|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
UK: A quick political fix
Roger Howard The Guardian
Wednesday 10 Jul 2002 The response of the home secretary, David Blunkett, to the home affairs select committee report on drugs policy appears to be based more on political expediency than the evidence provided by authoritative research. At DrugScope, the UK's leading centre of expertise on drugs, we believe that the report provided the government with the evidence it needed to develop an effective drugs policy. However, following months of the "adult and intelligent debate" about drugs he called for, Mr Blunkett seems to have been selective in acting on the report's findings, making political decisions, rather than looking at what works. As a result, we have a mixed bag of reforms. The decision to reclassify cannabis from a class B to C drug will mean that cannabis possession will now normally result in a police warning. However, despite the government's own advisers - along with medical experts - concluding that cannabis, on balance, is less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco, the UK could still end up locking people in jail for up to two years for smoking a joint. By raising the maximum sentence for dealing in class C drugs to 14 years in jail, the home secretary has maintained the existing penalty for dealing in cannabis. While DrugScope welcomes the targeting of major commercial dealers, users who pass on drugs only to close friends or are found in possession of a few cannabis plants may well ask why they should be jailed for such a minor offence. The decision to extend the current arrangements for prescribing heroin is welcome. Research from Switzerland and Holland demonstrates there are positive outcomes: better health and less crime. It suggests that it can provide a bridge into other forms of treatment for some of the most intractable of cases, where drugs users have tried and failed a number of treatment attempts. Unfortunately, not everyone in the drugs debate has carefully considered the body of scientific and medical evidence on cannabis. DrugScope regrets the resignation of Keith Hellawell and appreciates the work he did while the government's drug tsar, but, on balance, it is perhaps time he moved on. Despite the positive moves on cannabis and heroin prescribing, the government has missed some opportunities. The select committee had recommended the introduction of safer injecting rooms, also known as "shooting galleries". Unfortunately, the government has missed a golden opportunity to base policy on evidence available from Switzerland, Germany, Australia and Holland. This suggests that these rooms have real potential to bring down the number of drug related deaths, as well as reduce nuisance to the public by getting injectors off the streets. The decision not to reclassify ecstasy is also disappointing. We are surprised that Mr Blunkett has not taken the decision to refer the reclassification of ecstasy to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) as he has done with cannabis. Ecstasy can certainly be harmful; the question is, is it really as harmful as crack and heroin? We believe that the ACMD is the best body to make such a decision, based on an up to date and independent assessment of the evidence, rather than on political decisions based on short term priorities. From DrugScope's perspective, today's announcement is a mixed bag. After 30 years, the home secretary has taken the first step towards a drugs policy based on evidence for which we applaud him. We would, however, urge him to reconsider his position on other areas of drug policy, reviewing the latest evidence to ensure that the adult and intelligent debate he called for continues.
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!