 | NORML News: Debating Cannabis |
 Nandor presents the facts, Jim & Matt promote themselves, & Dunne doesn't show up. By PHIL SAXBY, NORML News Summer 2003-4
Recent months have seen a flurry of public debates about cannabis law reform.
Sukhi Turner, Mayor of Dunedin, chaired the first one on 10 October. Later that month Nandor Tanczos debated Jim Anderton in his Wigram electorate (Christchurch). Also in Christchurch, Tim Barnett hosted a public forum on cannabis policy and in November another MP from the Progressive Coalition (Matt Robson) accepted Nandor's standing invitation to debate cannabis policy with any MP, any time.
The debates continued in December with Jim Anderton debating Nandor in Ohariu - the electorate of Peter Dunne, who had refused to attend.
Its important to realise that these debates confirm that cannabis policy is still a hot issue. Around 200 people attended the Wigram debate, which received television coverage. Cannabis will again be an issue in the 2005 election, and the MPs know it. Labour MPs especially are aware that cannabis policy must be addressed - and that Peter Dunne is not likely to have the power to stall the process after 2005.
Jim Anderton desperately needs to find issues to bump his support up above 1% and so is willing to debate Nandor again and again. Reports from these debates are clear - Jim relies on prejudice and ignorance to carry his argument, where Nandor has all the facts and figures to prove his case. Yet, like Peter Dunne, Jim and his mini-party are relying on media reports and sound-bites to appeal to a different audience, already hostile or fearful of drug use.
Does it matter if sometimes these debates get noisy? Some media reports ignored the debating and gave a bad impression of the audience. In the end, these reports are probably not important in changing people's minds or votes. What is more important is that the debate is seen to be happening.
The big risk for prohibitionists like Anderton is that trying to exploit the issue can backfire. Anderton may get some cheap publicity on the night but a law reform argument may emerge from unexpected quarters, stimulated by the debate or the publicity surrounding it.
For example, soon after the Christchurch debate, under the headline "Cannabis ruling 'lost chance' " the local Press quoted Dr Fraser Todd, senior lecturer at Christchurch School of Medicine saying "I think they're missing an opportunity to look at dealing with health issues around cannabis a little more proactively". He also said that telling young people cannabis is more harmful than legal drugs, when many use it and know it is not, risks them disregarding the message about other more harmful drugs like speed (methamphetamine)."
In Auckland, Sally Casswell, New Zealand's most well known researcher on drug policy, supported law reform at the Matt Robson debate. New Zealand drug policy experts are needed in the wider debate, and many of them are aware of the failings of prohibitionist policies.
So, these debates are important and represent a new stage in the reform process. Jim Anderton and Matt Robson may double their present voting support (from 1%) - but along the way, the truth comes out!
|
|
|
|
| |
| Login |
|
You can register for some special extra features. | |
|
