COWARDISH POLITICIANS CHOOSE DELIBERATELY FOR A WRONG CANNABIS POLICY
15 February 2010
Source: De Volkskrant
By Gerd Leers, former lord mayor of Maastricht (NL)
4 February 2010
If Dutch Members of Parliament would follow their heart and common sense, there would be a majority for the legal regulation of cannabis tomorrow.
No issue in the Netherlands (but also outside) is charged with so much hypocricy as the policy on soft drugs. We know that we cannot reduce their use – therefore we tolerate sale and possession – but we still want to follow other European countries. And that is why we prohibit cultivation and purchase of large quantities.
And therefore, police commissioner Max Daniel is right when he says (Volkskrant, 1st February) that the cannabis industry has lost his innocence. However, one can ask: what’s new? Above all the lord mayors who have been struggling to make the best out of the impossible Dutch policy on soft drugs. If you prohibit a product that is very much wanted, of course the market will go underground. We know that since the days of Al Capone and the drought in the 1920s in the United States.
The most important question is: do you reduce the use of this crap by prohibiting it? Because as yet, no-one disagrees with the fact that it is crap. Just like alcohol and tobacco. Concerning health damage, cannabis has already lost its innocence long ago.
Only, the fact is: prohibition does not help. If that would be the case, we would quickly have closed this discussion. But in countries that surround us, where the policy regarding cannabis is much more repressive than in the Netherlands, the levels of use are higher. And the step towards hard drugs is taken much quicker.
That is logical: if you force cannabis lovers, especially young people who want to experiment, to buy their stuff from a hard drugs dealer, the step towards cocaine and even harder stuff is made quicker. In the Netherlands, the blower can go to the coffeeshop – where dealing in hard drugs is impossible – and see: the stepping stone-theory does not work anymore.
In terms of public health, Dutch tolerant policy is good policy. But it can still be improved. Because by taking out cannabis out of the taboo environment you can inform about it just like it happens with tobacco. And tax it like tobacco. With the same consequences as tobacco: a steadily decreasing consumption.
Because believe me: cannabis is crap. I am against it, very much so, and most Dutch people agree with me. And therefore there is only one way to reduce the use of it: regulate the cannabis market. But regulate also cannabis cultivation and cannabis trade.
Police commissioner Max Daniel is probably right when he says that 80 % of Dutch cannabis cultivation is meant for export. But he is wrong when he draws the conclusion that regulating cultivation and trade for Dutch coffeeshops would have no sense. In the first place many lord mayors would be very happy if they would be liberated of 20 % of pressure on the local police force. But more importantly, we would finally be able to prove that regulation leads to less crime ánd a better public health. With those figures we can convince Europe of the madness of the war on drugs, a war which Joseph McNamara and Dries van Agt characterised some time ago as: ‘The war on drugs causes more misery than the drugs themselves.’
Exactly for that reason, an agreement was formed in the city of Maastricht in 2005 between the national parties and the city government to start an experiment with the regulation of the backdoor of the coffeeshop. This agreement was signed by Nebahat Albayrak (socialdemocrat party, PvdA) – today vice minister of Justice (so in charge of making decisions) and Frans Weekers, still a MP for the liberal VVD, but redrawn by the party leadership that wants to make the message more conservative out of fear for the growing competition by extreme right populist Wilders.
If Dutch Members of Parliament would follow their heart and common sense, there would be a majority for the legal regulation of cannabis tomorrow. And the day after tomorrow would be the first of a long journey to convince Europe. Not an impossible one - see for instance the tolerant policies in Belgium and the Czech Republic. We are not the only ones anymore. And it would also not be the first time that the Netherlands would lead in an issue that everybody prefers to ignore, but where the majority finally is convinced of the fact that a good regulation causes less damage than tolerance or senseless repression.
Knowing that it can be done more healthy, that it can be done more safely, but not doing it because it is difficult to explain it to the voters; that is hypocrite. It is cowardish. It seems - in the short term - to please the voter, but in the long term it is another contribution to the failure of political authorities.
Source
COWARDISH POLITICIANS CHOOSE DELIBERATELY FOR A WRONG CANNAB
Excellent,well thought out,nicely written.
Surely the whole concept of the european law is being dileberately flounted. What If Ireland decided that only Irish resedents could drink in their pubs for example. The EU would be real quick to interject pointing out that it was against one treaty or another.
Surely the whole concept of the european law is being dileberately flounted. What If Ireland decided that only Irish resedents could drink in their pubs for example. The EU would be real quick to interject pointing out that it was against one treaty or another.
Roll on 093001022015
.