Article – Switzerland: Cannabis Products Act: What the consultation on the CanPG really shows

In April 2026, the Federal Office of Public Health published the results report on the consultation of the Cannabis Products Act (CanPG). On 106 pages, it documents the feedback of 162 participants on the proposal to implement parliamentary initiative 20,473. The IG Hanf Switzerland analyzed the report and classified the most important findings.

It is clear that the evaluation of the interrogation does not constitute a rejection of cannabis regulation. Rather, it shows that the proposal needs to be politically revised, made more practical and better supported on a federal basis. Accordingly, on 7 May 2026, the Commission for Social Security and Health of the National Council (SGK-N) published the results of the consultation advise and returned the draft to the subcommission. 

The evaluation of the consultation at a glance

128 organizations were invited, of which 76 responded. In addition, 86 spontaneous statements were received, including 22 from private individuals and 4 from international participants. A total of 162 statements are available, reflecting a remarkably broad social response. The interrogation lasted from August 29 to December 1, 2025.

The overall picture is divided. At first glance, support and opposition are balanced, but the distribution across the individual groups is revealing.

Cantons’ statements: narrow majority critical

Skepticism prevails among the cantons. 10 cantons agree or somewhat agree with the draft (SG, AI, BS, GE, GL, GR, NE, OW, SO, VD), 1 canton remains neutral (VS) and 15 cantons reject or somewhat disagree (AG, BE, BL, FR, LU, NW, SH, SZ, TG, UR, ZG, ZH, AR, JU, TI). The Conference of Cantonal Social Directors (SODK) is more in agreement with the draft, but links its approval to the introduction of a specific consumption tax.

It is noteworthy that many opposing cantons also share the thrust in principle. AR, JU, LU and NW expressly acknowledge that today’s regulation is no longer up to date. BL, LU and UR see the proposal as an opportunity for health and addiction policy, particularly in the case of decriminalization and harm reduction. The criticism is directed less against the goal than against the concrete design: too complex, too expensive, too few resources for implementation.

Political parties: Four for, four against

Of the eight parties represented in the Federal Assembly, GLP, GRÜNE and SPS agree with the draft, while the FDP tends to agree. The center, EDU, EPP, and SVP oppose this. The supporting parties see regulation as better protection for consumers and an effective lever against the black market. The opposing parties argue that this is a signalling effect, gaps in the protection of minors and fears of normalisation of consumption.

Umbrella organizations, commissions and authorities

The Swiss Association of Cities (SSV) has given clear approval. The Swiss Farmers’ Association (SBV) is neutral and emphasizes the protection of domestic production. The Swiss Trade Association (sgv) rejects and criticizes the lack of legal certainty.

The extra-parliamentary commissions EKKJ (youth issues), EKSN (addiction issues) and the competition commission WEKO agree. The EKSN describes the proposal as a crucial step towards responsible, health-oriented regulation.

The picture is differentiated among cantonal and municipal authorities. KKBS and SKBS support the alignment, but see gaps in youth protection. KKPKS and SSK consider parts of the proposal difficult to implement. VKCS and VKS warn of high control costs.

Addiction prevention, cannabis industry and civil society

The majority of addiction and prevention organizations support the proposal. Twenty-eight out of 33 national and local organizations agree or tend to agree. Above all, they welcome the principle that health protection takes precedence over commercial interests and the decriminalization of consumption. At the same time, they call for stronger flanking measures for minors.

The majority of the cannabis industry agrees with the proposal. The IG Hanf Switzerland, Wiiid and EssInv are clearly in favor of this. Mixed signals come from the pharmaceutical industry, with the central concern of a clear distinction between medical and non-medical cannabis.

Support prevails in wider civil society. Youth and social organizations such as AvenirSocial, DOJ and SAJV support the draft, particularly because of the decriminalization of young consumers.

Thematic focuses: Where the template triggers controversy

Health protection largely undisputed

The health-oriented orientation of the draft is widely accepted. Control of cultivation and sales, advertising bans, neutral packaging and high demands on sales outlets are generally accepted, even by many critical voices.

Protection of minors: demand for more substance

Six cantons and the SODK consider the protection of minors in the draft to be insufficient. Seven cantons complain about the lack of specific flanking measures and additional funds. Many addiction specialist organizations are also calling for improvements, for example in access to counseling and therapy services or in bans on consumption near educational institutions.

Enforcement and financing as a key sticking point

Eighteen cantons and the SODK consider the implementation in its current form too complex and expensive. Eighteen cantons are demanding additional funding. A specific consumption tax is required by 10 cantons, two parties (EDU, EPP), the SSV and several government bodies. In addition, it is demanded that the enforcement compensation from the incentive tax also go to the cantons.

Online sale: 16 cantons reject

The proposed online sale is one of the biggest points of contention. 16 cantons, the SODK as well as the EPP, SVP and EDU reject it, mostly with reference to the protection of minors. The FDP, GLP, SPS and several addiction organizations are in favor, seeing the online channel as an effective tool against the black market. Several cantons, which would accept it in principle, demand that the concession be within cantonal jurisdiction.

Pilot trials and timing of regulation

12 cantons consider the regulation premature as long as the evaluation of the ongoing pilot tests is pending. A broad concern is the creation of transitional provisions so that participants in pilot projects do not fall back into the illegal market after their end.

Classification by IG Hanf Switzerland

The report shows: A broad coalition of science, addiction prevention, cities, youth organizations and the cannabis industry is behind modern regulation. The majority of the opposing cantons’ criticism is not aimed at the direction of the impact, but at complexity, implementation effort and financing. This is precisely where the task for revision lies.

The CanPG has the potential to effectively combine health protection, youth protection and black market displacement. For this potential to become a reality, the template must be designed in a practical and economically realistic manner. A legal market that is more expensive, slower and less attractive than the illegal one cannot have its effect.

Our core requirements in the overview

The IG Hanf Switzerland has in its opinion set the following priorities:

• Combating the illegal market explicitly anchor in the purpose article.
• Advertising ban and additive regulation designed in such a way that legal providers remain competitive.
• In order for a legal offer to be competitive and stable structures to emerge, sales outlets should Make profits and work economically can.
• Protection of the Swiss hemp market through fair market conditions and adequate border protection so that domestic value added, quality and traceability are maintained.
• A transparent system of authorizations instead of concessions and open market access for all who meet the requirements.
• Online sales under cantonal jurisdiction instead of a nationwide distribution monopoly.
• Transitional provisions for pilot teststo prevent participants from relapsing into the illegal market.
• Differentiated regulation of cannabis flowers and resins instead of being classified as smoking products.
• The IG Hanf speaks clearly against blanket THC caps like 20% in the pilot tests.

What happens next

The evaluation goes back to the Commission for Social Security and Health of the National Council (SGK-N). It will revise the draft on the basis of the results of the consultation. From the perspective of IG Hanf Switzerland, courage is now needed for a proposal that reduces complexity, enables federal solutions and recognizes economic reality.

The consultation on the Cannabis Products Act documents a political mark of maturity. Instead of fundamental debates on bans, the discussion today revolves around enforcement, financing and detailed regulation. That is progress. IG Hanf Switzerland is committed to ensuring that this progress does not fail due to technical deficiencies, but rather results in effective, health-oriented and economically viable regulation.

About IG Hanf Switzerland IG Hanf Schweiz is the industry association of the Swiss cannabis industry. It represents the cultivation, production, processing and sale of hemp and cannabis products and is committed to modern, health-oriented and economically realistic regulation.

Source: Report on the results of the consultation procedure on the Federal Cannabis Products Act (CanPG), Federal Department of Home Affairs, Federal Office of Public Health, April 2026.

Results report Interrogation 20.473 8.5.26 D.pdf

Link to the press release from IG Hanf Switzerland: Cannabis regulation: Improve yes, delay no – IG Hanf Switzerland

Read at Source:  https://ighanf.ch/cannabisproduktegesetz-was-die-vernehmlassung-zum-canpg-wirklich-zeigt/