|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
UK: Clarke promises health campaign on cannabis
Matthew Tempest The Guardian
Thursday 05 Jan 2006 The home secretary, Charles Clarke, today promised a major public education programme about the health and legality of cannabis, as a decision loomed on whether to reverse a downgrading in the drug's classification. Mr Clarke said he was "very worried" about links with schizophrenia, after spending Christmas reading a review of the medical complications associated with new higher-strength varieties of cannabis. He admitted there was public confusion about the legal status of the drug, following predecessor David Blunkett's decision to downgrade it to a class C offence in 2003 - although penalties for possession and supply of class C drugs were simultaneously increased. Just before last year's general election, in what some criticised as a move to nullify the issue, Mr Clarke ordered the advisory committee on the misuse of drugs to revaluate the evidence linking the drug with mental illness, in the light of higher strength "skunk" varieties from the Netherlands and home-grown producers in the UK. Today he said he was "very worried" about new medical evidence linking cannabis consumption with mental health problems. That is an indication he may be prepared to restore cannabis to class B, although today he would only reveal one of the report's recommendations - to commit to a new public health education programme on the drug. Speaking to the Times, Mr Clarke said that Mr Blunkett's decision to downgrade the drug had left people confused about the potential impact of the consumption of cannabis. Over the Christmas break, the home secretary considered the report of a special advisory group he commissioned to assess the latest medical opinion on the effects of cannabis. Though he declined to discuss the report's contents in detail, he said he would accept a key recommendation to step up education about the effects of cannabis and its legal status. And he said it was significant how many supporters of reclassification have changed their minds in the light of new medical evidence. "I'm very struck by the advocacy of a number of people who have been proposers of the reclassification of cannabis that they were wrong," he told the Times. "I am also very worried about the most recent medical evidence on mental health. This is a very serious issue." Asked whether Mr Blunkett's decision to downgrade cannabis had led to confusion, Mr Clarke responded: "Yes. People do not understand the impact of the consumption of cannabis well enough and what the legal consequences of consuming cannabis are." He promised to take action to reverse the alarming lack of knowledge about the health dangers of cannabis, which has been linked in some studies to schizophrenia and other mental problems. "Whatever happens after this, let me reveal one recommendation of the advisory committee - which they make very, very strongly - which is a renewed commitment to public education about the potential effects of the consumption of cannabis and the legal status of cannabis," he said. "That is well made and I will accept it." Under Mr Blunkett's reclassification, cannabis remained illegal and users could be sentenced to up to two years in jail for possession of the drug and dealers to up to 14. But police were advised that most cases where people were found in possession of small quantities of cannabis should result in a warning and confiscation of the drug, rather than an arrest. This led to the widespread perception that its use had effectively been decriminalised. Advocates of reclassification argued that it would allow police to concentrate their attentions on tackling the use of more serious and harmful drugs. Asked today if the downgrading of cannabis had served any useful purpose, Mr Clarke said: "I think it gives a steer to the citizen on more serious drug consumption." The Liberal Democrats, who backed the original downgrading, warned Mr Clarke not to bow to "tabloid pressure" on the issue. The party's home affairs spokesman, Mark Oaten, said: "The case for treating drugs in different categories remains very strong and unless the advisory body make a strong argument to change this, the government should resist reclassification." David Davis, the shadow home secretary, who urged reclassifying cannabis upwards in his leadership campaign, merely cautioned waiting for the advisory board report.
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!