Do you have a link for that graph?
I’m curious to know how harm was defined. I find it hard to believe the harm from meth use is less than that for heroin.
Also if that harm takes into account fetal alcohol and P babies.
A relative who works in a school observed the increasing number of P babies coming through schools, for which there is no plan for, and also the increased number of very expensive Harleys on the streets.
The school’s in Flaxmere.
Physiological harm from heroin, excluding fatal OD, is transitory and minor whereas from P it’s major and irreversible.
Specifically, there needs to a substantial concurrent increase in mental health funding for areas which deal with the mental health issues associated with marijuana.
A small number of people develop drug induced psychosis from use and those with a psychotic disorder most often get a lot worse. The most at risk appear to overlooked.
The early intervention teams - the community based teams that target ask risk young people - are already massively under resourced and it just keeps getting worse.
This is definitely a huge step forward in harm prevention in many ways.
I have a couple of concerns.
There’s been some comment that this will have a negative effect on gangs. That’s unlikely. The gangs have already moved into the manuka honey black market – a legal, rural product which has a very high added value medicinal range. Much like marijuana will be. They’ll continue to poach, coerce and intimidate to get a product they can then trade for P and its precursors which they then sell into their own communities.
The other is the govt really does need to start properly funding acute mental health and addiction services as they have promised. Stop with this 12,000 new mental health workers sleight of hand. It’s 12,000 possible places in a one day workshop. That’s fine for what it is but it is not training mental health workers.
The lack of government action on corruption in the apartment construction industry has been more than puzzling. The lack of action in reining in dishonest apartment management companies has also been puzzling.
Why has a center left government been so reluctant to act against corrupt business in order to protect home owners? Why the reluctance to make sure apartments are built to standard and are run for the benefit of the home owner and not the management companies?
Mystery solved. One of the major sources of secret New Zealand First funding has been revealed to be Conrad Properties – which just so happens to be an apartment development company:
The largest series of donations occurs from Conrad Properties Ltd or companies and trusts connected to that company. The company donated $27,500 to the foundation in 2017 and 2018, as well as $15,000 in 2019 to date.
Conrad Properties has a single, 100 per cent shareholder in the name of KA Law Nominees Ltd. Five other trusts with the same shareholding as Conrad Properties also made donations.
The consequences of such political corruption has been the destruction a great many peoples’ lives.
Yes it’s a huge problem in Australia as well. It does seem to be finally getting a bit more political traction than here in NZ.
The construction minister Salesa is proposing home owners pay the builder’s insurance. A bit like pedestrians having to pay motorists’ insurance in the event they cause injury driving down footpaths.
And that insurance would only cover 10 years.
It doesn’t suggest any faith in the building industry to do the right thing.
What shocks me is that banks here will still lend to people buying, especially apartments. We *know* that the vast majority are not fit for purpose but the banks will still lend against them.
It’s completely unethical. At some point the banks will pull the plug on apartments because of the losses they face but in the meantime many more people will be unwittingly drawn into this nightmare.
Catalan independence leaders appear to have learnt all the wrong lessons from Brexit. Holding ill-conceived referenda to force through major changes without significant support doesn’t lead to any peaceful democratic solution. Especially if it’s a bad solution in want of a problem.
They may benefit instead from looking at the New Caledonia independence referenda process.
In New Caledonia there is a real issue of independence as a legacy of colonialism. But the population is quite divided with no clear majority either way.
What has come out of the Matignon Agreements (1988) and Nouméa Accord (1998) is a process of 3 referenda. The first of which was last year and the 2nd next year. That time frame gives a good picture of how the leaders of the various communities have understood the need for considered action to avoid the risk of communal conflict.
It’s a complex process that serves to a degree to buy time and diffuse tensions.
It’s a genuine attempt to reconcile genuine major communal differences that last year got an 80% turnout. Holding an ill considered and illegal referendum and declaring independence on a 43% turnout, as the Catalonian independence leaders did, looks very shoddy and authoritarian in comparison.
It’s a bit hard to take seriously Puigdemont‘s claim to be merely implementing the democratic will of the people. From Wikipedia:
The referendum was approved by the Catalan parliament in a session on 6 September 2017 along with the Law of juridical transition and foundation of the Republic of Catalonia the following day 7 of September, which stated that independence would be binding with a simple majority, without requiring a minimum turnout. After being suspended, the law was finally declared void on 17 October, being also illegal according to the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia which requires a two third majority, 90 seats, in the Catalan parliament for any change to Catalonia's status.
The independence parties which had at the time a slim parliamentary majority - but not a majority of electoral votes - organised a referendum that would be binding with a simple majority with no requirement for a minimum turnout. I don’t think that comes anywhere close to being democratic.
It’s little wonder the Catalan High Court declared the referendum illegal.
The sentences are counterproductive, making martyres of them isn’t going to help resolve the conflict.
But they are not guiltless. They declared independence on the basis of a referendum they ran which had a turn out of just 43%. If they had been able to continue with that I can’t see how civil unrest could have been avoided.
The essential conflict seems to me to be not between Catalonia and the central government but within Catalonia society based on how people identify. Stirring up that sort of situation with exaggerated grievances never works out well.
Leaky buildings still being built highlighting the very urgent need for action especially action on laws governing apartment building management.
Currently, f you buy an apartment you’re taking on a very big risk.
I think I might have referred to this issue somewhere up thread:
1100 out of 1200 buildings tested show evidence of compromised construction. The true extent of which may not become known for many years leaving anyone owning an apartment in such a building in a very difficult position.
This plus the continued building of leaky buildings on top of the $47 billion (more likely to be 2 to 5 times that) cost of previously built leaking buildings plus other issues such as passive fire resistance defects will all add up to a huge tsunami of pain and financial hardship for thousands of people.
It will also greatly undermine confidence in intensification as apartment buildings will all be suspect.
One reason this has not got the attention it deserves is so many people don’t want this to be out in the open. They want to sell up before this becomes common knowledge, while they still have a chance to sell to the unsuspecting.
Isn’t it seriously odd how such a major issue got zero attention during the local body elections.
And neither Labour nor National happen to show the slightest inclination to confront this disaster. The more time goes by with nothing done the greater the disaster will be and the greater the number of people who will have their lives destroyed.