[From Sir Humphreys Archives - with updates]
The Greens are claiming the EB brochures are filled with outright lies. I'm having a look at the claims, one by one, to see how the EB may have formed their opinion.
Outright lie #13: Offer financial assistance to cannabis growers for alternative employment.
I have been able to find no information to justify this assertion. The closest I got were these two statements:
1. An inference that (illegal) cannabis growers might be encouraged to grow hemp in the economically depressed Northland areas. "What is most interesting about the new policy is a pilot scheme to integrate commercial hemp crops into economically depressed areas like Northland that have traditionally been reliant on cannabis for their income." It is possible the EB mistook growing Hemp, with low THC properties as part and parcel of the drugs issue. Hemp crops are an interesting possibility for NZ, but that's another post.
2. The Greens Drug Reform Policy states: Commercial cultivation and trading of marijuana for profit would remain illegal, and areas currently relying on large scale illegal cultivation for their income will be assisted in making a transition to other work. Now, this all hinges on what kind of assistance would be offered in making a transition to other work. I can't quite see them getting "extra money" over and above the benefits they probably already claim. More likely some very expensive but flawed tax payer funded job jolt scheme.
A minor point though: The Exclusive Brethren (EB) could argue that tax payer money would be spent, based on the above statement by the Greens and presumably the EB simply want large scale growers caught and locked up. The Greens are instead suggesting we "assist" these criminals to transition into alternative employment. In this regard, the EB are correct. Which approach is the best one is, as usual, debatable.
I'm going to give the Greens the benefit of the doubt on this one, but I can kind of see where the Exclusive Brethren got their idea from.
However, Jeannette called this an "outright lie" and she said: Our drugs policy does not include offering financial assistance to cannabis growers. This is wrong and offensive. [Source] Given the above two statements by the Greens, including a commitment to "assist" growers rather than prosecute them, I'd say its more an "outright misunderstanding."
Verdict: Greens Innocent, but EB not yet caught in a lie.
Related Link: Greens Drug Policy
Related Link: Back to main post
The Greens are claiming the EB brochures are filled with outright lies. I'm having a look at the claims, one by one, to see how the EB may have formed their opinion.
Outright lie #13: Offer financial assistance to cannabis growers for alternative employment.
I have been able to find no information to justify this assertion. The closest I got were these two statements:
1. An inference that (illegal) cannabis growers might be encouraged to grow hemp in the economically depressed Northland areas. "What is most interesting about the new policy is a pilot scheme to integrate commercial hemp crops into economically depressed areas like Northland that have traditionally been reliant on cannabis for their income." It is possible the EB mistook growing Hemp, with low THC properties as part and parcel of the drugs issue. Hemp crops are an interesting possibility for NZ, but that's another post.
2. The Greens Drug Reform Policy states: Commercial cultivation and trading of marijuana for profit would remain illegal, and areas currently relying on large scale illegal cultivation for their income will be assisted in making a transition to other work. Now, this all hinges on what kind of assistance would be offered in making a transition to other work. I can't quite see them getting "extra money" over and above the benefits they probably already claim. More likely some very expensive but flawed tax payer funded job jolt scheme.
A minor point though: The Exclusive Brethren (EB) could argue that tax payer money would be spent, based on the above statement by the Greens and presumably the EB simply want large scale growers caught and locked up. The Greens are instead suggesting we "assist" these criminals to transition into alternative employment. In this regard, the EB are correct. Which approach is the best one is, as usual, debatable.
I'm going to give the Greens the benefit of the doubt on this one, but I can kind of see where the Exclusive Brethren got their idea from.
However, Jeannette called this an "outright lie" and she said: Our drugs policy does not include offering financial assistance to cannabis growers. This is wrong and offensive. [Source] Given the above two statements by the Greens, including a commitment to "assist" growers rather than prosecute them, I'd say its more an "outright misunderstanding."
Verdict: Greens Innocent, but EB not yet caught in a lie.
Related Link: Greens Drug Policy
Related Link: Back to main post
"..illegal cultivation for their income will be assisted in making.."
ReplyDeleteThe best assistance to get criminals to clean up their act is, chain gangs, jail and an armed citizenry, but i'm sure the greens will never go for that. Apart from the criminals, it'll be like shooting themselves in the foot.
"The best assistance to get criminals to clean up their act is, chain gangs, jail and an armed citizenry, but i'm sure the greens will never go for that. Apart from the criminals, it'll be like shooting themselves in the foot."
ReplyDeleteGood idea, but it won't work.
The Govt gets a nice amount of IRD $$$ from "illegal activities."
Besides there's too many Businessman and former Top Politicians with business dealings with the criminal underworld.
Is it really true? Does your motto actually mean 'No domination without possums?'
ReplyDelete