Our rising enthusiasm for discussing cannabis may be attributed to a number of factors. Considerable cannabis law reform has occurred elsewhere without catastrophe. Aside from the Netherlands' decriminalisation in the 1970s and various permutations within several states of Australia, some countries have gone further.
In 2001, Portugal decriminalised all drugs, resulting in significant enforcement cost savings, reduced use in some areas and increased uptake of drug treatment. There has been complete cannabis legalisation in Colorado and Washington, despite the US's pivotal role in promoting globalised prohibition and its resourcing of the War on Drugs (more than $1 trillion spent over the last four decades).
Stepping further over the line, Uruguay legalised cannabis this year. Again the emphasis has shifted from enforcement to health.
These and factors such as the legal highs debacle have certainly got people in this country thinking differently about cannabis. The latest Herald-Digipoll survey reported almost 80 per cent of respondents wanted cannabis to be "partially legalised", with 63 per cent supporting legal medicinal use and 16 per cent wanting it completely legalised. Only 19 per cent opted for the status quo (prohibition), significantly down from 45 per cent by the same poll in June.
However, despite an increasingly engaged public debate on cannabis law reform, those responsible for enacting legislation remain curiously quiet. National, Labour, United Future and the Conservatives have stated they are opposed to reform, with only the Greens favouring decriminalisation and Mana supporting medicinal availability.
Politicians' failure to even acknowledge the benefits of abandoning an obviously futile policy is increasingly under scrutiny.
Comments by Drug Foundation executive director Ross Bell that there is "a point blank refusal on just allowing the conversation, on learning lessons from other countries that have tried alternative approaches" sum this up.
As Bell and many others know, there are numerous alternatives to strict cannabis prohibition that would reduce economic and social costs, barriers to education and improve health. The police alone could shift much of their more than $100 million annual spend to more urgent areas.
It might be that a more rational response to this issue is found closer to grassroots politics. In May Auckland Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse proposed that grasping the nettle of reform is really the only way forward.
While Bell and others characterise the cannabis debate as a health issue, not a legal one, in my view we can go further; it is actually a social issue and everyone should engage with this.
Perhaps it is time for a national drug policy hui, with agreement to implement decisions and politicians having observer status only.
Geoff Noller is a Dunedin-based medical anthropologist, with an interest in drug policy and substance use.
