Subj: UK: OPED: Time to get real on drugs, and politics



Date: Sun, 15 Aug, 1999



Source: The Observer, UK





LEADER



ubject: Time to get real on drugs, and politics



WE ARE A NATION of hypocrites. Ten million Britons concede 

they have used drugs. One in five men and women in England 

and Wales between 16 and 59 have experimented with cannabis. 

According to 'Social Trends', published by the Government, 

35 per cent of 16 to 19-year-olds and more than 40 per cent 

of 20-to 24-year-olds have used the drug.. Yet any 

politician who urges that we look ourselves squarely in the 

eye and confront the patterns of our drug use is met with a 

collective raspberry. Our collective delusion over drugs is 

little short of astonishing.



Now Charles Kennedy has grasped the nettle. The Liberal 

Democrat leadership has long been embarrassed by its party 

conference commitment to establish a Royal Commission to 

examine the decriminalisation of some drugs. However, Mr 

Kennedy, in place as the Lib Dem's new leader for less than 

a week, has decided that this is a policy he should embrace. 

He is right.



Britain's approach to drug use is failing. The use of drugs 

such as cannabis, cocaine and softer amphetamines has risen 

because our collective 30-year experience of these drugs 

suggests that, while all have risks associated with their 

use, the dangers of addiction or serious ill-health are no 

greater than with cigarettes or alcohol. For all the efforts 

at confiscation and prevention, the supply of drugs is 

becoming more rather than less efficient. Yet because the 

supply and use of drugs remains criminal, there can be no 

policing of their chemical content which can be lethal, as 

the deaths from Ecstasy bear witness.



Worse, the criminalisation of the drug chain is itself an 

incentive to crime. At least a third of all property theft 

is by people stealing to pay for drugs; and the production 

and distribution of drugs has created international criminal 

drug organisations that are as violent and powerful as they 

are efficient. Laundering drug money has become big 

international financial business, and underwrites the 

existence of off-shore tax havens. Indeed, the loss of tax 

on what is becoming a major component of consumer spending 

and economic activity is another good reason for 

decriminalisation. Given the persistence, and growing 

acceptance of a sizeable market in drugs, why should bad 

people make all the money from it, when the Government could 

raise serious revenue for good works? In short, the issue 

needs to pulled out into the open.



The Observer has long argued that soft drug use should be 

decriminalised and made a civil disorder on a par with 

traffic offences. At the very least the penalties for drug 

use need to be standardised. We have to make a choice. 

Either we believe that certain drugs are too dangerous and 

harmful to be legal, and actually enforce the law, or stop 

the charade and change the law to allow for the use of soft 

drugs.



Of course, serious issues would need to be addressed before  

adopting the latter course. In particular, the danger that a 

soft drug can be a 'gateway' to harder drugs needs to be 

properly assessed. Public health implications must be 

evaluated. There are also a host of practical and legal 

considerations. The purpose of a Royal Commission is to 

consider such matters as part of an informed debate and Mr 

Kennedy's initiative is therefore to be welcomed.



It is also an astute political move. In one step he has 

established himself as a leader with powerful liberal 

sympathies, re-created the Lib Dems as a party that takes 

policy risks, and appealed to the young. Mr Kennedy may also 

find that the policy ideals less risky than some of his 

critics think. Britain is moving on, and there is a 

substantial progressive constituency that even right-of-

centre newspapers need to nurture. At the very least, the 

debate over cannabis legalisation will be a litmus test of 

the nation's liberalism. Whatever they say publicly, the 

buttoned-up leaders of the two main parties are certain to 

be monitoring reaction closely.



Kennedy's calculated risk will also give us some idea of the 

kind of politics people want. Do we want 'real' people like 

him at the pinnacle of politics; people who drink, smoke, 

swear; eat badly and confront us with hard truths? Or do we 

want machine politicians, technocratic, clean-living, 

masters of the soundbite? Perhaps we are about to find out. 

By poking his head above the parapet on drugs, Kennedy has 

already done progressive politics a service. Let us hope for 

more of the same.