|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
UK: Straw tries to soften rejection of drug report
Alan Travis The Guardian
Thursday 08 Feb 2001 The government yesterday tried to take the sting out of its rejection of a report urging reform of drugs laws by announcing that the 50,000 offenders cautioned each year for cannabis possession will not be given criminal records in the future. Ministers announced that they intend to change the legislation on the rehabilitation of offenders to ensure that the cautions 266,000 people receive each year for all offences, including drugs, will not have to be declared to employers or when travelling abroad. They also agreed they would review sentencing to ensure that those who are caught selling drugs to a few friends are not treated as harshly as professional dealers. Home Office ministers have been criticised for their rejection of the 24 main recommendations of the report of the Police Foundation inquiry into the state of Britain's drugs laws. The home secretary, Jack Straw, finally announced his "considered response" to the landmark report of the inquiry, chaired by Dame Ruth Runciman and which included two serving chief constables. Mr Straw confirmed yesterday that he had rejected its key recommendations to end the imprisonment of those convicted of cannabis possession and for a less serious classification of drugs such as ecstasy and LSD, which are bracketed with heroin and cocaine. The inquiry argued that the criminal penalties for cannabis possession often did more harm than the drug itself. The Home Office response yesterday said it was necessary to keep a prison sentence on the statute book for simple possession of cannabis as "an important backstop to ensure that defendants appear in court" and "as an incentive to treatment". Ministers agreed with the Police Foundation that ecstasy was less toxic than heroin or cocaine but said that when, three years ago, the advisory council on the misuse of drugs discussed its status it concluded that it posed "very real risks of fits, seizures, mental disturbances and death". It also identified possible longer-term risks to mental health. Similarly, on LSD the Home Office agreed it was less dangerous than heroin or cocaine but said it should remain a class A drug because "a bad trip is impossible to predict and can be terrifying". The official Home Office response adds: "Users may be prone to accidents while they are hallucinating and they experience flash backs, often some considerable time after the event." It also warned that LSD can complicate mental problems such as depression, anxiety and schizophrenia. One result of the report, however, is that an anti-drug driving publicity campaign - similar to the familiar drink- drive advertisements - is to be launched by the transport authorities. But the rejection of the landmark report dismayed drugs law reform campaigners. The head of the inquiry, Lady Runciman, said: "It is disappointing that a real opportunity for constructive dialogue and incremental change has been missed. All our most far-reaching recommendations have been rejected. At no point has the rationale underlying the proposals been addressed. It leaves us with a law that is out of touch with reality. I believe this is good report. Its time will come." David Winnick, a Labour backbench member of the Commons home affairs committee, agreed with Lady Runciman, adding that he hoped a more sensible debate on drugs would emerge after the pressures of the forthcoming general election campaign had passed.
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!