Hard News by Russell Brown

Note that two days after I return I'll be on the panel at the Tuesday April 26 Table Talk with Ali Mau: Cannabis - Beyond Prohibition, part of Ika restaurant's Salon series. I expect I'll have plenty to tell.

Excellent! Have fun, when there is an opportunity.

Shit! Is UNGASS next week?

Here's an interesting/cynical piece of news: the new agenda for UNGASS has member states approving the "Outcomes Document" (ie the usual 'declaration' one gets at these hui) on the morning of day 1!! They're approving the minutes at the start of the meeting rather the end. Go figure.

Shit! Is UNGASS next week?

Sorry – should have reminded you!

They’re approving the minutes at the start of the meeting rather the end. Go figure.

So the conclusions of the meeting are written before the three-day meeting and approved on the first morning? That's ... interesting.

You can imagine the diplomatic wrangling that led to that decision. Certain people fear countries showing up at NY and trying to renegotiate the weak outcomes document. Remembering that this was drafted in Vienna where most countries don't have missions.

That's awesome that you're attending Russell! Have fun in NY & BK

Isn't it the usual thing to approve the minutes of the previous meeting before commencing the next? That's what I know from my governance experience.

Interested in your coverage.
The recent spike in interest following Helen Kelly's experience has been fascinating.
Seems NZ is oddly conflicted about drugs. We seem to both delight in out addictions and have a po-faced attitude to it - especially when it's 'other' - as in poor people vs a few too many chards at a dinner party in Remuera. Consistent with wanting change but not changing the flag and approving of 'legal highs' (especially if if comes with correspondent highs in political polls) but disapproval of medical cannabis (under the disingenuous guise of a lack of evidence to counter the orthodox view of the drug). Astonishing that Peter Dunne is chairing sessions. He barely seems able to represent his own views, let alone those of the country.
Other than abusing alcohol I've never even held a lit cigarette, so I've no vested position on drugs - other than hoping for a time when people aren't vilified and harassed for activity that is equivalent to behaviour expressed by the 'majority' - booze v. dope for e.g.
Await your reports with interest.

Can we look forward to a photo of you, Peter Dunne and Helen Clark at CBGBs?

Have a great time and keep us posted!

Sadly it closed about 10 years ago. It's some sort of clothes shop now.

I guess even the Lower East Side gets gentrified.

That gentrification has been happening for a while*, but the intersection of Ludlow and Rivington – where the cover of Pauls Boutique was shot – is still there (and vaguely recognisable)

*The Tenement Museum is a testament of sorts to the Lower East Sides prolonged gentrification, and is well worth a visit if time permits

I'm looking forward to Russell's UNGASS coverage. I see Columbia's President Juan Manuel Santos has added his voice to those calling for a rethink on prohibition.

For those who are interested, here's the UNGASS draft outcome statement [PDF]. It's not the most readable document -- 24 pages of text with no index. I note that the word "cannabis" only appears once (3c, page 10) in the context of increased cooperation to "measurably reduce or eliminate" drug production; and while the word "health" is scattered about, the phrase "harm reduction" ain't there at all.

It’s not the most readable document – 24 pages of text with no index. I note that the word “cannabis” only appears once (3c, page 10) in the context of increased cooperation to “measurably reduce or eliminate” drug production; and while the word “health” is scattered about, the phrase “harm reduction” ain’t there at all.

It was always on the cards that "harm reduction" might be absent, just out of sheer factional pissiness. But also absent: a condemnation of the death penalty for drug offences. It's a horrible document in a number of ways.

It’s a horrible document in a number of ways.

As it's the declared "outcome document" for the session, what chance is there that large chunks might be amended or even better, discarded?

About half the countries in the UN are despotisms of some kind - while it's obviously necessary to deal with them to try and stop wars and so forth, why should they have any say in what our government lets us put in our bodies?

As it’s the declared “outcome document” for the session, what chance is there that large chunks might be amended or even better, discarded?

Probably very little. But it's still interesting:

http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/the-place-where-things-happen-strangely/