Page 2091 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 9 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MADAM TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Moore, would you speak through the Chair if you have something to say? Would you let Mr Stevenson - - -
Mr Moore: It was simply an interjection, in the spirit of the house. I will take it easy, yes.
MR STEVENSON: The same results were obtained when people were driving cars on a closed circuit for that purpose. The problem with alcohol in the USA today is a result of what might be termed harm minimisation or the lack of effectiveness of prohibition. I think it is a relevant point that it is estimated that there are over 100 million drinkers in America, and 10 per cent of them, or 10 million, are problem drinkers. This is the result of prohibition being lifted. This is the problem that, it could be said, the legal status of alcohol has placed on society. When we say that marijuana is no worse than alcohol and there is a debate about that, the point is this: Will decriminalising marijuana use or making marijuana legal increase its use and effects or decrease its effects? If you look at alcohol - they are very good parallels - one could reasonably assume that marijuana use will increase, and that therefore its effects will increase. It is a logical argument.
We are told that, if we do not have marijuana use as a crime but rather as an offence for which you can be given an on-the-spot ticket, we will be able to put those resources towards education. This is another very interesting parallel with alcohol. What has happened with the resources that are not needed for prohibition and the education of people about the harmful effects of alcohol? Just last weekend we had the Australian Medical Association referring in newspapers around Australia to the alarming and horrendously high level of drinking, particularly of spirits, among young people. The number of drinks, particularly of spirits, that young people are taking is extremely high.
I see no logic in the suggestion that marijuana smoking will decrease after its progressive decriminalisation and legalisation. On the contrary, I think that people will be more inclined to use it. The suggestion that the illicit nature of something increases its use was shown by the prohibition amendment Acts in America not to be true. We have had more drinking since that time. We have vastly more problems. Anyone who has studied the social problems in Australia and in Canberra will know that many of them are caused by alcohol. In America Enoch Gordis, director of the National Institute of Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, estimated that 25 to 40 per cent of patients in hospitals on any given day were suffering from alcohol related diseases. He said that these included diseases of the liver or the heart, gastrointestinal disorders and mental disorders.
There is a difference between pot or marijuana and other drugs. When we talk about marijuana decriminalisation, it is interesting to ask: Which of the 421 chemicals are we talking about? The definition of marijuana could well become relevant in a legal situation. We have enormous problems with alcohol. Alcohol in Australia is, of course, legal. The number of different alcoholic beverages on the market is astounding, as will be ascertained by going into any liquor store or bottle shop. Who would say that there is no possibility of this occurring within the marijuana area, looking at the fact that there are so many different drugs under that particular name?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .