It seems remarkable does it not you can have referenda in this country that have, seemingly, so few rules around them. 

The Drug Foundation, who should not be in the business at the best of times of being political operatives, have nevertheless decided to bring the worst aspects of Washington lobbying to New Zealand by raising money to buy spin, to twist your arm to vote yes for cannabis in September.

The question is, who's funding them?

They say for a start that the government money they get isn't being used. But of the money that’s being donated, who is it from? And how much is it? And most importantly, why don't we know? And if we did, would it potentially change your mind?

Here's an irony, I bet you anything you want, that these are just the sort of people who would object to us funding governments and political parties and the way they're funding their campaigns with few rules and little disclosure.

If you have to disclose anything over $15,000 for a political party, why not a referenda?

Here's my guess, at least some of the money will be coming from corporates who see profit in legalising dope. Those who gain most, will be finding the opportunity to profit the most. Show me I am wrong. And do those that stand to profit have our health interests at heart? Or their bottom lines? And if they're so above board and open with their views, ideas, and plans, why on earth aren't they out there telling us who they are, and what they're stumping up?

Nothing wrong with a vote. Democracy is good, ideas are good, and debate is good. But you debate with those you can see. We currently can't see who they are.

The entire campaign is run under the name of the Drug Foundation. We have no idea who's behind him. Why not? And if it was a corporate who had given a small fortune, what would your view be then?

Much is made in America about small donors, the likes of which Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren played on. Much is made of big oil, big gas, big tobacco, and firearms lobbyists who fund others. It's seen as shady and hijacked, where the rich and influential, get richer and more influential.

What you want most of all in these sort of debates is transparency and a level playing field.

Why don’t we have one? What have they got to hide?