Haha Im sure. I just hope he learned something from the conversation. Though that does take a willingness to admit when you are mistaken in a belief and Im not sure he has that ability, but I dont know the man personally.
Based on the brief conversation I had with him, you may have better luck hoping for a unicorn. ;)
My Thanks to Joe and Allison for that
At about 10.30 this morning my office phone rang. It was Bob McKoskrie, and he was not in a good mood.
Is there any information about why Friday 15th March? Was this atrocity intended to bury the climate action coverage? Could the murderer have been manged by the enemies of climate action, Mercer & Putin's cyber armies, or am I way of track?
The Police would have been quite busy with the Climate March, so that may have had something to do with it.
That's alarming. I'd formed the impression that they were making reasonable progress.
Things looked a little better to me after I attended the summer school event in Wellington last week, but there is definitely some cause for concern.
Seriously, is MOJ planning on not planning? Who let them think that's acceptable?
They are planning on planning (along with MoH). However, I'm not sure that they are entirely confident that a fully formed plan will be available within the very tight time frame.
We've got about 18 months before the election, so the plan will have to be fully formed and in place within a year or so from now in order for the electorate to be fully informed.
Notably, an even greater proportion of respondents – 78% – want to be voting in 2020 on a law already passed by Parliament.
Doug Sellman, Simon Adamson and I met with MoJ about this a couple of weeks ago. We flatly told them that going into the referendum without a fully-formed plan would be a disaster. I'll continue to harp on this for the forseeable future.
So experts in many fields, I would think, made a recommendation which they thought would benefit our society as a whole was just ignored because some business men didnt like it. As it would affect their industries "bottom line"?
Now that, is some arseoholic thinking, right there.
A lot of policy analysts were taken along for the ride by business, also. In 2011 I spoke to a group of policy analysts at the request of the Health Promotion Agency, and I told them flatly that the Alcohol Reform Bill would do almost no good because there were no reforms in it. They were not very pleased with my presentation that day.
An entirely reasonable idea, I just wonder how the liquor industry would like it. Not much I imagine with their work hat on, maybe a bit more with their caring parent hat on. A fragmented society breeds fragmented people hmmm.
I was just looking at the figures in the post. The Stuff article reads 10000 plants while the police info request reads 9000 plants taken. But hey whats a 1000 plants between police report and blazing headline.
The Law Commission recommended increasing the minimum age of purchase for alcohol to 20 years in 2010. This was roundly ignored during the discussions around "Alcohol Law Reform" in 2011, primarily due to industry pressure (I believe).
There's a forthcoming amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act which will explicitly guide police discretion away from prosecution where a health-based response would be more appropriate, or where prosecution would not be in the public interest. It's a pretty big deal.
My reading of that is the amendment is that it requires the Police to justify using prosecution, which in a sense is de facto decriminalization (which you already know I'm in favor of).
Hence my concern about giving the Police more discretion. On the whole I think it would be better if they had less.
When you give the Police full discretion, they tend to continue arresting those of us with higher levels of skin pigmentation...