Legal pot ‘best way’ to reduce harm

Legalising cannabis has been given a cautious thumbs up from health and addiction experts as Kiwi voters face a binding referendum on the drug's criminality.

Several leaders within the sector see decriminalisation as ‘‘the best way of reducing harm'' from the drug, as long as it is done correctly.

However, police and some in business sector are concerned more widespread availability will add to existing challenges they face.

Justice Minister Andrew Little acknowledged at yesterday's announcement there ‘‘a bit of detail still to work through''.

Canterbury medical officer of health Dr Alistair Humphrey said there would be

‘‘benefits and drawbacks'' to legalising or decriminalising any drug.

His was a personal view, having run a methadone clinic in Australia for ‘‘many years''.

‘‘Legalising cannabis does not necessarily mean that cannabis use will go up. We don't know that yet,'' he said.

‘‘But . . . the use of the criminal justice system to deal with the problem will go down, obviously. At this stage, it's what is the context in which we want to manage the use of this drug, along with other drugs? I think a social and health context is a better context than putting people in jail.''

Former National Addiction Centre (NAC) director Doug Sellman said legalising cannabis was ‘‘the best way of reducing harm'' from it.

But that needed to be done

through a regulated system that meant private companies could not make money from its sale.

‘‘We need a regulated market through the Government so we undermine the black market,’’ he said.

Dr Sue Bagshaw, director of 298 Youth Health, said a style of managing drug use similar to that of the Portuguese would be ‘‘ideal’’ for her.

According to the Drug Foundation, Portugal ‘‘massively’’ reformed its drug policy about two decades ago and has since become ‘‘a global leader of evidence-based policy [around drug use], grounded on the principle of harm reduction’’.

The country decriminalised drugs. More people were in treatment and there were fewer new cases of HIV as a result.

Bagshaw said cannabis ‘‘should be regulated, without a doubt’’, but making people criminals for using it was not the answer.

‘‘We put a whole load of energy into punishment and law enforcement, but we put no energy whatsoever into why people use drugs in the first place.’’

Police Association president Chris Cahill welcomed the announcement coming ‘‘nice and early’’ so informed public debate could be had ahead of the referendum.

‘‘We don’t have a position on what the vote should be – police, obviously, will police what is decided – but we do think there needs to be a very good debate and that all the issues, and the implications of a ‘yes’ vote, are understood.’’

How much people could have and how officers would police any excess needed to be worked through. Drug driving already posed challenges, he said.

‘‘You can test positive for cannabis but is there an impairment? That’s a challenge that already presents for employers now. Cannabis remains in your system for up to a fortnight but there’s not necessarily any impairment.’’

Yesterday, the mood on the streets of Christchurch was generally in support of legalisation.

Christchurch couple Arnika and David Macphail said the referendum would allow people to have an educated discussion on legalisation. It could also offer parents of sick children an alternative to pharmaceutical drugs.

Petros Chakwizira, 21, said he would like to see cannabis legalised as an alternative medicine, as long as it was regulated.