|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
UK: Spliff decision
Mary O'Hara The Guardian
Wednesday 21 Dec 2005 Setting limits on how much cannabis people can carry has led to accusations that the government's policy on drugs is too soft. What do the experts think? Peter Stoker Director, National Drug Prevention Alliance Government policy is hardly uniformly soft. It's more like jelly with nuts: fatalistic on illegal drugs, but questioning cannabis classification; gung-ho on tobacco, but intoxicated by 24-hour alcohol. Ignoring far higher quantities than the average user would ever carry massages crime figures, but even the Met's top cop is worried by this. The potential for societal damage with this proposal, coupled with supine interdiction processes, is greater than any relaxing on cannabis alone. Government has been persuaded to take what was, even five years ago, a broadly sound, all-party supported approach, and then unravel it into libertarianism disguised as expediency. The ability to intervene with early-stage users and divert them to healthier avenues is lost; treatment is more about maintaining use than ending it, despite addicts calling for the latter; education has been subverted into telling you how to use; prevention has been vaporised. Broadcast that use is inevitable, and what happens? More people use. Great news if you're a dealer, but terrible if you're a parent trying to raise healthy children. What is needed is a rational extension of government's still-retained goal for treatment: abstinence. This is not a pious ideal. Evidence-based prevention, education, law and order, intervention and treatment should have avoidance of drug use as the core goal. Rosie Brocklehurst Director of communications, Addaction The government has been very tenacious and pragmatic in the way it has steered drugs policy. Those for whom criticism of government comes easy should realise that this is an evolving field and even the experts are learning all the time about how to make treatment better. Treatment and prevention not only help individuals but also benefit the family, the community and the wider society. I think in this respect the government has been patient, even visionary, while remaining grounded in realpolitik. Deep understanding is what makes all the difference, and I think that work we do on the frontline has to be where we go further. So don't cut the money on the frontline - find it elsewhere. Trust the sector and free us up to deliver. Expect and encourage more mergers of treatment agencies, and recognise that, as we deal with one generation of users, a new generation is arriving, and new drugs are on the horizon - for example, crystal meth. Vivienne Evans Chief executive, Adfam We estimate that problematic drug and alcohol use within the family has a negative impact on more than 3 million people. The disparity between need and availability of support highlights the difficulties facing families battling the isolation and social stigma that goes with drug problems. Families are usually the first victims of the crime, abuse and stress that can often accompany substance misuse. Unprecedented resources are being provided by government to deal with the drug problems that the country faces. However, families remain a relatively marginalised group within the government's drug and alcohol strategy. Services set up to meet the needs of families are patchy at best. But engaging families in the process can be pivotal in achieving successful outcomes, turning the government's investment into real life-changing results for problematic drug users and their families. It is hoped the next drug strategy will incorporate dedicated resources and services to meet families' needs. Martin Barnes Chief executive, DrugScope The government is serious about reducing problem drug use and its many harms. There is no room for complacency, but the progress being made, particularly on drug treatment, is probably one of the government's best-kept secrets. There is record spending on drug treatment, with a 40% increase next year. The target of doubling numbers in treatment may be met two years ahead of schedule, but much more needs to be done to improve treatment quality and effectiveness. The upward trend in drug use has stabilised, with promising signs of falling use among children and young people, particularly for cannabis and some class A drugs. The government has introduced restrictions on bail for drug-related offences, compulsory drug testing on arrest and, should the test be positive, a requirement to undergo an assessment. The aim is to get more offenders, or potential offenders, into treatment. Cannabis reclassification was not a "soft" response, but based on evidence of its relative harm and the strategy to concentrate on even more harmful drugs such as heroin, cocaine and crack. The predicted increase in cannabis use has not happened. Indeed, the reverse has happened. Danny Kushlick Director, Transform On page six of the UK updated Drug Strategy 2002 it says: "We will maintain prohibition. . ." In 2003, the prime minister's strategy unit produced a report for the cabinet that showed that, far from tackling drugs, its policy of enforcing the drug laws was actually creating many of our drug problems. As a result of supply-side drug law enforcement, heroin and cocaine are worth more than their weight in gold and, consequently, organised criminals run the market. We have some of the toughest drug laws in Europe, the highest levels of drug use in Europe, the highest per capita prison population in Europe. Nearly a fifth of UK prisoners are drug law offenders, and more than half are there as a result of committing acquisitive crime to support a habit. The crime costs associated with prohibition are estimated at UKP16bn a year. Prohibition creates crime and criminal opportunities, increases public ill-health and drug-related dangers (especially for young people), wastes billions of pounds, contributes to political instability in producer countries, and infringes human rights. We should plan an exit strategy from the global "war on drugs" and replace it with a more effective system of legal control and regulation. Edward Garnier Shadow home affairs minister I sit as a part-time judge and most of the people that come in front of me are there, one way or another, because of drugs. Drugs are the single biggest factor behind urban crime. Legalisation is often put forward as a solution, but it is not as simple as that. The people who suffer the consequences of drug abuse would suffer it whether drugs were legal or not. Unless every country in the world legalised drugs, decriminalisation in this country alone would make things worse. Finding solutions to drug abuse requires more serious action than changing classifications. We need to get to grips with why people turn to drugs. Helplessness, boredom, the breakdown of the family and of communities are all contributory factors. A considered and mature review of our drugs policy should be uppermost in our plans for the future of the Conservative party. If we want a government that really will cut crime and the causes of crime, getting a grip on drug abuse and addiction is absolutely crucial.
After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.
|
This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!