these hypotheticals that you really shouldn't probably engage in but think about this for a moment. What would Thailand's both tourism sector and real estate sector look like coming off of the COVID shutdowns if Cannabis had not been legalized? I think that's a very good question. You see tons of retail commercial space being taken up by Cannabis shops which is keeping the commercial real estate sector - especially at the retail level - quite buoyant compared to other jurisdictions, most notably the United states where the commercial real estate sector, especially in retail, is crashing which nobody is really talking about right now but the data is pretty clear at this point, there's a real problem. Again so the economic benefits, you are just dismissing that out of hand? Really? Really? Quoting further: "His interview took the Public Health Ministry aback with Minister Dr Cholnan Srikaew declaring that the Cannabis legalization issue was too far along to turn back the clock now." Good point. I have disagreed with the Public Health Minister on multiple things in the past; I've done that with the prior Public Health Minister but credit where credit is due, when they get it right. Yeah, it has come too far along. Quoting further: "Dr Cholnan remarked that although the buck stops with the premier, re-listing Cannabis as a narcotic must be thought through carefully." Yeah that's an understatement! Very diplomatically put on the part of the Public Health Minister so let me put not too fine a point on it, not only should it be thought through carefully, it really shouldn't happen. If I haven't made that abundantly clear, I don't see the purpose of that. Again going back to when this all sort of started, the Minister of Justice said at the time that they began the rollback in the legal bureaucracy, the sort of apparatus of this, he specifically said "what is the point of spending all this time and resources on something that doesn't kill anyone? Meanwhile we've got hard drugs out there that do kill people. Let's work on that." I thought that was a great point. Quoting further: "He added the proposed recriminalization was strictly Mr Srettha's personal view since the Cannabis legalization policy was championed as one of the pledges the Government delivered to Parliament on which it was obliged to act." I think it's worth repeating that, quoting again: "He added the proposed recriminalization was strictly Mr Srettha's personal view since the Cannabis legalization policy was championed as one of the pledges the Government delivered to Parliament on which it was obliged to act." That is well put and I think it's worth pointing that out that yeah the coalition Government did come together with that being one of its platforms. Quoting further: "As of now, only products containing over 0.2% THC {tetrahydrocannabinol - Cannabis' main psychoactive agent} by weight will be considered illegal." Well where is that? That's not out there, that's not promulgated law. We have a regime that is dealing with this, but I haven't seen anything to that effect. Now I could be wrong; correct me if I'm wrong. Happy to be corrected, stand corrected in the comments, but again we have no promulgated law that creates any regulation to that effect that I have seen. Quoting further: "The decriminalization," (again I love this terminology and the Bangkok Post seems especially stuck on this word, "decriminalization" which is a nonsensical word, okay? Something is either legal or illegal and the law is enforced in a criminal capacity springing therefrom. There is no notion of ‘decriminalized’. What former Public Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul did in something of a brilliant legislative sort of hat trick, if you will or pulling a rabbit out of the hat used emergency powers to pull it off in narcotics list. When that Emergency Decree ended, those powers were extinguished so it now requires promulgated law to make that a narcotic again. Therefore the act that he undertook legalized Cannabis in Thailand, pursuant to the Doctrine of Codification - the basic notion under which Civil Law operates. Quoting again: "The decriminalization of Cannabis was initiated by the Office of the Narcotics Control Board," again the Office of the Narcotics Control Board basically is on board with this because they have real narcotics to go after; they have better things to do with their time than worry about this. Quoting further: "And followed through by the Bhumjaithai Party, a coalition partner which oversaw the Public Health Ministry." Yeah, as previously put. 

So again, this is one of those things where it seems to have become something of a political issue and I am certainly continuing to talk about it. I think this is something that has been highly beneficial to Thailand. In fact I think it's been a bright spot on what has otherwise turned out to be a rather dreary decade in terms of promulgated law especially when you look back at all the COVID emergency and all of that great stuff. At the end of the day, there weren't a lot of positive things to point at, I think this is one of them. It has helped the commercial real estate sector; it is helping a lot of small and medium size enterprises operate here in Thailand, and it's helping us, it's helping the nation because we are not spending money going after something that doesn't kill anyone. Now as discussed in other videos, I'm perfectly on board with even stiff criminal penalties for sales to children; I'm perfectly on board with regulation of how it's sold and where it's sold, even where it's consumed, how it's consumed and most assuredly I'm very much in favour of taxing the heck out of it and using it to further improve the infrastructure that we are already seeing improved here in Thailand already. So again, I am not against some level of again regulation and law enforcement associated with Cannabis but to completely turn back the clock to paraphrase Dr Cholnan, to completely turn back the clock, it is not only nonsensical, I think it is both inefficient and quite honestly, probably pretty bad for the country.