Looks like the government is rapidly backing away from recommendations to crack down on alcohol despite it causing more social costs than any other drug.
Personally I take a liberal view on drugs of all kinds including alcohol (especially single malts) but I suspect that the Nats back down has a lot more to do with not getting off-side with one of New Zealand’s most powerful industries than any libertarian argument.
Meanwhile it looks like their plan to make pseudoephedrine prescription only as part of their “war on p” may breach the bill of rights as it breaches people’s right to be presumed not guilty.
And across the country the police have busted dozens of people on a variety of charges related to pot.
So the question is, is a drug only a moral issue for the Nats when it doesn’t make one of their rich mates richer than the Queen?
But then again what would you expect from a government that appointed a booze marketeer to run our largest city?