Dunedin 12 & 13 July

The majority of the Health Committee seem well aware of the glaring problems associated with the prohibition, asking “what are we going to do about it? What policy are we going to replace it with?”

Obviously, not all of the Committee members held this view, but one thing that was clear throughout the hearings was that the prohibitionist arguments are illogical, inconsistent, or just plain bigoted.

The majority of reform advocates presenting their views to the Select Committee were young people who had never done anything as crazy as talking to a committee of MPs, and they kicked ass. It was a joy watching intelligent and articulate young people going head to head with seasoned politicians and getting their messages across.

The committee also heard from a number of more ‘senior’ law reformers who presented solid arguments, including Professor Fred Fastier, who served on the Blake-Palmer committee in 1972-3. That committee recommended continuing cannabis prohibition “only so long as it is seen to be largely effective,” but Prof Fastier recommended to this inquiry a policy of regulation and taxation.

Don Mowat of the Invercargill Safer Community Council said sharing joints was the perfect way to pass on the HIV virus. He said that educators should tell their students “Do as I tell you, don’t do as I do” as hypocrisy is necessary to tell kids not to smoke cannabis! Robin Taylor, Associate Professor of the Dunedin School of the Department of Respiratory Medicine, appeared for the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand and Asthma and respiratory Foundation of New Zealand. Professor Taylor said “The long-term effects of cannabis smoking are likely to be just as harmful as tobacco”, but that data to validate his claims would not be available for 25 to 30 years. When asked about the acceptance of cigarettes by society 100 years ago, Prof Taylor said they should have been made illegal. He supported prohibition to nip the use of cannabis in the bud, yet agreed that education will not work under prohibition. His argument against law reform was weak and riddled with inconsistencies, which most of the Committee seemed to recognise. Professor Paul Smith from Otago University’s department of pharmacology and toxicology said that cannabis was not harmless, but the harms associated with cannabis do not justify criminal sanctions. Prof Smith supported decriminalisation, and said it was unlikely that this would increase the use of cannabis. He said law reform would be a beneficial step, and pointed to international studies on cannabis use.

Roger Sowry never even made it to Dunedin for the hearing, and by the end of the second night, National members Lynda Scott and Paul Hutchison had also exited the scene. Damien O’Connor departed shortly before the Dunedin NORML submission, and returned shortly afterwards.

The Dunedin NORML submission was based on some simple points; mainly that punishment is unjust and counterproductive, and that realistic education and stigma-free treatment would better minimise the risks of cannabis abuse. The money wasted on busting and processing cannabis users can be used more effectively, and a cannabis tax would provide funding for these programs.

The absent committee members showed a lack of respect to the inquiry, and to those of us who had enough commitment and courage to appear before the committee. Next year is an election year, and right now cannabis law reform in Aotearoa is closer than ever, but the law won’t change until we all stand up for our beliefs and make our demands for law reform heard loud and clear.

Auckland 15 August

The day began with an “expert submission” from Keith Bedford, forensics manager at the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR). He tabled an analysis of cannabis samples that dispelled the myth that cannabis potency has increased to ten, twenty or even, as Judy Bailey would have you believe, “sixty” times what it once was. This line is often used to scare parents who tried pot in their hippy days, but ESR’s analysis of samples from the 1970s through to the 1990s showed cannabis potency had remained much the same, and hash oil had actually decreased.

Part of their submission also dealt with the touchy subject of suicides who had used cannabis, and that was what the Herald chose that for their “young suicides used dope” headline the next day. Contrary to the impression that there was any causal proof, Mr Bedford had stressed his study sample was very small and biased as it was only those the police had asked him to examine.

As well as a multi-million dollar contract testing cannabis for the police, ESR have expanded their business into providing workplace urine tests.

Testing bodily samples was supported by Michael Sheehan, who manages health and safety plans for several forestry companies. He detailed hazards caused by the illicit status of cannabis - man traps, sabotage of forestry equipment, rip offs, threats against forestry workers - and then called for more of the same, only harder!

Glenis Schomburg, a grandmother who has used medicinal cannabis to heal her RSI, held up a photo of a punk with a large mohawk taken at J Day and published in the Herald. Glenis was standing behind the punk at the time but her image was not used because it didn’t fit the stereotype.

Karen Blacklock of the Auckland Drug Information Outreach (ADIO) said cannabis health policy should be to minimise harm. People have always used and will continue to use drugs. The ideal of no drug use is unrealistic, and use, possession and cultivation by adults should be allowed. Karen disputed the ‘gateway’ theory, saying that although most opiate users had tried cannabis, very few cannabis users go on to try opiates. NORML’s treasurer Adrian Picot calculated in his submission that cannabis prohibition costs the government $669 million per year in lost GST and income tax payments and increased welfare payments. There is also a direct cost of $60 million spent enforcing the current law. This angle went down a treat with the committee as they now had the hard figures in front of them.

St Peter’s College principal Keiran Fouhy called for more of the same and predicted all sorts of shenanigans if cannabis were legalised. Committee chair Judy Keall replied “It reminds me of the homosexual law reform, everyone said they’d be running rampant and corrupting kids.”

Worik Stanton had spent 15 years campaigning for cannabis law reform, and wants marijuana de-emphasise d. The cost is huge to enforce the law, the harm to users of getting busted is huge, and the price of good weed is “ridiculous”.

Metiria Turei discussed Maori use of cannabis and said the problem is no worse than for non-Maori. Maori are not genetically inferior or more prone to addiction, but this attitude contributes to feelings of inadequacy.

The Seventh Day Adventist Church runs some treatment services and Judy McAnulty argued for court-ordered coercion to get people to use them.

Nandor pointed out we need more consistency in cannabis, alcohol and tobacco policies, to which National MP Lynda Scott laughed and said it wasn’t her trying to do that.

Judy McAnulty then changed hats to represent the Christian drug education group Drug-Arm, with Kelvin McAnulty and Paul Duxbury. They have a large number of ‘born again’ ex-drug users who preach abstinence and quiet nights at home.

Graeme Milnich, representing the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties, would have none of that and argued for a person’s right to do whatever they felt like as long as they don’t harm other people. This sort of libertarian philosophy went down like a cup of cold sick with some committee members, who do actually feel they have the right to tell you what to do. Graeme brushed off their dismissive looks and argued for the appropriate regulation and taxation of the cannabis industry.

Pip Harker is a jazz singer by trade but the law calls her a criminal. Pip talked about how marijuana was first made illegal in the 1930s, and Phillida Bunkle joked “It must have been the National Party!” Maurice Williamson replied “Don’t blame us, we weren’t there!” He then left the room, muttering “popping out for a joint, and missed Pip launch into an old reefer song by Louie Armstrong which went down a treat with the committee. Even Lynda Scott was seen to smile.

NORML’s webmaster Dr Stuart Young presented a review of the major studies done on cannabis policy, all of which backed law reform, and covered his work with the medical marijuana campaign.

Greg Soar, who lives with HIV, presented the case for the medical availability of cannabis, and passed his vapouriser around the table.

Jonathan Rennie, another long term activist, decried the lack of good drug education in schools. Jonathan was arrested for a few seedlings 3 inches tall and just wants to grow his own in peace.

Norml News writer Harry Cording relished his opportunity to attack the drug war and let them have it, saying even the terms of reference for this inquiry, which call for ways to minimise the use of cannabis, are wrong. Harry said “My submission is rude but so is the law.” So there!

--

Hamilton 14 September

In attendance were Judy Keall, Steve Chadwick, Damien O'Connor, Phillida Bunkle, Nandor, Paul Hutchison and Tony Steel.

The first submission was from Gary Clarkson, a long-time NORML member who went on the first Bus Tour with Nandor in the early 90s and now an executive member of the Green Party. He made good points on the Maori aspects on the rates of arrests compared to the rates of use. It was his role play at the end of his submission though, that really held the committee's interest. If he were a dealer, Mr Clarkson said, he would want dope banned. "If anything, I suggest going harder. It's all good for business. It will ensure we've got a healthy profit for a long time."

The Waikato Times reported the National Party and anti-cannabis groups are unwittingly helping drug dealers.

The MPs lamented that no actual growers or dealers had made oral submissions and were keen to know what they would do for a living if cannabis was legalised.

Sarah Porter from the Mental Health Collective made a very good impression. She made excellent points about the impact of cannabis prohibition on the delivery of mental health services. Best practice is impeded by the illegal status of cannabis, and prohibition prevents sensible treatment for people with a dual diagnosis. The law as it stands requires that health professionals must prevent or punish use. Under such conditions clinicians are unable to advocate a reduction of use. Sarah suggested that there should be a paradigm shift with cannabis being viewed as part of the solution in some treatments, and the MP's seemed to give this serious consideration. Te Ruunanga a Iwi o Ngati Tamatera were strongly opposed to cannabis being legalised. The committee asked as the group were well aware of the problems at the moment, how would keeping it illegal solve these problems?

Toi Te Ora Public Health and the Opotiki Safer Communities Council had both done extensive studies in their community and were keen to work on local solutions to local problems. They had done work with growers and dealers and agreed that there needs to be change, but couldn't recommend how, as they would need more hui to reach consensus.

Joe Citizen argued that use didn't necessarily mean harm, and that he worked in creative communities where almost everyone smoked pot. Three lovely old ladies with walking sticks and crutches arrived from the Growth Through Moderation Society. They opposed decriminalisation, but did accept medical use, and that‘s something. Anti-cannabis campaigner Dr David Gilgen told several stories about prohibition violence, but the Committee didn't seem to warm too much to him. Steve Chadwick's question, "How do we break the cycle?" said it all. Dr Gilgen answered "I don't know."

Keith Hull also argued for more of the same. More police, harsher penalties. No law change.

Family Care Support , a group of 110 families who run support groups around the country, polled their members and 80% of the families said they have an issue with cannabis but the real problem is with alcohol.

Caleb Armstrong, an intern at the Waikato Hospital, gave a powerful presentation that was mostly new to them including the origins of prohibition.

Unfortunately the elation of Caleb's 'lesson on law reform' was followed but deep sorrow of the persecution of Bruce from Thames. This man has been an invalid since a spinal injury in 1985. He was put on medication, morphine and other analgesics for a number of years and as an occasional smoker he tried cannabis as a safer alternative. Bruce found it not only took the edge off the pain, but also helped him to feel happy and relaxed. Bruce has been busted and imprisoned several times for growing his medication. Over half a million dollars of taxpayers money has been spent persecuting Bruce but he still makes his own choices.

--

Northland 19 September

Educational psychologist Les Gray told the inquiry he had been waiting for the opportunity for a long time, after being sacked in 1984 for speaking his mind about cannabis. Les appeared on the Holmes show with Det. Ian Hastings and was raided the next day. He refused to pay the fine, but someone did, “and to this day I do not know who paid it or which side they were on!”

Les tabled a draft of a drug education booklet he has been working on, and referred to a new book, The Science of Marijuana (L Iverson, Oxford University Press).

Phillida Bunkle referred to the health committee’s previous inquiry into the mental health effects of cannabis, which prompted committee chair Judy Keall to say “In 98 we realised we couldn’t prove a link... the sad thing about this inquiry is not all the members are attending and I think that is sad.”

Most law reform advocates have argued for a regulatory approach, but Les said the law doesn’t necessarily have to change, just get the police out of the equation.

“A period of ‘hands off’ and let things settle. No fear of arrest would restore democracy.”

Judy Keall replied that “that’s the least likely situation.”

Paul Hutchison: “A staged transition has merit.”

Steve Chadwick: “Step it along in the most logical way and you take the majority of the population with you.”

Judy Keall: “Yes, there needs to be consistency of approach.

They didn’t get any of that from Far North group Te Runanga O Te Rarawa. Errol Murray, their community relations manager, said they wanted “homegrown” initiatives, supported by government. There should not be a law change “until Maori health is on a par with the rest of the population.” While zero tolerance hasn’t worked, he said, there could be better use made of the current law including restorative justice measures.

Errol’s colleague Owen Lewis said “use leads to 8 year olds selling dak openly in schools” and this single comment dominated the press coverage of the hearing. The media didn’t report that the kid in question had found his dad’s stash and taken it to school because he thought it was cool. After being caught, he had apparently said “‘If I knew how much it was worth I would have sold it instead.”

Judy Keall explained “What we’re hearing is there is a problem, but that is here under the current law. Errol says we should keep the law and use it a different way. There are probably five options: Prohibition, prohibition with a better way, partial decriminalisation, fully decriminalise, and legalise or regulate.”

Mark Fieldman, a medical doctor, argued there is no association between what the law says and what people do. Cannabis is everywhere and you can get it easily.

“People have voted in favour of this drug.”

Oregon was the first US state to decriminalise, allowing up to 3 plants but no selling. Mark lived their at the time and said teenagers went from smoking to thinking its boring and went back to drinking. This aroused a great deal of interest in the committee, and when Mark noted US drug policy had failed, Judy Keall commented that was “because the sales are still illegal.”

It just kept getting better, as committee members tried to out-do each other and showing off with how much they had learnt. Phillida nominated coffee as her “drug of choice”, and Judy volunteered that she had “met plenty of bright marijuana smokers.”

Former NORML secretary Marian Barnes then discussed how she felt as a parent when her son was busted for pot and became the “black sheep of the family”.

This seemed to strike a chord with the committee, with Phillida noting “the outsider status made the relationships less supportive.” Steve Chadwick asked Marian if she thought diversion into the health system was an option. Marian said people would have to grovel and say they have done something wrong when they don’t feel they have, to which Judy Keall added “that’s right, I know someone here who is refusing to take a diversion because they don’t feel like they’ve done anything wrong.”

No prizes for guessing who she’s talking about!

Tracey Brown, a medical cannabis user, spoke about his injuries and how cannabis brings relief from constant pain. It was remarkable to hear Tracey tell his story, as he almost left the building after walking into a room full of suits. In the end Dr Paul Hutchison counselled him about how to apply for a medical marijuana license!

Carmen Hetaraka of the Community Action Group of Whanaruru carried an taiaha with a real axe head attached and everyone leant back in their chairs as he sang “God Save the Queen”. As I said, it was a bizarre day.

He supported prohibition “one hundred percent” and then listed the names of several Northland men who had been killed over cannabis deals. He said that “for those who support decriminalisation it’s okay, but my people [Maori] can’t handle it.”

This racist attitude that presumes all Maori are incapable of making decisions for themselves is also spouted by Alliance MP Willie Jackson.

You could see the committee members didn’t agree with Carmen, but they never took their eyes off his axe. Mike Finlayson, former National Coordinator of NORML and now Far North hermit, argued that prohibition is the antithesis of reason and justice. Law makers have blown up pot to be a “big deal”, and the new strategy should be to de-emphasise cannabis.

Mike tabled an article from the Herald about NORML’s call for a moratorium on arrests so all people can contribute to the debate. Pointing to myself, Mike said here is someone who has been forthright and public about their views and has been arrested and faces prosecution. Unfortunately the call for a moratorium was ignored by the committee members, although Judy Keall did say she would be very concerned if anyone was arrested as a result of giving evidence.

Paul Gourlie, representing the Cannabis Corporation, argued for harm reduction. He also wanted more consultation with Maori on marae, and said the time should be taken to get it right. The multi-million dollar industry should be regulated, he said.

--

Auckland October 3

Victoria Northfield, newly elected as one of Norml’s joint secretaries, presented a submission as manager of The Hempstore, which was the only pipe retailer to make a submission to the inquiry. The submission was heard “in secret” because Nandor’s involvement as part-owner could mean petty politics prevailing over an honest discussion.

The Hempstore’s submission focused on repealing the ban on cannabis pipes and bongs, arguing they are harm reduction devices, and a draft law written in genuine legalese was provided.

Barbara Disley was up next for the Mental Health Commission. She noted that well planned public health initiatives were entirely missing. The focus was on the illegality and not on education, and there was no inter-agency cooperation.

John Riddell called for zero tolerance policies and claimed better education is possible without changing the law, “like we educate against drink driving without legalising it.”

This argument, of course, ignores that there is no victim when it comes to using cannabis, and that drinking without driving is perfectly legal for adults. Rather, it is having laws that deal only with problematic behaviours such as juvenile use and drink driving that clearly define what is acceptable and what is not.

Then the time came for my own presentation, on behalf of NORML New Zealand. It was immediately obvious Lynda Scott did not want to even see me - she held the lunch menu up in front of her face during most of my submission.

I repeated our call for an amnesty on cannabis arrests, and again the committee showed little interest. I discussed international trends and advocated a system of Dutch-style cannabis cafes. Adults should be free to smoke pot and grow their own, the burden of proof for cannabis cases should be returned to the prosecution, the search provisions of section 18 should be repealed, and cannabis criminal records wiped. At least I got to say it to their faces, and that in itself was satisfying.

Nathan Kennerley said harm minimisation would only be achieved “when a more reasonable and rational education policy is implemented that doesn’t overplay the dangers of cannabis to people who it to be fairly safe, thereby diluting the messages about more dangerous substances.”

Brodie Andrews has campaigned for marijuana law reform probably longer than anyone else in the country. His submission was a thesis in length and detailed a huge list of police corruption and dodgy drug “education” by the likes of FADE and DARE.

It has been obvious from the start of this inquiry that with the exception of Nandor, cannabis is a very abstract thing to the committee members. Brodie decided it was time they met the cannabis plant we love and put a skunk seedling on the table. It sat there throughout the presentation by Auckland University’s Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit, and didn’t corrupt anyone near it or make anyone go crazy. When we eventually broke for lunch a thoughtful clerk followed Brodie out with the pot plant and supplied it back to him.

APHRU leader Sally Casswell was seated right next to the live cannabis plant and said - with a straight face - that cannabis prohibition is a strong deterrent because apparently it makes access harder and keeps use hidden away.

The APHRU submission aimed to “draw attention to the benefits of the current prohibition policy on cannabis.” Unusually for an academic submission, APHRU used emotive arguments well outside it’s sphere of expertise, for instance, making recommendations about how to combat organised crime, and raising doubts about not being able to create a “knowledge economy” if we reform the cannabis laws. In this regard they seem to have overlooked the Netherlands, which has the highest level of educational achievement in the world and a per capita income much higher than New Zealand’s. The Dutch also have a cannabis use rate much lower than here, despite - or perhaps because of - their “liberal” drug policy.

Sally Casswell did more than just forget the Dutch experience, she ignored it. She said we cannot compare our data with theirs because they are “different”. They may speak another language, but like us they are a Western democracy with a fairly conservative populace. The APHRU submission played down the huge costs imposed by the current law, and merely recommended more diversions and formal warnings for cannabis use. They advocated enforcement be “carefully targeted” on organised crime. Graham Watson, who has just been appointed manager of the ACT Party, represented the Auckland University Norml club and argued for a regulate-and-tax approach that would take the cannabis industry out of the hands of criminals.

“A model of regulated or controlled supply is proposed as the most effective public health and health promotion strategy to minimise the use and harm associated with cannabis. The single most harmful thing about cannabis is the current legal status.”

Christchurch October 17

The Christchurch hearings had already been postponed once in September, so it was with great relief that on October 17 we finally got the chance to present our arguments to the seven MPs sitting round the table that day. The hearing was notable for two things. First, was the overwhelming body of submitters who wanted to see the current prohibition of cannabis ended.

Second, was the complete absence (noted at one point in the day by Chairperson Judy Keall) of Roger Sowry. He’d bothered to fly down to the Garden City with the rest of them but chose not to attend the hearings! Fellow National MP Dr Lynda Scott arrived late and spent large portions of the day absent from the room attending to other business. One truly has to wonder how these two are going to be able to make informed decisions on this matter when they’re not present to hear the full weight of the evidence!

The first submission was Dr David Fergusson from the Christchurch School of Medicine. Dr Fergusson’s submission was based on the Christchurch Health and Development Study, which he heads. The study tracked 1265 children born in Christchurch in 1977 until the age of 21. It found that 70% of the subjects had used cannabis at least once, with 23% having used it more than 100 times.

Dr Fergusson reported that while cannabis might have harmful effects on a minority of heavy or vulnerable users, there was little evidence to suggest occasional use of cannabis was harmful. The biggest harm associated with cannabis use, he said, was the risk of criminal conviction, and he called for cannabis policies that avoided criminalising people when they posed no risk to themselves or others.

He said that the survey results indicated that the prevalence of cannabis use amongst young people is approaching normative and that “in effect, cannabis has legalised itself”. Dr Fergusson also noted that there were misleading exaggerations in drug education regarding the negative outcomes of cannabis use. Very few of those studied reported adverse effects from cannabis”, he said. Furthermore, from the cohort of 1265, only 3 had ever been admitted for psychiatric care. “Cannabis use”, he said, “does not increase the frequency of symptoms [of psychosis]”. Dr Fergusson noted that “occasional cannabis use is as harmless as anything can be”.

Blair Anderson was up next. He noted most pertinently that prohibition has muddied the social waters, and that when there are children under those waters drowning, we can’t see where they are to reach down and save them. “The Dutch model is more effective because the more moderate messages are actually reaching the kids”, he said.

Jeff McIntyre from the Youth Trust said that prohibition by itself did not work - “the level of cannabis use continues to climb in New Zealand. The current legal framework does little to deter use” - but called on the Committee to adopt the Swedish model of “coercive care”. In reply to a question though, Mr McIntyre admitted that the Swedish system required huge funding and resourcing.

Lincoln University Students Association Vice President, Greg Henderson, told the Committee that the view of the LUSA was that cannabis should be decriminalised but not legalised at this stage, which they felt was too sudden a leap. The current laws were not working and there should be a system of prevention and care rather than punishment. Jach Heremaia, started using medicinal cannabis six years ago, successfully replacing prescription drugs, and appeared before the Committee proud, confident and focused.

Another proponent of med pot was Neville Yates who has been disabled since the age of 14. He used to be on a plethora of prescribed narcotics to alleviate his suffering and became severely addicted. He weaned himself off hard drugs using only cannabis, but was imprisoned for cultivating a personal amount of his medicine. Mr Yates called for a moratorium on all med pot users so that they can present their stories to the inquiry without fear.

Vincent Williams, an industrial chemist, noted that prohibition only encouraged more dangerous smoking practices. He often came across people who used dangerous solvents to produce more concentrated forms of cannabis such as hash oil. Solvent residues ended up in the oil which were then being inhaled by users. “Making a thing illegal is not good control”, he said, “when alcohol was illegal, more people drank meths”.

Judith Hyndman’s son started using cannabis at age 13. Her daughter notified the police, but Ms Hyndman was dissatisfied that the system was not punitive enough on her son. He is now 21, still smokes cannabis, holds down a full time job but is estranged from his family. She blames this separation solely on his use of cannabis.

Tristan Swain from the Christchurch Youth Health Centre said cannabis is a health issue not a criminal one. He was aware of “lots of people” who use cannabis therapeutically. He said that while cannabis was more likely to be harmful to young people than adults, he “struggled” to find examples where cannabis had caused the loss of motivation.

Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party Deputy Leader, Mike Britnell, and Media Officer, Stephen McIntyre, presented the submission for the Christchurch branch of the Party. In a document entitled the Marijuana Matrix, Mr Britnell presented a picture of what shape regulated availability of cannabis would take.

Mr McIntyre presented the results of an unofficial survey of cannabis growers and dealers nationwide. Eighteen people were asked: “how will the nature of your business change when cannabis is fully regulated?” All but one answered that they would get a license to grow and/or open an outlet, go legal, stop being so paranoid and start paying taxes. The last person said he “might go legit”.

Hagley-Ferrymead Community Board member Yahni Johanson said the current cannabis prohibition laws created injustice for young people and should be changed.

Christine Mitchell said that it is now “normal” in New Zealand to smoke cannabis, and that she personally would prefer her children use cannabis than drink alcohol.

Dr Fraser Todd from the National Centre for Treatment Development echoed the sentiment of Dr Fergusson that there is little evidence of harm from occasional cannabis use. He said: “Coercion is a very negative thing to do and is unlikely to get good outcomes”.

Warren Bryson from Christchurch NORML related an incident from personal history which clearly illustrated the violent nature of the cannabis black market. He noted that people very nearly died in his story and that in reality there are individuals killed every year in this country as a direct result of cannabis prohibition - Phil Cowan’s case being the most recent example.

--

So what’s next?