MPS SHOULD LISTEN TO YOUTH ON CANNABIS

Another Youth Parliament has come and gone. Members of Parliament from
throughout the country chose about 120 young people to come to Wellington
for what is a triennial event and recreate as realistically as possible
what happens in Parliament, writes The Evening Post in an editorial.

Over two days, they talked, debated, listened and learned.

But they also came to contribute and one of the objectives of the Youth
Parliament is surely to let the views of young people be heard,
particularly by those politicians who sponsor them. Said Youth Affairs
Minister Laila Harre: "We need to do some more listening to you, about your
ideas of how you can become more active, and participate more in the things
that go on around here." How true. But will they?

Decriminalisation of cannabis was an issue at this year's Youth Parliament.
It's also an issue for New Zealand. Terms of reference for a review of
marijuana laws are about to be announced.

Decriminalising - a weasel word for legalising - marijuana for private use
is a favoured position.

Some MPs argue that harmful effects of the hallucinogenic are outweighed by
concerns that convictions for possessing marijuana take too high a social
toll later and that high marijuana usage brings the law itself into
disrespect. Polls and surveys have shown increasing usage among young
people and secondary school students.

Green MP Nandor Tanczos has trumpeted the need for law changes while school
principals, teachers and numerous others have begged politicians to
consider the harmful effects of even partial legalisation.

The Youth Parliament turned down partial legalisation by 69 votes to 47.
Participants debated a mock Bill passionately from both sides.

It was hardly radical. Having up to 5g for personal and private use would
not be a criminal offence and offenders would be punished by infringement
notices and fines that would go into a drug education fund. Smoking
cannabis in public would be an offence.

But to the majority at the Youth Parliament, it was hip to be square. "Just
because other countries do, it doesn't mean we've got to jump into the lake
with the rest of these lemmings and do it too," said West Auckland Youth MP
Vanessa Mulu. Laila Harre rightly said she hoped a review would take heed
of what the Youth Parliament had said.

Sadly, Mr Tanczos has quickly developed bad habits.

Somewhat churlishly, he said the youth of New Zealand were not represented
by the Youth Parliament. His failure to respect the views of those who were
there and acknowledge their right to express them was a crude put-down. The
vote told him a majority believe he's wrong.

He should stop deluding himself: he doesn't speak for the youth of this
country, he doesn't know what they're thinking. Young people, when given
the opportunities and the right environment, can think and decide for
themselves. They want to contribute to decision-making and, as one attendee
Lucila van Dam wrote in this newspaper, a sense of personal accountability
and respect for democracy follows.

This isn't new. Throughout time, youth have expressed similar wishes of
self-determination, but the Youth Parliament allows an opportunity for
youth to be heard and be seen to be heard.

For politicians, that means paying more than lip service to an ideal.

It should also mean the Ministry of Youth Affairs should get its act together.

Its website is still showing the programme for the last one held in
September 1997, complete with pictures of Minister Deborah Morris. Someone
should tell the Ministry Ms Morris resigned from Parliament in December, 1998.