Page 2082 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 9 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In South Australia, Madam Speaker, it was argued that the law prior to the introduction of the cannabis expiation system allowed a significant black market to operate around the recreational use of cannabis, which increased the likelihood of association with other illicit drug markets. In the ACT it is well known that, when cannabis is not available on the black market, treatment agencies report a higher incidence in the use of amphetamines. Mrs Carnell would agree that they are much more dangerous.
Decriminalisation of the cultivation of cannabis in less than trafficable amounts could separate small-scale cultivators and wholesale drug dealers and weaken the link between cannabis use and harder drugs. However, Madam Speaker, I am aware that there remains some concern in the community that the perceived softening of drug laws - that is the mischievous argument that the Liberals are making - with respect to cannabis will lead to increased use, particularly among young people, and that the harmful effects of cannabis on health will be understated. Research has found no support for the idea that a cannabis expiation system may encourage previous non-users to experiment with cannabis.
Mrs Carnell: It also has not decreased use.
MR BERRY: Come on! There has been no increase in detections generally or among at-risk groups such as young people since the introduction of the system. I would like to emphasise, Madam Speaker, that the introduction of cannabis expiation notices should in no way imply a less vigilant approach by the Government to the development of treatment, education and preventative measures aimed at reducing the use of cannabis.
Mr Connolly has made it very clear that the Government is ever vigilant about pursuing breaches of the law in relation to cannabis use, and will continue to be so. There is no question about that. For the Liberals to argue that the Government is softening its approach on drugs is outrageous in the extreme. What is happening is that the Government is pursuing the harm minimisation line, and that is an honourable move. The harmful effects of cannabis use on health cannot be denied - there is no question about that - and factual information about the drug will continue to be included in broad-based drug programs which are implemented in a variety of settings.
Madam Speaker, now that the ACT Government has given support in principle to this Bill proposed by Mr Moore, I would like to discuss specific aspects of the proposal and to suggest some changes. The treatment of juveniles under the proposed system is of some concern. As a matter of social justice, it is important not to discriminate against juveniles in terms of the severity of the penalty imposed. The ACT Government therefore supports Mr Moore's proposal to include juveniles in the cannabis expiation system. However, the proposed amendment is limited to issuing an expiation notice and providing a copy to a person with whom the juvenile normally resides, not necessarily an adult, parent or guardian.
Instead, Madam Speaker, a provision should be made to serve a copy of the expiation notice on a parent or guardian but not on any person residing with them unless that person is functioning as a guardian. The reason, Madam Speaker, is that many young people under the age of 18 reside in separate accommodation from parents or guardians and with groups of peers. Providing copies of notices to peers in our view would be inappropriate. Madam Speaker,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .