|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
UK: High hopes or going to dope
Julian Ford, Dave Lennard and Danielle Nuttall East Anglian Times
Wednesday 24 Oct 2001 IT'S one of the burning social issues of our time and this week Home Secretary David Blunkett has reignited it again. Politically, in proposing to reclassify cannabis as a Class C drug, he's shown great political courage. Few Home Secretaries in the past would have dared to make such a concession. Just look at the front page treatment given to Mr Blunkett's announcement by The Sun yesterday. The tabloid newspaper chose to carry the story about the IRA beginning to decommission arms and Mr Blunkett's proposal to reclassify cannabis under the same banner headline "What are they on? Peace Man!". Mildly entertaining perhaps, but should we really be making light of two such serious issues as drugs policy and the future of Northern Ireland? Heralding a massive shake-up of drugs policy, the Home Secretary says possession of cannabis should no longer be an arrestable offence. His proposal to reclassify the drug as Class C puts it in the same category as anti-depressants or steroids - a remarkable turnaround for Labour, who came to power in 1997 pledging a "zero tolerance" policy on drugs. He denies it is decriminalisation, stressing cannabis will remain illegal, but says it will make drugs laws "more sense on the street". In practice, cannabis users will be unlikely to face any consequences if they are caught with small amounts of the drug. Mr Blunkett will be asking the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs for scientific advice before going ahead - but the group first recommended reclassifying cannabis in 1979. If the ACMD reports back within three months, Mr Blunkett says he could make a final decision on the proposals next spring. "To have credible policy in treatment and harm minimisation and above all consistency in law enforcement and policing, we believe it is right to look at the re-categorisation of cannabis,' Mr Blunkett told the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee on Tuesday. "I shall therefore be putting to the ACMD a proposal that we should re-categorise cannabis to C rather than B, thereby allowing the police to concentrate their resources on Class A, in particular cocaine and heroin." "Above all, it will make sense to both those policing the system and those providing education and advice to prevent young people falling into addiction.' Not according to Chris Sadler, chairman of Suffolk police federation, who condemned Mr Blunkett's proposals to relax the cannabis laws by declassifying the drug. "We do not like the idea because it sends out the wrong signal that basically, society is getting soft on drugs," he said. "We would not say to motorists driving along the A140 who should be going only 40mph that we cannot cope with trying to stop them going over that so we will raise it to 50mph. It just wouldn't happen. "It's not something we welcome and it's not the right thing to happen if we want to deter young people from experimenting with drugs. "If we start saying we will not do you for cannabis now, then youngsters will say: "Oh well, we'll do something else instead or try something a bit harder," because youngsters generally like to rebel." "If you make something less illegal than generally more people are going to try it." A Suffolk Police spokesman said: "It's the police's duty to uphold the law and if there are changes to the law those changes will, of course, be upheld. "Already our policy in Suffolk is to target particular drug dealers who deal in class A drugs such as crack cocaine and heroin as these are the drugs that do the most damage in our society." "We have an anti drugs campaign in Suffolk which specifically targets dealers called Operation Crackdown where people can call a free to give information on 0800 253253." Essex Police declined to comment. Carey Godfrey, co-ordinator of the Suffolk Drugs Action Team, said his organisation had long been calling for a proper debate, but was anxious to highlight the risks of cannabis use. "We have been saying for sometime there needs to be a full debate on the cannabis issue. It is very confusing for young people when you look at the degree of harm caused by different drugs including legal drugs such as alcohol. "The Suffolk Drugs Action Team continues to take the approach there are risks associated with cannabis use both from the health and social perspective. In fact all our education to young people highlights the risks of all drug use, including cannabis." Conservative MP Tim Yeo broke ranks with the Shadow Cabinet by calling for cannabis to be made available for medicinal use, and for an open debate on whether the drug should be decriminalised. The then Shadow Agriculture Minister, now Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, became the eighth Shadow Cabinet minister to admit taking cannabis in his youth after then Shadow Home Secretary Ann Widdecombe unveiled her zero-tolerance policy to soft drugs at last year's Conservative Party Conference. The South Suffolk MP, who has admitted taking the drug while at university, said he had been greatly influenced by the experience of his son Jonathan, who took cannabis to ease the side-effects of chemotherapy treatment for cancer. But a leading East Anglian doctor spearheading Government research into the medicinal use of cannabis warned study should not be confused with recreational use of the drug. Dr William Notcutt runs a pain relief clinic at the James Paget Hospital at Gorleston and has patients from a wide area of north Suffolk and south Norfolk. In May last year the Government gave the go-ahead for the use of cannabis in medical research by authorising a number of trials by the Medicines Control Agency. The full-scale programme involved patients suffering from multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, severe pain and spasticity. One of the trials is being run by Dr Notcutt at the James Paget Hospital but he dismisses claims that the Government's proposals to reclassify cannabis as a class C drug will have an immediate impact on the medical studies. "I do not believe the Government's announcement will make a jot of difference to the medical studies of cannabis. "Although I appreciate that the medical and recreational use of cannabis have become somewhat entwined they really should be treated as completely separate matters," he said. Dr Notcutt likened the subject to that of the class A drug heroin that can also be prescribed as a painkiller. He said that no one talks about heroin as a painkiller, when it is produced as morphine, in the same breath as heroin as a recreational substance. The trials into the medicinal use of cannabis are expected to continue for some time. "Morphine has been around for well over one hundred years and still tests are being carried out on its uses. "I expect the same will apply to the use of cannabis in pain relief," said Dr Notcutt. It is expected, however, that sufferers of debilitating illnesses who take cannabis for the relief of pain will be much less likely to face prosecution in the law courts with the drug's new classification. Last year 51-year-old multiple sclerosis sufferer Thomas Yates, of Lowestoft, was cleared of cultivating cannabis after a jury at Ipswich Crown Court accepted his plea that he used the drug to ease his pain. It was cases such as those involving Mr Yates that put pressure on the Government to change the current laws on cannabis. But Mr Blunkett's proposals will not have any effect on people who cultivate cannabis - an offence which carries a 14-year maximum jail term. The new maximum sentence for cannabis possession would be two years, if Mr Blunkett sees through his proposals. The Home Office said that after reclassification, cannabis possession would be dealt with by either a caution - which would go on a criminal record - or by summons, which sees the offender called to magistrates court to face a possible fine, in the same way that many driving offences are dealt with. If reclassification of cannabis goes ahead, it would put the whole country on the same footing as a pilot scheme in south London where police are "turning a blind eye' to cannabis use. Since it began in July, officers in Brixton have been dealing with possession of small amounts by confiscating the drug and issuing a warning rather than arresting the user, a policy which the Metropolitan Police is hugely time-saving. Since the start of the experiment, 218 people have been officially warned for possession of cannabis, compared with 168 people that were arrested in the same period last year, but the Metropolitan Police are still evaluating the six-month pilot scheme.
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!