Limit the harm

Karl du Fresne suggests (Jan 10) that two advocates for cannabis reform may be driven by an ideological aversion to the capitalist business model. Anyone who engages with the world has an ideology, including du Fresne.

However, the word ‘‘ideology’’ garners a whole new emotionally charged meaning when used in a political context, where it suggests that people ignore facts and realities in the pursuit of fixed goals.

While corporates are not inherently bad, they are also not inherently good. The way in which some corporates use advertising to promote unhealthy products as ‘‘happy lifestyle essentials’’ is one example of bad corporate behaviour. The promotion of alcohol falls into this category.

Alcohol is a potentially harmful product, as is cannabis. If cannabis is legalised we should examine the mistakes made in how we promote and use alcohol, in order to avoid making them again. This would include advertising driven by large corporate budgets.

Nothing ideological about that. That’s just acknowledging that when we approve of something that is potentially harmful but provides pleasure, we should do all we can to limit that harm. That is, of course, incremental change. I’m beginning to feel like one of du Fresne’s ‘‘activists’’.

Geoffrey Booth, Pukerua Bay commercial activities are fully tax free as they operate as charities, as well as the commercial activities undertaken by some religious organisations. Not only do these companies have a privilege of not paying tax but they also have a much greater competitive advantage over other businesses that do pay taxes.

Piet Kreyl, Eastbourne