their policy works better than ours does in the uk but it still has its flaws. theoretically they bought it on themselves by allowing possession but not allowing production for the sale of cannabis, with coffee shops only being able to hold legally half a kilo at a time there's gonna be some confusion an mayhem as they are unable to supply the demand, so need to grow more illegally to do it. an this illegally grown cannabis comes from the so called organized criminals, as the government wont allow the coffee shops or licensed people to grow the amount thats demanded legally under supervised conditions, if this was the case the exported cannabis would probably be more controlled an less would leave the country, but saying that the demand will always be there so it goes in roundabouts really.
the only sensible option is for global legislation where it can be marketed an licensed properly ensuring quality control over import/export an would reduce the risk of young people getting hold of it easier, due to an age restricted market. cos lets face it the demand will always be there its just depends on whos going to control the supply, the government can take it under their arms and reap the benefits in taxes an having it under a controlled market etc or they can leave it to organised criminals that probably arn't that organized an will use the money to fund other crimes an more cultivation.
bannin it will only do what prohibition has done here in the uk and furthur fund the criminals that produce it also more illegal cultivation will take place once the ban starts as there is no one that can legally take control of the supply so it is all left to criminals.
anyone that says cannabis is harmful obviously hasn't done any research into the actual scientifically proven medical benefits an ACTUAL proven ill health effects of the plant.

By oliver wightman | November 10, 2008 8:39 AM

The ban is not solution.
If done properly, legalization is the better way.
Unfortunely, to interdict and to punish is easyer than EDUCATE.
And, of course, medichal chemist lobbies and tobaco industry will always be against something you can grow by yourself without giving proffit to them.
There are lots of perspectives so it turns necessary for all parts (pro and against) to TALK SERIOUSLY ABOUT positive and negative aspects of the issue.
Once again it's not the Netherland's politics that are wrong (i think).
The hard prohibition politics of all the other UE countries explains, in part, the behavior of some tourists ( a few, compared with total number).
They aren't habituated to FREEDOM
and FREEDOM MEANS RESPONSABILITY AND RESPECT FOR ALL.
EDUCATE THE PEOPLE that's what govs must do.

By s.lopes | November 10, 2008 12:00 PM

"Last month, police chief Max Daniel said in an interview with the NRC that he estimated Dutch-grown marijuana exports to total €2bn. He also warned of the growing involvement of organised crime in its production and sale."

This figure of €2bn was already stated earlier this year by the president of the Netherlands' police-force union (NBP) Hans van Duijn, when criticising current government policy and advocating publically for the legalisation of "wietteelt" (growing cannabis).

[http://www.nu.nl/news/1537995/14/rss/Voorzitter_politiebond_bepleit_legale_wietteelt.html]

He said that in the context of the government being able to "pull the bottom out of the illegal cannabis market", and thereby take millions out of the hands of [large-scale] growers.

At the same time the government should organise the controlled distribution of hard drugs to addicts, Van Duijn (60) said.

The chairman of the Dutch police union NPB Hans van Duijn says it is pointless to fight against the supply of cannabis. He thinks it only leads to more crime and he would much rather see soft drugs legalised in The Netherlands.

He made the comments arising from his own appraisal of how the administration were tacking the element of "drugs-criminality" and the results it was delivering in returns in terms of manhours invested.

By Noel McCullagh | November 10, 2008 5:48 PM

Time for a new election. This Harry Potter look alike has outlived his shelf life in politics. This idea is right wing lunacy.

By Joop Boonzayer | November 10, 2008 5:48 PM

Why is the reason of increased tourism to a couple of border towns used as an excuse to radically alter a proven and successful domestic policy? It just doesn't make sense to say that Amsterdam or any other dutch city should be punished because the border towns of Roosendaal and Bergen op Zoom are experiencing difficulties with visiting French and Belguim tourists. Furthermore, why can't it just be accepted in these countries? Obviously, there are many Germans, Belgians, and French who like to smoke herb - why should they have to travel to Holland to get high. This is a very bad decision and it will create many problems if it goes into effect. I lived in Amsterdam for 12 years and of course there are undesired aspects of having such a liberal social policy but it is 30 yrs old and has been proven successful in many ways. The dutch policy in my opinion should be total legalization and not just toleration. Legalizing would inject much needed money into the economy and would diminish the role of organized crime in its control of this industry. I hope more thought is put into the consequences of any proposed decision.

By J. | November 11, 2008 7:53 AM

This political move to oust what has been established as a model for harm reduction and adherence to Human rights would not only set back Dutch pragmatice approches to drugs, it would negate human rights and privacy laws as established in the EU, imho, so lest see it for waht is is, an expedient right wing political move that will not replace the lost revenue from cannabis nor will it make Holland more attractive to tulip lovers.

By kraut | November 11, 2008 1:48 PM

"Christian Democrats in parliament called for an outright ban."

How very Christian of them!

By Gerard | November 11, 2008 8:28 PM