The Greens’ call for marijuana to be legalised in Australia for recreational use, with its sale to be regulated through an Australian Cannabis Agency, is estimated to be a big winner for the Federal Budget. The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) has estimated that the Greens’ plan could be worth around $1 billion a year to the Budget, through a combination of additional revenue and savings being made by law enforcement agencies such as the Australian Federal Police. From The AFR:
Costings from the independent Parliamentary Budget Office show legal cannabis use with a 25 per cent excise and GST could raise about $3.6 billion over the coming four years and lead to savings for law enforcement agencies, including by the Australian Federal Police…
The PBO says there is a “high level of uncertainty” in the costings, given the market price and take up of a legal product can’t be known…
Sales would grow each year and about 10 per cent of the market would be made up by overseas visitors…
The costing document says the AFP would re-allocate a proportion of the resources currently directed at cannabis law enforcement to strengthen the law enforcement of other illicit substances…
The new agency would charge a $3500 application fee for production licenses, as well as annual grower fees ranging from $1750 per year for tier one licenses of up to 2000 square feet of plant canopies, to $2300 for tier three licenses and up to 10,000 square feet of crop. Retail license application fees would cost $1500, with annual fees for retail outlets set at $1000…
Colorado, which legalised marijuana in 2014, has reaped the revenue benefits with total revenue of nearly $250 million in 2017, most of which has gone towards schools and roads (see below table). There have also been cost savings for law enforcement.
Washington, too, has reaped the Budget benefits of legalising marijuana, with sales and tax revenue topping $80 million in the year to November 2017, which comes on top of the savings in law enforcement costs.
Sadly, the two major parties refuse to look at the evidence and remain strongly opposed to legalising marijuana. Health Minister Greg Hunt labelled the Greens’ plan is “dangerous and medically irresponsible”:
“It can actually have an impact on both physical and mental health issues, and the notion of spreading the use of unregulated, uncontrolled cannabis, people growing it in their own backyard, is utterly irresponsible”…
Whereas Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has referred to it as a “stunt”.
Both parties might want to re-read the testimony from the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, which threw its support behind legalising and taxing marijuana last week:
Cannabis arrests have accounted for the largest proportion of illicit drug arrests in Australia. In 2015-16, of the two million Australians who use cannabis every year there were almost 80,000 cannabis arrests…
Of these arrests, the overwhelming majority (90 per cent) were consumers while the remainder (10 per cent) were providers. Yet in 2017, 92 per cent of drug users reported in a national survey that obtaining hydroponic cannabis was “easy” or “very easy” while 75 per cent reported obtaining bush cannabis was “easy” or “very easy”…
Drug policy has surprisingly little effect, if any, on consumption patterns but does produce serious harm…
A study comparing residents of more liberal Amsterdam and more punitive San Francisco using the same methodology found less illicit drug use (including cannabis) in Amsterdam and a far greater likelihood that San Francisco residents were also offered heroin, cocaine or amphetamine on the most recent occasion of trying to buy cannabis…
Australia could allocate these funds to improving and expanding alcohol and drug prevention and treatment, an area governments usually find difficult to fund properly.
Regulation would enable governments to mandate plain packaging, like we have for cigarettes. Packages should provide health warnings, help-seeking information and consumer product information (including content of psychoactive ingredients and their concentration).
Proof-of-age restrictions on sale, similar to arrangements for alcohol, could help reduce access to cannabis for underage Australians…
Regulating cannabis would also mean that law enforcement could concentrate on responding to far more serious crimes — especially violent crimes…
Regulating cannabis would also reduce some of the cost of customs, police, courts and prisons and some of the income of major league black-market cannabis suppliers…
Or the two major parties could re-read last week’s testimony from Professor Nicole Lee from the National Drug Research Institute at Curtin University, which noted that there are no known social harms caused by legalising marijuana:
…one study found little effect of legalisation on drug use or other outcomes, providing support for neither opponents nor advocates of legalisation. Other studies have shown no increase in use, even among teens.
The research to date suggests there is no significant increase (or decrease) in use or other outcomes where cannabis legalisation has occurred.
Or they could examine the 395-page report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, which last year completed the world’s most comprehensive study into marijuana and found that unlike tobacco, “the evidence suggests that smoking cannabis does not increase the risk for certain cancers (ie. lung, head, and neck) in adults”, while also finding many therapeutic benefits from marijuana use.
As MB keeps arguing, there are strong arguments in favour of legalising marijuana, namely:
- It would bring marijuana into line with alcohol and tobacco, which are both legal and regulated despite being more dangerous to health;
- It would guarantee purity of supply;
- It would reduce profits to organised crime; and
- It would provide a useful revenue stream for the government, as illustrated by states in the US that have recently legalised marijuana.
Public policy should be based on objective evidence, which overwhelmingly supports marijuana legalisation.
