Cannabis should be legalised

The cannabis referendum, where Kiwis will get to vote on whether they want to legalise what is essentially a medicinal herb, has been well contested with both sides of the debate having pretty equal time in the media spotlight to express their various opinions.

However there has unfortunately been some comment from the vote no campaigners that could mislead voters into making an ill-informed decision.

So just to clear a few things up:

Legalising cannabis will not cause more work place impairment.

There will also be no significant, if any, increase in consumption rates.

In some countries where cannabis has been legalised, youth consumption has declined.

Of course cannabis already causes less harm than alcohol, which is legal.

Legalisation means people will be more likely to seek help for any drug dependence.

It would mean less young Maori being disproportionately targeted by Police.

Legalising cannabis will also mean there’s quality controls in place to reduce harm.

It would mean less people being put into danger when trying to purchase cannabis.

A regulated cannabis market could also generate $490 million in tax revenue per year.

Given these facts, there are no prizes for guessing how I will be voting in the Cannabis referendum. But for even more factual information, please visit:

The Jackal: Legalising/Decriminalising Marijuana

Drug Foundation: Vote Yes: Cannabis Control Bill

Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor: Legalising cannabis in Aotearoa New Zealand: What does the evidence say?

The Spinoff: Everything you need to know about the 2020 cannabis referendum

Māori to get equity in new drug law proposal

The Drug Foundation has proposed a new legal framework to reduce harm around drugs, including removing criminal penalties for the possession, use and supply of all drugs. And as our reporter Eruera Rerekura found out one of the aims of the proposed legal model is making sure that Māori are not disproportionately affected by the criminal justice system.

Fake support for marijuana law reform

We all know that the debate concerning whether medical marijuana should be legalised is over. The only ones who still cling onto the notion that cannabis is somehow dangerous are those stuck in the days of refer madness.

So the right wing has had to change tack. Instead of openly opposing marijuana law reform during the election campaign, they're now claiming to support it. It’s only after the election that the dishonest right wing will go silent on the issue and nothing will change.

In May, Newshub reported:

Legalise cannabis? 'I'd do it tomorrow' - David Seymour

"I think that time's going to come. People are going to look at what's happened in Canada and California and other places starting with 'C' and they're basically going to say: 'Look, it's time to make that change'," Mr Seymour replied, bluntly.

Obviously David Seymour wouldn’t do it tomorrow because in the three years he’s been in parliament Seymour hasn’t bothered to submit a member’s bill to change the law.

Instead, it was Green MP Julie Anne Genter's Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis and Other Matters) Amendment Bill that looks set to make medical marijuana legal… if a conscience vote is allowed.

A vast majority of the public thinks marijuana should be legal… that’s why some right wing MPs are now claiming that they support marijuana law reform. Despite the clever pretence, it’s unfortunately totally fake support.

For instance, when Peter Dunne claimed he supported the use of medical marijuana products that don’t contain THC he ensured his changes only applied to products that aren’t actually available in New Zealand. He also came out against the medical cannabis amendment bill.

In June, Newshub reported:

Green MP's marijuana Bill 'unworkable' - Peter Dunne

Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne says the public isn't ready for grow-your-own medicinal marijuana.

…

"What she's saying is she's effectively going to decriminalise cannabis across the board. That's not the position of a number of other political parties. I don't think it's where the public is at."

Clearly Dunne is just blowing hot air when he claims people aren’t ready. You’ve also got to wonder where exactly was Peter Dunne when Helen Kelly was campaigning for medical marijuana and dying from terminal cancer?

Of course Dunne doesn’t like the amendment because if it’s enacted the drug companies won’t be able to make lots of money from their inferior cannabis products and often more dangerous widely used pain medications.

What about the National party though? With John Key no longer in the House, has there been a change in direction? Here’s what Bill English really thinks about Dunnes spruiking for the legal drug dealers.

In April, Newshub reported:

NZ doesn't want 'marijuana industry' - English

"We don't want an official marijuana industry. We're not going to be legalising it."

Instead, the government wants an illegal marijuana industry that costs the taxpayer millions and millions of dollars each year.

He fears increasing access to medical products based on cannabis will increase recreational use.

So English didn’t really support Dunne giving the Ministry of Health the ability to approve the use of cannabis based products. However he allowed Dunne to grandstand on the issue in order to seem reasonable to the public.

"We just think the long-term damage of large-scale use of marijuana is pretty bad."

But the large-scale use of alcohol and its far more damaging effects on society is OK because the government can tax the fuck out of it.

Obviously what English thinks is in the minority. In this non-scientific poll a whopping 97% of responders think it’s time to legalise cannabis for medicinal purposes. That means the government isn’t listening to the public and will hopefully be penalised at the polls.

The right wing are seriously concerned that United Future and the Act party are goneburgers this coming election. Once again they’re trying every trick in the book to dupe voters into supporting them through dishonest campaigning. Let’s hope the mainstream media stops enabling them.

Julie Anne Genter interviews medical cannabis expert Dr. Bearman

An extended version of Julie Anne Genter's interview with medical cannabis expert Dr. Bearman where they talk about public perception, side affects and benefits of using medicinal cannabis.

The Green Party has put forward a medical cannabis Member’s Bill - read about it here.

You can find the Green Party's drug reform policy here.

Not the Six O'clock News - With Laila Harré Ep.1

Today we visit the Avondale Markets, talk about Internet Party's natural cannabis policy and more.

With thanks to:  "News Theme" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)

Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0

Pot growers ravage the land

Is Cannabis Prohibition Working?

H/T Let's Start the Conversation

The death of Stephen McIntyre

Today, the NZ Herald reported:

Father-of-two McIntyre, 47, was found dead at his home in Avondale, Auckland, on July 24. His death has been referred to the coroner.

Yanai said she planned to write to Police Commissioner Peter Marshall to complain about the force's actions.

Relieving Western Area Commander Detective Inspector Karyn Malthus said officers went to McIntyre's home to check he was living there, as his bail conditions stated.

Malthus said police could smell cannabis smoke within the address when the door was answered and chose to speak to him outside the address to "avoid causing him embarrassment".

Police chose not to pursue any charges over the cannabis smell, she said.

"Police inquired as to who Mr McIntyre's lawyer was so that any communication that might be required should go to the correct counsel. This is a normal police activity."

Blogger Martyn 'Bomber' Bradbury will today publish a letter on his Tumeke blog written by McIntyre immediately after the police visit on July 16.

"In retrospect, his friends now all see that the police turning up at his home at night and demanding to know what he was going to plead while threatening further charges had a terrible impact on Stephen," Bradbury said.

It's a very big call by Bomber Bradbury to say the Police officer's involved are responsible. Whether they were simply undertaking their duties or did in fact bully Stephen McIntyre to his untimely death is debatable, but what I think this case categorically shows is that even if the police were just undertaking their duties, this can have a detrimental impact on people, an impact that clearly goes entirely against the Police's guiding principles of ensuring public safety.

This is one of the main guiding principles within their code of conduct (PDF) that all police officers should adhere to at all times. In this case it appears that the police undertaking their duties as defined by the current law and perhaps even exceeding those duties has caused undue stress, which has resulted in the needless death of Stephen McIntyre.

It's not really about attributing blame, it's about understanding what has happened and looking for solutions so it doesn't occur again.

It should be said that the shock of possible charges and the mere presence of police can be detrimental to some people and that the police in general ignore the letter of the law and do not usually pursue misdemeanour marijuana charges. This appears to be a directive given by the Police themselves to their officers, not a directive of central government, who are ideologically blinded by their get tough on crime propaganda in order to gain votes.

Perhaps the Police's decision to not usually follow the letter of the law in terms of marijuana charges is based on the very sad situation that has once again arisen with Stephen McIntyre taking his own life. Perhaps if police had not vehemently pursued the well-liked marijuana advocate, he would still be alive today. What makes their charges against McIntyre different to the usual status quo is also debatable. Perhaps it's because he was an advocate for marijuana reform that he was targeted. If that were the case, it's an unfair use of police powers, and they should look at operational changes to better ensure public safety.

My point is that even if there was no police harassment, the law as it stands is somewhat responsible. Perhaps something good could come from this tragedy and there will be more public pressure for law reform that's based on reasoned arguments and what the evidence clearly shows.

In my opinion, decriminalizing marijuana is one of the main solutions to avert similar tragedies… A solution that is long overdue. Will New Zealand follow the various regions of the United States like Washington D.C. and Colorado's lead? With National in power, it's doubtful they will do the right thing anytime soon, and the unfair treatment of medical and recreational marijuana users will continue into the foreseeable future.

Stephen McIntyre with his wife Reiko Yanai.

War on cannabis driving black market

Today, the Police reported:

Police have seized and destroyed more than 130,000 cannabis plants and over 280 kgs of dried cannabis in a six month long, nationwide operation targeting cannabis growers and dealers.

Detective Inspector Paul Berry, manager Covert Operations, PNHQ, says cannabis growers and dealers are likely to be feeling the pinch after six months of coordinated action against them.

"More importantly, we have prevented millions of dollars worth of harm by getting these drugs and the offenders off the streets."

Operation National targeted indoor growers and cannabis dealers operating out of drug dealing houses. It ran alongside this year's National Cannabis and Crime Operation (NCCO) Operation Kelly which uses fixed wing aircraft to spot cannabis crops during the cannabis growing season.

The cannabis operations resulted in 2,573 arrests.

[...]

Police estimate that $350 million worth of harm has been saved to the New Zealand economy through activities associated with Op National and Op Kelly.

According to Corrections it costs $90,977 per year to keep each prisoner (the actual figure is nearly three times this amount)... So if only 385 of the 2,573 arrested for pot are detained for a year, that $350 million in apparent reduced harm to the economy is spent on imprisonment, which is in my opinion a complete waste of money.

The other problem is that the millions of dollars the Police spend on enforcing marijuana laws is driving the black market economy and ensuring that gangs can make a killing from selling a herb. That money would be better spent on rehabilitation and education programs that are proven to reduce consumption.

Detective Regan Boucher with 53lb of seized cannabis from Wellington

NORML protests

Legalising/decriminalising marijuana

I realize that this post is somewhat redundant, being that John Key has said marijuana will not be decriminalized while he is Prime Minister. This position is somewhat idiotic... especially when you consider the following evidence concerning the overal benefits to society decriminalization would facilitate.

To clarify the boundaries of the discussion, I am not talking about decriminalization for youth and I am not claiming there are no adverse health effects... I am however taking an in-depth look at what decriminalization would mean for New Zealand based on evidence gathered here and abroad.

My goal is to present factual information to try and progress the current stagnated debate and remove some misconceptions concerning decriminalization. I should probably clarify that I'm a non-smoker and have no vested interest in seeing marijuana decriminalized.

Now that I have got the introduction out of the way... here's my argument on why marijuana should be decriminalized.

Mental health issues surrounding marijuana:

Some people have argued that marijuana causes mental ill-health in those who use it. This is perhaps the most important topic of discussion, being that 20% of adult New Zealanders will experience a mental health disorder. The question is does marijuana use result in mental ill-health or do people's pre-existing mental ill health lead to their drug and/or alcohol abuse?

Here’s what a few of the relevant studies say:

Comorbid mental disorders and substance use disorders: epidemiology, prevention and treatment (PDF):

Summary: While at present there remains much that is not known about the causes of comorbidity, there is increasing evidence to suggest that simple causal hypotheses may not easily explain the association. There is a broad convergence of risk factors for both problematic substance use and mental disorders; a plausible hypothesis for the comorbidity between these disorders is that substance use and mental disorders (mood disorders, anxiety disorders, personality disorders and psychotic disorders) share common risk factors and life pathways. A number of longitudinal cohort and twin studies have explicitly examined this hypothesis and have concluded that common factors explain the comorbidity between alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use (Lynskey et al., 1998); dependence on different illicit drugs (Tsuang et al., 1998); alcohol and nicotine dependence (True et al., 1999); and nicotine dependence and major depression (Fergusson et al., 1996; K. Kendler et al., 1993).

Substance Use Among The Mentally Ill – Prevalence, Reasons for Use, and Effects on Illness (PDF Sorry, Pay-walled):

Substance use among a random sample of mentally ill, community-based patients was examined. Current use was found to have declined substantially from a high lifetime prevalence, and a family history of substance abuse was associated with moderate to heavy use. No association was found between heavy substance use and elevated psychopathology, hospitalization, or medication noncompliance. Hospital admissions and some symptoms were less prevalent among users preferring marijuana.

The question really does come down to a health issue… whereby those with a mental health condition who are using illicit drugs are less likely to come forward to seek proper medical assistance when a criminal conviction hangs over their heads. Decriminalization would alleviate this problem.

Conclusion: Marijuana activates reward centers in the brain, however it is not mentally addictive. Those who display an insatiable appetite for marijuana are probably suffering addictive personality disorder. Marijuana does not cause mental ill-health, however more people suffering from a mental health disorder self medicate with marijuana.

The effect of legal drugs on the use of illegal drugs:

If alcohol was an illegal drug, its classification under the Misuse of Drugs Act, using the new 2001 evidence-based criteria, would make it a class B drug. Alcohol has been demonstrated to have the harm equivalent of a Class B drug (High Risk to Public Health), which puts it in the same category as morphine, fantasy, ecstasy and d-amphetamine. Marijuana is a Class C drug.

Here’s the Institute of Alcoholic studies (2007) research into Alcohol and Mental Health (PDF):

A UK study (Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire) found the majority of patients presenting with first episode psychosis reported substance use. Reported substance use in this population was twice that of the general population. Cannabis and alcohol were the two most frequently reported forms of substance use/abuse, 51% of the sample meeting standard criteria for cannabis abuse/dependence and 43% meeting the criteria for alcohol abuse/dependence at some point in their life. 

American research suggests that overall, the prevalence of alcohol dependence is almost twice as high in those with psychiatric disorders as in the general population. One US study found that 19.9% of the general population had one or more psychiatric disorders, but in those with alcohol abuse or dependence the figure rose to 36.6%.

Therefore the symptomatic qualities for alcohol use by those with a predisposition to mental ill-health is relatively the same as marijuana... meaning those who have a predisposition to mental ill-health are just as likely to use alcohol to self medicate. The study continues:

The odds of being a smoker, a hazardous drinker or a drug user increase whenever one of the others co-exists. For example, heavy smokers have a twelve-fold increase in the odds of being drug dependent and those scoring above 16 on the AUDIT score a six-fold increase. However, age is also a major risk factor for drug dependence, with the youngest group having thirty-fold greater odds than the oldest group.

Conclusion: Reducing the availability of legal drugs by limiting outlets and increasing cost would also reduce people with a predisposition for mental ill-health to self medicate. This in turn would reduce the amount of consumption of marijuana and the negative social impact from problem users.

Drug education:

People with a predisposition for mental illness are more likely to have addictive personality disorder. Such afflictions usually develop well before people are introduced to alcohol or drugs. Programmes developed specifically to educate people about the risk of drug abuse are highly beneficial to society.

Here is what the Otago University study says:

In general, studies of drug education programmes have found these programmes to be most effective in increasing knowledge about the risks of drug abuse [79]. However this increased level of knowledge does not always translate in reductions of drug use behaviours [83]. An example of these issues has been provided by the evaluation of the US drug education programme Drug Abuse Resistant Education (DARE). This programme brings police officers into the class to educate young people about the risks of drug abuse. Evaluations have found that the programme is effective in increasing student knowledge but that the effects decrease with time and do not appear to alter later risks of drug abuse [85-89].

Conclusion: Increasing peoples knowledge reduces drug use, but without a continuation of early childhood education programmes, results decline over time. Decriminalization coupled with proper health and educational services reduces the amount of people self medicating and abusing drugs

The cost of keeping marijuana criminalized:

The latest Department of Corrections Annual Report (PDF) shows:

The total revenue spent for incarceration was $1,176,097,000. That works out to be $172,397.68 per year for each of the 6,822 prisoners for 2010/11. That’s also not the actual cost for Corrections with total taxpayer funds running at nearly $2.2 billion to 30 June.

Keep in mind that the 2.2 billion the taxpayer gave to the Department of Justice this year does not include Police or Court costs. Factor those into the lost productivity from restrictions placed on people who are prosecuted, the health consequences from people not coming forward to receive rehabilitation because of fear of prosecution, the cost to society because people undertake crime to be able to afford the $500 per ounce*, the cost to society because the gangs retain (often with violence) a major income stream that funds other crimes and the lost capital because it's not being taxed… and I think the financial side of the argument to decriminalize is settled.

*This might be an incorrect estimate of the current average price of marijuana.

Conclusion: The money saved from decriminalization can best be used for health and drug education, this would reduce overall consumption and therefore decrease the amount of young people being introduced to marijuana. A defined age limit would also help.

Decriminalization and consumption:

Some people have argued that decriminalization leads to increased consumption of marijuana. In fact South Australia's marijuana use increased from 26% to 36% after decriminalization.

However marijuana use has been increasing worldwide, which is the reason some places that have instigated decriminalization have shown increased usage of marijuana.

Here’s what the UN World Drug Report (15MB PDF) shows:

Global cannabis herb seizures increased over the 2006-2008 period (+23%), especially in South America, reaching levels last reported in 2004. Global cannabis resin seizures increased markedly over the 2006-2008 period (+62%) and clearly exceeded the previous peak of 2004. Large increases in cannabis resin seizures in 2008 were reported from the Near and Middle East region, as well as from Europe and Africa.

The 10% increase shown in South Australia is well below the worldwide increase of 23%. Here’s what New Zealand's Parliamentary Services says:

Decriminalization of cannabis in the Netherlands, Australia and the USA has not led to significant increases in cannabis use, but has led to law enforcement cost savings.

Conclusion: There is an overal reduction in consumption after decriminalization, especially when education and rehabilitation programs are also implemented.

Criminality and consumption:

The Massey University Conviction and Sentencing for Cannabis Use Offences in New Zealand report (PDF) shows:

In 1999 68.9% of people surveyed had tried cannabis by the age of 21... In 2011 80% of those aged 21 had tried cannabis.

Clearly the current laws are not working to reduce introduction or consumption of cannabis. The law is simply being ignored and costing us taxpayers many millions of dollars.

A Canadian report entitled the Impact of Cannabis Decriminalization in Australia and the United States (PDF) says:

The presumed benefit of the criminalisation of cannabis possession is the deterrence of cannabis use. There is, however, little evidence of a strong deterrent effect. Substantial increases in marijuana use occurred in the 1960s and 1970s despite the application of criminal penalties for cannabis possession both in the U.S. (7, 23, 44) and in Australia (17). These trends in cannabis use do not constitute conclusive evidence regarding the lack of a deterrent effect, as it is not known whether rates of use might have increased even more if cannabis possession had not been prohibited. Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that nonusers rarely cite fear of legal consequences as a reason for their nonuse (34, 44). Rather, the simple lack of interest or fear of adverse health consequences are the most commonly given reasons for abstention from cannabis use (33, 44). There is no discernable trend in perceived availability of cannabis despite high levels of drug enforcement in the U.S. (30, 31, 52). Criminological research on the deterrence of other forms of deviant behaviour indicates that deterrence does not generally occur if the risk of detection and punishment is low. This is clearly the case with cannabis use (23). In Canada, which until the late 1980s had the highest per capita rates of arrest for cannabis possession in the world, it was estimated that less than one per cent of users and one tenth of one per cent of use incidents were detected by the police (33).

Thus, in both Australia and the United States, laws prohibiting cannabis possession entail considerable enforcement and social costs, yet they appear to have little impact on deterring cannabis use. In the 1970s 11 U.S. states enacted “decriminalisation” laws which reduced the penalties of cannabis possession to a fine only, and more recently, several jurisdictions in Australia have enacted similar measures. In 1987, South Australia introduced a “civil penalty” approach to minor cannabis offences (including personal use and cultivation), which involves the issuing of expiation notices or “on-the-spot” fines to detected offenders. In the 1990’s, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory have followed with the introduction of similar expiation schemes. More recently, Victoria implemented a system of cautions for minor cannabis offenders in 1998 and Western Australia has since followed with a similar scheme. 

[...]

Impacts on patterns of cannabis use: The potential impact of the introduction of the expiation approach upon levels and patterns of cannabis use in South Australia has been assessed in several drug use surveys, with each analysis adding more recent data to the picture (eg, 11, 18, 19). None of the studies have found an increase in cannabis use in the South Australian community which is attributable to the introduction of the Cannabis Expiation Notice scheme. Lifetime use of cannabis did increase significantly in South Australia from 26% in 1985 to 36% in 1995, but similar increases were observed over the same period in jurisdictions with a total prohibition approach to cannabis, such as Victoria and Tasmania. Similarly, there was an Australia-wide increase in rates of weekly cannabis use over the ten year period from 1985 to 1995, and South Australia did not differ from the rest of Australia on this indicator (19). A comparative study of minor cannabis offenders in South Australia and Western Australia concluded that both the CEN scheme and the more punitive prohibition approach had little deterrent effect upon cannabis users (3). Offenders from both jurisdictions reported that an expiation notice or conviction had little or no impact upon subsequent cannabis and other drug use, and most subjects reported that even if they were caught again, they would not stop using the drug (3).

Conclusion: Keeping marijuana use a criminal offense does not reduce consumption.

A humanitarian reason to decriminalize marijuana:

The cannabinoid receptors that every human being has in their brains effects a number of physiologic systems, particularly beneficial for those who have ADHD, nausea and chronic pain. THC has even been shown to induce the regression or eradication of malignant brain tumors.

Marijuana is a medicine, and like many medicines some people choose to abuse it. Their abuse and peoples ignorance should not allow the medicine to be restricted.

Decriminalization allows people with serious illnesses like cancer and rheumatoid arthritis to use one of the best pain medications known to mankind.

Summary:

Decriminalization reduces adverse health consequences by allowing people to come forward without fear of criminal prosecution to get the medical assistance they require. The funds saved from decriminalization can better be spent on health and education programs, which in turn would reduce consumption of legal and illegal substances due to the comorbidity relationship.

Don Brash on Pot

In a speech given on law and order held in Auckland last weekend, Don Brash came out in support of decriminalizing marijuana.

It seems strange that he's promoting decriminalization... and it appears to me that his controversial statements are designed to gain media attention.

Being in the mainstream media equates to votes, and it doesn't seem to matter much what is being debated.

Perhaps that's why Labour is rating poorly in recent polling... the MSM doesn't give them much airtime. Anyway here's what Don Brash said:

So should making sure that the laws the police are enforcing are in fact keeping us safe from criminals.

Laws that do not serve that purpose, and indeed possibly make us more vulnerable to criminals, should not be on the statute books to begin with.

In that respect I have to say, after long and painstaking reflection, I have come to have serious questions about our current marijuana laws.

Since 1927, it's been a criminal offence to possess, use, produce or sell cannabis in New Zealand.

The police and the courts spend some $100 million of taxpayer money a year enforcing this prohibition of a drug believed by many people to be less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol. Is there really any point to this?

Some 6000 people are prosecuted every year for cannabis offences. Are we any safer for this?

It is believed that some 400,000 New Zealanders are cannabis users. In other words, some 400,000 New Zealanders routinely flout the law - roughly 10% of the total population. Has the sky fallen in?

Apparently, a majority of New Zealanders think this law is an ass. The last poll I saw, admittedly not a very scientific one, on stuff.co.nz, had 64% of respondents in favour of decriminalisation. Has the time come to pursue that option?

Just a couple of months ago, the Global Commission on Drug Policy pronounced the international War on Drugs a failure and recommended that governments should explore legalising marijuana and other controlled substances.

The Global Commission's members, I should add, include former UN Secretary-General Kofi Anan, former US Secretary of State George Schultz, former US Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, former presidents of Brazil, Peru and Colombia, a former Prime Minister of Greece, and businessman Richard Branson. These are hardly dope-addled hippies or wild-eyed radicals. They reported that drug prohibition has had devastating effects on individuals and societies all around the world and said the War on Drugs as we know it should end.

In the United Kingdom, the Liberal Democrats - in coalition with the Conservative Party - favour the decriminalization of all drugs.

In April this year, our own Law Commission, whose President at the time was former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer - again, hardly a dope-addled hippy or wild-eyed radical - recommended allowing cannabis for medicinal use and substituting a cautioning regime for criminal penalties in non-medicinal cases.

I'm haunted by the thought that all that police time and all those police resources could be better deployed in actually keeping us safe from real criminals intent on harming us, instead of making criminals of 400,000 New Zealanders who are harming no one - except, arguably, themselves, which is their prerogative in a free society.

I'm deeply troubled by the fact that the biggest beneficiaries of prohibition are the gangs, just as organised crime was the biggest beneficiary of the ill-fated prohibition of alcohol in the United States.

I'm troubled by all the crime gangs commit in pursuit of their illicit trade, and all the innocent victims caught in the crossfire.

I hasten to add I do not advocate or approve of marijuana use. Unlike Helen Clark and Peter Dunne, I haven't ever tried it and I have absolutely no intention of doing so. But I have to ask myself by what right I would ban someone else from using it, or support a law that does so, especially when I'm leader of the political party in New Zealand that is most committed to personal freedom.

Let me be absolutely clear: I'm not saying it's now ACT policy to decriminalise or legalise marijuana. I'm simply saying it's my personal view that we should give the idea serious consideration as there are some strong arguments in its favour - arguments supported by some seriously sober and responsible national and international leaders.

Apparently Brash made his statements without first consulting with the rest of the beleaguered Act ingrates. President Chris Simmons said decriminalizing the class-C drug wouldn't be the party's policy next year, in 2014 or even 2017.

John Banks, the party's Epsom candidate and a former police minister, said he could not support cannabis decriminalization.

Even John Key jumped on the band wagon by saying marijuana is a "gateway drug" and that it "causes crime".

Has anybody told John Key that the Law Commission thinks marijuana should be decriminalized?

What the Prime Minster fails to understand is that decriminalization of marijuana will reduce gang incomes and reduce the crime associated with the drug trade.

Does anybody know if John Key has even tried the herb? Peter Dunne admits it, Don Brash supports decriminalizing it and 13.4% of those between the ages of 16-64 regularly use it. So what's the big deal?

Being that the stats show far more crime is committed by those inebriated by alcohol, shouldn't John Key be calling for the prohibition of that dangerous substance... if that's his defining criteria for making something illegal?

Most cops turn a blind eye to personal use these days... they usually don't bother locking people up for a victimless crime.

The simple fact of the matter is that New Zealand should use the money saved from decriminalization to educate and increase health expenditure. They are proven ways to reduce drug use... everything else has failed.

Friday Fun with Photos #12

United Future leader and Associate Minister for Health Peter Dunne said he had smoked cannabis "a couple of times" as a student in the 1970s.

Click for larger image

Reefer Madness

A few MP's spoke on the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill in Parliament yesterday. While most showed a good grasp on what they were talking about, Peter Dunne dropped a couple of clangers in his uninspiring and droll speech.

Although the bill is in the most part well thought out, it has a number of items that raise concern. The bill proposes to deregulate Thalidomide, which is a terrible drug that has caused more harm than marijuana ever could.

While the council is correct in its argument that Thalidomide has no potential to be misused for psychoactive effect, they're completely wrong that thalidomide can be more effectively controlled under the Medicines Act 1981. The Government fails to understand that thalidomide is not a medicine at all, it's a dangerous poison.

Thalidomide has caused thousands of deformities and deaths, therefore it should be fully restricted as a dangerous substance. Removing any restriction around the importation of Thalidomide is incomprehensibly stupid!



I am also puzzled by the proposition to control the importation and supply of "drug utensils." The Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill states:

The provisions for prohibiting the importation and supply of utensils used for the purpose of administering controlled drugs will be expanded to make it an offence to possess utensils for the purpose of sale or supply and prohibit the importation of incomplete utensils that, for example, require only the addition of a metal cone for burning cannabis to become usable. This will allow Police and Customs to more effectively enforce the utensils provisions and minimise the visibility and availability of drug paraphernalia.

A bong can be made out of just about anything. What they hope to achieve by giving the police and customs the power to halt imports of anything that can be used to make a bong if you add a metal cone is questionable. It's clear that such a law could be problematic.

There's no question that such a provision will do nothing to curb peoples drug use. It's an ineffectual and ridiculous proposition showing just how out of touch the Government has become. They need to be undertaking things that are proven to be beneficial, not clasping at straws.

The amendment also imposes limits on over the counter sales of medicines that contain pseudoephedrine. However the Government fails to comprehend that 90% of all precursors used for the manufacture of drugs like P are smuggled into New Zealand from other countries. The vast majority coming from China. Still there is no provision given to try and limit the free trade of illegal substances that cross our borders.

I'm disappointed that the Government has failed to address the main issues surrounding New Zealand's drug use. In my opinion, a lack of rehabilitation centers and proper education are the main areas that need attention. Instead the Government believes that limiting access and increasing penalties will curb drug use. The failure of such a regime is unmistakable. It is similar prehistoric thinking as that seen in the 1930's, and look where that got us.

Stay off the Pipe

Last week, Chris Cornell sat down in Los Angeles with David Farrier for an interview. Chris was the front man of the hugely successful band Soundgarden. He then embarked on other endeavours such as Temple of the Dog, Audioslave and his solo career.

The seminal statement in the interview was “stay off the pipe.” Although Chris delivered this with humour, it’s a serious topic that needs further investigation.

Chris was referring to smoking drugs through a pipe, which is the preferred method to imbibe various mind altering substances from Marijuana to crack cocaine. His advice came a little late for Rock legend Rick Bryant, who was just jailed for possessing 400g of cannabis, a small amount of cannabis oil, ecstasy and some cocaine.

Defence lawyer Paul Wicks said there was no evidence his client had dealt to anyone other than friends and that Rick was a long-term cannabis user who used the drug to manage chronic pain. Wicks said the cocaine and ecstasy were used infrequently and had been in his house for a long time and that Rick's problem was with cannabis and he would undertake counseling if he was given home detention.

Justice Lang ignored this and sentenced Rick to three years, one month in prison. However with discounts for his early guilty plea, his charitable work and moves toward drug rehabilitation, Justice Lang ordered a final sentence of two years in prison. Rick will have no access to proper drug rehabilitation services while incarcerated, which is at a cost of around $100,000 per year.

Like the Government, our Justice system largely ignores advice from reputable researches such as the New England Journal of Medicine. Their recent paper (PDF) on Medicine and the Epidemic of Incarceration in the United States probably hasn't even been looked at by any National MP's. The extensive paper reviewed the deplorable plight of drug addicted and mentally ill inmates in America's prisons and concluded:

“Locking up millions of people for drug­ related crimes has failed as a public­ safety strategy and has harmed public health in the communities to which these men and women return. A new evidence ­based approach is desperately needed. We believe that in addition to capitalizing on the public health opportunities that incarceration presents, the medical community and policymakers must advocate for alternatives to imprisonment, drug­ policy reform, and increased public awareness of this crisis in order to reduce mass incarceration and its collateral consequence.”

I mention this because National is hell bent on following an American system, which has completely failed to curb drug use in that country. By following America's example and continuing the costly war on drugs, National undermines the ability of addicts to properly rehabilitate. There's also a huge cost in human misery from such archaic policies.

Marijuana is the third most popular recreational drug in New Zealand after alcohol and tobacco, both of which cause untold harm and carnage in our society. Unlike many other recreational drugs, Marijuana is not attributed to any deaths.

In the 90’s a Ministry of Health report found that 43% of males and 27% of females aged 18 to 24 years used marijuana in any given 12 month period. 70% of prosecutions for offences involving cannabis resulted in a conviction. Around 5% of the population used Opium or its derivatives, with around 13% trying hallucinogens at some time.

Chris was in all probability refering to P, also known as speed, burns and meth. It’s a commonly manufactured drug in New Zealand with the amount of Clandestine Drug Laboratories (Clan Labs) growing throughout the country as more people become addicted.

Methamphetamine is now the world’s most widely used drug, with New Zealand excelling in this negative trend.

Still the powers that be prefer to promote a punishment instead of rehabilitation program. The negative effects of which make gangs millions of dollars, creates more crime and keeps people addicted for longer. This is because a lot of crime is undertaken to pay for peoples drug habits, which are not reduced to any significant degree by incarceration.

An extensive report (PDF) by the New Zealand National Health Committee found that:

 A lack of alcohol and other drug assessments and treatment for prisoners undermines community safety. An estimated 2,000 prisoners with substance abuse problems are released from prison each year without an alcohol and other drug assessment.

They made a number of recommendations:

• consider the case for transferring responsibility for prisoner primary health care from the Department of Corrections to the health sector
• adhere to six principles for health and disability planning and delivery to prisoners
• improve planning
• strengthen relationships among responsible agencies
• improve the quality of primary health care in prisons
• strengthen identification, assessment and treatment of health conditions and disabilities, with a focus on mental health, alcohol and other drug dependence, and oral health
• ensure seamless continuity of care
• support maintenance of family relationships and responsibilities for prisoners
• assist organisations that provide support to released prisoners and their families and whānau.

All of which will be ignored by a National Government. There is one thing that I disagree with the authors about though, the reason for New Zealand's high drug use is pretty obvious;  when the economy worsens, people turn to drugs because their lives are not working. Societies worsening conditions increases drug dependency.

What is the Government’s answer to this major problem? So far it’s been to remove funding for rehab units that can help addicts kick the habit and continue to spend millions of dollars on more Police and new jails in anticipation of more disaffected people finding little option but to commit crime. Sadly, drugs are often the only answer to the reality of peoples lives. Meanwhile, National continues to preach a tough on crime ethos that has totally failed to fix the problem.

The Government has totally failed to even comprehend the negative dynamic their policies are causing. Poor communities have been hardest hit with police unable to contend with the tide of drug use to any degree as to decrease its negative effects. So now that the war on drugs is lost, what is the answer? I'm asking you because there's no point in asking the Government.

The week that was 30 April - 6 May

New Zealand has the third-highest rate of children living in single-parent homes, an OECD study says. This means nearly one in four Kiwi children are growing up in single-parent homes as more marriages break up and single women choose to enter motherhood on their own. Of twenty seven industrialised countries, New Zealand ranked third in the Doing Better for Families study, with 23.7 per cent of children living in a one-parent household, compared with the 14.9 per cent average across all countries.

Children's Commissioner John Angus said Kiwi children were four times more likely to be living under the poverty line if a single parent was raising them.


As of December last year, any person or organisation that provides financial service to a member of the public has to register with the Companies Office as a financial service provider and belong to an approved dispute resolution scheme like FSCL. The new responsible lending guidelines launched this week could prove a deterrent to loan sharking practices as they can be used to look into complaints made against lending companies whether they signed up to the guidelines or not, a dispute resolution provider says.

Child Poverty Action Group executive member Claire Dale said its good to see consumers will be able to access free information about the dispute resolution services but she objects to "the pretence that the guidelines will address the issues of finance companies making loans with cripplingly high interest rates, punitive default conditions, and excessive security and powers of repossession".

"New Zealand is one of the few countries in the OECD who has continued to deny the most vulnerable citizens the protection of a capped interest rate. The guidelines slap loan sharks with a dead fish, and sidestep the very real need for the government to cap interest rates," Ms Dale said.

The Law Commission issued a report on the 35-year-old drug laws, saying there was room for "a more flexible approach to small-scale dealing and personal drug use", particularly when linked to addiction. The report also suggests that the Government should carry out clinical trials on the effectiveness of cannabis for medicinal purposes.

A new system of warnings for personal possession and "social dealing" of drugs is proposed, with three warnings for a class C drug offence before an offender would be ordered to attend "a brief intervention session". Two warnings would apply for class B drug offences, and one for class A. There should also be a presumption against imprisonment for those prosecuted for "social dealing" that had no profit for the dealer, the report says.

Nearly half of New Zealand's adult population has used cannabis at some point in their lives and about one in seven were classified as current users in 2006. The report says there should be no changes that dilute prohibition of drug use. "However, there is room for taking a more flexible approach to small-scale dealing and personal possession and use." The police submission on the report, obtained by Fairfax, objects to the proposals for a "cautioning" approach. Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei said too many resources were directed into criminalising people rather than providing them with medical help.

"This new approach, if adopted, will actually save money, enabling greater resources to be directed into health services for breaking the cycle of drug abuse and addiction. It will also free police to tackle more serious crime." Metiria said.

On Monday Greenpeace activists began blocking the construction of the European Pressurized Nuclear Reactor (EPR) being built at Flamanville, France. Two trucks were anchored to the ground, blockading the entrance carrying activists. More activists scaled four cranes, attempting to impede further construction work at the site.

The EPR design in particular has a number of safety risks similar to Fukushima, as the French nuclear safety authority ASN pointed out a few weeks ago. The regulator must now act and enforce a moratorium on the site.

Click image for Fukushima status.

Worldwide concerns surrounding radioactivity continue after the Fukushima Dai-ichi meltdowns, with both levels in the atmosphere and sea water surrounding the plant containing higher than normal levels, and more concerns over the radioactivity which may have entered the food and drinking water systems.


In Germany, the Christian Democratic Union, blamed the Fukushima meltdown for a regional election loss. Seven of the county's oldest plants were temporarily shut down in the immediate aftermath of the event and protests have taken place in Hamburg, Berlin, Cologne and Munich, where 200,000 people gathered to demand the closure of all Germany’s reactors.

Austria's environment minister called for stress tests to make sure Europe’s nuclear facilities are earthquake-proof. The European Commission also agreed that in the wake of the disaster, stress tests should be performed on power stations in the EU to test how robust their safety systems are. EU Energy Commissioner Gunter Oettinger raised doubts that all the 143 reactors in Europe would get approval under the review.

In China, one of the biggest builders of new nuclear, has suspended building on its new reactors, pending new safety regulations. The Bangladeshi government on the other hand has announced they will go ahead with their new power station, while in India a safety review has been announced, although no shift looks likely in their pro-nuclear policy.

Customs officials in Chile detected radiation in cars that arrived from Japan onboard the Hyundai 106 cargo ship. Twenty-one of the 2,500 cars that arrived in Iquique, Chile from the Japanese port of Yokohama have been found to have low levels of radiation. Nearly one hundred port workers have protested the arrival of the shipment and subsequent exposure, claiming their health was at risk.

Global anti-corruption coalition Transparency International (TI) has released the ‘Global Corruption Report: Climate Change’, which presented guidelines to prevent corruption which could undermine climate change remedy actions. 

"Where huge amounts of money flow through new and untested financial markets and mechanisms, there is always a risk of corruption. Some estimate total climate change investments in mitigation efforts alone at almost $700-billion by 2020. Public investments of no less than $250-billion a year will eventually flow through new, relatively uncoordinated and untested channels. In addition, pressure already exists to ‘fast-track’ solutions, further enhancing the risk of corruption,” said the report.

It called on governments, international organisations, businesses and civil society to ensure good governance in climate policy, because under global climate agreements, substantial funding would be gathered to finance mitigation of emissions, such as renewable energy projects, and adaptation to impacts, such as construction of sea walls, irrigation systems and disaster-ready housing.

Conservation Department staff have been told to expect job losses as part of a wide-ranging review and restructure of the organisation. Director-general Al Morrison has told staff of the review, which follows a year of mergers and job cuts after the department had its budget slashed in 2009. It is refusing to say how many jobs may be at risk, saying it is too early and that the restructure is still in a "design phase".

The restructure could affect teams who process permits and concessions, mapping staff, resource management planners, and legal, payroll and administrative staff. Scientific and technical officer jobs were also being looked at as part of the review. Public Service Association national secretary Brenda Pilott said the review was being done to save money. The union did not know how many job losses there would be. In the 2009 Budget, DOC had $54 million cut from its budget over four years.

John Key is adamant that the NZDF has done nothing wrong in Afghanistan and continues to refuse an independent enquiry into allegations made in John Stephenson’s recent article in Metro Magazine, which accuses the NZSAS of being complicit in the torture of Afghan Civilians. This has resulted in the Greens saying;

"If the Prime Minister John Key and Governor General Designate Jerry Mataparae have nothing to hide, then they should welcome an enquiry as an opportunity for their version of the truth to be confirmed. If they continue to stonewall an investigation, and throw mud at the messenger, then the New Zealand public will have no choice but to assume that the SAS are in fact guilty as accused, and that the Governor General Designate and Prime Minister have deliberately lied the New Zealand public on several occasions" The Green Party said.

The Governor General Designate Jerry Mataparae and Prime Minister John Key.

John Key publicly attacked John Stephenson's journalistic credibility over the NZSAS Metro article. Mr Key also said Mr Stephenson made a phone call to him and alleges Mr Stephenson impersonated Duncan Garner, a well known TV3 right wing journalist.  The public attack by the Prime Minister as well as statements made by Rhys Jones, the chief of defence force - will possibly be the subject of legal action undertaken by Mr Stephenson.

New Zealand has the highest incidence of melanoma in the world, which is the most likely cause of cancer in Kiwi men aged 25 to 44, and those over 60 are most at risk. One in 13 men will get melanoma in their lifetime, compared with one in 18 women. Melanoma unit surgeon and Melanoma Foundation trustee Richard Martin says continued exposure to the sun for a long period, as in the case of farmers, means a higher risk later in life. The foundation says melanoma is a deadly skin cancer that has a devastating impact on 2000 New Zealanders and their families every year.

Melanoma is the most serious form of skin cancer. While it is not the most common skin cancer, it causes the most deaths. Melanoma is most common in white-skinned individuals, but it may develop in those with dark skin as well. About one in 15 white-skinned New Zealanders are expected to develop melanoma in their lifetime, and Australia and New Zealand have the highest reported rates of melanoma in the world. It was the third most common cancer registration in New Zealand in females and the fourth most common cancer for males in 2000.

Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Christopher Finlayson welcomed the beginning of the 11th New Zealand Music Month, saying it was a great way to sample from the full range of local music offerings with events nationwide.

“New Zealand musicians are consistently recognised on the international stage, from contemporary acts at the annual SXSW music fair in Austin, Texas to the NZSO performing in Vienna. We can take advantage of the fact we have thriving live music scenes across many genres right on our door-steps during May. New Zealand Music Month is an excellent opportunity to get out of the house and see our world class musicians in their natural environment, whether that is Auckland’s Aotea Centre or Karangahape Road, the Wellington Opera House or Cuba Street,” Mr Finlayson said.

Sir Bob Geldof was honored for his humanitarian work at the Gulf Intelligence Food Security Forum held in Abu Dhabi on Thursday. According to statistics presented at the conference, the number of people suffering from chronic hunger surpassed one billion for the first time last year. At the same time, food prices hit a new high in February 2011, surpassing the previous peak prices of December 2010.

“Countries such as the UAE that control vital natural resources like oil should take a stand and put pressure on other nations to ensure food security for all,” Sir Bob Geldof said.

Speaking on the occasion, Shaikh Nahyan Bin Mubarak Al Nahyan, Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research in the UAE, said ensuring world food security called for innovative and scientific solutions to the problem. 

"Food security is a complicated problem. Higher standards of living and better health care are signs of development, but they also increase the demand for food. We therefore need to increase food production and supply in ways that do not pose a threat to development, as well as ensure that development does not increase food security concerns," Shaikh Nahyan said.

There are reports of many civilians being massacred in the small Syrian town of Tel Kalakh, with reports that the Syrian army's 4th Brigade fired into unarmed protesters. Almost half the Sunni Muslim population fled over the river frontier into Lebanon, babes in arms, old people in wheelchairs, pushed through the shallow waters of the Nahr el-Kbir.

As many as 4,000 of the Syrian Sunnis made it to the safety of Lebanon to be given food, shelter and blankets by relatives and by strangers and they were there yesterday – 80 living in one house alone scarcely 20m from Syria, desperate to praise the kindness of the Lebanese, fearful of the things they had seen, ferocious in their anger against their president.

The men responsible for the killings in Tel Kalakh were members of the Syrian army's 4th Brigade, the same unit, commanded by President Bashar al-Assad's little brother Maher, that is besieging the southern city of Deraa, along with government snipers and "shabiha" thugs from the Alawi mountains. Dressed in black, the latter spent some time, according to Syrian refugee women, tearing the veils off girls and trying to kidnap them.

Muammar Gaddafi meets Barack Obama.

NATO undertook an attack on a Libyan building which killed Gaddafi's youngest son Saif al-Arab Gaddafi, and three of his grandchildren. This occurred despite the UN resolution 1973, which prohibits attacks on civilians. Nato maintains that it was not an assassination attempt and that the building was used to support military personnel. Libyan government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said;

"The house of Mr Saif al-Arab Gaddafi was attacked tonight with full power. The leader with his wife was there in the house with other friends and relatives. The leader himself is in good health, he wasn't harmed, however this is a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country. This is not permitted by international law. It is not permitted by any moral code or principle." the spokesman said, adding that Gaddafi's wife was also unharmed.