My Hemp Petition Before An Oireachtas Committee
By Brian Houlihan
In 2017 I took advantage of a lesser-known aspect of Irish politics by making a submission to the Oireachtas committee on public petitions. In 2015, I tried to get a similar petition considered but unfortunately, it wasn’t examined in time before the fall of the previous government.
My petition aimed to get the government to open up a committee to a ‘public consultation on the feasibility of developing a hemp industry’. In theory, this would allow members of the public, businesses, farmers, and others to submit materials to a committee and possibly appear before it to discuss the ideas.
Essentially I wanted an opportunity for hemp to be engaged with by politicians and the public. For context, it’s worth remembering that things have progressed somewhat from when I submitted the petition in early 2017.
The growth of CBD has continued, there’s more media coverage of hemp, the emergence of groups like the hemp cooperative, more farmers growing and more. In ways, my petition became more relevant with time.
In April 2017 my petition was first dealt with in public by the committee, as seen in the video above. At the meeting, the committee asked Teagasc to provide them with an update on a report they issued in 2009 on the hemp industry.
The committee also agreed to contact the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for more information about hemp having already received a letter from them.
I also received that letter from the Department of Agriculture, which had been submitted to the committee, as it was subsequently forwarded to me. The letter (see below) outlines the laws around hemp, its uses, previous research conducted in Ireland and more.
The letter also highlights a report by Teagasc in 2009 which examined the future of the industry which highlighted the needed for sustained investment and suggested a multi-department committee be established but that proposal wasn’t enacted.
The letter suggests “there are no market outlets or processing facilities for the crop available in the country”. It also notes because EU State aid rules don’t allow for direct funding any analysis on creating hemp processing facilities would need to establish costs “without recourse to State funding or assistance”.
The letter appears to contain misinformation as it gets the name of the Health Products Regulatory Authority wrong (it’s incorrectly called the Irish Medicines Board). There’s also no mention of CBD, hempcrete and other relevant topics. The letter is similar to statements given in the Dáil by government politicians whenever hemp was raised in recent years.
A month after its first appearance my hemp petition was before the committee again in May 2017 (see video and letter below) and several decisions were made as the committee decided to broaden out their examination of the matter. Requests were made to An Garda Síochána, the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Health for submissions on hemp.
It was agreed the petitions committee would ask the Department of Agriculture for an update on their report within the next three months, but in reality, it wound up closer to two years before I got any real updates.
At the same time, the committee provided me with a letter it received from the Department of Agriculture outlining its position. It states they will only consider holding a public consultation process after their consultations with An Garda Síochána, the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Health and others.
The letter suggests the matter requires the consideration of issues such as agronomics, growing conditions, climate factors, legislative issues, licensing and governance issues, economic viability and more.
The Department notes it intends to examine the issue and will involve other government departments, agencies, and parties. Only after all that would the department consider the possibility of holding a public consultation on hemp.
After waiting almost two years of for developments and having made several requests for information the only formal update I received was in March 2019 to inform me that I’m awaiting an update.
In the meantime, I had even bumped into the committee chairman Sean Sherlock on a train and raised the matter to no avail.
However, earlier this year I became aware through other informal channels that documents concerning my petition have been prepared and other knocks on effects had taken place. The Hemp Working Group and subsequent Teagasc event in June were in part a response to the petition.
Finally, in July 2019 my petition appeared before the committee for the final time. Albeit as seen in the video at the end of this post it was a short one. However, I was also informed by mail that my petition was being closed having been dealt with. But that email included a variety of attachments.
I received correspondence submitted to the committee by Teagasc, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and the Irish hemp cooperative.
Some of these submissions are multiple pages long so I’ve just included a snippet of them here for interest.
Interestingly, one letter notes the Garda weren’t allowed to take part in this study despite the request. However, the reply from the Department of Justice came from the Drugs and Organised Crime Division.
Below are the conclusions of a letter from the Department of Agriculture to the committee sent in April 2019 following their examination of the issue.
Below is a letter from the drugs and organised crime division within the Department of Justice sent to the Department of Agriculture in June 2018. The letter focuses more on cannabis than hemp and outlines their concerns over any loosening of restrictions.
Below is part of a letter sent by the Health Products Regulatory Authority to the Department of Agriculture in June 2018. Much like the letter from the Department of Justice, it focuses more on cannabis.
Below is part of a letter sent by the Department of Health to the Department of Agriculture in June 2018.
Below is a clip of the petition being closed last month and with that, the journey from conception in 2015 (and again in 2017) was over.
So was it worth it? Of course. For only a few hours of work, it ended up engaging various bodies in hemp. Do I wish more had happened? Of course. It’s a frustratingly long time to wait for activity but at least those frustrations were dampened by the emergence of a stronger hemp industry during this period.
While the petitions committee is a slow process it’s one that achieves some results at least, unlike say starting a generic online petition and spending hours gathering thousands of ‘signatures’.
Because of it, numerous departments were engaged in the topic where otherwise they were very unlikely to. It’s ensured they know there is a genuine interest in this crop.
With elections expected in the coming months and the ever-evolving hemp landscape, perhaps it would be long before we see a similar petition submitted again. Perhaps a more nuanced approach or specific submission will garner even greater results.
I’ll keep you posted (probably over the course of a few years) if that happens.
Brian Houlihan is cannabis/hemp historian from Ireland who is working on a number of books for future publication.
