So were back to 1999 in that the Green will need to ride the marijuana bus to stay in power. Though of course back then they were anti 1080 and anti GM but that before the James Shaw (former Bayer PR consultant who now leads the Greens) made the Greens more Blue. A good in-depth article on the referendum who supporting it whose not and why can be fond here
However what every one kind of missing is the referendum only on the smoke-able herb as opposed to things like Hemp, Food, or Medicinal, where legislation will remain under the guiding control things like TPPA which legalise and encourage corporate monopolies. As the monoply and GM goals of the WTO’s Codex Ailmentarius keep marching on
So sorry folks don’t expect Hemp batteries and other planetary saving breakthroughs, if governments were genuinely concerned about climate change and not endorsing corporate monopolies, are not likely to emerge, not in New Zealand at less, as Lockheed (funders of the Auckland University of Technology affiliated Rocket Lab) pushes deep-sea mining and conflict metal to save the planet instead. Unless of course their friend in big pharma have secured the patent rights over GM modified seed and will use that to crush independent growers. As they remain one step ahead of us all.
Perhaps this is why big tech big pharma funded, Auckland University of Technology affiliated Helen Clark Foundation, is both pro Lockheed war toys and pro-cannabis. Though I imagine that is just as much about the importance of controlling the Auckland Central (where AUT based) electoral vote, so Labour can finally throw the Greens under the bus and govern alone.
Also slightly amusing as Billy’s backed by the church of Scientology who oppose Cannabis. So where does that put NZPP/Advance role on cannabis. I don’t think any one has asked that question as Billy claims to be against the UN Agenda 2030, a trough he however happily grazed at for over six years (while also marketing himself as a Belt Road lobbyist and expert) with a bit of help from Helen Clark whom his Freemason AFIO (Association of Former Intelligence Officers – the political action group set up to push CIA agendas and propaganda) buddy Michael Stace, or should that be Leon, used to work for. Again a valid question in light Billy just aligned himself with Jamie Lee Ross only Nationals and Simon ‘just say No’ Bridge’s former whip.
Again some what odd considering Vinny Eastwood (former crusader against Freemasonry before he took their money and ran) own role with New Zealand Aaotearoa Legalise and the many donation he has made over being pro cannabis over the years. Can we expect a editorial change on the Eastwood Show now Vinny has new friends and donors?
Of course a NO cannabis vote is always good for anyone profiting from prohibition be they pro P pro armed police, pro narco gangs (a patch is patch), pro get your hands on government prison community project dollars to fix up your pad or ministry parties.
Further it can be ideologically expected the ‘right to life’ voters within the Tamaki and the NZPP conservative Christian Scientology ranks will vote NO against the legalise marijuana referendum and may in fact negate it.
To be fair the fact that euthanasia referendum was also put on the book at the same time as cannabis you can thank Winston Peters and his good friends in the alcohol and tobacco industry for. I suspect this is also part of Winston secret “guerrilla” warfare plan in which he is using noisy go nowhere under 1% third parties to undermine other parties in key electorate seats and if nothing else secure his retirement package. The art of politics is not just winning votes but costing the other guy votes too. Don’t write the old grey shark off just yet.
Meaning if right to life voters negate the yes to cannabis vote organised crime is left to continue controlling the drugs market while big business will be free via tolls like the TPPA and patent ownership to say no to hemp and other earth saving benefits that cannabis and Hemp both have to offer those not interested in just maintaining controls and dominance over our souls and wallets.
It also remains unclear what the guidelines for success of the referendum are. A flick though online electoral website parliamentary guidelines oddly does not clearly define what the precise winning goal mark is and what the definition of a “majority vote” is exactly. In the house that can be 75% and with pass voter referendums majority vote has being any thing between 60-69% . That the exact terms of winning are not apparently spilled out clearly to begin with is a further signs this competition results may already be fixed and the referendum a mere formality to give us the illusion we have a functioning democracy when we clearly do not.