Do You Support the Proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill? - A Resource for Voters

Non-Binding Referendum Question: “Do you support the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill?” – A Resource for Voters

What is the Cannabis Referendum About?

The Cannabis Referendum is to decide whether to legalise recreational cannabis. The referendum is not about medicinal cannabis. Being non-binding means that if a majority vote yes, the proposed Bill will be put through the normal parliamentary process and the ultimate decision will rest with the incoming government.

There are three ways of approaching recreational cannabis: 1: make it illegal and a criminal offence; 2: decriminalise it – retain its illegal status, but remove criminal sanctions and apply penalties and/or health-based interventions (such as addiction therapy) to those who use, grow and/or supply it; 3: legalise it.

Up to 2019, the law treated cannabis as a criminal issue. However, in 2019 the Misuse of Drugs Act was amended so that possession offences could be treated as health issues instead of criminal, except where there is a clear public good to be gained from prosecution. Thus, while cannabis remains illegal, the police can use discretion in deciding how to respond to those who use, grow and/or supply it; whether to charge a person or steer them towards a health-based intervention. In reality, we have a form of ‘de-facto’ decriminalisation.

There are good arguments to be made that the current laws and regulations around the possession and use of recreational cannabis are not working well:

The Proposed Law

The purpose of the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill is to regulate and control the manufacture, use and sale of cannabis. The intention of the Bill is to reduce the harms caused by recreational cannabis to individuals, whānau, families, and communities by: 1) controlling the potency and quality of cannabis products; 2) shifting users from the black market to legal supply outlets; 3) using the proceeds from these sales to fund health interventions to help those living with cannabis addiction; 4) reducing the demand for cannabis; 5) imposing a minimum-use age of 20 years; 6) ensuring that health warnings accompany the purchase of all legal cannabis products. A key question is whether the proposed law will be able to deliver what it promises.

Which Groups are Likely to be Most Negatively Affected by the Proposed Law?

Research shows the three most vulnerable demographics in our society in terms of recreational cannabis are:

Some Factors and Questions to Consider in Deciding How to Vote

Conclusion: Cannabis is a complex, nuanced issue. The current laws are not preventing harm despite it being illegal. Decriminalisation and legalisation of recreational cannabis around the world are a relatively recent change in approach and the long-term effects – physical, social, economic – whether positive or negative or neutral, are not fully known yet and may not be known for some years. The key questions are: 1) how do we best respond to the current ineffectualness of the law? 2) how do we best attend to the harm that is happening, especially to our rangitahi? and 3) how do we best prevent future harm?

For more information, see: https://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications?category=1 and https://www.pmcsa.ac.nz/ topics/cannabis/, as well The Nathaniel Report (Issues 57, 58 and 60).

Authorised by John Kleinsman, the Nathaniel Centre for Bioethics, 15 Guildford Terrace, Wellington 5028