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]