Corkery on drugs

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

writes:

The full horror of the Psychoactive Substances Act has landed.

More than 100 retailers are selling 28 brands of synthetic highs – with the blessing of 119 MPs who voted for insane legislation now implemented by the Ministry of Health.

This makes it sound like no retailers were selling no synthetic highs before this law change. Every drug being sold, was available with basically no restrictions prior to the law change.

Bowden has been allowed to buy a temporary licence to retail, import and manufacture synthetic highs, and is planning a pioneering factory on Auckland’s North Shore to keep them coming.

The rationale behind the interim legitimacy of the is that working with Bowden and his fellow travellers will be more effective than prohibition at reducing harm.

No the rationale is that you just need to allow some time to get the testing done. Any new drug can not enter the market until tested, but those drugs which had already been selling legally for the last few years have a few months in which to get tested. This is much more preferable to the old law which meant they never ever got tested.

Some may argue we should have had a period of total prohibition before the testing regime starts, but consider that it is the fact that cannabis is prohibited that has led to demand for synthetic highs. Try banning those also, and God knows what you will end up with people using.

I firmly believe that the 119 MPs who voted for this law did so to show that they were liberal-minded, well-adjusted, down with the peeps, almost groovy.

How ridiculous. They voted for the law as they thought a law which decided if a drug was safe based on scientific testing was better than a law where whether a drug is banned is dependent on how many media headlines it generates.

They’re not. New Zealand doesn’t want these drugs. We’ve got more than enough already.

Who is this we? The fact there is such demand for them suggests there is a market for them. Now the irony is that it is because drugs like cannabis are banned, that you have created a demand for synthetic highs.

Tags: ,

49 Responses to “Corkery on drugs”

  1. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    “The fact there is such demand for them suggests there is a market for them.”

    It does more than that.

    It confirms NZ society is in deep trouble.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Ross12 (1,147 comments) says:

    ” …. have a few months in which to get tested.”

    If the testing regime is any good it will take alot longer than a few months to get them tested. I read figures of up to a $1mill to get get tested. This suggests toxicity tests etc. etc. –more like 1 Year +.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (7,590 comments) says:

    Who is this we?

    I’m certainly one of them.

    The banning of cannabis does not create demand for the synthetic rubbish. Cannabis is very freely available.The drug pushers have simply created a new product which fools have fallen for.

    Drug pushers have always and will always do that.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. seerob1946 (18 comments) says:

    Isn’t this the same Corkery who herself was a drug addict in the 70′s in Sydney on heroin?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Fletch (6,010 comments) says:

    I firmly believe that the 119 MPs who voted for this law did so to show that they were liberal-minded, well-adjusted, down with the peeps, almost groovy.

    Are we talking about drugs or gay marriage?

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    “Are we talking about drugs or gay marriage?”

    Ha, exactly what I thought.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. David Garrett (6,343 comments) says:

    seerob: Quite apart from “the 70′s” being 40 years ago, perhaps the fact that Corkery had a drug habit (if she did, I dont know) gives her comments a bit more weight?

    The wider issue is another really hard one…prohibition of anything has never worked very well…maybe what we have decided is a lesser two evils thing? I dunno…you could argue this from 10 different ways, and the arguments would all make some sense..

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. nostrils (53 comments) says:

    Any journalist who uses the phrase “peeps” in an article is not worth reading.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    Hey, lets have drugs equality.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    Glad to read something sensible from Reddy. Yes, let’s treat all psychoactive substances in the same manner. Legalise and regulate.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. gump (1,474 comments) says:

    @Redbaiter

    “Hey, lets have drugs equality.”

    ———————-

    The Lancet has published studies that show Alcohol causes considerably more harm to society than Cannabis, so the two drugs shouldn’t be treated equally.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    The Lancet is a discredited liberal rag read only by progressive losers. You wouldn’t know that.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. The Scorned (719 comments) says:

    Comrade Kor-Kiri with her nutbar statism again….yawn

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. James Stephenson (2,018 comments) says:

    The Lancet is a discredited liberal rag read only by progressive losers

    Is it? I thought it was a proper scientific journal, usually cited by people that wouldn’t understand its contents, even if they had read it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    Just when Reddy had made a sensible proposal to treat drugs equally he had to go and regress to labelling anything that might contradict his views (changeable as they may be) as ‘discredited’ and ‘liberal’.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. flipper (3,537 comments) says:

    It would be useful if Corckery, nay everyone, were to sit down and discuss the issue with a bunch of year 10 to 12 students. I thought I was pretty well informed on the synthetic high crap, but three high school pupils, including one grandson, beat me hands down.
    They know more about those substances, about medical uses for marijuana, and about legal possession (for personal use) or marijuana, than can be imagined. Trying to TELL them, or impose our views, will not work.

    Frankly, given the knowledge (upon knowledge) explosion that will occur this century, I do not rate our chances of restricting these substances, any more than sugar.

    No doubt Police management will step outside their accepted role, and enter the debate, as they are doing over the sale of alcoholic beverages. The moment that they depart from their actual role of policing, and enter matters of policy, their continued credibility will be at stake – except for the manufacture of media headlines..

    So to revert to Corkery, she is a has been pile of rubbish. Rightly or wrongly the 119 legislators who voted for what they considered to be an enforceable (THAT IS ONE THAT IS SUPPORTED BY THE PUBLIC AND NOT SIMPLY IMPOSED BY THE KNOW-ALL BUNCH) regime, did so in good faith. Time will tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    Milky, if you didn’t voluntarily wall yourself in behind liberal information barriers you would already know that the Lancet is not granted much esteem outside the deluded world of the progressives.

    That’s your problem you see. I know what the left are saying but you don’t know what the right are saying.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    If Reddy knows of more reliable sources of information on the relative harm of psychoactive substances, he should post links or cite references. One blogger slagging off the Lancet over the numbers of dead Iraqis doesn’t assist this debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Black with a Vengeance (1,552 comments) says:

    Councils can put measures in place to stop dealers setting up and bloody well should…

    All you concerned citizens should present a submission to your local territorial authority to limit their ability to trade.
    ____________________________________________________

    Psychoactive Substances Act 2013.

    Local approved products policies

    item 68

    Content of local approved products policy
    • A local approved products policy may include policies on 1 or more of the following matters:
    o (a) the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to broad areas within the district:
    o (b) the location from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to other premises from which approved products are sold within the district:
    o (c) the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds within the district (for example, kindergartens, early childhood centres, schools, places of worship, or other community facilities).

    item 66

    Territorial authority may have local approved products policy
    • (1) Any territorial authority may have a policy relating to the sale of approved products within its district.
    (2) A local approved products policy may—
    o (a) provide differently for different parts of its district; and
    o (b) apply to only part (or 2 or more parts) of its district; and
    o (c) apply differently to premises for which licences of different kinds are held or have been applied for.
    (3) No territorial authority is required to have a local approved products policy.

    _______________________________________________________________

    As it stands, given the newness of the law, most Councils don’t have a local approved products policy, meaning any authorised dealer looking to set up shop automatically is given the benefit of the doubt and granted consent as long as they comply with existing legal requirements.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. flipper (3,537 comments) says:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
    James Stephenson (1,612) Says:
    September 23rd, 2013 at 11:56 am

    The Lancet is a discredited liberal rag read only by progressive losers

    Is it? I thought it was a proper scientific journal

    *****

    In matters medical.
    Social issued are political issues, and their views on those are not worth any more than mine on the causes of, say, snoring, or mumps.

    Medical “solutions” of social problems are about as “reliable” as vaccines for the treatment of a virus.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Ed Snack (1,734 comments) says:

    Mikenmild, the problem with the Lancet is that it lets itself get used for political purposes, most notably the pseudo-scientific Iraqi Deaths paper, but it has a number of other highly politicized papers to its “credit” as well. One can no longer be sure if their “headline” papers are in fact solid science or mere barrow pushing, and they brought that upon themselves by their editorial policies. The only way to tell is look critically at the data and results, and as you point out much of that may very well be essentially unintelligible to your average “peep”.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    This isn’t a thread about the Lancet – it’s about the legal regime for drugs. gump happened to mention a Lancet study to support his opinion about the relative harm of cannabis versus alcohol. How about citing some evidence that shows good reason to treat various harmful substances differently?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    No matter where you go in the world there are drugs. It is not a problem confined to the West or the modern day. Booze is by far the worse drug in modern day NZ The govt should stop fussing over synthetic highs and mind its own business. I would legalise all drugs and I say that as someone who does not take drugs and have even gone off drinking recently. I am anti drugs but feel no desire to have central government force my view on others.

    I would however drug test for all benefits. No if or but.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    Benefits only for teetotallers?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    “Benefits only for teetotallers?”

    Yes.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    “No matter where you go in the world there are drugs.”

    That’s (almost) one of the true things you have said, but only because no matter where you go in the world there is always some quantity of psychologically maladjusted losers who think they need it but are really only victims of pushers.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Changeiscoming (135 comments) says:

    Two things from this
    1- who would have thought that Pam Corkery is actually a social conservative (at least on this issue) her far left socialist mates will be beside themselves.
    2 – If anyone had any doubt that DPF is a social liberal and well and truely on the left then this should clear it up for you.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. edhunter (492 comments) says:

    Drugs are used (usually quite successfully)by every facet of society, from your sterotypical dole bludger through to doctors, lawyers & CEOs. The trick with drugs & pretty much everything in this damned world is moderation. whether it be drugs, alcohol, fatty foods, exercise, religion, reading blogs, TV watching etc do these in moderation live a happy well rounded life, abuse them & pay the consequences.
    Red where’s your happy place? You’re not suffering from small mans syndrome are you? It cant be healthy to be as angry as you appear to be here.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Redbaiter (7,552 comments) says:

    “Red where’s your happy place? You’re not suffering from small mans syndrome are you? It cant be healthy to be as angry as you appear to be here.”

    Here’s some humour for you Ed.

    It amuses me to see the way brain damaged leftists are so sensitive to strong disagreement, and so trammeled into all thinking the same, when they come across it they mistakenly categorise it as anger.

    Do you read the blog Media Watch Dog by Gerald Henderson? He put what I call the liberal psychosis quite well this week:

    Nancy: I’m very grateful that you have given so generously of your time. Finally, what about my (male) co-owner’s claim that the ABC is Conservative-Free-Zone?

    Nice Mr Scott: Absolutely simplistic, if you don’t mind my saying so. Nothing can be further from the truth. We had a communal love-in at our Ultimo headquarters recently for some of our presenters. Sure Phillip Adams agreed with Fran Kelly who agreed with Waleed Aly who agreed with Jonathan Green who agreed with Emma Alberici who agreed with Tony Jones who agreed with Geraldine Doogue who agreed with Kerry O’Brien who agreed with Julian Morrow who agreed with Virginia Trioli who agreed with Chip Rolley who agreed with Stephen Long who agreed with Paul Bongiorno who agreed with Jon Faine who agreed with Linda Mottram who agreed with Adam Spencer who agreed with Phillip Adams. Or was it the other way around?

    At the bottom of his blog Gerard copies all of the criticism he receives from the left, and they all describe him as angry or crazy. Its a syndrome I think that results from left wing group think that disallows anything unapproved and admonished anyone who dares to do so. Consequently their thinking is so crippled and their information sources so limited (like Cuban citizens) they have no other way of reacting to real criticism from outside of their approved circle.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. the conservative (58 comments) says:

    “Now the irony is that it is because drugs like cannabis are banned, that you have created a demand for synthetic highs.”

    I don’t quite follow. So the demand for synthetic highs is caused by illegal cannabis? If we use that logic, then it stands to reason that demand for cannabis is caused by illegal alcohol (another high)…………oops but alcohol is legal and we already sell bucket loads of it, and that hasn’t stopped demand for cannabis and harder drugs. We could legalise cannabis but that wouldn’t stop demand for alternatives, much the same as beer doesn’t alter demand for other forms of alcohol such as whisky.

    Legalising marijuana is simply not the answer to anything; it would only be opening up a can of worms. I find it strange that the very same people who have been pushing against cigarette smoking for decades now, would like to legalise dope smoking.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Colville (2,065 comments) says:

    Legalising marijuana is simply not the answer to anything; it would only be opening up a can of worms. I find it strange that the very same people who have been pushing against cigarette smoking for decades now, would like to legalise dope smoking.

    I would decriminalise marijuana in a heatbeat if I could. Let the cops deal with important stuff. Get the money out of gangs hands. Its not as tho what we do now is working anyways.

    I dont smoke, never have never will but surely a weed is better for you to smoke than some sawdust soaked in chemicals?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. scrubone (3,044 comments) says:

    The Lancet has published studies that show Alcohol causes considerably more harm to society than Cannabis, so the two drugs shouldn’t be treated equally.

    Outside of the Lancet’s credibility issues, that’s just daft.

    Of course Alcohol causes more harm “to society” – that’s because it’s legal and hence is not treated the same.

    The reason they’re not treated the same is that the body can process alcohol, and small amounts can actually be beneficial and have no lasting effects.

    It’s like saying that driving causes more deaths than cyanide, so we should be regulating driving more than cyanide.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. scrubone (3,044 comments) says:

    I dont smoke, never have never will but surely a weed is better for you to smoke than some sawdust soaked in chemicals?

    I’ve heard stories about some of these previously legal highs that indicated they were far more dangerous than the illegal ones they supposedly replaced. It was high time the situation was bought under control.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Kleva Kiwi (281 comments) says:

    People who think NZ has a drug problem need to get their heads out of their own asses and go travel a little bit. You will soon realise what is being done here is far ahead of most places.

    Be thankful we don’t have hard drugs readily available in this country like others. The sooner synthetic highs are proven safe and regulated, and the faster cannabis can be proven (either way) to be safe or not and also regulated, the better for everyone.

    I’m still amazed that some people live in some sort of fantasy land thinking that if you ban stuff the problem will go away.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. RRM (9,433 comments) says:

    Go away Pam, you booze-addled wreck.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Jack5 (4,571 comments) says:

    Kleva Kiwi posted at 1.55:

    People who think NZ has a drug problem need to get their heads out of their own asses and go travel a little bit.

    Like Singapore, Kleva Kiwi? They give drug dealers a bit of rope there … to dangle at the end of.

    The delay in bringing drug peddling dairies under control is an indictment of Possum Dunne, who seemed in charge of the changes. Obviously, his mind wasn’t on the job.

    If Corkery has a drug-taking history, I applaud her for getting free of drugs.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. edhunter (492 comments) says:

    Here in Australia it’s legal to have a still with a volume of no more than 5l but only for the puposes of distilling water & essences. It’s illegal to distill alcohol in any quantity. Yet I can go into any brewing shop in the country pick up a 30l still, the sugar the yeast, flavourings & enough expert advice to within 2 weeks time be drinking the fruit of my labours. The police aren’t interested in busting me or the shop unless I do something stupid like trying to sell it.
    My point is there are plenty of hydroponic stores in NZ doing basically the same thing, for years they’ve been enabling people to conduct in an ‘illegal’ activity & the police for the most part have turned a blind eye to it. If you start getting greedy and turn a hobby into a business then the police get interested.
    We need to get over this farce of having laws the police are unwilling to enforce & just decriminalise weed. People need to learn the difference between decriminalising & legalising after all 42% of kiwis have tried it & would we really want that many of us to have criminal convictions?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Rich Prick (1,538 comments) says:

    “Corkery on drugs”

    I see what you did there.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. cha (3,779 comments) says:

    My point is there are plenty of hydroponic stores in NZ doing basically the same thing, for years they’ve been enabling people to conduct in an ‘illegal’ activity & the police for the most part have turned a blind eye to it

    Not any more, Operation Lime put an end to it.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=Operation+Lime‘.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Ian McK (237 comments) says:

    Anything this foul and disgusting Corkery pens should be tossed into the nearest rubbish receptacle. Why APN have her contributing is a mystery, they are a fairly conservative group, unlike evil Fairfax.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Jack5 (4,571 comments) says:

    The Conservative at 1.27:

    I find it strange that the very same people who have been pushing against cigarette smoking for decades now, would like to legalise dope smoking.

    Dead right.

    Similarly, while the message about the danger of drinking and driving is understandably preached widely, how often to you hear or see a message warning against driving and smoking marijuana or driving after indulging in amphetamine or cocaine or heroin?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Everyone who wants to do drugs is already doing them. The reason I did not smoke up this morning had nothing to do with the law.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Scott Chris (5,871 comments) says:

    Corkery on drugs

    Yes, I suspect she is. Corkery, like many lefty conservatives thinks emotionally not rationally.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. edhunter (492 comments) says:

    cha- jsut checked & Switched on Gardener’s website is still up & running with 10+ branches nationwide, yep that worked maybe operation lime should’ve been called operation lemon.

    Kea you’re right while the law may stop some, others dont care, but that’s the same with all laws.
    There’s more chance of someone dying be they innocent or guilty because of excessive speed than someone dying of having a cone yet having a cone could lead to a criminal conviction & a speeding driver just gets a fine.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. mikenmild (10,630 comments) says:

    When laws are foolish, the right thing to do is to change them. Let’s hope that the new regime for some substances can eventually be used as a model for others.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. fishe (143 comments) says:

    Redbaiter – the Lancet is a liberal rag haha what?

    Next you’ll say Nature is socialist nonsense because they publish climate change science…

    scrubone – I get your point, and quite a few studies do suffer from that basic issue, although the better studies try and control for it. Not perfectly obviously, but you can make fairly decent comparisons, especially in some populations where weed is really prevalent.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. gump (1,474 comments) says:

    @Redbaiter

    “The Lancet is a discredited liberal rag read only by progressive losers. You wouldn’t know that.”

    ————————

    The Economist magazine has consistently argued for the legalisation of dugs and the reform of anti-drug legislation. It also supports the recognition of gay marriage, government regulation of tobacco, and gun control.

    So please go ahead and tell me your opinion of The Economist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. valeriusterminus (245 comments) says:

    Well CB-boy Logan did not endure
    Why should BB-boy Matt expect otherwise ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. ChardonnayGuy (1,131 comments) says:

    Oh dear, David, that headline had me in stitches. A wag near me opined “that explained a lot!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.