A short statement about my involvement with CLEAR Cannabis law reform. I have already posted this to my Facebook page:

For the past several months I’ve been working with CLEAR cannabis law reform as website editor. I was pleased to be involved in a campaign which took a serious and professional approach to the campaign to end prohibition.Now the important point to make is that CLEAR is a single issue campaign, it isn’t a social club.The past few months have been difficult with a campaign aimed against the leader, Peter Reynolds. The origins of this campaign were dubious in the extrme, and the whole thing was born from people who have been around the law reform movement for years and have at best failed to make a good impression and at worst given the whole effort the awful stereotype image it has.The allegations against Peter focus on his private life and political views, which I admit are not mine.

I outlined the whole sorry mess on the UKCIA blog a few weeks ago.  I called that blog “Small minds discuss people”, read it and you’ll see why.

Anyway the problems continued and hit a new high – or low – over the past week. Now my only reason for being involved in CLEAR was to support a serious cannabis law reform campaign, this has now become impossible and it is with great regret that I can no longer be involved. So I resigned today (Friday 30th MArch) , I am no longer a member of the CLEAR exec.

I don’t use cannabis myself (time was…) but I do still want to see the madness of cannabis prohibition ended. I suppose I’ll just stick to running UKCIA, although I do wonder why I bother.

Since I wrote that there have been new developments within CLEAR which I am not a party to, but it seems the website ownership was transferred and at the time of writing points to the electoral commission. I can only assume that is an indication of the seriousness of the situation.

As of now, Peter Reynolds is still the official leader of CLEAR, contrary to some claims being made he was not unseated. As I understand things, he intends to remain as leader.

I was a witness to everything that unfolded before 30th March and maybe one day I’ll give an account of it all, but for now I’ll keep it to myself in the hope that CLEAR can survive this crisis. I still very much support the aims and objectives of CLEAR, which were the only reason I gave my support to it.



UKCIA is a cannabis law reform site dedicated to ending the prohibition of cannabis. As an illegal drug, cannabis is not a controlled substance - it varies greatly in strength and purity, it's sold by unaccountable people from unknown venues with no over sight by the authorities. There is no recourse to the law for users and the most vulnerable are therefore placed at the greatest risk. There can be no measures such as age limits on sales and no way to properly monitor or study the trade, let alone introduce proper regulation. Cannabis must be legalised, as an illegal substance it is very dangerous to the users and society at large.

11 thoughts on “CLEAR?

  1. What a shambles. And that, for me, sums up a large percentage of people involved in the so called cannabis ‘culture’. Very rarely do i find people with a similar outlook on the whole cannabis issue to myself. From the outside looking in, admittedly, it seems many people believe to somehow own cannabis and see it as their ‘thing’, im still reeling from Derricks comment about someone on a radio show boasting they brought high potency cannabis to England (did that happen or was it a nightmare i had?) What is this electoral commission business? perplexed by that one. I feel disheartened and wonder why i bother doing the, albeit small, bits and pieces for a change in direction, god knows how you feel Derrick!. Im sure Peter is not someone i would go to the pub with and share a few drinks but then nor would i with a huge percentage of other cannabis ‘activists’ (UK420 etc) im sure the feeling is mutual of course. Peter obviously has a large ego and maybe should have worked hard behind the scenes with a more subtle person as spokesperson, something all political parties do (sometimes!!) The shame is that the behaviour of some characters involved in all this gives the opposite image of cannabis that needs to be portrayed. I sit and ponder…do they smoke the same thing i do? Maybe i smoke some other plant? Or do i just give cannabis smokers to much credit. We are, after all, part of the same fallible, ignorant, stupid, selfish, pointless human race, thought i would leave it on a happy note!

  2. Hi Andrew – the name’s “Derek” please 🙂

    The person who claimed to have introduced high potency “skunk” to the UK was interviewed on the “Dopefeind” webcast. It’s not sopmething to be proud of IMO.

  3. Having read Peter’s blogs on the 7th Jan and seeing the way he has conducted himself since then, I can still not understand why you chose to back this disgusting man.The moment I realised the truth about Peter Reynolds, I couldn’t leave CLEAR fast enough.Unlike some so called activists, I do not feel the need to sacrifice my self respect,opinions and belief in unity and tolerance by sticking by a man I once truly believed was speaking for people like me.

    Did you really imagine ANY community would accept such a hostile and bigoted man?He incited racial hatred ffs!What else do you call hoisting up a picture of a swastika on his blog page with ‘Israel’ written under it?!Calling for the ‘eveil jews’ to be dealt with by the west.
    Or how Islam was also Evil?

    How can you defend a so called politician who believes homosexuality to be perverse and that there are too many Chinese in the UK?

    How can you trust a man who like that?
    He bans people, like myself, if they disagree with him.He attacks people who dare to have a different opinion to himself and threatens to shop people to the police if they don’t agree with him.

    He has now also spectacularly failed to understand that he is not wanted by nearly all CLEAR members and does not have the support of the CLEAR exec.
    He even refuses to stand down and is holding onto the misconception that he is still in control of CLEAR.

    The Cannabis community is stronger than ever now thanks to Peter and his aggressive and dictatorial manner.
    Do you really expect us to just put up with Peter’s abuse and childish antics on the off chance that he may get weed legalised?We have more self respect than that.

    All that I have just pointed out to you is but the tip of the iceberg.Every hour that Peter spends squatting in the CLEAR domain is another wasted hour of unproductive activism and another nail in CLEARS already nailed shut coffin.

    To use one of Peter’s favourite words, I wouldn’t trust that mendacious man as far as I could throw him!

  4. So glad that you have finally seen sense Derek. The fact is Clear is larger than Peter, if he was serious he would re-stand for election, if only to stop all the BS.
    As for your other post about ‘Small minds…’, you still failed to see my points, or if you did you chose to ignore them by not answering them, very typical of the Clear mentality, sidestep the issue at all costs…
    I am glad you are out of the equation, compromising yourself like that was not nice to see.

  5. Derek is a great loss to CLEAR and I very much hope that when the vicious bullying he has been subject to calms down he will feel able to return to what is the largest, most effective and successful cannabis campaign Britain has ever seen.

    That “Dirtysquirty” can hide behind her alias and splurge her vile abuse and distortion of my views is an inevitable consequence of the freedom of the internet. The hatred and prejudice screams out of her words though and anyone should be able to see through them.

    I am a liberal, an “extreme” liberal some might say. The allegations of racism, homophobia and bigotry are absolutely false, ridiculous to anybody who knows me. That a few have sought to twist and misrepresent my words is the inevitable consequence of being the leader of CLEAR. The jealousy and spite that has erupted because the campaign is now on a professional footing and having a real impact is astonishing.

    More than 50% of the submissions to the Home Affairs committee drugs inquiry cite CLEAR evidence. That is a fantastic achievement and a revolution in the credibility of the cannabis campaign.

    I have now called for a vote of confidence from the membership of CLEAR. We shall see what the result is.

  6. Yes, well a vote from Facebook will hold no credibility what so ever Peter.
    Leave the booze alone, take stock and have a vote that can actually have credibility….

  7. So now there will be a vote, but that vote is not good enough! What will be good enough, building a wicker man putting Peter inside and setting it alight? You are not cannabis, you have no more of a right than any person on the planet to represent any cannabis issue. You are not the chosen representative of the cannabis plant, deal with it. I don’t know this ‘dope fiend’ but the name sums it up for me, personally anyway, ‘fiend’ imagine ‘alcohol fiend’ ‘crack fiend”fiendy fiend’ is that the image we need to portraying, it plays straight into anti-cannabis group. Use your own name, unless you are embarrassed of your parents naming skills.
    Sorry DEREK, but remember a rose by any other name……

  8. Actually Peter, it isn’t “abuse” as you put it, it is that term you have so many problems with, the truth, or Fact.
    Care to deny it Peter?

    Glad to see the vote won’t be held on Facebook.

  9. Actually Tom your comment wasn’t “fact”, it was speculation on your part. That’s enough anyway.

    As I understand things the vote will be amongst CLEAR members and a members newsletter has gone out about it already.

    Facebook isn’t the real world, even if some people think it is.

  10. Facebook isn’t the real world nnnnnnoooooo!!!
    next you will tell me I don’t need to be afraid of the boogie man

Comments are closed.