Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs,alt.hemp From: [f--nd--l] at [s1.elec.uq.oz.au] (Matthew Flindell) Subject: Cannabis Law Reform in Queensland Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1993 23:37:40 GMT In recent months in Queensland, there's been quite a bit of debate on the subject of cannabis in the law. The CJC has presented a discussion paper and is asking for submissions on the subject before it makes any recommendations to the Queensland State Government. I hope that this is of interest to those on the net. I'd like to hear any opinions anyone has. Eventually, I'll help put together a submission from the University of Queensland Student Union, and the broader it is, I think, the better. Things in Queensland (and Australia) are looking good for cannabis at the moment, so I think a number of good submissions would be very timely. Please note that any figures below are purely from memory - they're approximate. A bit of background : In the late 80's, at the end of a twenty-year (or thereabouts) reign by the right-wing Nationals, we had the Fitzgerald Commission. Originally, it was set up to investigate corruption in the Queensland Police Force, but eventually got to the Government level. One result of the Commission was the creation of the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) to monitor corruption and review the adequacy of current legislation. One specific task set by Fitzgerald was to investigate the drug legislature. As cannabis relates to 95% of all drug-related crime in Queensland, the CJC felt that considering cannabis alone would be sufficient. The cannabis laws in Queensland would best be described as 'draconian', at least compared to the other states in Australia. It's still a criminal offence to possess an associated implement, eg. a bong, pipe, even a packet of cigarette papers with the sleeve torn off. Possession of a joint can receive penalties slightly worse than for procuring a child for prostitution, assault or break-and-enter. All this is coupled with a prevailing attitude within the Queensland Police Force that remains largely "conservative redneck". The discussion paper the CJC presented included no recommendations - they want to receive submissions from the public first - but basically presented the facts. Obviously, from a legalisation/decriminalisation viewpoint this is great. Examples : : A section summarising about thirty Government 'inquiries' into cannabis laws, etc. - from Australian & US State and Federal and other Federal governments, since about 1970. Of them, none recommended tightening of laws and two recommended no change in the law due to lack of knowledge of the medical effects. : A summary of a literature review stated that generally, scientific reports have been quite biased to one side or the other, and that the majority haven't found significant damage for moderate use. : Cannabis is the second largest cash crop in Queensland (after sugar cane). : Young unemployed or unskilled males are over-represented in arrests - they comprise 12% of users and 60% of arrests. On the other hand, white- collar workers are under-represented - they comprise 10-15% of users and 2% of arrests. : There were statistics on "past-month" use that are comparable that everything else I've read - ie. quite a lot of people. Anyway, here's the CJC's request for submissions. If anyone has anything they think would be suitable to include in such a submission, I'd like to include it in my sources. I'm aiming to get our Student Union to send them a really weighty one. ============================================================================== SUBMISSIONS The CJC Advisory Committee on Illicit Drugs is seeking submissions in relation to the preferred legal status of cannabis in Queensland. All submissions will be considered; however, it would assist the Committee if the following specific issues were addressed in submissions: : Preferable aims for drug policy generally. : Preferable aims for cannabis policy. : What levels of cannabis use should be considered socially tolerable or intolerable? : What individual or social harm or benefit results from current levels of cannabis use? How does or would this vary if levels of use were to change? : Should the industrial use of cannabis (ie. for cloth or paper making) be permitted? : Should appropriate medical uses of cannabis be permitted? : What are appropriate goals and mechanisms for cannabis (or drug) law enforcement? : What are appropriate goals and mechanisms for cannabis (or drugs) educational or health promotion campaigns? In general, submissions will be made available for public inspection at the Library of the Criminal Justice Commission. Those submissions where admission of criminal activity is made (ie. of cannabis use) will be placed on a public register with the notation "Name and address supplied". Submissions marked confidential will _not_ be placed on any public register. Submissions should be made to: The Secretary Advisory Committee on Illicit Drugs PO Box 137 BRISBANE ALBERT STREET 4002 by 20 September, 1993 ============================================================================== Generally, there's been increasing media debate about cannabis all around Australia. South Australia and ACT have decriminalisation for personal use, although penalties for dealing and growing large numbers of plants are still high. Tasmania has government plantations to produce paper. But - it's still pretty much 50/50 in the opinion polls as to what should be done with the laws, so when this discussion paper came out, Wayne Goss (the Queensland Premier) said that he didn't intend to decriminalise cannabis, "because there's no need for a third harmful legal drug [such as tobacco and alcohol]". Well, just the other night, there was a meeting at the Sitting Duck Cafe in West End ('bohemian' suburb in Brisbane) with several speakers to discuss just this issue - the head researcher for the CJC, the local representative for HEMP, Hilda, a drug counsellor and a pro-legalisation lawyer. About three hundred people turned up, which left the cafe overflowing. Each speaker spoke for ten minutes, followed by about two and a half hours of questions and statements from the audience. The general impression I got from the night was that, after submissions were surveyed, the CJC would make positive recommendations to the Government. When asked if the Government could be expected to approve such a recommendation, we were informed that Wayne Goss had sent a letter to the CJC saying that they would support the Committee's recommendations. Everyone screamed bullshit and the CJC rep. said that his previous experience as a journalist had taught him not to believe everything he reads. (By the way, the Government has already disregarded the CJC's recommendations on prostitution law reform, and made the laws tighter.) The pro-legalisation lawyer made suggestions as to what could be done if the Government rejected it. His main suggestion was 'outing' of Queensland politicians who vote against the recommendations. Example : when Wayne Goss was 19, he wrote a play based on "The Sound of Music" which he called "The Smell of Kooch[?]." A definite outing target! On the other hand, there was quite some criticism from some, in that the majority of arguments for liberalisation come from a civil libertarian viewpoint, and yet outing is a breach of the victims' civil liberties. IMHO legalisation is the best way to go, but I think that in the short term, decriminalisation is the best we can expect. This is mainly because of the several treaties which Australia has signed regarding legality of cannabis. The lawyer suggested, though, that it may be possible to show that Australia signed the treaties under duress from the US Government, and that therefore Queensland could lose the restrictions on cannabis law. I'm not sure how feasible this is - he himself said it would need a bit of research. The drug counsellor was an ex-user who was now concerned about drug use in children, and that people have places to go to be rehabilitated. Hilda was an old lady in a purple dress who'd "been to all the world's leading researchers [eg. Dr. Gabriel Nahas] and found that cannabis is ABSOLUTELY TOXIC." She was completely full of poetic, long-winded rhetoric and failed to respond to any questions she was posed. One exception - she disagreed with the CJC's review of the literature, which I thought was quite realistic. She also quoted a case of some teenagers who'd "disembowelled a live animal whilst under the influence of marijuana." The other speakers referred to Hilda as a good example of the point of view we'll have to overcome. I'm actually optimistic about this, because the audience managed to get her and the drug counsellor to agree, if only briefly, that legalisation wasn't an unfeasible alternative. Well, that's a bit of a summary of Queensland cannabis law reform. As I said, I'd like to compile a really good submission. I'd like to present a long- term proposal (because I'm in favour of legalisation) and a realistic short- term proposal (because decriminalisation will _have_ to be the first step). Once we've gotten a draft together, I'll post it for criticisms. Shen Flindell [f--nd--l] at [s1.elec.uq.oz.au]