Tauranga Act party member and former National party MP Bob Clarkson is backing Act leader Don Brash's call for a debate on New Zealand's marijuana laws.
Don wants the use of cannabis decriminalised, saying too much valuable police time is taken up enforcing a law that is flouted by about 400,000 people a year.
Act party leader Don Brash and member Bob Clarkson.
He raised the cannabis issue at Pakuranga on Sunday in a formal speech on law and order where he also set out a firm new policy enshrining the right to self-defence in the Bill of Rights Act.
Cannabis laws made criminals of 400,000 New Zealanders who were harming no-one except arguably themselves 'which is their prerogative in a free society”.
Don Brash's personal view is supported by Tauranga Act party member and former National MP Bob Clarkson, who says the subject should be debated.
'A law that everybody breaks seems to be a wrong law,” says Bob.
'I don't use the stuff myself. I don't use drugs; I find it's unnecessary, I get my fun out of life.”
It is a personal view and he doesn't know a lot about the issues involved – in spite of being Nandor Tanczos' neighbour in Parliament for three years.
Former Green Party MP Nandor is a Rasta and openly announced an intention to continue smoking cannabis following his election to Parliament.
'I sat next to Nandor in Parliament for three years and we had some robust debates on it,” says Bob.
'He wasn't a bad person, and he was quite intelligent – it's just that we agreed to disagree on some things.
'He made good sense on some of his arguments. I would like to see a robust debate on it. It needs debate there's no two ways about it.”
One reason for the debate is politicians are renowned for making pronouncements of subjects they know nothing about, says Bob.
Bob's main interests are building houses and industrial buildings and he's happy to admit he knows little about the issues involved, that's why he wants the debate.
But he adds the debate is needed because the current laws are being ignored by a large percentage of New Zealanders.
23 comments
Stupid Arguement
Posted on 26-09-2011 13:25 | By tabatha
Using the idea people break the law why not have open speed limit, no warrants, no registration as people break those laws as well. Brash is trying to gain votes and support from a minority group. The results of smoking cause costs for the Health system and from talking to some heavy users from the past they feel disadvantaged from smoking. Some will deny of course. Forget about elections they cost money. Brash's arguement on the money side is very weak.
Pardon?
Posted on 26-09-2011 13:46 | By Matt
"But he adds the debate is needed because the current laws are being ignored by a large percentage of New Zealanders" So is driving whilst using a cellphone, or speeding whilst passing a stopped school bus. Shall we scrap those laws too? What about making the use and manufacture of methamphetamines lawful too as the dope smokers will need to trade up to something a bit stronger after getting used to being stoned more often...
Bob Da New
Posted on 26-09-2011 15:19 | By Demandthetruth
This is an ACT - well stone the crows - a new cash crop for Tauriko!
Party vote bribe
Posted on 26-09-2011 15:55 | By Glen Clova
Brash is pissing in the druggy`s pockets for the party vote.As for Bob` opinion well that dos`nt mean much we know what he is like when someone takes away his toys
cheap shot
Posted on 26-09-2011 16:28 | By sojourner
I agree with all of the above; it is a cheap shot at winning votes, from about 400.000 voters presumably. Just because people break a law does not make that law stupid, useless, or unnecessary, it makes it a broken law with a lot of criminals doing the breaking of it. Who says potheads do not harm anyone but themselves? Having a 'robust debate' on any subject means being extremely well informed on that subject, which neither one of these vote grabbing politicians are, nor do they care to study the subject first before flapping their mouths. They should just shut up, use their brains and come up with something USEFUL! But that might be a big ask.
ALCP and ACT
Posted on 26-09-2011 16:58 | By dgk
I haven't seen any ALCP members surporting the ACT party as a result of this....I wonder why?
The usual dribble
Posted on 26-09-2011 17:17 | By handbag
Isn't it interesting...the comments made by people with no idea what they are talking about. I wonder, how many of these people take antidepressants, alcohol or other 'legal' forms of drug use. Many seem to blame the strain on the health system on smokers of all forms...but what about the abuse of antidepressants, who do not learn to cope with their emotions, end up needing stronger perscription drugs, counselling and at times be admitted to hospital...is this not adding a strain to the health system...not to mention the abuse of fast food...the list goes on. This is an outdated law based on old fashion morals, these so called 'morals' came about through myth and misunderstanding. Cannabis is a natural herb with many benefits, not just about the 'high' gained from it's use. Many studies have found benefits that can help with a huge variety of health problems. May I suggest the people who only see the bad in cannabis could try doing a little research themselves instead of blindly going along with the masses.
What if?
Posted on 26-09-2011 17:39 | By Tony
We just made personal possession an instant fine . We will never be able to tax it So with an instant fine at least we would get something to off set the cost ,
To by handbag
Posted on 26-09-2011 17:54 | By tabatha
Have you seen or heard from someone who started on Cannabis? I have been priviliged to hear an ex drug addicted, his words not mine speak and if he could have turned the clock he would not have been involved. He said that he started with weed (cannabis) and the habit grew and the need for something stronger took over. He was lucky someone was able to help him before he went right out of his tree. He also said that he knew of many others who had the same problem. Possibly administered in a controlled way fine, but that is far from the truth with this far fetched idea. I I said earlier and others added to it wipe all laws and go lawless shoot your neighbour, etc. Because this idea will only lead to it.
Just imagine
Posted on 26-09-2011 18:32 | By KiwiSteve
if pot was decriminalised, there would be a lot more people like Mr Brash and Mr Clarkson around. Don't just think about winning votes from Dopeheads, think about the harm dope causes - remembering NZ at the moment doesn't have a decent mental health service. How many more people can the Beehive hold???
TV3 CAMBELL LIVE POLL
Posted on 26-09-2011 20:21 | By onthelevel
DECRIMINALISE POT = 72% CRIMINALISE POT = 28% It's a no brainer really ! VOTE ACT and get a life.
To Tabatha
Posted on 26-09-2011 20:49 | By handbag
Yes, I have seen and heard from people who sarted on cannabis and yes, there are those who go on to use harder drugs, but this is not normally the case - but they are the usual words loudly said by some who do not see the bigger picture. It is very easy to blame a life a gone wrong on the use of drugs or alcohol, when in fact it could be their upbringing - lack of guidance, a lack of a job or any number of things that have happened to take a person down the wrong path. There are many people who smoke cannabis as simply a way to relax, like many who enjoy a glass of wine or beer (after work hours). Remember, this is about decriminalising cannabis not making it completely legal. This would mean less court time and less people going to jail, less money to pay out the tax payer. Let's not get it out of perspective.
Steve Crowe must be
Posted on 27-09-2011 09:13 | By Openknee8ted
ACT's head of election campaign?
At last a party with some BALLS
Posted on 27-09-2011 09:18 | By The Tomahawk Kid
What I do with MY life is nobodys business but MINE. What I do with my body SHOULD BE none of your business. YOU mind your business, and I will mind MINE. If EVERY person that smokes dope in this country stopped voting for the immoral political parties that make them CRIMINALS there would be a new political party running the country tomorrow. Unfortunately they are more interested in getting a share of other peoples property to worry about voting for and protecting their own RIGHTS. All of you who are happy to partake in your OWN choice of poison but demand others be diend theirs are nothing but Hypocrits. If these politicians were REALLY interested in YOUR HEALTH they would BAN ALCOHOL - but they are NOT! They are only interested in VOTES! Banning booze would be an instant suicide for their party. The time is LONG overdue for people to take back sovereignty over their own bodies from the government.
@Kirrie
Posted on 27-09-2011 09:27 | By The Tomahawk Kid
If Brash is pissing in the pockets of the DRUGGIES, then on that same rationale, Labour and National are pissing in the pockets of the ALCHOHOL DRINKERS! WHY? Because Alchohol is the biggest cause of health problems, and death on the roads in this country - yet NEITHER of the parties will ban it will they? WHY? Because they will lose votes. So Its not really about our HEALTH is it? - Its about VOTES. And in the same way, that is why NEITHER the RED OR BLUE party will considder decriminalising POT - not for health reasons, but for VOTES. It is immoral, and pathetic - just like those two parties, and all those biggots and hypocrits that perpetuate this immoral advance auction of other peoples rights, wealth and property.
decriminalise it
Posted on 27-09-2011 10:30 | By labjnz
my veiw is that it is more harmles than alcahol as there are no fights caused by it and it has the same charictoistics as if you don't respect what it does yes you do lose motivation but if you have it every noun the it is harmles as is alcahol if you have it every noun then and don't have to much its fine but when you abuse it it gets the better of you. i personal think that you shouldn't be labeled a criminal for smoking cannibus. I think itsjust pathetic how people get crimanal records for just having a tinne on them.
14GK
Posted on 27-09-2011 11:13 | By 14GK
I wonder how we'd all feel with 72% (TV3 poll)of our drivers (think buses,trucks or 16 year old licence holders) being doped or even a work mate using a forklift after having a "smoke" or perhaps even a policeman on traffic control while he's high on weed? I wonder what Brash & Clarkson were smoking when they came up with this idea?
@Tomahawk Kid, brilliant!
Posted on 27-09-2011 11:18 | By SpeakUp
You hit the nail on the head: "... they are more interested in getting a share of other peoples property to worry about voting for and protecting their own RIGHTS." and "The time is LONG overdue for people to take back sovereignty"." Outstanding!
@ TOMMY HAWK
Posted on 27-09-2011 12:32 | By PLONKER
You got it, it is only about votes, nothing moral, or otherwise. @ 14GK, I am sure what ever it was would have been a good "drag".
ofcourse its all about the votes
Posted on 27-09-2011 16:03 | By labjnz
coz if the get the majority of votes it means the majority of nz wants it not just the pedantic knobs who think its a bad thing and vote against it and get innocent people whos only illegal thing they do is smoke weed thrown in jail
@labjnz and onthelevel
Posted on 27-09-2011 19:50 | By The Tomahawk Kid
I do not care what the majority want. This is the immoral lunacy that got pot smokers in the trouble they are in in the first place, so its time you realised that other people should NOT be entitled to vote away your rights. (PS: I dont smoke dope, and I wouldnt even if it was legal) I want my rights as an individual upheld. I want the right to put into or onto my body whatever I choose. The flip side of the coin is that you must also be responsible for the consequences of your actions. (not have nanny state take responsibility and fob the expenses onto others.) @14GK: It would still be against the law to operate machinery and drive vehicles under the influence of ANYTHING, be it drugs or alcohol. This law must be upheld. It SHOULD BE an employer's RIGHT to make it clear employees are not under the influence of mind altering substances at risk of losing their job. Its not a GOVT issue - it is a RIGHTS issue. Voting away other peoples rights is immoral. I would be surprised if Brash did drugs. He is doing this because he recognises the TRUE meaning of the word RIGHTS, not to mention he would be the ONLY politician aware of Milton Friedman's Iron law of prohibition. @Sojourner: Labour and national's limp wristed stance on ALCOHOL is ALSO a cheap shot at winning votes, and VERY CLEAR it is NOT about people's health.
100% CORRECT TOM A HAWK
Posted on 02-10-2011 13:52 | By GROMIT
Being a space cadet and on a high 24/7 is not good for: - children, driving, work, fellow workers and of course brain function. To suggest any merit in this is indeed the "pottiest" idea yet. They should have a referendum on it and then the NZ Police will know who to go and visit.
2 dogs and a kiwi voting on what to have for Breakfast
Posted on 03-10-2011 19:36 | By The Tomahawk Kid
REFERENDUM? - AAaaarrrggghh! There we go again! The majority voting away the rights of the minority again. Why do Minorities have NO RIGHTS? A referendum is the counting of HEADS - NOT the quality of the THOUGHTS in those heads. A referndum is 2 unregistered Dogs and a Kiwi voting on what to have for Breakfast.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.