Bring your placards, banners 13th May Whangarei court 11.45am
This Tuesday 13th May at 11.45am our wonderful Green Fairy Gandalf will be appearing in the Whangarei District Courthouse to hear further charges.
These charges under the outdated Misuse of Drugs Act 2975 are relating to the raid on his property on 25th February this year and the confiscating of his illicit cannabis products destined for patients all over Aotearoa NZ.
We ask all those who wish to support Gandalf and can make it, to turn up in your Green outfits with your placards, banners and 'noisemakers' (aka drums, whistles etc) to stand in solidarity with Gandalf on what will be a stressful day for him and his family.
We ask that you are respectful to the environment and the general public and to gather outside the Courthouse to raise awareness and create a media moment to further publicise the plight if Gandalf and his family and patients plus the many others in our community who suffer the same injustice.
Maki Herbert will again be the Rally Marshall so please approach Maki if you have any concerns or require information.
Gandalf really appreciates your support on these occasions and I'm hoping many of you will be able to gather beside him to uplift his spirits and show him the community support he has.
Kia kaha e hoa ma
Arohanui Pearl
YES! We asked AI the big question. ChatGPT 3.5
ARE THERE HUGE BENEFITS OF LEGALISING AS STRONGLY VOTED FOR (2020) IN AOTEAROA NZ? (YES, or NO? 400-word report please)
COMPREHENSIVE POSITIVE GAINS FROM CANNABIS LEGALISATION AND CONTROL IN NEW ZEALAND 2023:
These could be easily achieved through responsible, equitable legalisation and control of cannabis in New Zealand, which would counter many negative aspects of the current invasive law:
Restored Public Trust: Responsible legalization restores public trust by demonstrating a commitment to transparent and well-informed decision-making.
Enhanced Personal Freedoms: Legalization empowers individuals to make informed choices about cannabis use without fear of legal repercussions, respecting personal freedoms.
Encouragement of Open Dialogue: Legalisation fosters open discussions about cannabis and related issues (one less major taboo), encouraging diverse perspectives and informed debates within society.
Economic Growth: A legalised and regulated cannabis market can lead to economic growth through increased tax revenue, job creation, and the development of a new industry.
Global Reputation: Embracing cannabis legalisation aligns New Zealand with global trends, enhancing its reputation as a forward-thinking nation with progressive policies.
Optimized Resource Allocation: By redirecting law enforcement resources away from cannabis enforcement, the focus can shift to more urgent public safety concerns.
Equitable Enforcement: Legalization helps eliminate disproportionate enforcement on marginalized communities, promoting fair and just treatment under the law.
Innovation and Research: A legal cannabis industry encourages innovation in agriculture, medicine, and technology, fostering scientific advancements and improvements.
Strengthened Rule of Law: Responsible legalization restores a respected the rule of law, promoting a just and well-regulated society.
Increased Civic Engagement: Citizens are more likely to engage with a government that respects their choices and values, leading to active participation in civic matters.
In conclusion
One-word summaries and describes our answer. A resounding “YES!!” Comprehensive gains can be made.
By addressing the negative aspects of prohibition through responsible legalisation and control, New Zealand could potentially unlock these substantial positive gains for its society, economy, and overall well-being!
One Year Anniversary since our Med Pot HERO Neville Yates passed from this earth.
J Day 2019 Latimer Square Christchurch.
The Researcher OG
We have to wonder when some of these creations made for research, like JWH-018 or some toned-down spinoff, will end up in bottles on pharmacies’ shelves; with this study, we question the safety of several knockoffs made in the current marketplace. This does give us insight into what happens when people are exposed for an extended period to synthetic cannabinoids, which bind in heavy ways to the CB1 & CB2 receptors, which don’t have any relation to the Cannabis plant.
Take the case of “Spice.” It’s a great example of how something created for research was grasped by a legal market and turned into something that could be sold. Knowing it was being smoked made it even more of a reason to regulate quickly, but that didn’t happen. Sadly, this wasn’t just a few companies created due to this fad —it became a thriving subindustry.
The original first hit the streets in the early 2000s in products like “Spice,” “K2,” and other so-called legal highs. Versions were legally sold as air fresheners in gas stations, smoke shops, and online.
When people smoked too much of it, they often had extreme reactions: psychosis was the usual, usually leading to aggression as the strong synthetic would cause addiction to smoking Spice, sometimes even seizures on rare occasions, heart attacks, and even death in some cases.
Authorities banned JWH-018 in many countries (including the U.S. under the Controlled Substances Act). Still, underground chemists kept tweaking the molecule slightly to create new versions (“synthetic cannabinoids”) that stayed temporarily legal.
*Read this, the latest blog on GenevievesDream.com
#Cannabinoids #CBD #CBDa #CBG #CBGa #ECS #ECSBalance #Endocannabinoids #GenevievesDream #ResearchReview #Researcher #ResearcherOG
Amnesty is urgently called for all Green Fairies, and their patients
Auckland Patients Group advocates for an amnesty on all medicinal cannabis patients, carers and supporters until safe, legal, affordable access to botanical cannabis is available to all patients.
Just a reminder that Gandalf is appearing at the Whangarei District Courthouse on the 13th May.
Please check Auckland Patient Group page for confirmation of that appearance closer to the date.
Blair Anderson ALCP candidate for Wigram writes…
Op-Ed: Facebook’s Cannabis Censorship Wasn’t Just Bias—It Was Anti-Democratic by Blair Anderson, Another Mild Green Initiative
In 2020, Aotearoa was offered a rare opportunity: to choose a new path on cannabis. The Cannabis Legalisation and Control Referendum was pitched as a national conversation, a chance to weigh evidence, hear diverse views, and decide whether we wanted a safer, regulated alternative to prohibition. But if you looked for that conversation on Facebook, you wouldn’t find it.
Search “cannabis” and all you got was this:
“If you see the sale of drugs, please report it. We remove content that doesn't follow our Community Standards. If you or someone you know struggles with substance misuse, free confidential treatment and information are available.” And then… nothing.
No discussion, no resources about the referendum, no visibility for reform campaigns. Just a digital dead-end that framed cannabis as a problem, not a policy issue. At the height of a national referendum, the world’s largest social media platform effectively shut down one side of the debate.
It didn’t stop there. The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party, which has been around longer than Facebook itself, was reportedly locked out of its page during the very weeks it needed to reach voters. Meanwhile, conservative lobby groups like Family First and their uniformed police allies enjoyed full access, pumping out a steady stream of fear-based messaging—often exaggerating harms, distorting facts, and misrepresenting international evidence.
This wasn’t just inconvenient. It was anti-democratic.
When Facebook becomes the default town square, and then quietly fences off part of that square, it doesn’t matter whether the cause is overzealous moderation, outdated algorithms, or PR-friendly content policies. The effect is the same: a skewed debate where one side gets a megaphone and the other gets muted.
This chilling of public discourse isn’t limited to the digital realm. Activists like Blair Anderson, a founding member of the MildGreens drug policy reform group, have felt the cold hand of state censorship in much more direct ways. Anderson was once locked up and remanded at large simply for speaking publicly about alcohol and other drugs. Not for selling or using them, for talking. (Ironically on High Street). His arrest wasn’t just punitive; it was symbolic. It sent a message that drug policy is not to be debated—it is to be obeyed.
That kind of suppression doesn’t just silence one person. It casts a long shadow over public participation. When advocates risk detention for expressing 'legal regulation', when entire campaign platforms are digitally buried, the public gets the message: this subject is dangerous. Best not to talk about it.
What we saw was a modern-day update to an old problem: the silencing of dissenting voices in drug policy. The platform’s content filters, likely shaped by the global war-on-drugs mindset, couldn’t distinguish between illegal sales and legal political advocacy. The word cannabis was flagged, flattened, and disappeared. The public didn’t just miss a chance to hear from all sides—they were actively prevented from doing so.
This isn’t about whether you support cannabis law reform (though the evidence from Canada, Uruguay, and parts of the US suggests it’s long overdue). It’s about democratic integrity. A referendum is only as fair as the debate that precedes it. If social media platforms, where most of that debate now takes place, are suppressing legal, evidence-based, rights-oriented viewpoints, then we have a much bigger problem than just a failed vote.
Prohibition has always thrived in silence, stigma, and misinformation. It’s hardly surprising that its digital footprints behave the same way. But if we’re serious about participatory democracy in the 21st century, we need to start treating these platforms not just as businesses, but as civic infrastructure. And when they undermine democratic processes, they need to be held to account.
The 2020 referendum may be behind us, but the struggle for an open, evidence-informed cannabis conversation isn’t. If we let digital gatekeepers and outdated laws decide which voices get heard, the war on drugs won’t just continue it will evolve into a war on democratic discourse itself.
Learn more about where reform is and isn't at the J-day is May Day event next Saturday, 3rd of May, commencing with the Million Marijuana March (25th year) commencing at High Noon, Cathedral Square and "roll and stroll" to Latimer Square for an afternoon of Music and celebration.
We are told that NZ needs more medicines for cancer and other diseases by Patient Voice Aotearoa, and they aren’t wrong.
But they also miss the point.
MedSafe (the regulator) seems captured. By whom, I do not know. But their actions suggest cause for deep concern.
Why would MedSafe commit a deliberate fraud to deny kiwis (and aussies!) access to safe, affordable, generic, and beneficial products that are proven by time and peer reviewed evidence to kill and retard cancer “in dose dependent fashion”?
These products have numerous other benefits. Pain, arthritis, anxiety, and more. They’re exactly the kind of product many citizens, and Patient Voice Aotearoa, want.
In summary: the Australasian food regulator (FSANZ) could see NO REASON to deny the public cannabinoid rich Hemp foods in 2016, due to their safety and public benefit.
Furthermore: MedSafes own internal advice said they were legal. ESRs Chemistry team said they were legal, and ESRs General Manager even made an affidavit to the High Court on the subject.
But. Amazingly. The Aus/NZ ministers of health wanted them kept from the public, and MedSafe seems to have concocted a lie to achieve that.
There may be an innocent explanation. Maybe MedSafe did not commit a fraud. If not, they could prove it. All they need to do is release the legal advice they used to deny us foods for health.
But MedSafe refuses to release the advice, citing ‘a lack of public interest’.
This seems odd.
Not least because the secret legal advice
A. Is based on a perverse interpretation of an international treaty no other country adheres to.
B. Was vital to overrule ESRs Chemistry team.
C. Is at odds with the OECD, AND the European Court of Justice.
Furthermore, it seems MedSafe had to concoct this legal advice to deny the public access to products the food regulator had concluded were,
1. Safe
2. Beneficial (incl. anti-cancer properties, and more)
3. Beyond its power to prohibit (due to their safety and benefit).
It may or may not be relevant that,
1. cancer is a key driver of pharmaceutical revenues, and
2. A patient cured is a customer lost, and
3. 90%+ of MedSafes revenues come from levies on medical/pharmaceutical products.
These factors suggest that prohibiting foods that benefit the public was as ‘commercially sensible’ as it appears unethical.
Read the evidence for yourself at www.thehempfoundation.org.nz, then join us.
Help us to prove there is ‘public interest’ in knowing if our Ministry of Health is on the publics side, or if it needs to be radically reformed.
Join us at the Hemp Foundation. We need your support to hold govt to account. It’s free! There are no obligations! We do all the work!
But we do ask, “Each one teach one. Learn and share” Arohanui. Tadhg
click onto link.
The hemp foundation
https://www.thehempfoundation.org.nz
In New Zealand, cannabis is classified as an illicit drug.
Possession of cannabis can result in a fine of up to $500, while supply or manufacture can lead to a 14-year jail term 1. The police are committed to reducing the demand for cannabis and disrupting the supply chain. Each year, they target people who grow and supply cannabis through aerial searches throughout New Zealand. Crops are seized and destroyed, and assets and cash obtained through the supply of cannabis can also be seized 1.
As for driving under the influence of cannabis, law enforcement officers are trained to detect drug-impaired driving using standard field sobriety testing (SFST) typically administered at the roadside. Drug recognition expert (DRE) evaluation includes a series of tests and a toxicological sample (urine or blood) 2. The most common method of roadside testing is still road-side behavioural or cognitive tests, performed by regular or specially trained officers. In states like Colorado, blood tests are also used if marijuana inebriation is suspected after a behavioural or cognitive test 3.
Detecting people driving under the influence of cannabis is a serious concern for law enforcement agencies around the world. In New Zealand, a survey conducted by the Drug Foundation revealed that “cannabis driving” is a serious road safety issue, with up to 12% of New Zealand drivers having driven under the influence of cannabis in the last year 1.
In Canada, law enforcement officers are trained to detect drug-impaired driving using standard field sobriety testing (SFST) typically administered at the roadside. Drug recognition expert (DRE) evaluation includes a series of tests and a toxicological sample (urine or blood) 23. In addition, police use oral fluid drug screening equipment to detect drug-impaired driving 3.
In South Africa, per se standards are used in legislation to address drug-impaired driving. There are generally two types of per se standards: zero-tolerance drugged driving laws and per se laws that stipulate non-zero thresholds for drugs or their metabolites, which constitute evidence of drugged driving 4.
Cannabis and alcohol both negatively affect a person’s ability to drive.
According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), cannabis use can lead to slower reaction times, impaired judgment, and decreased coordination, all of which can contribute to a higher risk of accidents on the road 1.
However, it is difficult to compare the effects of cannabis and alcohol on driving because they affect people differently. The effects of cannabis depend on factors such as the amount consumed, the method of consumption, and the user’s tolerance level 2. In contrast, alcohol has a more predictable effect on driving ability because it is metabolized at a relatively constant rate by the body 3.
That being said, studies have shown that driving under the influence of cannabis is less dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. According to a study published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, drivers under the influence of cannabis are less likely to drive aggressively and more likely to drive at slower speeds than those under the influence of alcohol 4.
Another study published in the journal Addiction found that drivers with blood alcohol levels above the legal limit were 13 times more likely to cause a fatal accident than sober drivers,
while drivers with THC levels above the legal limit were only 5 times more likely.
It’s important to note that driving under the influence of either substance is illegal or can result in serious consequences.
If you plan on consuming either substance, it’s best to avoid driving altogether.
Learn more:1. cdc.gov2. journalistsresource.org3. goodrx.com4. journal.nzma.org.nz5. msn.com6. interestingengineering.com+3 more
AOTEAROA LEGALISE CANNABIS PARTY PRESS RELEASE
“Wellington Central is Wide Open and we have an equal chance” say the ALCP.
The ALCP believes that with Grant Robertson no longer running in Wellington Central, the electoral race in this area is now wide open. The party's candidate, Co Leader Michael Appleby, has gained significant popularity during meetings and stands a great chance of winning as he continues to make his presence known. Appleby's objective in this election is to represent the cannabis community, which currently lacks proper representation.
It is important to note that 1.4 million people voted YES in the 2020 cannabis referendum,
and their opinions should hold weight in policymaking.
Even capturing 10% of that vote would secure 140,000 votes, which could potentially grant the ALCP seats in parliament.
A troubling double standard arises when we observe that many parliamentarians openly enjoy alcohol for recreational purposes while also admitting to past cannabis use. Yet, they continue to support the criminalization of the marijuana community.
This hypocrisy fosters a sense of injustice and inequality. As New Zealanders, we value fairness and are dissatisfied with these double standards.
The ALCP recognizes this sentiment and urges voters to
"Don't get Mad – Get Even and Party Vote for the ALCP" in the upcoming 2023 election.
In addition to Michael Appleby, the ALCP boasts a roster of talented candidates. Co Leader Maki Herbert has garnered notable support in Te Tai Tokerau, while Rebecca Robin in Te Tai Tonga is making waves with her musical pursuits. Christopher Coker, running in Auckland Central, gained considerable attention after appearing on the television show "Border Patrol" wearing a cannabis suit, which received thousands of likes. However, one of the party's standout candidates is Blair Anderson, who is running in Megan Woods' electorate, Wigram. Anderson recently returned from Canada with positive reports on how the country effectively regulates cannabis. He even shared the Deloitte Cannabis Canada Reports with Megan Woods, the Labour Party candidate, for her consideration.
Candidates available for comment
Party co Leader Michael Appleby - Wellington Central 027 440 3363
Party co Leader – Maki Herbert – Te Tai Tokerau 0224 108 369
Deloitte Cannabis Canada Report – Wigram Candidate - Blair Anderson – 021 823 647
Micheal Appleby candidate for Wellington
https://fb.watch/nimJ4vGiM6/
Karori Residents Association. Wellington central meet your candidates.
(9) #highturnout2023 - Explore | Facebook
Roll over TOP Party. With one week up our sleeves (God willing and fingers crossed) stay tuned for the massive ALCP "charm offensive" and challenge to split vote with co leader Michael Appleby next MP for Wellington Central and start feeding the MMP 'LEGALISE' coat tails vote and #highturnout2023 smart mob October 14!!! And liberate Aotearoa long overdue...
It is not responsible to leave cannabis on the black market.
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party say Government control is a better option.
New Zealand lags behind world trends when it comes to legalising cannabis.
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party say cannabis products, have wide-ranging benefits, both social
and medicinal as well
as mitigating climate change with sustainable hemp industry.
Let’s create an environment that gives adults the freedom to use cannabis responsibly.
Party vote Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party and help fix this broken law.
Authorised by Irinka Britnell, 563 Worcester Street Christchurch 8011.