Dear Department of Health and Social Care,
Further to your spokesman’s assertion that cannabis “poses serious risk of psychotic illness and harm to unborn babies… and is extremely addictive”, I would like to request the following information:
1. The number of babies born to mothers who use cannabis regularly whose congenital abnormalities can be DIRECTLY traced back to their mother’s cannabis use.
2. The number of people with no previous history of psychotic illness subsequently diagnosed with mental health issues after using cannabis - in other words whose mental illness can be said to be categorically caused by their cannabis use.
3. The number of people who’ve sought - or are seeking - assistance for their “cannabis addiction”.
If you believe so vehemently that cannabis is dangerous and has no medical benefits - something you cannot now claim in all honesty after granting a temporary licence to Charlotte Caldwell - why has the Home Office granted a medical grow licence to GW Pharma to produce medical cannabis on the the BritIsh Sugar site in Wissington, Norfolk…? In 2016, the U.K. exported more than 95 tonnes of cannabis, making us the largest exporter of cannabis in the world. I would like to request a full list of countries to which we export, and would like an explanation as to why you will grow it for export, whilst denying its benefits to your own citizens. If it has no medical use, and is as dangerous as your spokesman has claimed, then why are you allowing a pharmaceutical company to grow it for export…? What are the government’s links to GW Pharmaceuticals…? Is is not true that GW Pharma is owned by British Sugar the managing director of which is Paul Kenward, the husband of Victoria Atkins, the Minister for Drugs.
Care to explain why I, and the thousands of others who would benefit hugely from being able to legally access medicinal cannabis, are bein denied that access, whilst the husband of a government minister makes millions from our misery - how can that not be viewed as anything other than the absolute epitome of hypocrisy…?
The Billy Caldwell case means that you can no longer continue to deny the myriad and far-reaching benefits of cannabis; the British Medical Journal and Royal College of Physicians, two of the most respected medical organisations in the country, have been demanding its legalisation for years - if it’s “addictive, dangerous and has no medical benefits” why are two of our foremost medical organisations demanding it be legalised…?
I trust that you will respond to me in a prompt and timely manner