by Metiria Turei
Next Wednesday is Members Day and there are five Green Party bills on the ballot that will be debated. Two are mine, one about Liquor Advertising and finally, our Medicinal Cannabis bill.
Despite keeping it back for some years (!) now because I have wanted it to stay on the political agenda, it is time to let it go to debate. The Health Select Committee has reported on the NORML petition and I think its time to have the debate in the House and get the issues aired there. I am a little unhappy about this, because I am not confident the bill will pass its first reading, but keeping it on the order paper won’t necessarily help either.
The Health Select committee kept their recommendations to Government to minimum:
• that it update the prescribing guidelines for pharmaceutically-based THC1 derivative medicines to include Sativex as a medicine under the Medicines Act 1981; and
• that it continue to make pharmaceutically-based THC derivative medicines available to treat serious medical conditions when traditional methods have failed.
In so far as the committee considered Sativex, the recommendations are fine. But the issue of accessibility and the use of the best medicine (Sativex is unsubsidised and very expensive and whole natural product provides more effective pain relief) were not properly dealt with and our bill fills that gap.
Our bill would allow for registered medical practitioners to prescribe cannabis to those with specific serious medical conditions, such as Alzheimer’s disease, arthritis, glaucoma and those suffering from nausea associated with cancer chemotherapy. The patient would be registered with both the Ministry of Health and the Police. They would be able to grow a limited amount of cannabis for their medicinal use, as prescribed by their medical practitioner.
Our Doctors Survey gave a clear indication that medicinal cannabis is a viable medicine for some patients. The Ministry of Health, in the select committee report says:
The Ministry of Health told us that the scientific and clinical evidence, while not overwhelming, supports the medicinal use of cannabis for the treatment of serious medical conditions when traditional medications have failed. It says that cannabis provides a broad spectrum effect… The ministry also says that the toxicity associated with excessive doses of cannabis is unlike that of the analgesics currently prescribed for chronic pain and disease, in that cannabis has a wider safety margin, with fewer short-term side effects.
In the years since this bill has been pulled there have been a variety of objections to the bill, some more vehement than others. I agree that the bill takes a very upfront and open approach to the medicinal use of cannabis. It is a system that enables a patient to easily access medicinal cannabis while maintaining a clear link to medical and law enforcement agencies. It maximises the opportunity for relief from pain and nausea suffered by thousands of New Zealanders. It is a bill focused on treating ill New Zealanders in the most compassionate way possible.
Published in Health & Wellbeing | Justice & Democracy by Metiria Turei on Wed, June 24th, 2009
More posts by Metiria Turei | more about Metiria Turei
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
can i ask why you are not being active in the court of public opinion..?
surely selling it there..on easily argued compassionate grounds..
..would be politics 101..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You people really should try and curb your book burning instincts. A ban on liquor advertising now, is it?
You seem to forget that we are your princpals, and you our agents. Otherwise, how to explain the fact that you dare to assault our freedom in this way; using the police as your private army?
As the saying goes, smoking is a lot healthier than fascism; as is drinking.
Of course, as a Capitalist, I’m supposed to stick up for your freedom of speech all the while you are using it to assault mine…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil u said: can i ask why you are not being active in the court of public opinion..?
Um, isn’t Meyt blogging about it here a start to doing exactly that Phil?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
toad..
..the bill goes up for debate this week..
..she has had the bill for ‘years’..
..and has been silent on the issue..
..i am talking about telly shows/wimmens mags..et al..
..to swing public opinion to demand it..
..sigh..!..do i really have to expain this to you..?
..aren’t you a paid political ‘operative’..?
..and ..um..!..would ‘too little..too late’..
..just about cover it..?
…you really think this is ‘enough’..?..toad..?..
..and the silences ’till now the right way to sell this bill to the public..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I would usually at this point explain to innocent readers that wat is an extreme Libertarian. However, his post does that most effectively on its own making further elaboration unneeded
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What would you call me Valis?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Wat,
MPs in New Zealand are meant to represent either the people who voted for them on the list, or the electorate they were elected in. Unless you voted for the Greens with your party vote, you can’t expect them to represent you, nor can you expect to tell them what policies to support. The Green MPs are not your agents, nor are you their boss (irrespective of the fact that their pay comes from taxation). This is just the way the system is set up. If you don’t like this, you’ll have to fight for a fundamental change in the way New Zealand’s electoral system works.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Earnest, sincere, stubborn, somewhat confused, certainly inconsistent.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
samiuela, as long as the greens are proposing/passing laws that affect the whole population, they are representing us all on some level.
Maybe the greens should be a single issue party?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
On second thought, as samiuela seems not to know what an extreme Libertarian is, perhaps I was wrong and should in future continue my public service announcements regardless
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Maybe the greens should be a single issue party?
Guess I forgot “simplistic”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Earnest, sincere, stubborn, somewhat confused, certainly inconsistent.”
Hey, I’m an ESSSCCI, or Esky for short.
I have realised Valis, that I am politically and culturally bi-polar.
It remains to be seen whether a balance will be achieved
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Insert joke about having a chip on both shoulders here…
Trevor
(Apologies to BJ)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gawd… When I was a kid Chip and Dale were popular… and my first name is – (only my Mom, my Brothers and my Wife use it). You can’t touch me with the lightweight stuff Trevor, I’ve had the lot.
Wat, at risk of repeating myself. Free speech is a speech to an assembled group or a discussion in a beer-hall or a guy standing on a street-corner with a megaphone. Advertising is not free. I suggest you check with the Dom Post for rates if you wish to do some. It does get around their 200 word limit quite neatly. Money should not have a voice in a democracy, PEOPLE should have a voice.
Prohibitions on advertising (as opposed to sale) of harmful substances DOES have an effect.
Nor do Green MPs have a responsibility to reflect the view of a Libertarian. If Libertarianz could organize enough support (over 5% in this country) you’d have specific representatives who would not be responsible to my views. They do have a responsibility to act to improve conditions for all New Zealanders, but they do this according to the GREEN concept of what those “improved conditions” would look like. I’d like to think that you COULD do it… if the hurtle were the 4% that was recommended.
Of course organizing a party that governs itself and has some sort of effective leadership is actually pretty difficult for people who worship the individual and despise government. This reflects the nature of the Libertarian fallacy. Good luck.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sativex – yes, I think they’ll swallow that but they’ll choke on grow-your-own.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I would hazard the suggestion that it is not in any way teh job of the MP to represent the population but instead for the MP to represent themselves and promote the policy they (or for a list MP, thair party) consider best for NZ, the citizens voting to support the MP or party they feel will most benefit themselves or the country as a whole based on their own ideology. Thus the democracy becomes representitive in form but the representives have no obligation to represent anyone but their own selfs opinions.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil – ..to swing public opinion to demand it..
You reckon it’s that big? Big enough for Metiria to nail that flag to her mast (given that that flag is a red rag to so many bulls******s)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I suggest that we Greens should quit yammering about meaningless changes to bad but working law and write letters to our local papers explaining “harm reduction”, pointing at Portugal and going over the difference between an addictive poison and one that is not addictive and has no known lethal dose.
There’s plenty to say. We’ve wasted enough time and effort arguing about BS already.
Libertarianz will I think, join us. They reach the same place on this issue.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
yes greenfly..i do..
..if metiria/the greens can’t ’sell’ proven pain-relief for those in the final stages of diabetes..(as just one example..)
..if they can’t ’sell’ that..on basic commonsense/compassionate/cited-international-examples..
..they are in the wrong business..
..this defines ‘no-brainer’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and what really p*sses me of..
..is that we are at voting time..
..and..despite years to do it in..
..we have heard not a murmer from metiria/the greens on this..
..i have said before this is politics 101..
“..Despite keeping it back for some years (!) now because I have wanted it to stay on the political agenda,.”
perhaps a little more ‘explanation’ of this fob-off excuse for inaction..
..is needed..?
(was if all down to just ‘fear’..?
..is the explanation that simple..?..
..cos for the life of me..
..i can see no other political/logical reasons for this consummate failure to engage with the public..
..on what is not a ‘drug’ issue..
..but an (easily-solvable) health issue..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and um..!..well said bj..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
specialist recommended pot as an alternative to codeine based pain relief but at $250 per oz (at least) it is just too unaffordable even tho it works!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
the ending of prohibition/the blackmarket would see those prices plummet down..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“the ending of prohibition/the blackmarket would see those prices plummet down..
phil(whoar.co.nz)”
Bloody hell! Phil gets basic ecomonics at last!
Now try applying that to the rest of the economy Phil and you will realsie the silly nonsense big State socialism actually is….
“On second thought, as samiuela seems not to know what an extreme Libertarian is, perhaps I was wrong and should in future continue my public service announcements regardles”
An “extreme” Libertarian….like an extreme socialist or an extreme Christian is simply a consistent one holding to and living by the principles of their belief or philosophy….its nonsense and a shallow smear.
Indeed if you are not “extreme” about your position then can you really be said to truly support it?
““I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
Barry Goldwater.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ah..!..james..!
a libertarian..?..i presume..?
a question for you..(two actually)
1) under your ‘rule’ what happens to the poor/sick/dis[posessed/sole-parents etc..?
2)..and re that piece of sh*t who killed that dog..
..is it true that libertarians would only oppose that..’cos the dog wasn’t his..?
..and that if the owner of the dog did that..
..libertarians would have no problems with this..
..’cos the dog is their ‘property’..
..is that true..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil,
There has been a reasonable amount of media on the this issue, including a tour on the Doctors survey… I cant make the womens weekly run a story and it is just as useful having others make it a public issue too with letters to the ed etc, so its not just seen as a green or a political issue.
We cant run the whole campaign from here. Both NORML and the Drug Foundation have worked on it. Whats been missing is the ground level activism that is also needed. You could just as easily help too.
meyt
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Letters to the Editor people.
I sent mine 2 hours ago. Pull together enough letters and the editor takes notice of the importance of the issue EVEN if the letter doesn’t see print.
Then the reporters come to ask Meyt.
letters@dompost.co.nz
Do it!!!!
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
meyt..thank you for answering..
..are you saying the 7pm circuses/nine2noon/q&a etc..
..wouldn’t want to talk to you about this..?
..have your press people ‘tried’..?
..and..
..”..You could just as easily help too..”
i do what i can do..
..at whoar/kiwiblog/here..
..with my resources..
..what else do you think i can/should do..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The patient … would be able to grow a limited amount of cannabis for their medicinal use.
It’s patently obvious what will happen when this is debated in the house.
Phil – are you supporting the bill and the details therein, or are you mixing a desire for general decriminalising in there? the ending of prohibition/the blackmarket would see those prices plummet down.. phil(whoar.co.nz)
If you are, you are asking a lot of Metiria, to go out into the community and promote the very thing that has (perhaps) hampered Green progress for so long.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
my first article was on 4th april..2005
http://whoar.co.nz/2005/marijuana/
i just re-read it..
..it still stands..
..and there have been many many since then..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..Phil – are you supporting the bill and the details therein, or are you mixing a desire for general decriminalising in there? the ending of prohibition/the blackmarket would see those prices plummet down..”
don’t [play thse games fly..i was answering the previous commenter..
..and yes..of course i am for the portugal model..
..(don’t yu believe what you say/preach..?..’prohibition dosen’t work’..)
..’cos portugal has proved that ending prohibition is win win..on all levels..
where is the courage of the convictions..?..fly..?
..and the passion to sell them..?
..why is everyone so ’scared’..of the truth..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My suggestion for garnering support from the media, would be to have patients who are: in dire need of Sativex and who don’t have a history of recreational marijuana use, front the campaign. There is a need to clearly seperate the two ’spheres’ in my opinion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and can you not read the zeitgeist..?
..everything is under question..
.many of the old certainties have been swept away..
..what better time to argue passionatly for the positive changes/outcomes..?
..that we believe in/have been fighting for….
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil – where is the courage of the convictions..?..fly..?
..and the passion to sell them..?
..why is everyone so ’scared’..of the truth..?
Well, do we want to pass this bill or not?
And are we going to employ winning strategies, or not.
Jumping in boots and all would be courageous, but, are we playing to win or lose?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – will you post your letter here?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and if you need further proof of how well prohibition works..
one midday news reported on a un report..
..showing young nz and australia..
..are the heaviest cannabis users in the world..
(..”..we’re number one..!..”..)
..the lowest..?
..the countries with the most liberal laws..
..go figure..!
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If I post it you should not copy it. They’ll notice if the get a lot with the same phrasing
Good point about getting patients to front some of the publicity, except there are none in NZ with the right to use it. Only some who would clearly benefit.
OK… This isn’t one of my best efforts (I have to be ANGRY for those), but it covers the bases.
+++++++++++++++
Why is prohibition of Medical Marijuana supported?
Doctors will tell you it is useful for Glaucoma, Diabetes.
Multiple-Sclerosis, Parkinsons and Cancer… (the list is actually MUCH
longer).
The status of the drug in NZ is prohibition, apparently a throwback to
our subservience to the US DEA in 1975. We should have known better
then. We DO know better now.
The question is whether prohibition of good medicine taken with medical
supervision, is sensible.
The “Legalization will come next” argument is empty. Portugal
decriminalized all drugs in 2001 and the result was a REDUCTION in drug
related problems. Harm reduction works. The only people who benefit
from the current laws are the gangs who control the supply (and the
quality) of drugs that are universally available with NO restrictions or
controls as a result. Supporting gangs is not in the public interest.
…but THIS law change is only about medical treatments!
Patients are suffering and sicker than they might be.
Why?
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks bj – naturally, each of us are able to pen our own. My letter to the editor count now stands at over 200. Only 2 have been ‘lost’ in all that time.
Nice line about the ‘emptiness’ of the Legalise argument. Of course, many will immediately go there. That’s why I’m asking Phil to be clear of what it is we want at this stage. I’ve no argument, Phil, with decriminalisation (at least for now), but let’s attain the first step before we go higher
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i accept the incrementalist nature of med-pot..
..but just getting back to the zeitgeist..
..when america is onthe brink of a seachange in laws..
..changes argued mostly on commonsense/revenue grounds..
..in that..in a time of shrinking government revenue..
..the double madness of pouring millions into pointless ‘enforcement’..
..and of giving all that taxable revenue to the gangs/blackmarket..
..once again..
..(given we are already ‘number one’ in consumption..eh..?)
..how are those arguments not equally valid here..?
..and how can now not be a’good time’..
..for a major push on this..
..yes fly..i do want to get ‘higher’..
..legally..
..after decades of it..
..i weary of the madnesses ofprohibition..
..and having to constantly p*ss into the wind..
..by having to state the bleeding obvious..
..time and time again..
phil(whoar.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Clause 11 should add a wry touch to the debate.
Clause 11 states the Police are to supply cannabis seeds to medicinal cannabis identification Card holders or their designated agents from stock seized during the course of law enforcement activities.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
go to rnz..
hear the ignorant blathering absolute cr*p on this..
to give mora his due..
..he is trying to present the portugal argument..
..there is some libertarian i have never heard of..
..and garth george..
..go..be gobsmacked at the depth/width of the ignorance on display..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Letter to the Editor (suggestions welcomed)
When you are suffering from severe pain, like the intense pins and needles diabetes sufferers feel in their fingers and toes or the unrelenting pain amputees experience, you deserve the best pain relief doctors can offer.
Sativex is the most effective medicine for such chronic pain.
Sadly, doctors can’t offer Sativex to New Zealanders because of an out-of-date law that excludes medicines derived from the cannabis plant.
It’s time to allow pain sufferers access to Sativex and other pain relief products, by changing that law.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bjchip,
“Wat, at risk of repeating myself. Free speech is a speech to an assembled group or a discussion in a beer-hall or a guy standing on a street-corner with a megaphone. Advertising is not free.”
Coming from an eight year old child, that would be very precious and sweet.
Coming from a grown man, not so much.
“Gratis versus Libre”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_Libre
You see, bjchip, the “free” in “free speech” is not referring to price, it is referring to freedom; to one aspect of liberty.
If you wish to argue that others have a right to censor your speech and, just as importantly, censor what you are allowed to see and hear, then you go right ahead.
Because that’s what we’re talking about here; the state censoring what you – a supposedly free adult – are to be allowed to see and hear.
Do you really consider yourself to be such a dolt that you need politicians controlling your reading and viewing?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Wat
The point I made during the elections was relating to democracy and there is a very REAL point to what I said that is not disturbed in the least by the varied meanings of “free”. You CANNOT have a democratic election if money affects the relative ability of people to express their opinions. When I said it then I meant it EXACTLY as it was said, and the moral force of any discussion of “free as in speech” is entirely wasted because if you want to have real democracy you have to lock out the influence of money.
THAT is well known and is accepted wherever democracy is actually practiced.
However, that is not the only problem with your expression of gratis vs libre. The other problem is that the right to free speech does not extend to advertising. You want to speak, fine. You want to assemble? marvelous. There is no “right” to use the amplifying effect of money to force people to pay attention to whatever you say. That is what advertising is all about and it is not “protected” speech. The state isn’t censoring books, it isn’t stopping articles from being published or opinions being expressed here or television commentators or any other sort of censorship. It is prohibiting the buying of advertisements.
Lets look at the specifics of the reasoning in this case.
The question of restricting advertising for an addictive drug is posed. The choices are four.
The first is that we can hire enough advertisement time of our own to cancel any message sent by the liquor industry.
This would be at the expense of the state and would come out of our taxes. It would be a hell of a lot of money. You have to match them dollar for dollar if you have an ad agency that as good as theirs.
The second is that we can continue doing nothing much and pay the price in medical and social damage to the society, including the deaths of innocent people at the hands of people under the influence.
This ALSO comes out of our taxes. The damage is not trivial. This is more expensive than the first option… particularly to the people killed.
Notice yet how the liguor industry is raising taxes and (indirectly) killing citizens?
The third is that we can prohibit their product entirely. This is a well known way of failing to do anything useful at even greater expense to the society and it does greater damage to EVERYONE’ s freedom. Because we have in our wisdom realized that most people can have a little nip now and again and take no harm at all. This is the most expensive possible option. We use it in our “war on drugs”, and its success is largely measured in the increased importance of various gangs.
Finally we can limit their right to advertise.
Note that there are no benign choices here. The requirement is to minimize harm to the society. That is practically a definition of why we have government in the first place. We have to balance a public interest and an individual “right” and the balance is NOT subject to the same moral imperative that drives the questions of free speech vs censorship. The restriction is on the amplifier, not on the speech.
You want to lump it all together so the society pays the damages that the advertising encourages? Libertarians are notable for doing stuff like that. It reflects poorly on their philosophy that they then complain about the costs and the taxes.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Far be it from me to give John Key National Government Inc any advice at all – but – by far, the one thing it could do to ensure another term is to decriminalise dak.
The harm to society perpetrated by the current laws amounts to class warfare. The sooner Aotearoa perceives drug abuse as a health issue and not a crime issue, the sooner the harm ceases. People with market minds will never agree, of course.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
well said BLiP – I wonder how far off we are being able to conduct referenda per e-mail – surely it could be done in a ratifiable way…
might avoid said $9m costs, and may just get a authentic reflection on how the numbers stand
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If the Green Party were serious about this bill why wasn’t NORML or the New Zealand Drug Foundation given any warning, it usually takes more than a week for emails to be read by politicians so we have absolutely no time to lobby politicians on this subject.
Is this more about ridding yourself of the cannabis issue now you are co leader of a political party?
I feel so let down by your party I feel you are now no better than the likes of Labour or National, neither of which really listen to those who vote them in.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why is it this is the only place that states you are going ahead with this bill, it’s obviously not very important to you or it would be in the media by now or even made it to your Green home page but alas as an ex ALCP member you have really let the side down, shame on you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ime the media are not a reliable source of truth or importance – this issue has been near the top of the pile for a long long time.
Some sort of decriminalization should be considered routine, as the law relating to thc is ethically way out of line, and has been criminalizing a large proportion (@10% I think) of Kiwi’s who are harming no one else – and then not even themselves.
The places in Australia where it is decriminalised have shown no health abnormalities – and in fact have achieved the goal of decriminalising individuals – as this country looks at locking people up in shipping containers – common sense, on this issue, heads in the opposite direction.
Currently we are funding a huge untaxed black market. By forcing Cannabis outside the Law, it therefore is distributed by people who deal in all kinds of illegal and seriously dangerous activities – we serve these people bread and butter money – and cars houses and whatever else they can skin off it. Hardly a credible course.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I found out about this bill going ahead on Trademe of all places!
How is the public meant to show support if its not in the media?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ – true enough. What will you do now?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Never vote green.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ Says:
June 26th, 2009 at 10:35 am
“If the Green Party were serious about this bill why wasn’t NORML or the New Zealand Drug Foundation given any warning”
Or GreenCross, the medical marijuana support group. I suspect they could have dragged out some patients to speak on the issue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MNiceGuyNZ – concentrate! I asked, “What will you do now?”
not, “What won’t you do?”
“Never voting Green” will only bring you misery and dissapointment. Why deny yourself happiness?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kahikatea: I am a member of Greencross too, I recently had a parcel from them intercepted by the police, I am still under investigation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly: What good has come re cannabis from the Greens?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I would like Metiria to step forward and explain to us why she is presenting a bill with no media coverage and the only information released is here on this blog? Is this something you have to rid yourself of to be co leader?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ: What good has come re cannabis from Labour, National, Act, UnitedFuture,Maori Party, Progressives – more or less than from the Greens?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Which party has consistently had cannabis related policy but hasn’t used it in coalition agreements?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ asks:
Which party has consistently had cannabis related policy
Why, that would be the Greens!
Being blocked every time by the likes of Winston Peters, Peter Dunne, Jim Anderton and any number of National/Labour MPs is the Greens fault, MrNice?? You WHAT?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Which minor party had more members get into govt than the others, therefore theoretically giving it more influence in coalition agreements?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Which party wasted it’s chances?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
fly..are you seriously defending how this has/is been handled..?
if not..please tell us how it could have been handled worse..?..
niceguy is making valid points..
..and you are playing wordgames with him/the issue…
i repeat..
how could ib done to make it more guaranteed to fail..
and metiria..
..if you do this…
;guarantee this failure..
..you will be tying a dead albatross around your kneck..]
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil said:
fly..are you seriously defending how this has/is been handled..?
To clarify Phil, by this do you mean the MedPot issue?
Mr Nice is talking about the broader issue I believe
Which party has consistently had cannabis related policy but hasn’t used it in coalition agreements
etc.
Am I defending Metiria’s handling of the MedPot issue? No.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly: You appear to be the Green representative on this blog, I ask questions, you ask questions back, want to continue with the word game or answer the questions, or is wasting people’s time a Green thing?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
whew..!..on the ‘med-pot’..
the criticisims of the non-handling of the general pot/prohibition issue by the greens are totally valid..
..btw..i see bj left a cogent pot-comment over at kiwiblog..
..i hope he donned full body protection..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ – my apologies for inadvertently misleading you. I’m no representative at all. I’m rank and file, sitting at home with the flu, taking up too much air-time. I’ll butt out (if you’ll pardon the smoking pun).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and I am sitting at home high as a kite on prescription medication awaiting a knee reconstruction – 21 days to go. Sativex would have been an option but at around $300 a week for the stuff I don’t think so, can buy an ounce that will last me 4 months for about the same price. Shame I am seen as a criminal for going down that path.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just to be clear, the Greens have never fornally been part of govt. from 99-02 they gave confidence and supply votes that were needed for the govt to remain in power. Since 2002, no govt has ever depended on Green votes to govern.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil
That comment went in almost 24 hours ago. Not one answer. Positive rating but it doesn’t have much of a readership and I probably need to repeat it near the top of one of his open threads… or if he opens one on this topic.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj..
the thing with kiwiblog isn’t the regular rightwing numbnuts who comment there..
..it’s the reading audience..
..like it or not..it has the largest audience in nz..
..which is why i fight/argue there..
..if it was just those ranting-….numbnuts reading..?
..meh..!..i wouldn’t bother..
..so..it would be a good counter to my more ‘impassioned’ soundings off..
..for you to offer erudite/tidy summaries of issues..
..we will studiously ignore each other..
..and you can be good cop to my bad cop..
..and because you can to or fro with the resident gibbons..
..in a way..it works better/as well as letters to a newspaper..
..and you would build a name there quite quick..
..i really think it would be worth your green-effort..
..to regularly contribute there..
..(9-10 am on open thread ‘works’ for me..)
..and hey..!..they’re ‘easy’..eh..?..most still have their knuckles still dragging on the ground..
..and remember..!
..always don full body protection..!
(you never know what you’d catch there..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
9-10 AM? I’ll keep it in mind.
I reckon that none of them wear lace-up shoes either.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why should cannabis be limited to those who are sick?
Why shouldn’t I be allowed to consume it recreationally.
While I agree with the bill (in that it at least is better than the status quo) it doesn’t nearly go far enough.
One hopes that ACT have the balls to support it as well. Also, with labour in opposition for at least another 2 1/2 years they have got absolutley NOTHING to lose by supporting it to select committee level.
Surely ACT, Greens, Labour and Maori PArty could see this debated in select committe?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Maori Party will not support it, being very socially conservative on such things, unless there was a conscience vote, in which case they’d split. ACT is no sure thing either. They are economic liberals, but generally not social liberals. Again, a conscience vote would see them split, but overall it wouldn’t be enough to pass first reading.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What do you think are the chances of passing such a bill and reducing harmful use of cannabis amongst young users?
zero.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Niceguy…don’t worry too much about greenfly, she’s a nasty passive-aggressive quite a bit of the time.
Funny though…you are being critical of the greens for slowing down on the push towards cannabis freedom, and I am constantly criticising them for being determined to push cannabis reform forwards.
Doesn’t cammabis reform have more to do with the libertarianz than an environmental party??
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Valis – why wouldn’t the Maori party support medicinal cannabis, given that it is very effective in the treatment of pain in Diabetes sufferers and Maori are prime candidates for that. We aren’t talking decriminalisation or legalisation for recreational purposes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bjchip,
What it boils down to is that you object to what other people are saying and are prepared to initiate violence to stop them saying it.
People like you should be stopped. By force.
-”Notice yet how the liguor industry is raising taxes and (indirectly) killing citizens?”
No, I must admit I haven’t notice anything of the sort. I haven’t noticed the liquor industry engaging in anything but perfectly consensual and peaceful trade with free adults.
What I have noticed it people like you believing you know better than the adults themselves what it best for them and being prepared to initiate violence to impose your will against them.
Proud of yourself, are you?
And when other adults vote to restrict your freedoms, are you going to be so damn smug and superior I wonder? Or it is a different matter when the plebs take it upon themselves to censor their betters?
Just who the hell do you think you are using the threat of lethal violence against peaceful and free individuals?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – did you nick some of wat’s marbles when you were at school together? He’s not going to let it go!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greengeek said:
“What do you think are the chances of passing such a bill and reducing harmful use of cannabis amongst young users?
zero.”
Being classified as a criminal and having to deal with criminals to get cannibis is “harmful use” which would be reduced by decriminalising marijuana. Those same criminals often have other drugs available too.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly, like I said, the Maori party can be very conservative. With cannabis, they have the same fear of “sending the wrong message to our young” that many other sectors of society have, despite the evidence that prohibition is a failure. While they might support the idea of med pot, this bill is about patients growing their own, which I think will be a few steps too far for them to go.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The opinion at the UN has changed regarding drugs since the recent symposium, it appears the Portugal model appeals to them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/un-backs-drug-decriminali_n_2 20013.html
Maybe those in our govt need to be made aware of this.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Valis – agreed. The ‘grow your own’ aspect will sink the bill for most MPs, not just those of the Maori Party. Why weren’t the two aspects (capsulated Sativex and home-grown-leaf) kept seperate? Winning the ‘pill bill’ should have been easy and would represent a positive gain. The immediate reaction from conservatives I spoke to about the bill and the home-grow aspect was a. It’s the Greens advancing their ‘Legalise Dope’ programme in disguise and b. patients growing their own will be in danger of being robbed of their crop.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Looks to me like the ‘Public Service Malaise.’
i.e. do nothing – that way, if anything goes wrong you can blame the forerunners. If you do something and it fails – it’s about the only way7 for a Public Servant to get demoted.
If you do sopmething, and it works – you will attract the envy and e4mnity of your colleagues – wioll cut you8r game of golf short toot sweet.
Therefore, the No1 rule of Govt:
Do Nothing
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I don’t know the answer except that this bill was written 4-5 years ago. It was Nandor’s and only later taken over by Meyt. Also, I understand that Sativex, based on an extract, is not as effective as the whole product, so that could have played a part too.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There is wide variation from plant to plant and from strain to strain in the chemical composition of cannabis. Sativex is one formulation, which is essentially a guess at the ideal combination of chemicals. It is undoubtedly a better guess than its predecessor Marinol, which only contained delta-3-tetrahydracannabinol. I suspect there’s room for years of future research as to the ideal combination of cannabinoids for treating certain conditions, and the ideal combination may well be different for trating different conditions.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If this is the only place the Greens are advertising that they are going to proceed with this bill, the absence of Metiria here speaks volumes. It appears to me that she is washing her hands of this issue now she is co-leader. Ministerial position 1, rights of medicinal cannabis users nil. Was her involvement in ALCP just a stepping stone up the govt gravy train?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Be a prat if you want, but there is no reason to ascribe personal corruption to Metiria as the reason for not fighting for this bill. It is not a bill that will pass, so the question becomes how much effort should be put into it now that could be better spent elsewhere. This is not a campaign that Caucus or the wider Party has identified as a priority. That position can be justly criticised without resorting to stupid personal attacks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just who the hell do you think you are using the threat of lethal violence against peaceful and free individuals?
Really? Is that something I said? No… it is something that you impute to me on the basis of your understanding of the state solely as a coercive force.
It isn’t SOLELY that, and until you wrap your mind around the depth of that issue you will never work out the problems that Libertarianism has with the real world.
-”Notice yet how the liguor industry is raising taxes and (indirectly) killing citizens?”
No, I must admit I haven’t notice anything of the sort. I haven’t noticed the liquor industry engaging in anything but perfectly consensual and peaceful trade with free adults.
Then I suggest that you haven’t been looking at the results of the choices that some people make with respect to alcohol. Some who are in fact not adults but who do get to watch those clever advertisements anyway. Overall alcohol is more damaging to the bottom line than any other single drug. It kills fools easily (wait, maybe that’s a GOOD thing? no… they all too often take a lot of other people with them ) . It stands behind much of the child abuse in the country. Worse than cannabis by orders of magnitude. WE pay for the funerals, WE pay for the ACC, WE pay through the nose for the abuse… and the ACC levy is increased by some amount that is directly attributable to our drinking habits.
So it is in the country’s interests to limit this abuse to the extent possible within a free society. It DOES impose a tax on you and it DOES kill people. Pay more attention.
The options in a free society are what I outlined. You have another one? Please bring it forward.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Protect her as you wish Valis but the simple fact of the matter is this: If you don’t put any effort in then of course its not going to get any acceptance. In your own words you are saying this bill will not pass, yet the party you protect has done diddly squat to promote it, it appears more just a vote gathering exercise at the expense of cannabis users. I hope after this bill is lost due to the Greens inaction that cannabis voters go somewhere where they will be taken seriously.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks I will, as I don’t believe her to be corrupt. You can say about the Party what you wish, but you should try to see the difference between the Party’s priorities and personal corruption.
My views are much closer to yours and I’d like to see us do far more on cannabis prohibition than we do. But my best judgement says that there’s no way a grow-your-own bill will pass in this House, no matter what we do. Of course you can take your vote to the ALCP, but cannabis law won’t change until the Greens are in govt, so it won’t help the cause.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I know where the Greens priorities lay, that’s obvious by news releases.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ1 – in your search for a champion for your cause, it sounds as though you are looking for a ’smoking gun’.
Have you a viable strategy for success? I’d like to hear it. It sounds as though you do. Something from the grassroots, or are they/we impossible to muster? What exactly do you aim to achieve? It’s important to come clean, as you will be accused of a ‘wider agenda’ no matter how reasonable your claim and if you drip-feed you real end-point you will be sunk.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly, I am currently under investigation by the police. They intercepted a parcel of raw leaf in the mail that came from Greencross, cannabis is the only thing I do illegally. I use cannabis because it is a better alternative to highly addictive opiates, look at Micheal Jackson!
Simply having the right to use cannabis as a medicine is all I want, without fear of persecution or prosecution, plain and simple.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ – You seem a nice guy and those things you want seem entirely reasonable. Only 19 days til your op. Good luck.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ, you have to realise that Wat considers it to be immoral for the state to interfere in people’s lives to enforce any values except for private property rights. He’s quite happy for the state to interfere to enforce those. I’m sure that if you were as one-eyed as him it would all make sense.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i would like to dissect this comment from metiria turei..
“..# Metiria Turei Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Phil,
There has been a reasonable amount of media on the this issue,..”
where exactly has this coverage been..?..mags..?..dates..?
..i have seen absolutely nothing..
..can you give us even one link..?
“.. including a tour on the Doctors survey…”
what is the ‘doctors survey’..?
..and is that ‘it’..?
“..I cant make the womens weekly run a story..”
..no metiria…but somewhere near your office..are your media-people..
..it is their job to go out and secure that ‘interest’..
..this has to be the weakest excuse..eh..?
“..and it is just as useful having others make it a public issue too with letters to the ed etc, so its not just seen as a green or a political issue..”
backing up your doing nothing..?
“..We cant run the whole campaign from here..”
this one has me grinding the teeth..
..you have done nothing..there has been no ‘campaign’..
..let alone a ‘whole campaign’..
..and hey..!..you are an mp..a party co-leader..
..you have been elected to do this sh*t..
..don’t try and blame us..!
..whoar..!
“.. Both NORML and the Drug Foundation have worked on it. Whats been missing is the ground level activism that is also needed. You could just as easily help too..”
and even more of the blame-game..eh..?
you have done/said nothing in years..
..and you sit there..
..blaming everyone else..
..and for what..?
like..do you feel at all bad..about this cr*p that niceguy..and other sufferers are having to still go through..?
..does nothing move you to action..?
..or is it as niceguy says..
..just all about your personal ambitions..?
..hey..!
..if it looks like a duck..quacks like a duck..
..it probably is a duck..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil, it would appear we are talking to a brick wall, no Green representative, or the person herself seems to wish to discuss this here, looks like a referendum on smacking is a higher priority.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil blathered
Phil: If you do not know what the doctor’s survey is then you have not been keeping up to speed.
Where is your credibility?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well Phil, I remembered this morning. So far nothing from the Dom Post, including no “points noted” so it is still “alive”. Need more people to write to this. Write-ins sometimes make a difference, but there have to be enough of them.
I have to agree that the release of the bill appears more of a deck-clearing effort than any sort of attempt to get it moved positively (particularly given the lack of effective notice given to the other people who have an interest in it).
Unfortunately this and many other things are (for me) entirely secondary to the problems with the environment as a whole. I just wish we could get TRUTH out of some government orifice without having to create a new one for said government. Applying this to present and past governments alike.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Maybe Wat will be for the medpot bill?
respectfully
B J
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Wat4Pot
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..Where is your credibility?..”
where is metirias’..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
btw..family guy on tv3 last night..
..had one of the funniest/clearest advocacies for legal pot..
..brian..the dog..managed to get the mayor to legalise pot in quohog..
..and there is this song and dance routine..in support of the benefits of pot..
..(tearing needles/’p'-pipes from addicts ..and (cheerily) turning them onto pot.).
..from brian and stuey..
..that is tear-inducing funny..
..and as i said..
..one of the best examples of ‘clear’ advocacy..
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh..!..frog..
..seeing as the bill is argued/voted on on wed..
..and there is no other ‘green party material’ on it..
..d’yathink you should/could bring this thread back to the front page..?
..wouldn’t want people to think you are ‘burying’ the issue..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil
Near as I can tell, when stated as I stated it, nobody really disagrees enough to post on it. Kiwiblog doesn’t seem to even notice that it is there.
Which may be the real problem here.
Reps won’t know what people really think.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Reps won’t know what people really think.
How many people have a well thought-out view on this issue, do you think bj (and Phil)? Aside from the fact that the bill is not just about a single ‘aspect’ of medicinal cannabis (the grow-it-at-home clause will cause many to throw thier arms in the air), most people are, as you and Phil are indicating, seriously uninformed. Is exposure through Woman’s Weekly and Sunrise going to help or hinder? While I agree that in order to succeed, sufficient resource has to be invested (into information dissemination in this case) and has not been here, as you describe, it’s no small issue and would take more than what you are calling for. Have the ‘grassroots’ done effective work toward the raising of positive public awareness? I’m not trying to deflect ‘blame’, just thinking that as a member of the general public, I’ve not heard anything much at all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well thought out? Probably 1 in 10.
I am just looking at the difficulty of getting the 5 in 10 who have POORLY thought out opinions to front up to the debate.
Either that or (from my current experience on Kiwiblog) 4 in 5 support it but nobody is talking about it because they do NOT care enough (why argue if you agree), and their representatives will have no clue about the level of support that is actually there.
Which seems to me more likely at this point.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..bjchip Says:
June 29th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Phil
Near as I can tell, when stated as I stated it, nobody really disagrees enough to post on it..”
that is good..even the knuckledraggers know we are correct/right..
..they have not jumped all over you..
..that’d be that ‘erudite-explaining/clarifying’ i referred to earlier..
..even if they know he is just acting..everyone is nice to the ‘good cop’..
and remember with kiwiblog…
..it isn’t the commenters that matter..
..it’s the readers..
(plus..i see you got more thumbs-up than i have in four years..)
..that’s all gotta be good..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..just thinking that as a member of the general public, I’ve not heard anything much at all..”
yeah..that pretty much sums up the efforts to date..
..and fly..for an issue that isargued on such strong pillars as commonsense/fairness..and most importantly..compassion/ending suffering..
..the light of day/publicity..
..can only be a good thing..
..(i mean..how can you not be able to ’sell’ that..?..)
..and i am still bedeviled by that question:..
..’what are metiria/the greens so ’scared’ of..?..on this issue..
phil(whoar.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yeah.. well THAT quiet isn’t what I want. They’re off arguing Rugby now so I dropped a reference to see if I could get someone there to actually front an argument so I can actually get it some column inches.
Otherwise it is pretty much the same as having it as the last post on the 25th.
Hardly noticeable.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – begin your comment on kiwiblog with,
“John Key is looking pained.”
Once the derision, that will come pouring down on your head for saying that, has ceased, you could gently introduce the idea that .. sufferers of extreme pain need Sativex etc.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil
IMHO this is just another cost of S59. Many of our positions are now difficult for the PARTY to argue because the general public has had its opinion of us re-shaped by that.
Now the leadership is afraid to take on any leadership role in anything but the most core positions on the environment or something we can pragmatically partner with National on. I think I understand the fear… we can’t afford further marginalization.
Yet as you and I both understand, this is a winning issue if it comes down to a debate containing any honesty whatsoever. It is an EASY win.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil – you are wondering why anyone/everyone is reticent about debating cannabis reform publically? Perhaps they recognise/fear that the moment you argue for medicinal use, the clamouring hordes will assign you to the ‘legalize pot’ camp.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly
I happily occupy the top of that hill and have defended it successfully many times. The Portugese experience and the backing of those notorious lefties at the Cato institute just make it that much easier. I can usually count on Libertarian support for the position and that describes most of the Kiwiblog regulars to a fair degree, as well as DPF.
The only people who don’t agree are those who don’t have neural processes advanced beyond the knee-jerk. This unfortunately describes most voters for Labour and National. Reducing them to incoherent shouting and insults is almost trivially easy, and usually is very educational for the audience.
respectfully
BJ
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj..last time i looked..
..you had seven thumbs-up..
..you are second comment on the general thread for the day..
..sheesh..!..
..(checked my thumbs-down lately..?..)
phil(woar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Enjoy the high ground, eh bj!
Agreed on the veracity of the argument and the frustration over the jerkers-of-knee, mind you, if that knee was agonisingly sore from some degenerative disease, you’d have the perfect ‘in’. I’ve a story, if you’ll bear with me…
I once stood as a Green candidate for the General Election, in a knee-jerky part of the country. During a ‘Meet the Candidate’ meeting, I introduced the decrim issue, getting the ‘jump’ on the audience and hecklers who were hanging out to make issue of it. Once my address was over, we all took a toilet break. Several of the leather-necks waited for me in the foyer to ‘discuss the issue’ further, saying, “I wish the Greens thought the same way you do” – I described how that was exactly how the Greens did think and the debate continued, o’er top of the stalls. I felt that the crowd had grown, and emerging from my compartment, discovered that there was now a sizeable crowd gathered, all ’sons of the soil’, all nodding sagely and in agreement with what we were discussing. It was a special moment (my best inside of a public toilet).
The point of my tale is: don’t argue the toss in a public hall when there are any number of public toilets around the country where real progress can be made! Nah, just joshin’ Talk to people in terms of how they will benefit from this ‘thing’ or how they (or their loved ones) will suffer without it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If this bill doesn’t pass then I suggest the National Party ensure there are wheelchair ramps on these new container cells….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Excellent post Greenfly.
Every vineyard in Marlborough mulches the prunings because it’s cheaper than building bigger storage dams or boring deeper wells and improves soil quality and quanity. There is even a groundswell of native tree planting based research showing that they attract the “right” sort of birds – insect feeding natives rather than fruit feeding exotics.
How can we use your strategy to protect waterways from dairy farmers?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think Kevin has answered my question in his latest post
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
the silence is deafening..eh..?
..and shows just what a farce/one-way dialogue it is here..
.the old ‘top down’..
..eh..?
(a.k.a..’shut up..!..peasants..!’)
..unbelievable arrogance..eh..?
..and makes a total farce of ‘green’ way of doing things..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
No one is trying to shut you up, phil. Its a blog, not a Party meeting, so its opt in and a very haphazard form of communication. That MPs sometime visit the comments section of their posts is good, but it will always be hit and miss. Your hyperbole will more likely encourage less participation, not more.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i am not saying anyone is trying to shut me up..so..fact wrong there..
..this is a green party blog..
..it has the imprimatur of the green party ..
..and mp’s post here..
..is it too much to ask for a two-way conversation..?
..this bill goes to its’ death on wednesday..
..i thought the green part was ‘different’/alert to the voices of those who vote them into office..
..am i wrong in that assumption..?
..and ‘hyperbole’..eh..valis..?
..nice ad hominem there..eh..?..(very ‘green’ of you..)
..and instead of just ad hominem..
..how about pointing out which of my arguments is ‘wrong’..and why..?
..try and engage your brain..
..tell me where/how i am wrong..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil, comments like “unbelievable arrogance” are simply over the top and pointing out that people won’t react well to such is not an ad hominem attack. “try and engage your brain” is a much better candidate for that.
I’ve told you why you can’t always expect a two way conversation. Sorry if that is unsatisfactory.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ok..so i am just a loud pr*ck..fair do’s..
so why no replies for niceguy..?
“unbelievable arrogance’..
..q.e.d..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil u said: so i am just a loud pr*ck..fair do’s..
Piripi Te Ure strikes again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
that’s quite clever ..toad..
(got some wholehearted green-nods for that one..eh..?.)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Toad! That’s hitting below the belt!
Phil. I don’t believe you are too strident over this issue at all, given that you are correct.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
looks like the Greens have become like the rest of the political parties sucking on the public tit, they only care about voters at election time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
To be fair, the Greens haven’t electioneered on this issue for a long time, so there’s been no false advertising recently on the level of priority being given it. But we’re still the only Party in Parliament that supports the sort of change you want.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Libertarians campaigned on cannabis last election, though they also had a different policy that contradicted their drug policy.
The Greens website: http://www.greens.org.nz/druglawreform
If it isn’t a policy of the Greens and something they are not striving to achieve, why do you have it on your website? Just there for vote gathering purposes?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why am I getting no response from the her, why am I just getting excuses by a Green lacky?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why is it the Green party has this as a policy but sees the lives of sick people as not being a priority, it would appear they would rather see us in prison rather than have equal rights to those who take mind bending legal pharma drugs who in comparison make sick people’s lives worse. The Greens suckered two ALCP candidates to join their cause when they first got started for the cannabis vote and now they are turning their backs on us, the Green party is now no better than Labour or National.
All these questions and not one answer from the person responsible.
Well Meteria, enjoy your political career, snubbing your nose at those who got you there in the first place should see your support crumble, but I guess now you are co-leader you don’t have to worry about that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
P.S please remove your drug policy from your website.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kei hea tou whakahoki e maangai?
He patai tika tena ne ra?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m with Mike E here – going for Med use only is a bit weak in many ways….it agrees that pot is too dangerous to buy over the counter whilst maintaining that a bottle of scotch is ‘armless.
Then what about Spiritual Practice?
There are people whose religion is discriminated again by this law
Mr Noice – lackEy….lackey; and you can’t be very intuitive considering:
a; the Green Party would assign someone to look after your fractious complaints
b; The person you refer to has probably, twice your IQ (from my reading)
c; ‘The Green Party’ is not a monolith.
d; Maybe you don’t get an answer because people can’t understand the question? kindly as etc
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Going for Med is possibly able to be passed in any parliamentary make-up.
That makes it a POSSIBLE policy.
Going for complete legalization would be better but cannot be passed unless a broad majority have been fully educated on it. The bill went in IIRC, as a member’s bill, not a party bill. That was done years ago by Nandor. It has survived for a long time and yet it is still viable.
Want to imagine a full legalization bill in today’s parliament? The education needs to be done. The lies about the consequences have to be pointed out. Cato did us a great favor by publishing. It’s all a very easy sell, but a week’s notice isn’t enough to do squat.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As it seems no response is better than some, the lackey will now butt out and find more productive work.
BJ, would you post a link to the Cato report please.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
By your command:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10080
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuyNZ – Metiria spoke and spoke strongly on the Greens stance on drug law reform on Q&A following her success at the coleader election recently, so she’s not maintained ‘radio silence’ on the issue. Demanding that the Greens remove their drug policy from the Green website doesn’t really ‘read’, if only because it contains much more than the MedPot issue and is in itself a constant advertisement for the Green view of drug reform. The bill hasn’t been presented yet and while you’ve already declared it dead in the water, it might be worth watching the response/result and working out an approach from that. Metiria does describe the lack of ‘ground level support’ and I’m wondering why that support hasn’t been forthcoming. Are we disorganised? Were we napping? Could it be that ‘we’ have our messages mixed? Listening to the protaganists, it seems to me that some want more than others and cannot agree on strategy. Do you have suggestions MrNiceGuy, that will make ’round 2′ of the battle successful? Switching your political allegiance
might satisfy some of your irks, but in terms of the final result you desire, I can’t see how that will be a positive action. If you were driving a programme to legalise medicinal cannabis, what would you do?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yer BJ point taken – I would be goin for a ‘Decriminalization’ policy, over Legalization – it worked real well in Australia – and honestly, I couldn’t really detect that any law had been changed as Police there had long since been persuing a copious amount of more serious crime.
I think you can get like, a Parking Ticket for it if you wanna be a noofy and smoke it downtown or in front of the local Blues, but otherwise – methinks it is much ado about nothing.
Unless a conviction for pot’s gonna make you cry – personally, I would likely take it as a good character reference
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Mark
yer – your
goin – going
Decriminalization – Decriminalisation
Legalization – Legalisation
wanna – want to
noofy???
Maybe you need to work on your own IQ rather than criticise others.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oh dear – kind as – means kind as you might be….
Yep my IQ gets plenty of excercise, but not by mendacity
I think I know why you get no answers…
I make plenty of typo’s and use plenty of slang too – but that’s beside the point, as you seem. Good Luck etc etc.
I too have better things to do than dangle dags – who you votin fer then?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Noofy: a person whose name indicates he has a particular nature when his behaviour indicates the opposite. Example: A horse named Gentle who bucks as though he has a burr under his saddle. Noofy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thar Fly; yes indeed – the vernacular is actually noof-noof
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I do not understand the argument that we cannot use marijuana for medical purposes because it is also an illegal drug.
When I had my aortic dissection event (which is terribly painful) I was only able to get any sleep because of my morphine injections. There were wonderful but I did not rush out of hospital looking for a fix.
I can see the attraction. Quite apart from the pain relief morphine makes everything look radiant and beautiful. The nurses used to bung it in then line up at the end of the bed and enjoy watching my face as my mind converted these three rather ordinary looking young women into the most beautiful women in the world. It’s nice to spread some joy around!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen, I have a friend who went to jail for growing his own medicine, when released he was prescribed morphine, after awhile that didn’t work anymore so now he is on prescription methadone, his life has gone backwards as a result.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Aw jeez Owen – post of the week, right there – please expand your heretofore unheralded talents as a writer
ps sorry to hear about the condition though – sounds like hell.
There is no logical argument against cannabis – just a bureaucratic chicken response. Ignorance is oft Fear dressed up as righteousness and backed by the zealot’s anger. All emotive, no science involved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen is right. There is no good argument against using cannabis as a medicine. It’s illegality as a recreational drug has no bearing on the discussion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Dom Post publishes an op-ed in support on the day of the vote. Yesterday would have been good. Not my letter though.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
link..?..plse..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – the Dom Post may well have published the op-ed in response to/as a result of, your letter!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
not published online it seems, rest of the media not a peep. Just shows how much effort the Greens put into things doesn’t it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shows how much effort the Greens put into things doesn’t it
Check out what’s happening in Parliament today, MrNice and ask yourself how much effort the Greens put in to ‘things’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Judging by the medpot bill, not very much.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thousand of children who get smacked, yeah a high priority.
What about the thousands of medical users of cannabis sent to jail every year? Sent to prison because they wouldn’t tow the line and take the pharma drugs on offer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How long has the Greens had a drug policy to bring some equality to users lives? How many years do you think medical users of cannabis have voted for your party in the hope of getting this equality? How many votes do you expect to get now you have shafted them?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuy – there’s nothing worse than talking into a vacuum, so..
despite my not being a representative of the Party..
I’ve some responses for you.
First – to clarify – are thousands of ‘medical users’ sent to jail each year ? It seems a very high number, almost improbable.
Can you tell me which other party has a MedPot bill before the house at the moment? Or plans to have one? Or has ever had one? Just interested.
Can you tell me which other viable, in-parliament party has been willing to wear the opposition that comes from championing the cannabis cause? Which other party has policy in support of the decriminilisation of cannabis displayed on their website? Which other party has or had a MP willing to declare that they use cannabis and were willing to do so in the public arena despite the opprobrium?
Just one or two things to consider MrNiceGuy
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ALCP
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How many MPs do they presently have?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly
I know that…. I just think they should have done it a day or two BEFORE the vote so that the drones in the Beehive had some time to get a whiff of the public opinion. I don’t guess that half of them are going to see ANY information before they vote.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MrNiceGuy
I don’t care if it is 1 or 1000… if we have a smidgen of data on the number I could be more effective. Truth is that I can make a strong argument if there is even ONE, but I haven’t been able to sniff out the data I need.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bjchip – indeed it should and they should, the drones. Now, in the absence of that whiff, we are relying on Metiria’s delivery. How good is she? We’ll see. My questions to MrNiceGuy were working toward asking why the ‘ground-force’, including the ALCP, haven’t done the ground work themselves? What is their raison d’etre? Surely, seeing the bill approaching, they would unleash their coiled energies and treat the public to an example of what unfettered passion can achieve? I heard nothing! No personal street-corner demonstrations of support, few (if any) letters to the editor (there was not much notice, but plenty for that form of expression). I’m not trying to deflect from the criticisms MrNice and Phil and you have made of the Greens, but the questions do beg.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ALCP, NORML and joe public all got a weeks notice that they were going to proceed with this bill, there has been no indication this was going to occur so it caught all of us by surprise. WE only found out about this from a post on Trademe of all places a week ago. All the effort that could be possibly mustered has.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A weeks notice is not much at all. The issue though, of medicinal use of cannabis, is one that could have been broadcast at any time. Was there not an ongoing campaign from these groups? Didn’t ALCP, NORML and individuals who are passionate about it have material/strategies ready to roll out at a moments notice? Were they keeping in personal touch with the MP responsible for ‘calling’ the bill? If they weren’t, perhaps next time around, they should. I don’t mean to criticize, because it may well be that a strong campaign has been maintained and all of these things and more were in place, so I’m just asking.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
your criticisms/questions of others are valid..fly..
..but in no way excuse the shortcomings elsewhere..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Quite right Phil and they are not intended to, as I stated.
Btw – how’s the battle for the minds and hearts of our bitter brethren over on Kblog going? Bj and yourself are putting up a calculated and reasoned attack, so I expect there is confusion. Glistening, nacreous pearls – heaving, bristling swine.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’ve been thinking green crosses and pseudo-vampires myself.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – be sure to turn out your trouser cuffs, each time you return.
This comment: Why champion this bloody weed marijuana is poetry and I’m looking for the aha! moment, when one of sloughs off a skin, sheds a shift and says, ‘Y’know, y’er right!’
Won’t
be
holding
my
breath.
Ryan Sproull’s comment – what do you make of it? He’s sharp.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
remember..!..full-body protection..
..at all times..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
full-body/good whine
[DPF: 100 demerits for the 'full-body' comment]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Looks like I am destined to be a criminal. Vote went like this: 34 Yes, 86 No
Please excuse my french…
Fuck the law Im going to continue using cannabis.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
hmmm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Looks like I will be a criminal, Vote was 34 Yes, 86 No.
Again I ask the Green party remove their drug ‘policy’ from their website.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I just heard Metiria Turei on telly saying that she was planning to rewrite the bill and put it into the member’s ballot again. Has this been her intention all along? Is this why she didn’t try to whip up public support for it before the vote?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If this were the plan, why were we not informed? Maybe the cannabis voters are keeping their party afloat….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nine years of green party non-activism/neglect on this issue..
..whimpers to a close..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My flatmate raised an interesting point the other day that I had failed to consider; “allowing medpot has the potential to be a beurocratic nightmare” and would be if users were allowed to grow their own supply under a otherwise unchanged framework. The only ways it could be made practical would be to eaither keep the production and distribution by individuals illegal and have the state provide it in a similar meathod to most otherwise illegal drugs or to completly decriminalise, or legalise, the consumption and distribution of the drug. Using the first method most of the medpotters will be rather unhappy, while the second method is alittle too controversal judging by how strongly the medpot bill was defeated.
Not that I would smoke the idiot leaf any more frequently than I do at present.
That said; im all for decriminalisation and even legalisation
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sapient – ‘idiot leaf’ – care to expand? My question: Could Rodin have carved ‘The Thinker’ if he were a smoker? (‘He’ being Rodin)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly,
Thus the ‘idiot leaf’.
Lol, i was wondering how long it would take for someone to comment on that.
I have decided as of 8:32 am that that is what I shall now refer to it as. This is because it is oft held that ‘weed is for philosophy’. But from my observations and personal experience weed doesint so much assist in philosophical discussion as make you so stupid that everything you say seems really profound.
Looking at it from that perspective Phil becomes so much easier to understand.
On the subject of the idiot leaf, I recently saw for the first time evidence of meth-doping in palmy, though maybe thats due to my very selective exposure rather than any actual shift. I find that scary. Interesting but scary.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘idiot prohibition’ i think you mean, sapient.
cannabis tends to draw out and amplify whatever is in a persons mind, whether logical or stupid (in my case mainly logical of course LOL). Dont blame cannabis for stupidity, it was there already.
However whichever way you look at it prohibition is an dysfunctional, invasive, unsafe and costly social control (or lack thereof)- idiocy / deceit in the guise of ‘common sense’…
the med pot case tends to loose sight of the big picture in that prohibition is a law and order farce which protects no one. cannabis is already freely available in NZ, is number one with teens (but behind your backs) and prisons are the biggest growth industry…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘National MP Jonathan Coleman, a doctor, said it would bring cannabis
into mainstream society.
“You can’t make out it is a good thing, we need less drugs in society,”
he said.
“We would be sending a signal that it’s okay.”
He said doctors would be swamped with demands for cannabis cards from
people insisting they were seriously ill and needed it for pain relief.
Dr Coleman, and other MPs, said there were prescription drugs available
which used THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.’
re-read: Yes you can have cannabis but only in the pharma form we got paid off for saying
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If you use prescription versions of cannabis based medicine its ok, if you use raw leaf for relief we will send you to jail.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Currently the only people able to afford Sativex are those on ACC where ACC pays for it. At a cost of approx. $900 a month what beneficiary or low income worker can afford it? Considering an oz of cannabis is approx. $350 would last me 4 months, guess which option I choose.
If politicians insist we use Sativex then subsidise it for heavens sake!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Also the current method of obtaining Sativex means it is basically unobtainable for many.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As posted on g.blog,
Green policy would see you “free” to grow your own medicine, but not “free” to bring up your kids in a manner that follows your own beliefs.
Selective socialism?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Weedeater,
Indeed, prohibition is more dangerous than helpful. A point I make an effort to argue whenever I have a community or health related essay possibility, one of my hobby-horses infact.
I would agree that weed does bring out underlying characteristics, as do all drugs. I would say that, as per my previous statement, it would seem to decrease cognitive capacity.
In the many times I have used this drug I have only once or twice felt mentally impaired, but that is because I myself am under the influence and thus the base-line shifts. Regardless of the person, they will be effected negativly, same goes for alcohol and tabacco; its just a case of susceptability to the phenomina.
I agree that the idiot grass can be wonderful for releiving pain, works better than the pills i am often seen popping, and i do love the effect when you lie down and close your eyes but, like alcohol and tabbaco, I just cant stand the feeling of impairment. lol. or the price. Being stoned all the time, seems to me almost as hell like as all the pain. But then again its not my place to make choices for others.
I wonder how effective a full on legalisation campeign would be.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The comment was made of radio Live news, that many MPs failed to support the bill because the list of maladies cannabis was purported to be effective for, was too long to be easily ’swallowed’ and they felt that more was being pushed for than was necessary. A shorter list might have helped a good deal, As with any delivery that is intended to convince, with the public or with politicians, short and to the point is the winner.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think you guys are viewing this issue from the perspective of outsiders. The green party represents the views of less than 10% of society. You are definitely on the outside on this issue.
While you may think you have cannabis use under control in your own lives (chuckle) the rest of society realises that cannabis use needs regulation just as alcohol, bad driving and child porn do.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greengeek, that’s exactly the issue. Cannabis is not regulated, it is simply outlawed. The Greens simply want to bring it in line with alcohol & tobacco.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
jarbury Says:
July 2nd, 2009 at 9:35 pm
> Greengeek, that’s exactly the issue. Cannabis is not regulated, it is simply outlawed. The Greens simply want to bring it in line with alcohol & tobacco.
well, not quite. we don’t want to saturate the airwaves with cannabis advertising like is currently done for alcohol.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kahikatea – yes hence the other private member’s bill that was debated last night.
Nobody from National was smart enough to realise that the two seemingly contradictory bills were actually pulling both issues towards the same endpoint. My word they’re stupid.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Comment from Tony on NORML:
The Nats blocked voted as per Tues Caucus.
Why,
not that they were all told. but although they became aware medpot al la natural was effective and safe they could not figure out supply.. It had a major fish hook , although the support for medpot was there they could not bring them selves to agree to cottage grows .. so it meant Sativex or Pharmac distributed imported medpot.. The HURDLE WAS they once made aware of the potential up take , and they realized it would very quickly be an approved medicine that would attract subside. The predicted Pharmac budget blow out scared them shitless.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Cottage grows reduces the bill on Pharmac….
As the uptake of Sativex increases, the use of other medicines would reduce.
Is the National Party made up of drongos or what….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)