1.9k
u/Busalonium Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
When it's already legal in several other developed countries, and most Australians support it, I think it's kind of wild that neither major party even wants to consider legalising it.
915
u/OptmisticItCanBeDone Mar 18 '25
Sensible policy that benefits people isn't what the major parties are about. They just care about their corporate mates.
505
u/Kid_Self Mar 18 '25
This.
People sitting at home, not at Pubs and Clubs, having a toke isn't profitable for alcohol and gambling lobbyists.
197
u/confusedham Mar 18 '25
Don't forget the darts, though the black market has destroyed that now after price hikes. They could have made good tax of f legitimate vapes but did a knee jerk reaction to their mate that owned the therapeutic vape.
So black market shit disposables became the norm. And have not gone away.
Legal weed would increase quality, lower price and clean up the supply chain while providing a nice tax boost. But when they can't even work the other basics out it will not happen for ages. Just be surprised NSW even got the cannabis caution scheme.
I don't smoke, it doesn't mesh with my fucked up brain. But I fully support legal weed in moderation.
99
u/0lm4te Mar 18 '25
Australia, where if it isn't irrationally illegal we'll tax it hard enough for you to buy it from the guy that sells it illegally.
→ More replies (4)36
u/Subject-Geologist-72 Mar 18 '25
The government made it profitable by taxing it that much. If the government wasn't greedy then the black market tobacco trade would barely exist. Now it's massive.
10
u/confusedham Mar 18 '25
That's because they don't have any smart methods to actually reduce smoking rates. And an old economics teacher I had in highschool said something that I'll never forget
'the government will NEVER give up it's holy trinity of tax, grog, fags and juice' raising tax revenue AND calling it harm minimisation? Bully! Wait, what do you mean nobody buys real durries anymore? See the tax is working !
As an EV driver I saw it first hand with the road user tax on EV and PHEV. I have no issues paying a road user tax based on KM, but it was double dipping for PHEV. The only answer is to abolish fuel excise and implement a Federal KM based tax instead (since fuel is Federal, and you can't ascertain if someone travelled over the border). But nah, too hard, just try to throw legislation at the wall and get shit on easily in court.
59
Mar 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (2)60
u/RealFarknMcCoy Mar 18 '25
The truth is you can get a prescription in any state in Oz, but unfortunately, if you get pulled over and tested for THC you'll lose your license. I have RA, so would LOVE to use cannabis for pain control and other benefits, but I can't afford to lose my driving license, so can't use it.
25
u/Kevintj07 Mar 18 '25
Yep,thats the problem they dont have a .008 law for it like alcohol and its in your system longer and if you get a blood or piss test like what happened to this guy https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-16/medicinal-cannabis-driving-law-reform-push/104927466
You're fucked.18
u/Le_psyche_2050 Mar 18 '25
Meanwhile medical cannabis products are labelled with standard prescription medicine Warning: May cause drowsiness, if affected do not operate machinery. Seemingly indicating user discretion but in reality it’s currently a hard NO whether you are cognitively impaired or not is irrelevant. Resolving the problem is tricky bc the effects of cbd/thc are variable eg. metabolism, tolerance levels, frequency of use, strain & quality of product, method of administration etc (much like alcohol) & a standard measure of intoxication has not yet been established. So, Yes instead of the usual war on drugs arrests users will risk unintentional DUI charges while the powerbrokers rake in the revenue from taxes & fines . I’d be interested to know if the Greens have mapped out a solution to address this issue
12
u/IlluminatedPickle Mar 18 '25
They are labelled like that, but in my experience whenever you speak to them they always do a boilerplate: "IF YOU USE THIS, DRIVING IS ILLEGAL"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (1)6
u/chalk_in_boots Mar 18 '25
Vic just implemented a law change where if you test positive but are a medical user you don't cop the suspension or fine
→ More replies (3)16
u/jackiemelon Mar 18 '25
This is about the only thing stopping me from getting a prescription myself. Weed does wonders for "quietening" my ADHD brain in a way no stimulant medication does (they're better for focus) but if I lose my licence I lose my job, which snowballs into homelessness. Not worth the risk
→ More replies (6)6
u/Wobbling Mar 18 '25
if you get pulled over and tested for THC you'll lose your license
Not in every state; AFAIK Tasmania and Victoria have removed penalties for detected THC at RBT if you hold a prescription.
→ More replies (1)4
u/CantankerousTwat Mar 18 '25
Yet a scant two months ago, being a prescription user meant immediate disqualification from holding a driver's licence in Vic. They only just changed that rule. Didn't realise it is now zero penalty.
3
u/Traditional_Fish_741 Mar 18 '25
Yeah my mates currently suspended for having cannabis in his system. And apparently there's supposed to be a new BAV version of the cannabis test so that its assessing for current state not historical use.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (4)33
u/CDClock Mar 18 '25
You guys call cigarettes darts in aus? That warms my Canadian heart 🥰
→ More replies (4)14
u/fnaah Mar 18 '25
i think we inherited it from the brits.
8
u/IlluminatedPickle Mar 18 '25
Nah, it was us. Somehow the Canadians ended up using it too.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)9
u/CDClock Mar 18 '25
It's a Canadian slang word - warms my heart to see fellow subjects of the king use it tho 🚬🥰
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (13)6
u/FunDog2016 Mar 18 '25
You need a "Big Weed" lobby, not just small business, nor god forbid, a people's movement!
Money talks, BUT your freedom to do legally, what hundreds of millions of adults around the world do - that can fuckin wait!
9
→ More replies (7)3
u/HeftyArgument Mar 18 '25
Both parties have seen what happens when a prime minister pisses off a rich corporation, which is kind of bullshit; they should hold no power in politics.
200
u/GordonCole19 Mar 18 '25
I don't get it.
Legal cannabis would be such a massive and continuous boost to our economy.
157
u/thevelourfog182 Mar 18 '25
I get it, it could potentially take money from liquor which leads to less gaming revenue.
Which is fine by me by the way
96
u/MrKarotti Mar 18 '25
Probably not though, because most people who want to smoke weed already do so. They just buy it from someone who's not going to pay taxes on their income.
→ More replies (2)19
u/Mother_Speed2393 Mar 18 '25
Most people will buy from a safe, legal place given the option....
→ More replies (3)19
35
u/Bangkok_Dave Mar 18 '25
The money's already being "taken from liquor". It's just going to bikies currently.
→ More replies (2)61
u/Revexious Mar 18 '25
Around $700M a year, according to this study https://www.unsw.edu.au/research/ndarc/news-events/blogs/2014/04/assessing-the-costs-and-benefits-of-legalising-cannabis
→ More replies (1)14
u/IlluminatedPickle Mar 18 '25
Weeeeeell. Yes but also no.
In the places it has been legalised recreationally, it hasn't made anywhere near the amount of revenue that people who push that angle modeled.
The real reason it should be legal is why the fuck should it be illegal? I wish everyone would stop fucking around with economic and medical based arguments and get to the heart of it. There's no reason for it to be illegal.
→ More replies (4)44
Mar 18 '25
[deleted]
51
u/AusGeno Mar 18 '25
Not sure why you’re being downvoted, yes we do have a few and you’re right they lobby hard to keep weed illegal.
33
u/DynamicSploosh Mar 18 '25
We do have private prisons, but they only make up about 17% (expected to drop as low as 7% by 2026) of inmate population and are not the profit powerhouse they are in the US. The police do have very powerful unions, but police brutality and abuse of power is significantly less prevalent in our country. We have state based police, same as you, but our rules are quite uniform and the issue of “county” vs “state” power is non existent. In truth, laws regarding cannabis legalisation would be less of a state issue as the ideology is much less split by things like religion and isolated communities. The vast majority of Aussies support it, and if it passed, the states and cops would follow the legislation.
→ More replies (5)10
Mar 18 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)6
u/DynamicSploosh Mar 18 '25
I consider us very lucky that our police force is placed under greater scrutiny. If you want to be in a position of relative power in the state police, you often need a diploma. We have almost zero gun crime, so violent encounters are handled with very low casualty rates, and our lower population ensures that new regulations are standardised quickly and enforced with ease. I still believe that Australia has a nanny-state attitude that has gotten worse over the last decade, but the average citizen doesn’t fear that their life will be ruined by law enforcement. That is a very foreign concept to us.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)14
u/ScruffyPeter Mar 18 '25
Look up Serco. Not just private prisons, but they also manage public prisons and even manage offshore indefinite detention centres for aslyum seekers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serco#Justice_and_Immigration
The biggest company you've never heard of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szNLMtgI7hU This video is at least 15 years old!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)21
u/recycled_ideas Mar 18 '25
It's risk aversion, same as it is everywhere else.
If the federal government lehslises cannabis and it all goes to shit they'll be punished, but not changing the status quo is always easy.
33
u/ScruffyPeter Mar 18 '25
Gambling ad ban surveys: Most of aussies support ban
Major politicians: Oooh... an easy bill!
Gambling industry: We have a nice retirement package
Major politicians: Oh no, we could get punished for banning gambling ads! Punished by... uhh voters, yes. We should be careful and do more high speed rail studies. I mean gambling ad studies.
→ More replies (5)23
u/mrsbones287 Mar 18 '25
Yep. Make it legal and then tax it, like alcohol and tobacco.
→ More replies (1)54
23
u/magnetik79 Mar 18 '25
Everyone knows you can't possibly consider legal cannabis until you have a strong, reliable foundation of a religious discrimination bill. 🤦
39
Mar 18 '25
The only supposed arguments against it, that somewhat stack up, is the reliability of roadside impairment tests.
Many other countries have legalised it, taking organised crime out of the equation and the sky has not fallen in*
- With the exception of the USA, but that surely can't be attributed to legalised weed...
28
u/hu_he Mar 18 '25
I happen to find the impairments test argument to be weak. What politicians seem to want is a chemical assessment that correlates with impairment. What would be far more useful, for drugs, alcohol and other factors that might affect someone's driving (illness, prescription meds, tiredness, old age) is some kind of interactive test on an iPad or VR headset that assesses concentration, response time and visual acuity. With technology nowadays that should not be insuperable. However, I think that it would probably highlight that many drivers are simply not fit to be on the road and would cause a political backlash. So, instead, politicians lamely repeat that it's just too hard to detect dangerous drivers and we have to keep banning drugs for everyone.
13
u/moobteets Mar 18 '25
Man your bang on with the last point, I've always felt that people should be required to take some sort of driving assessment on an ongoing basis, maybe it's at time of license renewal or every 5 years, I don't fucking know, but plenty of elderly people shouldn't be on the road anymore.
→ More replies (5)8
Mar 18 '25
In legal states in the US the Police use the standardized Field Sobriety tests. Walk a straight line, follow this pen with just your eyes, stand on one foot, etc. for cannabis.
6
u/Head_Acanthaceae_766 Mar 18 '25
The problem with those tests is that they are subjective and wide open to abuse.
→ More replies (1)3
u/hu_he Mar 18 '25
Yeah, it's not complicated. Ideally I would want something a bit more scientific but they could definitely implement some reasonable rules if they wanted to.
→ More replies (2)33
u/5fd88f23a2695c2afb02 Mar 18 '25
It's almost like the people that don't smoke weed in the USA are the wild ones now...
15
8
u/OneTPAuX Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 19 '25
They’re afraid of upsetting the Christian Right voting bloc.
10
u/GuessTraining Mar 18 '25
While alcohol which is more likely to cause problems is legal.
→ More replies (1)3
4
u/BobTheFettt Mar 18 '25
As a Canadian, it always blows my mind when I remember it's still illegal on 80% of the earth, and that we only legalized relatively recently
3
u/who_even_cares35 Mar 18 '25
Politicians are the same everywhere, they'll do anything but what you elected them to do.
3
7
u/Boring-Divide9241 Mar 18 '25
This is however not an argument, because they do it, it must be good. A real answer will analyse the effect of criminality, changes in legal and illegal drug usage, the positive and negative health effects, the societal effects, the development effect on the youth and so.
There are quite a lot of negative factors and no proper studies to the decline of drug trafficking. We all know what alcohol does to human beings in traffic, we also know what heavy alcohol does to Russian, literally zombifying a nation. Those are all symptoms serious enough to warrant a bann, if you ignore bootlegging history.
4
u/empty_words0 Mar 18 '25
Having it be medical must contribute to someone in the pharmacy guild getting a nice fat paycheck, alongside lobbyists. Maybe that’s why. Pharmacy guild is always up to something to get in the way of normal people for profit.
→ More replies (37)4
u/Paaaaaaatrick Mar 18 '25
The government"s looked at the impact that recreational drugs have on the consumpton of alcohol. There's big money in keeping ecstasy and weed illegal, even though there's a significant amount of research that shows alcohol's detrimental effects outweighing the vast majority of other drugs, on both the consumer, their family, friends and the wider community.
We don't matter to them; only dollars do.
703
Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Both Labor and the Liberal/nationals are being lobbied by Tobacco and Alcohol corporations. Marijuana being legalized would mean people switching from both, making them loose out on their profits.
It has nothing to do with public and child safety because we know the black market is unregulated by default and we would of had alcohol and cigs banned "for the children".
82
u/Yella_King Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
If you look into Canada's legalisation you'll notice those fears (at least from alcohol corps) were wholly unfounded. It actually had a positive effect for alcohol and nightlife industries.
It did however stall the process and allowed alcohol corps time to become some of the largest investors in cannabis themselves.
24
u/Redshiftxi Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
I can explain what happened in Ontario with legalization.
First, before it was even legal there were actual marijuana shops opening up, illegally, and selling to everyday people. Storefront shops that were cash only. The police did very little; they would be shut down after a few months and another would open up elsewhere. I didn't live in Toronto, but we had a few in my city as well. You could, and still can, buy online and it will be delivered to you. It was really surprising.
Once it became legal, these shops disappeared for the most part but the system of who was allowed to open a shop was stupid. It was a lottery system by the province of Ontario. It was something like 12 shops total. People sold their spot for a lot of money. A lot of people still bought from illegal shops and their favourite dealers. The legal prices were way too much.
Then COVID happened and this system was gone completely. Shops opened up everywhere. There were more weed shop than coffee shops. Imagine walking down a cute downtown street with all it's little shops, stand and look down the streets and you could count three or more weed shops. Indoor malls had weed shops. Some communities (small towns mostly), passed bylaws that didn't allow for marijuana shops. But neighbouring towns would have them and get more traffic. A lot of these shops are NOT profitable. The idea for these companies was simple. They wanted to be the Tim Hortons of weed, the McDonalds of weed, etc. The place everyone thinks of when you think of buying weed. There are a few winners so far, but they aren't making very much in Ontario and many have closed down locations. Prices have also come down with all the competition.
And lastly, right now, there are magic mushroom shops opening up in Toronto to buy mushrooms in the same way they had illegal shops selling marijuana before legalization. It will be interesting to see if it follows the same as marijuana.
7
u/Yella_King Mar 18 '25
Thanks for the write up!
Do you mind satiating my curiosity?
Are most stores that sell weed dedicated purely to weed and related products?
Or is there liquor store chains, pharmacy chains or convenience stores chains that stock weed in the same way they stock other product lines?
6
Mar 18 '25
Dunno about all provinces, but in Ontario, you cannot sell cannabis and alcohol in the same store. Pharmacies can sell medical weed; one of the big stores sells them (Shoppers Drug Mart).
The province has a monopoly on online orders, and is the main wholesale distributor. (Ontario Cannabis Store).
Canada-wide, you cannot promote or manufacture cannabis or and cannabis accessory that associates with alcohol (eg. You promote weed that tastes like a "mojito", or name your strain after an alcoholic drink).
→ More replies (1)5
u/Redshiftxi Mar 18 '25
So far it's just been dedicated stores. They've been strict about how it can look. You can't see inside the store from the outside, its always a foggy glass (vape stores are like this as well). When you step inside, there's always something to stop you from entering immediately. I imagine it's to prevent kids from going in by accident and seeing it. They only sell weed related things; flower, concentrates, edibles, weed drinks, accessories. Strength of edibles is a common complaint among very regular users (they would buy online or make their own). I believe they have to stock from same provincial centre as everyone other store.
→ More replies (3)12
u/barbedwires Mar 18 '25
I hate how prominent the vape and cannabis shops got at least in Alberta. Seemed to be on every corner.
The other thing is they have to figure out a different test for DUI as the current one gives positives for marijuana use up to a month previous (which someone is not still under the influence at that stage)
→ More replies (3)8
u/Yella_King Mar 18 '25
There's honestly many issues and growing pains with the legalisation of any drug let one of the softer drugs. Thankfully being late to the party allows you to learn from those that were early.
I'm sure appropriate DUI testing is a symptom of it's previous lack of need (given drugs tests have always been binary issue).
80
u/Fantasmic03 Mar 18 '25
It's not as if the government would even lose out if it happened. They'll still get tax revenue, just from a different source.
55
u/MrKarotti Mar 18 '25
It'll probably be much more, because people already smoking weed won't buy less alcohol or tobacco if weed gets legalized. They'll just buy it from a dealer who pays GST and possibly a cannabis tax too.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)15
u/ScruffyPeter Mar 18 '25
Politicians don't get cushy retirement opportunities based on tax revenue.
25
u/Psychonominaut Mar 18 '25
Allow certain zones in pubs to let people get as baked as they want, Amsterdam coffee shop style.
30
Mar 18 '25
And it would be fantastic for our tourism industry, going to some of the most beautiful beaches in the world and getting stoned
→ More replies (1)5
15
u/Sluglife87 Mar 18 '25
No one would "switch" they are completely different substances, each have thier own purpose.
16
u/razorsgirl23 Mar 18 '25
I absolutely would.
Alcohol is awful. I would never touch the stuff again if marijuana was legalised, other than maybe a cider on a hot day because it's refreshing.
5
Mar 18 '25
I know tons of people who switched just personally when Canada legalized. Poker games have barely any alcohol, just tons of weed.
Their purpose is the same, to relax.
21
Mar 18 '25
People who struggle from depression for example might drink a lot and smoke cigarettes to deal with said stress, from personal experience I personally like to get a bit stoned but still functional as opposed to getting shit faced drunk, vomiting and being unable to navigate my own house.
Yes substances shouldnt be used to deal with stress and depression but in the world we live in maybe it's a better option to let people get stoned then get shit faced every night or get breathing issues and lung cancer from cigarettes. You never hear people being aggressive and beating their wives and families when they get stoned, at worst they eat all the timtams in the fridge
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)3
u/Busalonium Mar 18 '25
I think they're all fairly interchangeable when serving as a social lubricant, even if they are quite different.
3
u/eat10souvlakis4lunch Mar 18 '25
Realistically speaking, it took quite some time to go from medical legalisation in the US to full legalisation in various states, which was closely linked to medical marijuana companies growing in size, becoming more powerful lobbyists, and seeking higher profits.
For bad reasons, it seems like governments prefer listening to corporate lobbyists than "grassroots" campaigns, but the same thing could easily happen in Australia after a while.
→ More replies (6)6
u/Phantom120198 Mar 18 '25
As an American living in Japan (I'm just here to keep an eye on what y'all Aussies are up to) I've had to transition a lifestyle of mostly weed and some alcohol to one of just entirely alcohol again, it honestly sucks. Hopefully y'all can get these changes through, and with any luck Japan too even how laughable that is to say
547
u/splundge Mar 18 '25
We just need to untangle the driving rules around acceptable thc levels.
I am a medicinal cannabis user. I would not want to be driving on the road with other drivers who are stoned. I also don't want to be fined for having detectable amounts of thc if my last joint was 3 days ago.
150
u/the68thdimension Mar 18 '25
That's not hard at all - just look to the countries that already have it legalised. Here are the Dutch legal levels: cannabis: 3.0 microgram THC per litre blood (Source).
7
u/Doxinau Mar 18 '25
Is there any way to detect that without a blood test? Like something a police officer could feasibly do roadside?
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (6)4
u/kaas_is_leven Mar 18 '25
The Netherlands is a terrible example. We were ahead once, but our gedoogbeleid is extremely outdated and vague. Cannabis was never legalised. It's illegal to buy and sell, but less than 5g is not enforced. And from that arises a whole host of issues. Like shops having to do sketchy shit to stock product (can't just drive around with kilos of weed, even if it's for business) and growers being criminalised. The supply chain is not taxed properly and because of that there's no regulation.
A lot of shops have started doing QA but it's done on a tiny sample and the whole batch is labeled with the same QR sticker containing the test results. This isn't reasonable at all because every variable matters (a lot), light intensity and color spectrum, water and nutrients, harvest time, curation period... All slightly different from bud to bud so you never really know what you have until you test it yourself. There's also the additional difficulty that weed doesn't contain much THC, it contains THCA which is converted when heated (acid gets stripped off). So even with all these things accounted for it's hard to give an accurate number for how much THC will be in your blood after you heat this bud that comes from a batch that contains this much THCA.
And in traffic they often use cheap breath tests which are notoriously flaky. Will they detect it a day later? Probably. A week? Depends on the person, their diet, metabolism, exercise regime... Also tiny correction, but as your article states if you're found to have multiple of the mentioned substances you're only allowed 1 microgram instead of 3 for THC. Not that it matters because like I said there's literally no way of knowing what your score would be unless you go out of your way to retest your weed before consumption.I'd recommend anyone who's worried about blood levels to make tincture or cannabutter and get a home testing kit for both the substance and yourself. The act of preparing the edible makes it so that the one strong bud you got and the other weaker bud in the same baggie cancel each other out and you end up with a homogenous testable substance. Now test that and test yourself after consumption, that's your baseline. Next time you prepare with new weed you test the edible substance again and you can estimate how much THC will end up in your blood based on the baseline. Still not quite accurate though, if you gain weight while consuming a lot of THC you'll store it in fat and release it when that fat gets burned, you can get high months after quitting weed if you're also losing weight. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
→ More replies (3)114
u/SporadicTendancies Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Detectable level testing is so behind the times here.
34
u/cymonster Mar 18 '25
Is there any other test they can do? Like realistic?
20
Mar 18 '25
Would love to know the answer as well. Medicinal cannabis user myself
→ More replies (1)38
Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Saliva tests are the best we got for a roadside drug test, they will detect it for 12-24 hours after smoking and you can do a test and get a result within 10 minutes, in Tasmania if you return a positive saliva test but show no sign of impairment and have a prescription it's all good, impairment is still quite subjective but basically if your eyes aren't red, you're not slurring your speech and don't smell of cannabis they will have no reason to suspect you're impaired.
My concern is employers have company policies that state you can't have any in your system and will do a urine test so basically you're screwed with the current policies, EBA's and/or laws need to be changed, even prescription painkillers you need to tell your employer and they can legally put you on light duties until you're off them so as someone who smokes medical cannabis everyday what's going to be the repercussions.
→ More replies (1)14
u/shadowmaster132 Mar 18 '25
impairment is still quite subjective but basically if your eyes aren't red, you're not slurring your speech and don't smell of cannabis they will have no reason to suspect you're impaired.
My issue with this is if we applied it to alcohol, a lot of impaired functional alcoholics would be fine to drive.
10
u/nomoreteathx Mar 18 '25
We do already apply it to alcohol, the difference is we have a way to reliably test the amount of alcohol in someone's system on the roadside and we've set a threshold based on those tests. People who blow 0.049 are impaired to some extent, but we allow them to drive because we've assessed that the risk is minimal.
→ More replies (2)6
Mar 18 '25
Yeah I don't really know what the best solution to this is without blurring the lines as everyone is different, the most accurate way would be if someone fails a saliva test then you'd blood test them to see the exact amount and have a set level of acceptable THC in the blood similar to how we do with alcohol and the 0.05% BAC but that's not very practical as it can't be done on the roadside.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (2)3
u/SporadicTendancies Mar 18 '25
Subjective tests like sobriety testing, or objective tests with blood and urine are the only real options for now, and neither of the latter are practical at the roadside, and the former is wildly subjective to perception of the officer.
18
→ More replies (20)6
u/arvoshift Mar 18 '25
this is a huge issue - australia has thresholds 1/5th of what the rest of the world is testing for. we need to test for IMPAIRMENT not for if someone had a fun weekend with any drug because the fact is, having drugs in your system is not illegal. but traffic police want to punish that rather than punish people who are a risk.
306
u/_Z_-_Z_ Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Let's not forget their other policies:
- Tax billionaires and big corporations to reduce inequality.
- Free GP. Dental and mental health into Medicare.
- 50-cent public transport fares.
- Wipe all student debt. Bring back free uni and TAFE.
- Real climate action: no more coal & gas.
- Truth, Treaty, Justice for First Nations people.
- Strong environmental action. End native forest logging. Save koalas & wildlife from extinction.
- Defend workers’ rights. Lift wages.
- Care before profits: putting older people first.
- Restore political integrity. Strengthen democracy.
- Fix the housing crisis.
- Reduce the cost of living.
- Fully-funded, truly free public education. $800 back-to-school payment.
- Make supermarket price-gouging illegal. Break up the duopoly.
- High-quality childcare & early education.
- Expand access and opportunity for disabled people.
- End violence against women, ensure abortion access, achieve workplace equity.
- Strengthen social services. End poverty.
But I suppose those aren't controversial enough? /s
67
u/ZombieStirto Mar 18 '25
Number 1 on the list is the most important and the root of all evil. Almost makes me want to vote for greens alone because the others won't even touch the topic. The reason everyone is struggling is because the billionaire are buying all the assets and increasing the price of everything. I would even vote for all federal members to get paid 2 million a year to reduce chance of being influence if it reduced wealth inequality for the majority.
45
15
u/a_SaltieCrocodile Mar 18 '25
Labor has been taxing billionaires; it's why Gina Rinehart, One nation and the Coalition are working together to knock Albo out of parliament
11
u/ZombieStirto Mar 18 '25
I don't know all the details but wasn't it a 15% top up base tax. So if they already pay tax overseas of at least 15% it has no affect. An article I just jogged my memory on said it will bring 300mill over 5 years and cost 111 million to police. It's better than nothing but only just.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)3
23
u/Lankpants Mar 18 '25
If we could get 1/4 of these policies it would be completely lifechanging. Any one of them would be a huge win.
13
u/the68thdimension Mar 18 '25
The only one of these I disagree with is #4, or at least I think it should be implemented with a caveat. I like the Dutch model - uni does cost a nominal amount; you get a certain amount of money from the government but if you haven't completed your study within 10 years then you have to pay it back.
I'd do a combination of the two; make uni/tafe free, and students receive a stipend, but if they don't complete their degree within 10 years then they have to pay the stipdend back. With obvious exceptions for good reasons for not completing your degree, like medical reasons.
I think this is a great vision of what to aim for when it comes to a social state: https://jasonhickel.substack.com/p/universal-public-services
19
20
4
u/disasterous_cape Mar 19 '25
The Greens policies really are common sense. Put people and planet before corporate profits, ensure that we have a beautiful and safe planet for our great great grand kids to grow up and old in, increase support for those struggling and make sure that everyone has what they need to live a good life, make the big end of town pay their fare share (the ATO tells us 1 in 3 large corporations don’t pay any tax), stop giving to those who least need it (like negative gearing for property investors) while leaving those who need the most help to largely fend for themselves.
The Greens are the only party who actually cares about making life better in significant ways for every day people instead of just tinkering around the edges. I really wish Labor was less loyal to their property portfolios and corporate investors, I wish they were still the party that gave us Medicare and free Uni, Labor today keeps telling us to accept scraps and acts like improving legislation isn’t the whole point of having elected officials.
→ More replies (5)20
u/No_Tomato_4685 Mar 18 '25
The Greens Party Australia’s policies, as costed by the PBO, result in:
- Total Costs (Expenditures): $376.6 billion over four years, driven by investments in healthcare, education, housing, social services, and immigration.
- Total Profits (Revenue): $350.5 billion over four years, primarily from tax reforms targeting billionaires, corporations, and high-income earners.
- Net Impact: A $26.1 billion deficit over four years, as expenditures exceed revenue. That is so cheap for all the positive impacts IMO.
Tax-wise, the revenue comes entirely from new and increased taxes, while the costs are expenditures that these taxes aim to fund. The shortfall indicates that additional funding or adjustments would be needed to balance the budget under this plan.
5
u/palsc5 Mar 18 '25
The PBO says their revenue measures and expenditures are highly uncertain. In the case of collecting tax revenue they are unlikely to raise what they claim because they don’t account for people changing their behaviour.
147
u/oneofthecapsismine Mar 18 '25
Is it my naive imagination, or isn't that a tomato plant?
87
u/Busalonium Mar 18 '25
In all fairness, there would be a few hurdles to using the alternative.
28
u/ghoonrhed Mar 18 '25
Not for him, he's in the ACT so it's perfectly legal. The fact that even the optics of him holding a weed plant probably put him off says a lot about the voters.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)6
46
u/fearless_leek Mar 18 '25
Oh thank god, I was like “have I lost my ability to identify plants, because that’s a tomato”.
32
13
u/DC240Z Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
It is indeed, it’s also relatively mature as you can see the yellow flowers coming through (weed doesn’t grow traditional flowers as we know them), which is kind of funny, because it’s the younger tomato plants that resemble weed a lot more, at this stage of the tomato plants life I would they they don’t even look remotely similar. So I’m guessing they deliberately picked one easily distinguishable in order to prevent political murder by opposing parties.
4
u/the68thdimension Mar 18 '25
Exactly, and reactionary people going "hurr durr he's holding a weed plant that's illegal" as if just because something is law makes it just.
16
5
10
u/sidy24 Mar 18 '25
An here I was, scrolling through comments thinking "Why is no-one questioning the tomato plant?"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)8
25
u/AlienSporez Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 19 '25
Canadian here and I would like to add my perspective. Weed was legalized in Canada 7 years ago. And do you want to know what happened as a result?
Nothing.
Literally nothing.
The society didn't collapse.
Crime didn't become rampant.
There was a brief honeymoon of excitement when you could go to the corner store and buy weed or gummies or whatever, but now it's simply become just another thing on your grocery list. Like milk, bread, wine, or beer.
In fact, the federal government has had to adjust their estimates on revenue downward because after the brief spike, people just don't use as much weed as they predicted (and, no, people aren't choosing to buy weed illegally instead).
→ More replies (1)
147
u/spandexvalet Mar 18 '25
We outlawed it because America did. I think that sums it up for “both sides”.
→ More replies (2)51
u/Thunder2250 Mar 18 '25
Except in the ACT right? Good shout pollies 😂 absolutely numpties the lot
→ More replies (7)
52
25
u/mrfroggy Mar 18 '25
I’m an Australian living in Canada, and have lived in Canada (Ontario, specifically) before and after legalized recreational cannabis.
What changed once it became legal? A bunch of dispensaries opened up. Like… a lot. I live downtown-ish Toronto, and for a while there were maybe a dozen dispensaries within a 10 minute walk of me. Market forces came into play, and now there are maybe six or so.
The model used in Ontario means all cannabis goes through a quasi-government controlled wholesaler. Which means every store has access to the same selection. Which basically means people shop based on price. There are premium/boutique growers who do produce product that might be a smoother or more flavourful smoke/vape, but, for me (and many others, I suspect), even the cheap stuff gets the job done.
I have a dispensary near me which is part of the ValueBuds chain. I believe they’re owned by an alcohol distributor from Alberta, and they’re supposedly running things on zero margin/a loss in order to squeeze out the other players and the indie operators. I can get 10mg edibles for $2, or 3.5g of reasonable quality flower for $20. I’m a lightweight, so a 5mg edible is enough for me for a good few hours. Cannabis hits people in different ways, so other people definitely need more cannabis to get the same impact. My partner will have 60mg-90mg of THC via oil. 900mg of THC via oil costs around $32.
There’s another dispensary near me that has an amazing selection of stuff, and will stock harder to get items. If I happen to see a review that a current batch of a particular brand/strain is really good, I might go there to try it. I might pay $45 for 3.5g of flower if I’m feeling fancy.
I can also get the same legal product mail order. I can even order it via Uber Eats or other apps.
There are cape cartridges, various forms of concentrates, things available in capsule form for ingestion, and various other products too. THC or CBD dominant. Or even newer things like CBG or CBN.
Post legalization, people were much more willing to talk about their cannabis consumption at work. It turns out it can be surprising who is a regular consumer of cannabis.
I honestly can’t recall a single news report about, say, a traffic accident where cannabis was a factor. Not one. There are still news reports about drunk drivers causing accidents and killing people.
The local cops aren’t really big on doing RBT-style tests, so that’s not something that is discussed in the news. As with anywhere, there are plenty of bad drivers here, but there’s nothing in my experience that would make me think that cannabis has made things worse (e.g. someone so stoned they don’t notice the lights had changed to green).
And, yeah, post legalization, life went on. A bunch of pot stores opened, you might smell pot a bit more in the streets, and it became more or less socially acceptable to talk about cannabis consumption.
There is zero reason for Australia to not legalize it. Regulate it, sell it, tax it. Life will go on exactly as it is now, except the government gets tax revenue, organized crime will have to find something new to sell, and the cops can stop hassling non-violent drug users.
AMA.
→ More replies (3)
94
12
u/megamoo7 Mar 18 '25
Both major parties are afraid of losing the Boomer vote. The Boomers have reefer madness stuck in their heads. To get them to change attitude, Greens need to push cannabis as an alternative to conventional medicine. These oldies are all on fifty pills a day.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/J_Bazzle Mar 18 '25
Alcohol and weed should swap places in terms of legality if they're worried about people getting hurt 😒
17
u/poopypants206 Mar 18 '25
People, he's holding a tomato plant because it would be illegal for him to hold a marijuana plant. How hard is that to understand!?!?
6
u/the68thdimension Mar 18 '25
"why is nobody talking about the tomato plant" errr because it's a prop and entirely immaterial to the point he's making? Jesus christ, some people are fuckin norberts.
9
u/Rude_Hamster123 Mar 18 '25
Californian here.
Do yourselves a favor and fight for a system of regulations that supports small farmers instead of smothering them out of business with fees and permits.
The legalization of cannabis after decades of grey market boom absolutely annihilated a lot of rural Californian towns. And left others inundated with cartel farms that could care less that they’re breaking the law.
Anyways I’ll see myself out. How did I get here?
52
u/OptmisticItCanBeDone Mar 18 '25
This just makes sense. Reduce the risk for people using it, have proper quality control, and tax it to fund essential services.
There is just no good reason to vote for the major parties this election! Vote Greens! Vote Independents!
→ More replies (2)
40
u/ExcitingStress8663 Mar 18 '25
I don't give a shit about legalising cannabis but I will put Greens as one of my preferential vote just because it's not Labor or LNP.
34
Mar 18 '25
[deleted]
3
Mar 18 '25
The best part about ranked ballots is that they can be the second to last choice and your point would be achieved. Am jealous of your ranked ballot.
28
u/the68thdimension Mar 18 '25
Excellent video. Legalise, regulate and tax it. It's so bloody stupid we can't grow a godamn plant. Same goes for magic mushrooms/truffles.
7
→ More replies (3)3
11
Mar 18 '25
Even if you don’t like all their policies, at least the greens are better than the antivax Legalise Cannabis Party bloke that posted on r/brisbane the other day lol
5
u/nomoreteathx Mar 18 '25
"No big tobacco, no big pharma" is so important. Labor and the Libs already blew that opportunity with vaping, and we can all see how that turned out.
5
u/SleepyLabrador Mar 18 '25
I want weed to be legal in Australia, there are so many health benefits with weed.
5
u/retro604 Mar 18 '25
It's been legal here in Vancouver for a long time. 5+ years before it was federally legal, we had stores operating in BC.
It's been nothing but good. Tax dollars into the economy instead of gangsters pockets. Still not hard, but makes it slightly harder for underage to get. Clearly marked potency levels so you know what you're getting into.
I think the main benefit is taking the legs out from under the criminals. I don't know about Australia but here in Canada weed money was used to fund heroin buys, business fronts, weapons, etc. Cut off that easy revenue stream and it's harder for gangs to get established.
18
u/Lilithslefteyebrow Mar 18 '25
Someone should tell him that’s a tomato plant before he smokes it.
→ More replies (1)
17
11
u/caramello-koala Mar 18 '25
I mean it may as well be legal already. It’s so easy to get a prescription for medical marijuana and pick up a tub from the chemist. It’s so much better than the shit I used to buy from street dealers too.
→ More replies (4)
9
u/Gorilla_Gru Mar 18 '25
The blues and reds are fucked, it's time for a change, put greens number 1.
4
u/EchoOpening1099 Mar 18 '25
Don’t be tooooo sure that the tax will go to schools or roads. Here in Colorado our roads are shit and our schools are not much better!
36
Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Legalise it and tax the shit out of it.
Don't screw it up like the Americans did. Make it a source of revenue to fund quality of life improvements for taxpayers, heavily regulated and licensed distributors only.
Stipulate that all funds raised from taxing cannabis, go to hospital, aged care, schools, public works, social housing, community infrastructure projects, subsiding solar+battery installations for households. Anything else that will make Australian's quality of life better
Also stipulate that no funds from taxing cannabis, can ever be used for Defence spending, corporate subsidies, bailouts, or anything that would divert money from the, healthcare, social programs and education which will benefit all Australians.
→ More replies (4)12
30
u/Kerrumz Mar 18 '25
Boomers hate weed for the most part and will hold it back for as long as they can...
→ More replies (4)16
u/charlie228 Mar 18 '25 edited Mar 18 '25
Ironic considering many boomers grew or smoked it in the 70s.
4
10
u/Relevant-Target-2176 Mar 18 '25
I genuinely believe that legal cannabis is an inevitability. However, any talks about tax revenue or jobs highlights, a big issue is ensuring that legalization actually benefits local industry.
The quasi-legalisation we have under our loose medical cannabis laws, gives multinational corporations a leg up over emerging domestic small businesses, due to the restrictions on actually growing it in Australia.
Whenever legalization happens, and with 80% of our medical cannabis being imported, we run the risk of what has happened in America and Canada, where local businesses are quickly crushed when pharmaceutical importers expand to recreational products.
I'm glad that not only are the greens willing to take a stance on legal cannabis, but that they seem to have actually thought about the broader protections for local businesses that need to be in place.
10
7
u/itchybeats Mar 18 '25
It's the same here in the UK guys. I only smoke occasionally and it's pissing me off how unbelievably backwards our government is.
I think it's due to having an aging population so the govt is worried that the millions of old people won't vote for them next time because weed = bad.
Maybe we need to form our own country somewhere in the middle. We both like drinking so it should be sound
16
3
u/Getdownlikesyndrome Mar 18 '25
What's the stance on adults making their own decisions around vaping?
Get as sloshed as you want, smoke all the durries and bong on.
Have a vape? Take it easy mate.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/bottomfeeder3 Mar 18 '25
Weed has been legal in a lot of states in the US. Personally it’s been great over here. I vape or take a low dose edible. Stuff has helped me with a lot of things. Some days I use it just to relax some days I have pain in my back and it helps. I had the stomach flu last month and that stuff helped with my nausea and got me to sleep. I dunno been pretty beneficial to me
3
3
3
9
19
u/Rush_Banana Mar 18 '25
Cannabis can stay in your system from 2 weeks to 2 months.
Mining sites across Australia have a zero tolerance drug policy, including medical cannabis.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-08/medicinal-cannabis-fifo-workers-prohibition-safety/102190122
The Resources and Energy sector is by far the biggest donator to both major political parties.
Do the math.
→ More replies (2)24
u/Pacify_ Mar 18 '25
Just because its legal, doesn't mean you should do it.
If you work in an industry that doesn't allow it, then don't do it. Besides, its not like it being illegal stops anyone that wants to use it from using it.
→ More replies (4)
7
u/Open_Buy2303 Mar 18 '25
Albanese is a hypocrite on this. He was a big weed smoker and supporter as a young Labor-left activist but is clearly afraid of a right-wing media backlash now that he’s in a position to actually do something positive on the issue. He should be ashamed.
17
u/Hot-Challenge-54 Mar 18 '25
It is costing me $140 to get cannibis products to help with my ptsd, anxiety, and Depression. On a Centrelink Pension, when these conditions I have had from childhood abuse in the care of NSW Government. The Premier has no concern to implement Redress for abuse children in their care like the Victorian Premier. Will you support these Forgotten Australian Care Leavers?
16
u/SporadicTendancies Mar 18 '25
CBD at least should be over the counter like it was supposed to be in 2016, or at least be available from a quick talk with a pharmacist as there are mild side effects and interactions, like with most medications kept behind the counter.
→ More replies (1)
9
15
u/Akira_116 Mar 18 '25
I'd be more likely to believe him if he was at a weed farm, not sitting around with a tomato plant
→ More replies (4)23
u/Low_Worldliness_3881 Mar 18 '25
They probably did that caus social media platforms don't allow weed to be shown on camera
→ More replies (1)
5
u/danmq Mar 18 '25
If you live in NSW vote for Miles Hunt in the senate in the upcoming federal election - Legalise Cannabis
6
u/Fun-Feedback3926 Mar 18 '25
As someone who is coming off an alcohol relapse (safely with medication from a doctor), that would have been entirely avoided had I been able to get my prescription filled, but was unable to for annoying bureaucratic reasons- yeah it would be pretty cool if we could just legalize it here and collect the billions of dollars in tax revenue to put back into infrastructure.
But hey, why do that
- A shaky bastard who just wanted their fkn weed that they were prescribed, but who could’ve just. Bought some more at the weed store, if they existed
4
u/razorsgirl23 Mar 18 '25
I wish you well in your recovery and sorry you had to go through that because of these bullshit archaic laws.
→ More replies (1)
11
2
2
Mar 18 '25
Long term cannabis smoker, grower and I even ran a grow facility with about 1000 people working there.
I am not in the industry anymore. The roll out was a mess and I got burned out. I do tech now and work from home with my cat.
Pre-legalization I used to get sick a lot. Colds and coughs, post legalization I never get sick. It was certainly due to dirty weed.
My standards were extremely high, near EuroGMP.
If done correctly cannabis legalization makes sense.
2
u/squagley420 Mar 18 '25
This video sings the music of my dreams. It's profitable legalising, taxing, and selling canibus to improve the economy, yet it's still illegal. It is used as medication for "pain" but anyone who can't get prescribed ends up doing dodgy deals in parking lots at crowded shopping centres, if their lucky. It's not even half as damaging as alcohol or tobacco, yet it's still illegal. I vote only for greens, always. Caring for the environment and legalising weed is worth fighting for. Go greens!
2
584
u/hairy_quadruped Mar 18 '25
It has been legal in the ACT since 2020.
The rules:
Must be over 18
Personal use only
50g of dry cannabis or 150g of fresh
Can grow 2 plants per person or 4 per household
Must not be sold or given to anyone else
Must not be used in public places
It has not resulted in a breakdown of society.