UK Drug Strategy 2010 – A Plan To Fail
Mother Knows Best
Gone are the days when central Government tells communities and the public what to do.
Rt. Hon. Theresa May, MP, Home Secretary, December 2010
A slim volume of treacle-like and turgid social worker-speak shot through with a few strands of sharp hypocrisy. See here.
A disappointment? Not really, it’s pretty much what I expected – an authoritarian, moralistic smokescreen behind which the government will do what it wants with no regard whatsoever for the views or the welfare of the people. It stinks.
It claims to be radical in that it turns away from reducing the harms caused by drugs and instead aims to force abstinence. In other words, do as we say or suffer the consequences. It is, in fact, a medieval solution to a 21st century problem. It seems that the British government no longer cares about the harm caused by drugs. All it cares about is that you STOP! This is the ultimate exposition of Nancy Reagan’s discredited “Just Say No” campaign because it really is “just” say “no” – no other option exists. This from a government that advocates giving people methadone to “treat” cannabis use. Can you believe it? That isn’t medieval. It’s prehistoric – or perhaps better described as mid 20th century, a sort of Dr Mengele method.
I give Ms May credit for one thing. She mentions alcohol alongside drugs in the first sentence of her foreword. That is progress but from then on there is little of any value. Nothing that you couldn’t have copied from any out of date A level textbook on social work.
The laughable assertion quoted above that the government doesn’t tell us what to do is just absurd. Never has there been a more hard line approach to the drugs issue. See Edwin Stratton’s article in The Guardian here which reveals just how draconian, anti-civil liberties and severe this government is.
In the penultimate paragraph of her foreword, Ms May acknowledges that there were calls during consultation on the strategy for “liberalisation and decriminalisation”. She dismisses these as not “the answer” but fails entirely to consider the enormous harm caused and crime created by existing policies. I will be making Freedom Of Information requests to determine just how much notice was taken of the consultation.
There is a complete failure to understand or consider the harms of prohibition. 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.
Broken Britain
Emphasis is given to the introduction of elected Police and Crime Commissioners. I support this move. Hopefully, these elected officials, being closer to reality and not ensconsed in Whitehall’s ivory towers, will mitigate some of the damage that this strategy could cause. They will have the impossible job of trying to implement these ideas and will surely give Ms May and her protege James “Broken Britain” Brokenshire some lessons in reality and common sense.
The statistics and figures quoted in the strategy are manifest nonsense. Apparently the economic and social costs of Class A drug use are £15.4 billion per annum while the equivalent figure for alcohol is £18 – 25 billion. Supposedly the total illicit drug market in Britain is worth just £4 – 6 billion per annum while the market for alcohol is £30 billion. There are just 320,000 heroin and/or crack cocaine users but tens of million that use alcohol. These figures just don’t add up. Maybe that’s part of the reason this strategy is so badly conceived and directed.
It’s only part of the reason though. The main problem is that the government’s approach is based on prejudice and an arrogant, moralistic, proselytising stance. See David Nutt’s article here on what the government would do if a completely safe alternative to ecstasy was developed. 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?
Powerful Medicine. Gentle Pleasure.
Cannabis, the most widely used illegal drug by a factor of at least 10 barely gets a mention except in passing. This, in itself, exposes the inane content of this strategy. The government apparently intends to deal with cannabis in exactly the same way as it deals with heroin and crack. The medicinal use of cannabis, now a burgeoning industry and source of hope to people all over Europe and America isn’t even mentioned. The crass stupidity of this strategy is almost beyond belief.
So the battle lines are drawn. Every other civilised country in the world is coming to terms with the fact that the war on drugs is unwinnable, even lost. Theresa May, like some mad first world war general, is blowing her whistle and urging on millions more to go over the top into certain death, or at least misery and degradation. Her slightly fey, sweet boy, Colonel Jimmy is hiding behind her, determined to gain credit for something but definitely not doing anything worthwhile, “Crikey! Not me. I’m staying safe.”
This could be a deeply depressing day but at least now we know where we stand. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have completely turned around on the progressive and liberal ideas they have advocated in the past. Nothing is a better indicator of the integrity and intelligence of a government than its drug policy. Britain is shamed by this effort which will inevitably cause more harm, cost more money and ruin more lives.
Peter Reynolds 
I say ‘no to drugs’ just to punish the Lib Dem party and their dope head followers. They were obviously stoned when the signed the coalition agreement.
Ram Pandit
December 8, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Concise, well argued and spot om- the prohibitition of drug’s, the ‘war on drugs’ and de-facto- the human beings that use and enjoy them- is considered by some (Seigel et-al) as a fifth primordial drive as important and integrated aspect of human BEING as the need/desire to eat, procreate, etc.
The present self declared ‘Goverment of National unity’, non elected- self selected by vy virtue of constitutionaly legitimisecd ‘coup de tat’ has created a vertible medicine ball sized ‘Yenshee Baby’ and called it a ‘National Drug Strategy’.
it’s a turd and you cannot polish a turd withut getting covered in shit. Sadfly this is a recipe for death, disease, harm and misery.
Time to abolish prohibtion and introduce regulation.
Prohibition is not and never been abot rug userrs- it’s about predjudice, racism, class hate, crimminalisation , control and notably the projection of power, stategic, economic, political and other interest’s by covert and plausibly ‘denaible’ means.
Best: Alan joyce Coms officer ( voluntary & board member the National Users Network). Facebook page ubder ‘national usr’s network’.
Apol’s for typo’s etc- but I suffer ME and this format doesnt help with the problems that come with it. Dood article/blog. AJ .
Sadly too many forget history or neglect to research and educate themseves about it-
ALAN JOYCE
December 11, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Oh ya ignorant fool….just do your home work before speak your mind
Sam
December 12, 2010 at 9:08 pm
That was for ram
Sam
December 12, 2010 at 9:09 pm
Simple as this! Just because the old cow and mr slime want us to stop that does not mean I am going to leave from my daily spliff and magical studio time. These people need to wake up and get intelligent.
Legalize cannabis. Drug policy that keeps making the dealers richer and richer.
Architect
December 8, 2010 at 8:30 pm
Professor Nutt’s quote resonates in my mind now from his lecture:
http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/nutt_video.html
I’ll paraphrase, he said that if you think we had it bad after Labour’s strategy and misuse, imagine what we’ll have under the Tories.
A cold day, one that could resonate in history.
Still, a good day for the dealers and cartels, Christmas has come early. So, every cloud…
Jason (HomeGrown Outlaw)
December 8, 2010 at 8:50 pm
A sad day indeed. After all the news articles about decriminalization and so on over the last few months I was entertaining some sort of misguided hope. Can we stage protests? Would it do any good? Sigh.
Simon
December 8, 2010 at 9:18 pm
I knew the Coalition were going to be bad, but this is a new low even for them.
What I can’t work out, is do they actually believe that that’s that? Are they so naive as to assume that everyone else will back down?
FFAAnon1
December 8, 2010 at 9:24 pm
what a disgrace, i was going to train as a councelor, i would have covered: ADHD. bereavement, rape, eixt and of course DRUGS…giving methadone to “treat” cannabis “addiction” is like giving a murderer a gun and a group of homeless people to wean him off his thirst for killing people…in short it is batshit insane…actually giving a heroin addict pure cannabis to wean him off that crap is the best solution…how many babies have died because they got their hands on their parents methadone…we all need to spam these idiots in charge…go look up an article on the comedy site “cracked” about how the internet fought back or internet vigilantism etc…a spam king got his just desserts, people located him and he now gets truckloads of mail each day lol, this is needed, lets flood em with the truth !!!
adhd
December 8, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Did we really expect any different?
Nick
December 8, 2010 at 10:31 pm
I dislike drugs QED And that includes cannabis and the ones I am on to control my epilepsy, no matter how harmless people suggest cannabis is.
BUT : as for Theresa May’s suggestion that
METHADONE ..? !
Is a suitable replacement to “wean” people off it…… Christ: the woman must be on a Class A drug herself!
The Debt Collector
December 8, 2010 at 10:41 pm
You can’t blame sweet Theresa for it. Belive it or not, this is the protocol for “cannabis addiction”.
No such thing exists of course but it is sometimes used as mitigation for other crimes which leads to…
Peter Reynolds
December 8, 2010 at 11:40 pm
Its Obvious! Teresa’s a stoner and as weed is such a gateway drug, she needs something a little stronger!
Nick
December 8, 2010 at 10:45 pm
you guys that say cannabis use is bad must be extremly week minded ppl i have been using pot on and off for years and have never touched a hard drug and if you are so feeble as to not be able just stop like i can it proves that you are less than human the only drygs ive ever had a problem with is the ones they give me ffor my back injury that shit is extremly addictive and ive just recently found that out if my doc could have prescribed pot i would have been a lot beter off as i know for a fact its not addictive its the fucken tobbaco that ppl put with it but pure green is not that addictive as i have proved with myself as i can stop when i feel like it just like the last 2 weeks i havent had a cone and dont feel any sort of withdrawls missed my pills for a couple of days and started to shake and sweat and got depressed and anxious dont be small minded ppl get it together and legalise pot for over 21 year olds and for medicinal purposes i think another reason that they want to make pot illegal is so more ppl stop getting stoned and chilling at home not spending any money they want us out there spending all the time the more you spend the more tax they get
giraffy
December 9, 2010 at 12:04 am
I’m right up there with you, nibbling the tallest buds mate.
Peter Reynolds
December 9, 2010 at 12:06 am
what can we do!!!!!!!
graham
December 9, 2010 at 12:23 am
I agree, due to my involvement with cannabis, study, campaigning, the BMCR, and a medical user, just eery area of my life… it got to saturation point for me and I stepped away for two weeks with no mention of the green plant allowed and me deciding to not ingest.
Cold turkey just isn’t true, not even a chilly chicken in fact. Apart from the pain that I’m in, that I’ve masked with my prescribed codeine, (class b drug) I have not had a single issue with halting the plant’s “evil” clutches. Funny how that works, now, come getting back off the codeine, well, been there, done that, a famed hell for those who are ensnared deeply in this tolerance building drug.
I think another repost of this video is called for if it will work (sorry in advance Peter if you have to tidy this up):
Jason (HomeGrown Outlaw)
December 9, 2010 at 1:45 am
I was joking about the Gateway.. I too have smoked for more years than is polite to mention. I don’t use anything else and have no urge to. As we all do, from time to time the tap runs dry. I’ve never felt any signs of withdrawal either.
Nick
December 9, 2010 at 2:20 pm
The figures in the strategy are hogwash!
“It is estimated that 1.6 million people have mild, moderate or severe alcohol dependence. About
a third of these will face some challenges that are similar to those dependent on drugs in needing
support to help them recover”
Just 1.6 Million have mild, moderate or severe alcohol dependence! Utter tripe!
Click to access drinkinggb_excessive.pdf
And why the sudden focus on relatively harmless ‘legal highs’? are they really causing that much harm?
I really hate the home office. This strategy is a disagrace. And there is seemingly nothing anyone can do about it. We’ll be stuck with the ridiculous criminalisation of ‘drug’ addicts while alcoholics can fall of the wagon anytime without fear of criminalisation. Its insane and its got to change!
The main harm assiocated with cannabis is the police!
Bob
December 9, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Interesting to think that in the late 1960s, when Herion was legally available to registered addicts via a (very) few outlets, the number of addicts was in the hundreds.
After reclassification we saw an enormous leap. Just so with cocaine and several other substances.
Interesting to see how the various costs of both Drugs and Alcohol are calculated – after all, the two are often used at the same time – just watch City Bankers on any Thursday night.
Addiction is a medical problem for the individual, and until we actually cut the gordian knot, all drug policy will be ineffective.
Doctordrink
December 9, 2010 at 12:30 pm
The saddest thing about all this is our common desire for legalisation. There are of course many reasons be they medical or purely for our own relaxation and the opening of minds however one thing that strikes me is that non of us want the break the law. Surely, in its self this is the strongest of statements. We are not ‘bad’ people.I have known many who’s mind has actually benefited from exposure. Its sad times we live in.
Nick
December 9, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Nick, once again, you strike the very nub of the issue, the bull’s eye.
Peter Reynolds
December 12, 2010 at 9:37 pm
what about our freedom?
Architect
December 10, 2010 at 4:50 pm
METHADONE, to wean someone off Cannibis?
What the hell are these nuts talking about?
Its like suggesting that getting a paeadaphile to baby sit a group of 7 year olds!
I do wonder whether our Politicians should indeed be tested for psychiatric defect before they take up office. Ineed are they on this stuff themselves, which is why they want to legalise it?
This Country frightens me more each day, and I only wish I know where to leave for, since it seems the rest of the world is as corrupt.
I am on drugs to control my epilpesy, and know that it will not be the epulepsy which kills me, but the drugs causing renal breakdown and eventual failure. But to suggest that someone takes Methadone to wean someone off Cannabis is the most absurd thing which I have come across.
The Debt Collector
December 11, 2010 at 6:24 pm
[…] UK Drug Strategy 2010 – A Plan To Fail « Peter Reynolds. A slim volume of treacle-like and turgid social worker-speak shot through with a few strands of […]
Peter Reynolds doesn’t like it either | yourbrainondrugs.net
December 14, 2010 at 2:40 am
Great analysis, Peter.
I wonder if there’s anything I’ve said about legal highs that you disagree with: http://www.synchronium.net/2010/12/14/legal-highs-the-2010-drug-strategy/
If you get the chance to skim it and come across any problems, I welcome your opinion. 🙂
Synchronium
December 14, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Excellent piece. Good to hear some common sense.
Dave Dave
December 15, 2010 at 9:49 am
When the previous government seemed to be making headway towards a common sense approach they were led up the garden path by Debra Bell. A lady with no relevant experience, other than a son who was smoking way too much that she cast out onto the street, unable to deal with the situation. Being too mashed to get a job he took the easy option and turned to theft. I’m sure there are a lot of parents out there who are in a situation they don’t know how to handle. The cannabis situation is quite simply out of control. I know that honesty is always the best policy though and earns respect. Sacking qualified advisors gains none. We need real advice out there, not “the boy who cried wolf”.
As a cannabis user myself, the idea of stealing from people or even just making a lifestyle decision to scrounge from the state are morally reprehensible. It just doesn’t fit in with my view of how we should live. You need to earn a living for yourself, there is no self respect earned from stealing or scrounging.
Unfortunately for the police they too are close to the sharp end of government policy. Most know very little at all about cannabis as there is very scant information offered by official sources. By the nonsense that is constantly being trotted out they could be forgiven for thinking that anyone who uses cannabis is a rabid drug addict frothing at the mouth who must be stopped at all costs! I’m not saying the police are completely innocent in all this, there are people in all walks of life who will abuse their power when dealing with people in vulnerable positions. These people need weeding out, believe me I’ve met them! I have also met quite a few police who have been true examples of what law enforcement should be about who are a credit to the force.
The government gives the police an impossible task with regard to cannabis. The people who they generally come into contact with are more likely to be substance abusers. Although now they seem more pro-active looking for cannabis “offenders” they are more likely to meet good people being criminalised for no good reason. They wouldn’t have come into contact with them otherwise. The war on drugs is essentially a war on a person’s free will to decide what goes on in their body and mind. It does not offer equality in the eyes of the law when making a comparison with legal drugs such as alcohol. It is therefore not compatable with human rights.
It’s important to distinguish the difference between disaffected youth who have been sold a glamourised gangster lifestyle by the media from the people who go to work and smoke a joint when they get home or maybe eat a cake on the weekend rather than go to their local city where they are potentially exposed to drunken violence. Amusingly a security guy from a coffee shop in Amsterdam told me it was “like a holiday” because he “didnt have to fight”. He didnt really need to be there but hey its a job!
I think we also need a distinction as to what constitutes addiction with cannabis. Most people know that drinking a bottle of whiskey every morning will make you an alcoholic pretty quickly. Your brain simply adjusts to being drunk and before long you you will need a drink just to feel “normal”. This very quickly leads to the health problems associated not to mention the other issues concerned with relationships, employment etc.
Cannabis can often be used without the physical health problems associated with alcohol abuse. Vapourising and cakes or other forms of oral ingestion such as diluted oil similar to Sativex remove a lot of risks that are inherent with smoking. However, all day, every day recreational use is not good for you in my opinion. As with alcoholism, your brain will adjust to it, so you are no longer getting really stoned unless you go way overboard. You are just maintaining a level with nothing to compare it to, this means dependancy, not a physical addiction. I think people should use cannabis no more often than sensible drinkers would use alcohol. Lots of people do seem to get away with it though as different people have different tolerances. It also depends on what you do for a living, artists, writers, musicians may get away with more, whereas if you’re in a safety critcal job for example you shouldn’t be under the influence of anything that will affect your perceptions or reaction times when working.
Medical use of cannabis is a different story. If you suffer from a chronic condition it will probably need chronic treatment (no pun intended!). It seems that cannabis is a safer alternative to strong pain killers which seem to have a strong zombie effect, physical addiction and a high toxicity within the body; more severe side effects than cannabis.
With regard to mental health, there are some people who are susceptible to mental health problems, my heart goes out to these people as they seem to be largely forgotten by the government. They clearly need to be very careful about using ANY drugs, not just cannabis (when I say drugs I include alcohol). If someone at risk maybe uses or abuses drugs the effects can be devastating. Mental health is an issue the government needs to care of quickly, it seems to be overlooked.
For people like Debra Bell who say that cannabis isn’t the same stuff you smoked in college, you’re dead wrong. The active ingredients are still the same. There are a wide range of different strengths of cannabis available though. Prohibition forces the UK market to concentrate on stronger forms as was the case with moonshine during alcohol prohibition in America. It’s not that cannabis has changed. In Amsterdam you can buy stuff ranging from very very low concentrations of THC and CBD right up to 20%+ and in varying proportions. This is like comparing a beer or a wine to a whiskey or a vodka. They will all get you drunk it just depends how drunk you want to get, how quickly you want to get there and your natural level of tolerance to the substance. Not to mention preference of flavour, smell etc.
When the UK started to develop it’s internal production (amusingly encouraged by prohibition) higher strength strains were naturally selected the “Skunk#1” hybrid was popular because of its strength and very strong smell (hence the name “skunk”). Cannabis strains are constantly developing in the same way people breed fruit and vegetables for their different qualities. There are male and female plants that will, if left to there own devices, pollinate and reproduce with an offspring that is a cross of it’s parents. This is a natural process. Market pressure forces the breeding of high strength strains to be more predominant. Changes in the law would allow for lower strength strains to be grown. The lower strength stuff currently available is smuggled into the UK and is more often than not tainted and comes with a rather dodgy past. People need to know the strength of what they are using to make an informed and safe decision. It’s a bit like buying a bottle of wine and when you look at the label it says “??% Vol”. It just isn’t safe. When you prohibit something all control, moderation and common sense goes right out of the window. Just take a look at the prohibition movement in America. It seems daft now but it was a very serious problem back then!
Sorry for the length of this comment but I got rather carried away, there is a lot to be said on this subject and very little opportunity to speak freely. Thanks for your blog Peter you are doing good work and for that you should be applauded.
Dave
December 15, 2010 at 2:11 pm
Thank you Dave. A great contribution.
Peter Reynolds
December 15, 2010 at 2:42 pm
Nice to see Peter Hitchin sticking his ore in
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/15/cannabis-professor-david-nutt-peter-hitchens
Please help shut this idiot up…
Bob
December 15, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Yeah, he’s mad isn’t he? I’ve already commented as have others. What is a truly extraordinary is that his brother, Christopher, is a long time advocate of medicinal cannabis.
Peter Reynolds
December 15, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Yes, you’re right about his brother, he is on Ytube, staggering, maybe its sybling rivalry?
Bob
December 15, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Excellent article.
There are now so many people calling for drug law reform but the politicians keep banging on with the same misinformation as they always have. When will the media and concerned politicians finally make it a priority to expose the fact that we have been lied to for decades? Making random comments or the occasional article is not giving the issue the urgency and importance it deserves.
Any other policy would have been tackled years ago with the media, opposition parties and the public demanding the government’s head on a block. Think about it – would any government policy be renewed each term if it didn’t meet even one of it’s goals or failed on every level for 30+ years? … especially when it costs well over £20 billion of tax payers money every year?
I have written about this for years if anyone is interested.
http://theaustralianheroindiaries.blogspot.com/
Terry Wright
December 16, 2010 at 4:48 am
Many years ago I wasn’t sure my stand on legalising drugs, then after spending years on rundown estates where it was endemic, I got to see the harm it did to folk, similar in many ways to alcohol use..
For a long while, I thought decriminalization would help the situation by taking the profit away from the dealers, and I still think that would be the result.
But..
Hearing what happens in other countries that have done similar, whilst drug dealers make less profit, the number of users go up.
Much like how because alcohol is cheaply and easily available, its is a cause of much misery.
So, now I think we need to make more effort to keep these substances away from the general population and it is about time we rethink our stratagy on alcohol and look to make that more difficult to get hold of to reduce its bad effects.
The same could equally be said for too much cheap food and obesity as well..
Freedom to choose = darwinism
Either we spend a fortune stopping people hurting themselves and others, or we spend a fortune after the event cleaning up.
Having been on the receiving end of others drug fueled violence, I can’t say I’m awfully keen to experience the latter, when the former would mean that good citizens can go about their business unmolested by the fallout of the bad behavour of others.
Whilst an athiest myself, I have to say, the nicest places I have lived have been the more restrictive religious based communities where such use of anything bad for us is less.
It makes me think that Sharia Law is not necessarly a bad thing after all..
Do bare these thoughts in mind the next time you are managled in a car crash because the drivers attention wasn’t all that due to their harmless habit..
Nanos
December 16, 2010 at 9:44 am
Please let me know, did you find out how much the consultation was considered? to me it seems like the compassionate and empathetic arguments made in the consultation responses were completely ignored
Chloe
chloe
March 5, 2011 at 9:13 pm
It was pretty much ignored. It was a sham from the beginning. The Home Office is now promoting its new strategy as if it were something bold and imaginative.
In fact, it is one of the most regressive drug policies in the western world.
Peter Reynolds
March 5, 2011 at 9:48 pm
yes infact nothing at all innovative as they say it is. Another example of Lib Dem sold out policy and Third way politics. It has become the subject of my dissertation and I have to say I had had high hopes (excuse the pun) for the new strategy and for the development of the reform movement, but after analysing the new Uk drug strategy I find the abstinence approach and blame the victim ideology towards addiction non only entirely unsympathetic and uncompassionate but also completely counter-productive! If only David Nutt was PM!
chloe
March 5, 2011 at 10:34 pm
The actual drug astrategy when published has largely dispenced with Ian Duncan Smiths agenda- and abondoned the obsession with abstinence choosing insteead to focus on ‘recovery’.
There are to be no time limit’s on opioid maintenance therapy ( ‘MARS’ – medicaly assisted recovery and PSR ( phamacologically sustained Recovery’) are recognised and hence afforded legitimacy many, me included, feared was to be denied despite the extensive evidence base supporting opioid maintenace therapy including the plain brute statistical fact that if your not on it then you are up to 20 x more likely to die prematurely as a consequence.
Further recognition is still given to the importance of harm Reduction measures- although far less emphasis than i and many llike me would welcome seeing.
Further a number of activist’s do not identify with the ‘recovery’ paradigm and will continue to resist such simplistic categorys of being, behaviour and values.
for many prohibition is a primary cause of drug related harm, social disruption, human rights breaches, abuse, and oppression, seerving to compound what health problems excessive drug use may do without the added harms of prohibition.
It is perfectly possible to live to a ripe old age on prescribed , pharmacutical grade opioid’s, Heroin included, if ingested sensibly and the medication made avialable legaly. Bill Burroughs and Herbert Hunke both lived into their 80’s and 90’s- not bad given their legendary poly drug use)
Crack and heroin are now ‘old mans drugs’ – as the demographics illustrate and any walk along Britians Mean, Blighted and bitter streets can amply evidence- the drugs of the current younger person’s zeitgeist are Cocaine or ‘Bash’ ( a cheap, highly adulturated and hence far more harmful varient of the former- cocaine) , Weed – often used to excess, and to a lesser extent- ( due to drink drive laws) booze.
Oh & voilence. The nature of distribution, retial and production- the UK is now a net exporter of cannabis- and a major transit and distribution centre for the cocaine trade in the EU.
As I’ve writttten- prohibition is big business- all involved are making a great living- apart from the peasant and indigenous poeples who grow the plants from which the prohibited drugs are derived and the consumer’s, crimminalised, ripped off, psycho pathologised, and demonised.
And this emergant demographic of bash, cocaine , users is not presenting for treatment- nor likely tyo- it’s stigmatised as bering for losers, junkys, crack heads, and wankers.To use words I hear frequently and with sadness.
So it’s no where near as bad as it might have been, but what a missed opportunity- this ‘goverment’ has clung to discredited policys and prohibition when it could and should have initiated a planned exit strategy from the war on human beings who use drug’s as set out in Transforms policy document ” After the War on Drugs: A Blue Print for Regulation “.
Still there’s a lot of money in prohibition De Costa’s from the UN caused some red faces when he revealed that it wasn’t goverment funds that bailed out the global banking system it was the vast liquid wealth of the Drug Trade that ‘saved the Post capitalist Banking System’ as we know and love it.
Both prohibitionist’s and ‘drug / crime syndicates’ have a vested interest in the present order of things and it’s perpetuation- I do not hear many ‘Afghani War Lords- or President, brother and Family arguing for an end to prohibition- likewise the CIA, DEA, MI5 MI 6, et-al.
Nor the private army’s such as [‘Blackwater’ who make a vast profit for conducting the drug war – in this instance in Columbia- with state of the ART US technology, illegal hebicides, pesticides and other chemical agent’s associated with harm.
Nope there’s a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$££££££ to be made.
In Europe those states with what are alleged tohave the most liberal policies on drugs- Portugal, et-al have also shown a significant decline in drug users needing treatment, in drug use, in hard drug use and in drug related harm.
Now just one step more and make the leap from de-crimminalisation to fulll regulation and legalisation.
Alan J.
ALAN JOYCE
March 6, 2011 at 12:31 pm