Photo: Caleb Oquendo / Pexels
“We don't allow cannabis.”
It's a phrase that security staff have been trained to say for years.
Increasingly, that answer is no longer sufficient.
Since November 2018, specialist doctors in the UK have been able to prescribe cannabis-based medicinal products for certain patients. Many of those patients are disabled people attending concerts, festivals, sporting events, theatres and arenas.
The result is an operational challenge that many venues never anticipated.
A customer arrives carrying a controlled drug. Security staff recognise it as cannabis. The customer explains that it's prescribed medication. Nobody is quite sure what happens next.
That uncertainty creates delays, embarrassment and, in some cases, unlawful barriers to accessing services.
Medical cannabis isn't really the issue. Operational preparedness is.
The Industry Is Catching Up
Most venues have invested heavily in accessibility over the last decade: accessible seating, Changing Places toilets, companion ticket schemes, quiet spaces and accessible viewing platforms.
Yet comparatively few have reviewed their prohibited items policies to reflect one important legal development: some forms of cannabis can now be lawfully prescribed medicine.
As a result, organisations are often trying to solve twenty-first century accessibility problems using procedures written before medical cannabis prescriptions even existed.
The Real Operational Question
The question isn't: “Is this cannabis?”
The question is: “Is this lawfully possessed prescribed medication, and if so, how do we manage it safely and respectfully?”
That requires an entirely different operational response.
Lessons From Recent Events
Recent incidents demonstrate how quickly uncertainty can become poor customer experience.
Albert Hall Manchester
In early 2026, a customer attended Albert Hall Manchester carrying prescribed cannabis flower in its original pharmacy packaging, together with photographic identification matching the dispensing label.
Despite this, the customer was reportedly refused entry after staff incorrectly believed that only cannabis oils could legally be prescribed. The customer was required to leave their medication outside before being admitted.
Following public criticism and further correspondence, the venue reviewed its policy, updated its published guidance and reportedly offered compensation to the customer.
The issue wasn't hostility. It was lack of knowledge.
Medicine Festival
Medicine Festival 2026 is a particularly useful example because it demonstrates what good practice looks like in practice.
The starting point was a zero-tolerance position. A disabled customer contacted organisers in advance to ask how prescribed medical cannabis should be brought onto site. The initial response relied on the festival's drugs policy and stated that prescribed cannabis couldn't be admitted because security staff couldn't verify prescriptions.
Following further engagement, that position changed completely.
The festival introduced a documented verification process requiring medication in its original pharmacy packaging, prescription evidence and matching identification. Staff were briefed, an escalation process was introduced and accessibility information was updated before the event took place.
Nothing changed legally. Only the operational process changed.
That is exactly what good accessibility work looks like.
Not all prescribed cannabis creates the same operational issues
One of the biggest mistakes organisations make is treating “medical cannabis” as though it were a single product. It isn't. Different prescribed medicines create very different operational considerations.
What should a venue actually verify?
This is where many organisations overcomplicate the issue. A venue isn't acting as a healthcare provider. It's not responsible for deciding whether the medication is clinically appropriate. Its role is much narrower.
The forgotten issue: data protection
Every time a member of security asks “What condition do you have?”, they're handling special category personal data. Very few venue policies address this.
The Access Advantage — Subscribers Only
This article continues in The Access Advantage
The full article covers the medication comparison table, what proportionate verification looks like, data protection obligations under UK GDPR, Equality Act considerations, and what operational accessibility in practice actually means — closing with a question every venue should be able to answer.
Subscribers get monthly legal briefings translated into operational language, direct access to ask one question per month answered personally, and first sight of every tool and framework before public release.
Subscribe to read in fullFirst month free — £14.99/month or £150/year after that.
What's in the full article
Not all cannabis is the same
A comparison of prescribed formats — oils, capsules, flower, vaporisers — and the distinct operational considerations each creates.
What to verify, and what not to
The proportionate verification process, and why venues don't need a diagnosis to make a lawful decision.
Data protection and what good looks like
The UK GDPR angle most policies miss, and the characteristics that separate a functional policy from a liability.
Chris Fry
Accessibility specialist and legal professional. Postgraduate legal qualifications, CEDR mediation accreditation. Contributor to House of Lords and Commons Select Committee proceedings, and Court of Appeal cases. Founder, Strategic Access Advisory Limited.
This article provides general legal and operational information and isn't legal advice on the circumstances of any particular organisation.