If one was to pick a politician most likely to trigger a debate about whether cannabis should be decriminalised, not many people would have had Don Brash at the top of their list. That it is Dr Brash who has labelled the current approach a failure should make it harder for National and Labour to ignore this issue.
Let us look at what Dr Brash actually said:
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?
I am not an advocate for legalising all drugs. But I do agree with Dr Brash that the current laws around cannabis have largely failed, and that at a minimum personal use and consumption should not be a criminal offence.
The opportunity cost of having so much police time spent on cannabis offences is a real issue, as Dr Brash says:
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.
The Law Commission has also advocated a mandatory cautioning scheme for anyone charged with a personal possession or use offence. For Class C drugs such as cannabis they recommend that a person only be prosecuted from their fourth offence. This could be a sensible compromise between full decriminalisation and the current law.
Do you think the current law is working well? Or do you support decriminalisation, or maybe the Law Commission's halfway house of a mandatory cautioning scheme for personal possession and use offences?
David Farrar is a centre-right blogger affiliated to the National Party.
Sponsored links
Decriminalize it. It's ridiculous not to. I don't need to repeat the reasons, it's just logic and common sense.
As someone whose marriage fell apart because of marijuana addiction, I certainly would not say that it harms no one but the user. What about the abuse that comes from someone in withdrawal? What about the endangering of others while they are driving under the influence, or working in a dangerous environment when you smoked up just after breakfast?
If there are medical benefits to marijuana, then the pharmaceutical companies can extract the useful stuff, and distribute it in a consistent form, that won't cause cancer by smoking it.
I hope the government makes tobacco illegal too.
Weed rules. If you don't like cannabis, throw out every album you own if it was made after 1960.
Complete legalization is the only way to combat the issues surrounding it. The the government has control, can tax it and dispense it as they choose. There will always be customers for marijuana so why not get the money active in society rather than benefiting criminals.
I think it's ridiculous that choosing to partake in marijuana is illegal - especially considering that two major drugs, alcohol and tobacco, are not only legal but also have been shown to cause harm to both the user and society.
I find the response of the major parties to this issue to be well beyond inadequate - John Key's argument of "go and ask the parents in New Zealand whether they want their 18-year-old child to be smoking a joint before they head off to school" is emotion baiting bulls**t.
How about go ask parent is New Zealand whether they want their 12 year old children getting drunk and smoking ciggies.
He's missing the point beyond belief. My view is, it need to be legalised, age-restricted, taxed, and teens need to be educated about the potential harm of consuming it without fearmongering and just saying "it's bad". A lack of information and creating an air of mystery around a substance only increases curiosity for kids.
Great sensible stuff from Brash. Brilliant to see ACT returning to it's liberal base - they've got my vote now.
Populist vote grabbing, nothing more. Don Brash has shown, in 2005, that he'll say & do anything to get into power, whether he believes in it or not. The corporate-style takeover by Don Brash didn't increase support for ACT. Bashing Maori didn't get them any higher in the polls. So now they'll try for the *stoner* vote.
While consistent with libertarian ideals, ACT is about economic liberalism, not social liberalism. Should ACT be in any position of power after the election cannabis law reform will be quietly 'conceded' to political & corporate interests (perhaps in exchange for removal of the minimum wage). National, Big Pharmaceutical, the Police and the private prison industry simply won't allow it. Once in power all they will care about is pushing their self-interested neo-liberal free-market low-tax deregulation & privatisation dogma. A neo-liberal free-market low-tax deregulation & privatisation ideology that brought the world economy crashing down in 2008, and has been shown repeatedly around the world to be a failure for everyone but the top 1%.
Decriminalisation doesn't go anywhere near far enough. Cannabis would still be illegal to grow or use. It would not be taxed or regulated. No new industries or jobs will arise to take advantage of the thousands of industrial uses that legal cannabis could bring. Gang-run tinny houses will still be dealing to children. Medicinal users will still be persecuted. Cancer sufferers will continue to die. Anything less than full legalisation & regulation is just a cop out.
But at least the issue can now be debated. Should be interesting to hear what the other political parties have to say about the issue.
Brash is right. It's time for NZ to move from the past into the present. Get with the times. Full legalisation wouldn't bother me - decriminalisation is an obvious and logical step that ought to be made.
Common sense should prevail ...at least that's what you'd logically think. we have people in our prisons on tax payers money sitting next to hardened Criminals for doing nothing more than planting a flower, In there with rapists, Thieves, murderers and i shudder to think what else The positives of decriminalization and Deregulation FAR OUTWEIGH the negatives. If we decriminalized it and regulated it just like alcohol and tobacco we wouldn't have to waste even more of our Police forces time running around arresting people for wearing GANG PATCHES because without a guaranteed source of income to fall back on these gangs and these gangsters wouldn't be able to exist!. Yes they do have hard drugs to push but check the police statistics people...MARIJUANA IS STILL THE NUMBER 1 SOURCE OF INCOME FOR THESE LEECHES!. Also environmental positives, Medicinal benefits, Think about the Job growth that Deregulation would provide?.... Sadly this will never come to pass, One look at the budget provided for the war on drugs is enough to tell you it won't happen, Where would they get that amount of tax free income from if Decriminalization and Deregulation were to come into effect?. This is a world made by the greedy FOR the greedy and they will fight tooth and nail to keep that money coming in at the expense of Common sense and decency!. At least Mr Brash had the courage to say it WELL DONE MR BRASH!
Not with a bang or even a whimper
You can't beat Wellington (on a good day)
'Happy' Gilmore's political career likely to be brief
Labour's crazy new energy policy
Time to call Tiwai smelter's Bluff
Is car park tax National's 'lightbulb moment'?
Backtracks on climate change cause little heat

Newest First
Oldest First
"Do you think the current law is working well? Or do you support decriminalisation"
Hey here's a novel idea - write an article with some substance and come up with your own point of view.