THE RECENT UWI marijuana symposium organised by Dr Alana Griffith presented the opportunity for extensive reflection on the issue of decriminalisation from different perspectives and CADRES was anxious to engage with stakeholders on one of the political aspects.
The issue referred to as ‘ganja politics’ has both international and local components; however, these comments and the related research examines the extent to which support for, decriminalisation was influenced by the individual’s support for, or opposition to, either political party.
The presentation draws on three separate CADRES surveys executed in Barbados (2003), St Vincent (2013), Antigua (2016) and these time periods have some relevance to the conclusions. The Barbados data were collected in 2003 during the course of an election campaign and while more recent data is available for Barbados, this does not speak to party support considerations. The Antigua data are the most recent, while the St Vincent data were collected in 2013 before the election was called.
The national position of support for, or opposition to, decriminalisation was reported on separately by CADRES with respect to each country and has therefore been omitted in this instance. In addition, the “Party Support” reference has been modified to “Government supporters” “Opposition supporters” and “Uncertain supporters” to enhance comparability. Certainly, the levels of support vary between countries; however, the focus here is on the extent to which support for, or opposition to, a political party influences the respondent’s views.
Summarily, it can be seen that in all three instances the levels of support for each position does not differ between government and opposition supporters by more than five percentage points (which is the margin of error for all CADRES national surveys). In addition, a curious positon emerges where in Barbados and St Vincent the “Uncertain Supporters” appear marginally more inclined towards the retention of the status quo.
These observations could perhaps have been influenced by the environment in which the surveys were conducted – the Barbados survey was conducted when the issue of ganja decriminalisation was not a national issue and therefore no position was taken by either government or opposition; the Antigua survey was conducted after the government articulated a position in support of limited decriminalisation; while the St Vincent survey also benefited from an articulated position in support of medical marijuana which the opposition has not opposed.
It is clear from these varying opinions that the positions taken by leaders have had little impact on public opinion, or more simply put; the issue has not been politicised. In the case of Barbados, there has been a significant increase in support for some form of decriminalisation since 2003 and one presumes that this is in respect of persons who both support and oppose the government consistent with this regional trend.
It is important to note that there has not been a position regionally where a government has supported and opposition opposed a stance on this issue which would have tested the extent to which a political party could leverage its influence over supporters on this issue. Notwithstanding the important “take away” from this analysis is the assertion that the issue of ganja decriminalisation is not politicised and this is important from two perspectives. On the one hand, it means a government or political party is not likely to grow its support significantly by promoting decriminalisation, but it equally means that their support for decriminalisation is not likely to result in significant electoral losses either. While one appreciates that the victory margins in Barbados and St Vincent are such that small changes in public opinion could have a major impact on the electoral fortunes of either party, there is an equally important point that there is no clear political divide on this issue as it relates to the leaders of both parties.
The foregoing should therefore nullify any suggestion that government is not moving on the issue of decriminalisation out of fear that the public might judge them harshly at the polls. Certainly, significant gains might also be questionable; however, there is no scientific evidence that there will be significant losses and governmental hesitance is therefore more likely to be related to an unwarranted timidity on the part of government, especially as the evidence of social and medical benefits of decriminalisation are becoming difficult to ignore.
Peter W. Wickham is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES). Email: peter.w.wickham@gmail.com