By Bob Ainsworth MP
Over the last couple of decades, the United Kingdom hasn’t had a proper, rational debate on drug policy. The mantra has always been prohibition, prohibition, prohibition. Whenever the words decriminalisation and legalisation enter the debate, they are dismissed.
After the publication of the government’s disappointing Drugs Strategy, now is the time to open up that debate. That is why I triggered a debate in Westminster Hall and called on the government to consider all the options on drugs policy.
Why now though? Why didn’t I say these things when I was the Drugs Minister? The first reason was that I came into the job in 2001 with a traditional view of drugs policy; that prohibition worked. As I came to realise that, quite frankly, wasn’t the case, I was bound by collective responsibility, which comes with ministerial office. I had a choice; gradually move the policy on or cause a tiny splash by resigning. I chose the former and we made progress on treatment and education as a result.
So what am I calling for? That’s simple. I believe that we should have an independent, evidence based review on drugs policy that looks at all options, including decriminalisation and legalisation.
We need to drop the dogmatism and evaluate what works and what doesn’t. David Cameron said the same, as part of the Home Affairs Select Committee in 2002. But when he became Tory Party Leader he felt he had to deny his clearly held beliefs.
We need to realise that only when we start being grown up about the alternatives to prohibition will we make any progress on drugs policy. Then and only then, can we save many lives up and down our country and across the world.
Bob Ainsworth is Labour MP for Coventry North East. He was a Home Office minister in the last government responsible for drugs policy and more recently secretary of state for defence.
Comments
Ian Michie / December 16 2010 3:35pm
So you want to change one set of criminal gangs from controlling the drug trade to a different set of Westminster based criminal gangs instead?
I see........
Michael Jecks / December 16 2010 6:25pm
Thank God for a politician who's prepared at last to think about prohibition versus all the other options.
The fact is, prohibition serves to generate massive profits for anyone who is prepared to break the law. From murderers in Colombia, Venezuela, Mexico, killing tens of thousands of innocents a year, to the gangs on British streets.
Prohibition is killing people. Whether it's the gangs who 'cut' their powders with chalk, flour, aspirin, or even rat poison, or the poor devils who don't realise that the government donations of methadone can be poisonous, this policy is responsible for large numbers of deaths.
It is also creating a vast pool of criminalised people. Users, who only want to try drugs without hurting anyone, all too quickly become career criminals. Generations of kids now have records because they wanted to try drugs that were legal only a few years ago.
The policy has led to ever increasing control of the public. More and more restrictive laws, more police powers, more prisons.
What the hell is the point of all this? It only serves to generate revenue for the criminals.
Legalise the lot. Tax it all, make it problematic to be caught in charge of a car if you're loaded, but respond maturely to something that has been going on since the Druids discovered magic mushrooms or before.
jasper / December 16 2010 8:43pm
Don't suppose there is any chance of you declaring this as well?
Over the last couple of decades, the United Kingdom hasn’t had a proper, rational debate on immigration policy. The mantra has always been racism, racism, racism.
David / December 17 2010 8:09am
Having worked with drug users in the criminal justice system as a front line practitioner for the last 23 years I can tell anyone who cares to listen that prohibition and the subsequent criminalisation of drug use is counter productive.
Let us not forget that there are a large number of drugs that are freely available and just as potentially dangerous/addictive (in the case of cigarettes and alcohol more so) than street heroin or crack cocaine. Many drug users simply turn up to their GP's Surgery for a repeat prescription of sleeping pills, tranquillisers or strong painkillers and never risk prosecution or criminalisation. Bringing those who use drugs obtained from other sources back into a legally acceptable system of supply is far preferable to the present system. They can be supplied clean drugs (that are actually very cheap)and this will reduce crime associated with the acquisition of expensive unclean street drugs. At the same time they can be offered treatment to reduce or stop should they choose to do so.
Criminal organisations will then inevitably switch to other activities, such as people trafficking, and the police can use the substantial resources, that will be freed up and they now use to ineffectively tackle drug use, to tackle serious criminals who are well resourced and will do whatever is available to them to make money if there is an opportunity (such as that supplied by prohibition of drugs in the UK and elsewhere).
Peter Reynolds / December 20 2010 2:50pm
The responses of our political leaders to Bob Ainsworth's initiative have been grossly irresponsible and negligent. James “Broken Britain” Brokenshire is the most dangerous man in Britain and will be responsible for far more death, misery and degradation in our country than any terrorist.
The evidence that the war on drugs is an expensive failure is overwhelming but politicians prefer to waste money and lives rather than grasp this nettle.
The cowardly hypocrites, Cameron and his poodle, sit back while they allow Brokenshire to oppress, pillage and brutalise our fellow citizens.
Britain now stands as one of the most backward and restrictive countries in the world when it comes to drug policy. We now rub shoulders with those countries that execute people for drug possession. There is no civilised country in the world with a more repressive drugs policy than Britain.
The main problem is that the government’s approach is based on prejudice and an arrogant, moralistic, proselytising stance. Prohibition is immoral and evil in itself. When will our politicians wake up to what most of the rest of Europe and the USA already knows?
Every other civilised country in the world is coming to terms with the fact that the war on drugs is unwinnable, even lost. When will Britain's leaders wake up? Public opinion is overwhelmingly in favour of drug law reform, particularly the legalisation of cannabis. Why are we being ignored?