Canada’s economy: a modest proposal

AS the Carney government announces a raft of nation-building projects ranging from new oil and gas pipelines to critical minerals to port expansion, one obvious economic opportunity is missing from the list: expansion of our recreational chemical industry.

Others disparage the product as illegal drugs, but the industry consortium, the Earthways Alliance, promotes the term recreational chemical. Just like “tar sands” creates negative brand equity for the fossil fuel industry (hence oil sands), so too do the tired, old terms “illegal” or “illicit” drugs. It casts a bad light.

With economic development at the fore, one must look at all opportunities, especially now that Mr. Carney allows ministers of his government to ignore existing laws and regulations standing as roadblocks. So we should look south to Colombia, a country only slightly larger than Canada (51 million versus 41 million population) where 4.3 per cent of its GDP is derived from the export of cocaine, compared to just 3.2 per cent of Canada’s GDP derived from oil and gas.

Canada could easily become a recreational chemical superpower, providing “clean” cocaine for the rest of the world. Our state-of-the-art facilities would meet every green standard using organic coca plants raised in greenhouses heated by natural gas, a boon to the fossil fuel industry. The finished product would be made not in clandestine makeshift laboratories, but in safe, government-licensed manufacturing plants, providing high paying jobs.

Yes, Canadian production of the product would be more expensive, but the Earthways Alliance assures us that our clean, ethical cocaine would displace cheaper, dirtier product from nations without Canada’s sterling reputation.

Like the fossil fuel sector, the recreational chemical industry has a long history of social advocacy by providing for the poor.

Pablo Escobar, a deeply misunderstood drug lord, was considered Colombia’s Paisa Robin Hood, well known for his charitable works. He featured routinely on the Forbes billionaires list and used his wealth to build hospitals, schools and homes for the impoverished. He was just like America’s oil barons who’ve generously funded education, hospitals, scientific research and a vast shadowy network of right-wing think tanks and advocacy groups to promote libertarian ideology, Project 2025 and climate denial. But unlike oil barons, Escobar never plundered the public purse. He even offered to pay off Colombia’s national debt!

His economic impact included spending $2,500 a month just on rubber bands to wrap bundles of cash. Surely anything that increases the demand for products derived from fossil fuels must be good. A vigorous recreational chemical industry would fuel the demand for fast boats and drones for product transport, creating even more economic spinoffs.

Canada’s clean cocaine would be a perfect transitional chemical as the addicted attempt to wean themselves off hard drugs: the Earthways Alliance likes the term “safe drugs,” somewhat akin to “decarbonized oil.” Though the underlying chemical content may be identical, and truth be told, the harms exactly the same, our ethical imprimatur makes all the difference.

Some argue that conventional recreational chemicals, including clean cocaine, will be replaced by cheaper, even cleaner alternatives without the harmful side effects. These are based on rapidly developing technology that have dropped production costs dramatically. But the supply is not steady, as it depends upon inputs that are intermittently available. The advocates for these products argue, however, that this problem is solved easily and cheaply by storage. However, the Earthways Alliance casts doubt on these claims.

Any suggestion that such unconventional alternatives are better than the conventional products seems highly dubious for reasons that will be invented shortly. These will be announced in a flashy new advertising campaign using the same PR firms that promote the fossil fuel industry and big tobacco. Their work has successfully debunked, or at least cast doubt on, the science about the existential dangers of climate change and the health risks of smoking. That was a stellar effort making them the perfect choice to promote the benefits of recreational chemicals.

Naysayers, and there are always some, argue that Canada has a moral obligation to not contribute to the global misery that accompanies the consumption of our products. But surely that obligation rests not on the producers, who merely meet an obvious demand, but the consumers. We cannot by sidetracked by such trifling concerns when our economic future rests upon industrial expansion, market diversification and becoming a recreational chemical superpower.

Yes, others may suffer even at a planetary scale, but our short-term GDP shall grow. Profit margins will fatten, delivering value to shareholders; and joy and mirth will spread across corporate boardrooms.

What could possibly be more important than that?

Scott Forbes is an ecologist at the University of Winnipeg. The opinions expressed here are his own, as is his sense of humour.