Jeez! 5 plants per member? I guess the surface of our small country won't be big enough...

By yep | November 10, 2010 4:23 PM

Interesting indeed, sounds like the US co-op or Spanish club model. A good thing generally but if it is to be a replacement then will be bad for tourists who will still look to score weed, only illegally though.

This is the first I've heard of this Utrecht experiment, does anyone know any more?

By Wiet Roker | November 10, 2010 5:33 PM

I wonder which is the difference between people growing five plants for their own use, and coffee shops growing five plants for each of their members.

While all these restrictions happens (things from 'liberalism'), our Ministry of Disease (former Ministry of Health, before Wlders cabinet arrival) has implemented a measure to facilitate cancer, lung diseases, addiction to snuff, allergies and heart diseases. Smoking ban lifted in cafes. That is the same to say a measure to damage our public budget by making grow cost of health care. Obviously in favor of tobacco companies interests.

By zenplus | November 10, 2010 6:39 PM

They are taking money out of social programs then giving most of a million for this stupidity? How are they going to replace the lost tourist income, raise taxes? The new government seems stoned on ideology and glassy-eyed stupid.

By Gary G | November 11, 2010 1:46 AM

It sounds like the new cabinet and Eindhoven are at cross-purposes.

Or does organised crime consist of tourists and under-age smokers?

There must be a lot of potheads in Holland in order for this topic to dominate the headlines continually.

By KenM | November 11, 2010 4:35 AM

Actually, Mr. M (Ken), funnily enough, there are fewer 'potheads' (cannabis consumers) in NL than in either of the great Drug Warrior Super Hero countries, e.g. Britain and America. Cannabis use in NL is a bit lower than the European average.

Organised crime in NL, like in Mexico, or anywhere else where criminality is facilitated by prohibition, most likely don't use cannabis themselves, but produce and sell it for profit. Again thanks to prohibition, because profits are so obscenely huge the most violent psychopaths become the kingpins of their industry. Both Eindhoven council (mayor Rob van Gijzel) and your government are quite right to try and find ways to reduce their power. (The obvious solution would be to legalise cannabis.)

By McD | November 11, 2010 10:46 AM

As for this topic 'dominating the headlines continually'... Well, as a medical user whose well-being is dependent on breaking this law, I follow it quite closely. Indeed, I'm subscribed to DutchNews mainly because it's a good place to get the news first, as it was in this case. I can tell you, however, that this news is almost always kept out of the headlines. If you have a more careful look at its positioning you should find it hard to ignore the fact that it is hardly placed in headline position. In the course of the past few months I've probably seen four or five - certainly no more than half a dozen - articles directly related to cannabis.

By McD | November 11, 2010 10:50 AM

More than half a million EURO for this nonsense? Prevent tourist from coffee shops? Oh wait, I forgot, tourists are coming to this country for its museums and culture... which are getting budget cuts now! *sigh*

By madjestic | November 11, 2010 11:12 AM

It is all so tedious. The reason cannabis was banned in the first place is because it was deemed bad for the users and society at large.

Scientific evidence has mounted which clearly and undoubtedly proves that cannabis is by far less harmful than tobacco and alcohol.

So why is cannabis still illegal and the more harmful substances of alcohol and tobacco still legal? Hypocrisy.

So even more hypocritical governments neighboring the Netherlands drive their citizens to border towns creating havoc and criminality.

Remember, this is not happening because cannabis is a terrible substance. It is happening because of the hypocrisy of 'nanny' societies who cannot allow their citizen's freedom in spite of overwhelming evidence proving the safety of cannabis.

By Jim | November 12, 2010 3:50 AM

@McD and Jim: Thanks for that insight!

I always thought that cannabis was banned because its use tends to lead to the use of other drugs, such as cocaine and heroine.

Since I am not a user myself, I have no personal experience with it and rely on the info commonly available in the news.

I still can't understand why people resort to this stuff (except for medical reasons), including alcohol, cigs, pills, etc. Can anybody enlighten me?

Why do people need to get 'high'?

By KenM | November 12, 2010 10:31 PM

@KenM: There are a complex set of reasons for why people want to get high/drunk--the short answer is they need a mental vacation.

Once upon a time in the US, a newspaper magnate named William Randolph Hearst owned vast pulp and paper factories. Hemp was threatening his monopoly because it made better paper and he did not control this industry. He used his massive power of the press to demonize hemp/marijuana and to this day, the lies he propagated are believed by the gullible and uninformed.

No one in the entire world had ever died from a marijuana overdose.

Marijauna is not a gateway drug according to science.

Marijuana does NOT cause cancer according to multiple scientific surveys.

Hypocrisy rules.

By Jim | November 17, 2010 5:37 PM