Gross Deficiencies In Cannabis Laws - Professor

Cannabis should be treated the same as alcohol and tobacco - controlled but legal, Emeritus Professor Frederick Fastier told the health select committee cannabis inquiry on Thursday night.

Speaking before the committee in Dunedin, Prof Fastier said while he did not advocate cannabis use, current legislation had gross deficiencies.

He recommended the first line of defence against the abuse of cannabis should be non-legal sanctions based on sound drug education, and legal sanctions to supplement other measures should be modelled on those for the abuse of alcohol.

Prof Fastier, foundation professor of pharmacology at the University of Otago, said prohibition did not work because cannabis was too easy to grow and intoxication by cannabis was too difficult to detect. ...

Full Article

--

Focus on Cannabis Health Effects

The health effects of cannabis use and education of young people made up the bulk of submissions at yesterday's health select committee inquiry in Dunedin into cannabis use.

Several committee members explored links between cannabis and cigarette use and compared short and long-term health problems.

These were presented by Dunedin School of Medicine Associate Prof Robin Taylor, of the Department of Respiratory Medicine, whose submission was on behalf of the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand, and Asthma and Respiratory Foundation of New Zealand. ...

Full Article

--

ANOTHER GOOD DAY IN THE INQUIRY

I called the newspaper on wed night, who said they didn't know the inquiry was coming. We got good ODT coverage today, top story, big picture on front page, and they came back today, as did some telly reporters.

The Asthma Thoracic Trust gave mixed messages... stated that education will not work under prohibition, undermining the National strategy of asking "will it be a better idea to change the law straight away, or would it be safer to have an extensive education campaign before law reform in order to prepare the country for this step."

Professor Paul Smith from Otago Medical School was very positive that law reform would be beneficial and offered a lot of arguments, i.e., that decrim hasn't increased usage in other countries.

Invercargill Safer Community Council gave a horrid submission, delivered very well by a confident public speaker who used to be a cop. He bluntly advocated a hypocritical approach to drug education. I was bummed out the committee didn't really challenge him at all.

A lot of great personal submissions: the workshop the other night appears to have paid off, because all of the people who came along were fabulous, focusing on key points, not waffling, prepared for questions which came up from the committee, getting their messages across well, and most of them had never spoken in public before.

By the end of the night, Lynda Scott and Paul Hutchison had cruised off. Damien O Connor left and missed my submission and a couple of other good ones. Sowry wasn't even there at all. Do we have any option to make a complaint about the lack of respect these members absences show to the members of the public who have had enough commitment and bravery to make an effort to come forward and speak to the committee?

The committee is clearly sick of wafflers, and wants to know more about public health policy, they heard a lot about education today and one weak point we had was on improvements to the treatment agencies.

Nandor said that a good idea would be a huge show of support for law reform on the steps of parliament next year.

Well, all in all, very satisfying. Quite a few people came along to the hearing and were kicking themselves that they never put in a submission. I'm going to push this fact in the local student newspaper, highlighting how satisfying it was, and how everyone who didn't get involved missed out on a wicked experience, hopefully to generate support for future actions that seem a bit overwhelming to the masses.

I hope this is helpful.

love and strength to you all,

Duncan Eddy. duncaneddy@hotmail.com