Friendly warning and disclaimer: These forums are provided for the thousands victims of prohibition who form the pot community of Aotearoa for discussion of marijuana-related issues. NORML reserve the right to delete off-topic posts. The views expressed in any forum are solely those of the contributor and not necessarily approved or endorsed by NORML New Zealand Inc.
Joined: Oct 27, 2004 Posts: 237 Location: Dunsterdam
ALCP launch Dunedin North campaign Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:58 pm
Tuesday, 17 June 2008.
Media Release: Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party
ALCP launch Dunedin North Campaign
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party (ALCP) has announced that politics student Julian Crawford will stand as their representative in Dunedin North for the 2008 General Election. Mr Crawford is currently in the last year of study for a BA. he is the webmaster for the ALCP and has been involved in the cannabis law reform movement for many years. Mr Crawford has also received a state-funded legal education, having been prosecuted for cannabis three times in the past 5 years.
“It is sad to see so many people victimized by a law which has no justification. There is no reason why people should be in prison for cannabis. Cannabis is a wonderful herb which is loved around the world. Many people of all ages gain relief thanks to marijuana’s therapeutic effects, This medicine should not be denied to healthy people let alone sick and pain-stricken individuals. Thankfully the tide is turning and the cannabis laws are rapidly becoming an ‘ass’. Those with the courage to come out of the grow-closet and bring cannabis culture out into the public arena deserve a lot of respect, for they are rapidly making the cannabis laws unworkable.”
Mr Crawford will formally launch his campaign tomorrow (18/6/0 at Otago University, where he will address the weekly 4-20 protest. He will be outlining the party’s election policy as well as encouraging supporters to make sure they are enrolled.
“Four-twenty protest groups have shown a friendly and responsible attitude towards the public. Clearly cannabis users are not the criminals they were once supposed to be but rather a legitimate sub-culture that deserves the rights of ordinary citizens. These social gathering would be ideally accommodated by Cannabis Café proposals made by the ALCP. Under ALCP policy, Adult customers would be able to buy small amounts of cannabis (subject to GST) from licensed café outlets.”
“I am excited to be contesting this seat and I look forward to meeting many supporters of cannabis law reform over the next six months. I was very pleased to see that Pete Hodgson legalized medicinal marijuana during this term of parliament. If elected to parliament I will look to build on this success.”
For more information about the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party visit: www.alcp.org.nz
The cannabis laws have always been seen as an "ass" by cannabis smokers (in my time at least).
What's happening is that more and more people are realising that they are an ass (hopefully).
Whether that's happening "rapidly" is debatable, although there has been quite a bit of action lately with the OU Norml 4:20 and the Cannabus.
I guess we'll have a better idea of the pace of change when the election results come out.
Secondly, why Cannabis Cafes?
I can understand that that is how they do things in the Netherlands, but we live in New Zealand.
Can't the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party promote an indigenous solution to our cannabis problem?
Legalised Tinny Houses maybe .
But seriously, why cannabis cafes when most people will be going there to buy cannabis rather than drink coffee? Some cafes will then have to be R18.
And what about the Smokefree legislation? It seems unrealistic to expect that regulations applied to cannabis smoking or sales will be more liberal than those currently applied to tobacco.
In that regard, I heard something on the BBC this morning about cannabis cafes in the Netherlands and their soon to be imposed smoking ban (no tobacco smoking in public, apparently). The person interviewed said that they did not know how the law would be applied to cannabis smoking, although he did point out that it was still illegal to smoke "hashish" outside in the Netherlands when the reporter mention that English pubs had providing outdoor smoking areas.
It will be interesting to see what happens there. The person interviewed saw the Dutch smokefree law as unenforceable whereas it has been enforceable here.
The Party Pill shops could be a good blueprint for Cannabis shops.
IMO it was a big blow for CLR that BZP party pills were outlawed because I saw cannabis fitting nicely into that Class D category and regulated R18 Cannabis (Head?) Shops being the outlets.
Maybe expand SOG ("For all your cannabis needs").
Anyway, BudBeard, I'm not meaning to be hypercritical of your announcement but just floating a few ideas.
I hope you are successful with your campaign.
Re: ALCP launch Dunedin North campaign Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:02 pm
“I am excited to be contesting this seat and I look forward to meeting many supporters of cannabis law reform over the next six months. I was very pleased to see that Pete Hodgson legalized medicinal marijuana during this term of parliament. If elected to parliament I will look to build on this success.”
Um there something that changed without anyone knowing? or have i been asleep?
Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 1344 Location: Nelson area
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:17 am
Congratulations Julian for standing. It's great to see someone from the NORML forums (been posting since 2004) Standing for their convictions.
I remember first hearing of Julian when he was unfairly arrested by the Nelson (undi-cover) police during a cannabis protest on the steps. And then got to know him through mutual friends. Julian has done great work for ALCP on the website.
Julian you are an inspiration for today's generation who sadly seem to be affected by the apathy of our attract/distract controlled society.
If ALCP could get some one to stand in every electorate then they would only have to guarantee 2000 (out of 35,000) party votes to ensure that we reach the 5% threshold.
Make us all proud Julian and go out and Cream North Dunedin for ALCP.
potshots wrote:
Secondly, why Cannabis Cafes?
I can understand that that is how they do things in the Netherlands, but we live in New Zealand.
Can't the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party promote an indigenous solution to our cannabis problem?
Legalised Tinny Houses maybe .
But seriously, why cannabis cafes when most people will be going there to buy cannabis rather than drink coffee? Some cafes will then have to be R18.
"Cannabis cafes" is just a term potshots. Surely Chris would be wanting to turn the Hemp Store into a cannabis outlet when regulation finally rolls on. Does that mean he'll have to serve coffee I hear you ask. In a word, NO. Will we see Star bucks selling cannabis? NO. "DUTCH-STYLED COFFEE SHOPS" is just a term to set some parameters. Netherlands cannabis outlet design seems to work (I'm sure once were in, we'll have to take a junket over to see for ourselves hahahahaha ), so it makes sense to utilise the only non-prohibition design, rather than start from scratch. I'm sure that it will be modified to a point to suite New Zealand's society.
ALCP uses the term to emphasise the fact that we don't want cannabis to be sold in your local supermarket, diary or pub. We can not just go around saying "Prohibition is unfair, legalise cannabis" we need to offer an alternative to prohibition (Unless you want to see open legalisation where BIG BISINESS runs advertising on T.V., Radio, Magazines, Bill-boards, Sales, specials, sponsoring sports. Then taking the PROFITS OFFSHORE).
But I would have thought that this was obvious.
Steven[/b] _________________ Regulation will set cannabis free
Freedom's just a TICK away - VOTE Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 2008 then everyone's a winner
Contact me: steven@alcp.org.nz Party website http://www.alcp.org.nz
Obviously not, steveoh.
The only thing that appears obvious to me is that you assume that because you know what you mean then everyone else will know what you mean as well.
steveoh also wrote:
"Cannabis cafes" is just a term potshots. Surely Chris would be wanting to turn the Hemp Store into a cannabis outlet when regulation finally rolls on. Does that mean he'll have to serve coffee I hear you ask. In a word, NO. Will we see Star bucks selling cannabis? NO. "DUTCH-STYLED COFFEE SHOPS" is just a term to set some parameters.
It seems to me that if someone uses the term "cannabis cafe" then they obviously mean a cafe from which small amounts of cannabis can be bought.
It does not seem obvious to me that it might mean something else, otherwise how do we know what the ALCP means when it talks about "cannabis cafes"? "Cannabis cafes" could be just about anything under your definition providing "big business" isn't sending the profits offshore.
Anyway, it seems to me that the term "cannabis cafes" doesn't establish many parameters at all.
"Specialised R18 cannabis shops" seems to be a better description IMO.
And steveoh wrote:
Netherlands cannabis outlet design seems to work (I'm sure once were in, we'll have to take a junket over to see for ourselves hahahahaha ), so it makes sense to utilise the only non-prohibition design, rather than start from scratch. I'm sure that it will be modified to a point to suite New Zealand's society.
Yes, cannabis cafes worked for the Dutch, which is exactly why I think the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party should develop an indigenous policy that would be more likely to work here.
The Netherlands is a very different country to New Zealand.
The Netherlands is densely populated compared to NZ (4 times as many people in a country 1/8th the size).
It also has (or possibly had) the world's largest port.
It shares borders with Belgium and Germany, France and Luxembourg are reasonably close, and the UK and Denmark are only a ferry ride away.
The Netherlands is also part of the virtually-borderless European Union.
On the other hand, NZ borders no countries and is thousands of kms from it's nearest neighbour.
I would also challenge your claim that the Dutch cannabis cafes system is "the only non-prohibition design" in the world.
My understanding is that there are several European countries (Switzerland and Spain spring to mind) that now have a more relaxed attitude towards cannabis use than we do.
It is also worth remembering that cannabis use is still illegal in the Netherlands so their system is not strictly "non-prohibitionary".
Finally, steveoh wrote:
ALCP uses the term to emphasise the fact that we don't want cannabis to be sold in your local supermarket, diary or pub. We can not just go around saying "Prohibition is unfair, legalise cannabis" we need to offer an alternative to prohibition (Unless you want to see open legalisation where BIG BISINESS runs advertising on T.V., Radio, Magazines, Bill-boards, Sales, specials, sponsoring sports. Then taking the PROFITS OFFSHORE).
To be honest, steveoh, given a choice between the current system of controlling cannabis use by arresting people and "big business" selling it in supermarkets before taking their profits offshore, then I would have thought it obvious that the latter option is the much lesser of the two evils.
After all, if someone objected to the profits going offshore, then I presume that the ALCP would have no objection to them growing their own cannabis.
steveoh and BudBeard,
Have either of you read the 2003 Health Select Committee's Inquiry into Cannabis Use?
One of the interesting points within it is the fact that none of the 552 submitters supported Option C: Prohibition with expediency principle, which is "the situation that currently exists in the Netherlands."
On the other hand, 52.3% of the submitters supported Option G: Legalisation and regulation (cannabis available on the open market, like alcohol and tobacco) plus 1.3% supported Option H: Free Trade (cannabis available on the open market, "like bananas").
After Option A: Prohibition (the status quo) with 17.5% support, Option F: Partial Prohibition (grow-your-own but no sales) was the 3rd most popular with 7.1% support.
Could be something to think about if you are after the popular vote.
Having said that, the report did note under Option C: Prohibition with expediency principle that: "The lack of support for this model among submitters may be because few recognise that this is the actual legal position in Holland, although it could also be because submitters believe that proper regulation above board is required. It is notable that some 1,500 submitters signed a form letter calling for 'Dutch style coffee shops'."
However, in Appendix C it says the HSC received 1771 postcard-type submissions plus another 207 similar form submissions.
Also the penultimate sentence of the form submission simply reads "I support the introduction of Dutch-style cannabis cafes" and is the only mention of cannabis cafes.
Also under Disadvantages of Option G [Legalisation and Regulation] the report notes: "Disadvantages of this option are that it might result in increased availability, which could result in increased use and increased risk of harm from the drug. This policy has not been adopted in any industrialised country, although the Dutch model can be called a 'de facto' as opposed to 'de jure' legalisation regime, since it regulates the cannabis market in reality although not in legislation."
However, under Option C the report notes that "this is the situation that currently exists in the Netherlands, and has resulted in very low levels of cannabis use amongst youth and some of the lowest rates of hard drug addiction in the Western world."
And under Disadvantages of Option F [grow-your-own] it says: "Disadvantages of this option are that it might be interpreted as symbolising a position in favour of cannabis use, access to cannabis might be enhanced, and it may give rise to increased use. However, there is no evidence that it would increase use. In fact, evidence suggests that it would make no difference."
Apparently, official Government inquiries in Canada (1972), the USA (1972) and Australia recommended Partial Prohibition, and "until recently, such a policy operated to a limited degree in Spain."
Anyway, it seems to me that there is a lot of confusion about what a lot of the legal options actually are and what different terms mean, and IMO the 2003 HSC report does clarify the situation a bit.
I can't help but wonder if Partial Prohibition would have got more support if we had realised back then that Legalisation and regulation would be impossible due to the Dunne Deal whereas a moratorium on arresting recreational users and personal cultivators was still possible (and probably more likely).
Hometoad, currently no one is standing in South Dunedin so if you know someone thats interested let me know.
As for Cannabis Cafes, this is based on our policy:
"That provision be made to establish regulated R18 cannabis commerce, like alcohol and tobacco, but with no promotional aspects."
What the policy really is saying is that any retail outlet that is a) licensed to sell cannabis, pays GST and Income Tax and buys from a liscened supplier/grower will be within the law.
The reason I like the term cannabis cafe is because I'd rather have the option of rolling up on site and socializing with other customers, instead of just buying weed at the dairy and taking it home. As for smokefree laws, this can be accomodated the same way as pubs who have made covered beer gardens. _________________ Tick the Leaf - www.alcp.org.nz
Welcome to Dunsterdam - www.otagonorml.com
Great work Jules (I guess if you're running you might as well go by your real name here now, huh?).
I wish I was back in NZ to keep the Pulse going with you guys. Hopefully the election will be in November. Best of luck, make sure you keep us all here well informed with your travails!
yay go standing in the election. have lots and lots of fun
420 is a good platform for you there jules. otago police denying narks is one of editors picks on stuff.co.nz how many police resources are being wasted here? how many get wasted every day?
i especially liked attributing medical marijuana to pete hodgson. its making a presumed statement and challenging pete to correct it. and then more media and debate. perfect.
keep it high
t
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
at Otago University, where he will address the weekly 4-20 protest. He will be outlining the party’s election policy as well as encouraging supporters to make sure they are enrolled.
.
), so it makes sense to utilise the only non-prohibition design, rather than start from scratch. I'm sure that it will be modified to a point to suite New Zealand's society.
