Peter Reynolds

 

This week I debated Peter Hitchens on cannabis again. It was at Cannabis Europa in the Barbican. The text of my opening speech is below.

After about 14 years of doing this repeatedly. I’ve grown quite fond of the old blowhard but he has nothing new to offer. Just the same evidence-opposed assertions and less than a handful of anecdotes that shed no light on the subject at all.

So please, will someone step forward? I can definitely get such a debate hosted at a university or other respected institution. I can guarantee publishing it on YouTube, possibly even we might get it broadcast on TV.

Is there a politician with the guts to do it? I doubt it. They all runaway like frightened rabbits from any serious discussion about drugs policy. They’re terrified of what the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail will say, even though most of them know that what we’ve done for 50 years has caused more harm than good.

This is an open invitation. Contact me on Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn or by email at peter@peter-reynolds.co.uk

My Speech at Cannabis Europa, 25th June 2024

Thank you chair, Mr Ellson, and thank you Mr Hitchens for coming to this debate. My respects to you for entering what must seem like the lion’s den.

I am here to explain why the current law against cannabis causes far more harm than it ever has or ever could. We have suffered under bad drugs policy in Britain since the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1928. The prohibition of drugs, including cannabis, has created criminal markets which have caused extraordinary harm to our society. I suggest that it is the worst failure of social policy since the war. Nothing else has impacted communities, divided the people from the police, like prohibition. This may be elevating drugs policy to higher importance than you have heard before but I consider that bad drugs policy, prohibition, is driving the breakdown of our society like nothing else. The problem is not cannabis, nor any drug. It is prohibition.

Now, I offered Mr Hitchens the opportunity to phrase the motion for this debate. I was ready to speak either for or against, however he wished it to be set.

So, ‘This house calls for the repeal of the laws against marijuana’ and I speak for the motion. It is the last time that you will hear me speak the ‘M’ word. I prefer the correct scientific and botanical term, cannabis.

But the ‘M’ word, or rather the use of it, is a very good place to start. It’s an Hispanic nickname for cannabis which was deliberately selected and promoted by the architects of cannabis prohibition in the USA, William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper magnate and Harry Anslinger, head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, later to become the DEA.

They chose the ‘M’ word in order to associate cannabis with Mexicans and the perceived threat across America’s borders. How little has changed! They went so far as to even enshrine the word in US legislation. Transforming racially charged slang into statute. An extraordinary exercise in state propaganda..

So it was a racist meme from the beginning. Hearst’s newspapers published stories about Mexicans going insane, committing horrendous violence, sexually ravaging white American women and all of it was put down to cannabis. Again, it’s remarkable how little has changed. In Britain, the Mail newspapers continue this campaign of disinformation today.

I understand, of course, that language changes, develops but the choices we make are important and this history illustrates how the laws that currently exist are based on prejudice, misinformation and have nothing to do with science, health records or evidence of any sort. When that was tested by rigorous scientific method by David Nutt and his team, the Labour government had him sacked for it. That’s how deep this falsehood runs

So, as the motion states, I would repeal the laws against cannabis and I would replace them with laws that seek to control and regulate it.

Some argue that cannabis should be treated like carrots or cabbages. If we could go back to beginning of the 20th Century, I would agree. There are many plants in our gardens far more harmful than cannabis but 100 years of bad drugs policy, of prohibition, have created and supported a gangster-driven criminal market which we cannot walk away from. For the safety of our society, the cannabis market has to be regulated – not to protect us from cannabis but from the violent criminal trade in it.

I do not suggest that cannabis is harmless. No one with any sense claims that it is. But it has many benefits. Not just as medicine but as something that can bring great pleasure, insight and joy. It can enhance life experiences such as music, food, all forms of culture, spirituality and relationships. It is unique in this regard. I like to think of it as a condiment for life. It enhances and develops all the flavours of life and although those of us who consume it understand this, these benefits are largely obscured by the hysteria and falsehood around it.

Clearly, excessive or irresponsible use can cause health harms, as with any substance. The most vulnerable are children and that’s why the principle role of the law must be to protect them. As for adults, they should in my view be able to consume anything they wish without restriction under law – unless of course they cause harm to someone else. And we already have all the laws we need to protect others without banning personal possession or use of any drug.

The main harms to children are around brain health but in mature adults, science shows exactly the opposite, that cannabis is neuroprotective, promotes neurogenesis and is a prophylactic for brain injury either through trauma, stroke or neurodegenerative disease. Professor Gary Wenk of Ohio State University says that regular, moderate use of cannabis in middle age will delay the onset of dementia so effectively that most people will never experience it

So it is with protecting children that the law should be concerned. Yet what we have seen, beyond doubt, is that the effect of the law has been exactly the opposite. The laws against cannabis are the principle cause of its harm to children. Because it is prohibited, it is easier for children to get hold of it than the drugs that we regulate, alcohol and tobacco.

The criminal market in cannabis drives street dealing, sales to children, the exploitation of children as runners and it inveigles them into gang culture and county lines. I suggest that cannabis prohibition is the root cause of most knife crime. It and the prohibition of other more dangerous drugs is the cause of most crime and violence in Britain. There is no dispute about this. Over 70% of people in prison are there for drug-related crime. Police spend most of their time on drug-related matters. We have created this huge edifice of drug crime which now overwhelms everything else. Globally we have created the biggest ever criminal market worth, 10 years ago, in 2014, $652 billion. We have done this deliberately. It is stupidity beyond belief.

It is because of this huge, overwhelming weight of drug-related crime that our police have no time for real wrongdoing, for burglary, rape or fraud. And this is a choice we have made. There is no inherent wrong in cannabis. It’s just a plant. We have obsessed over ‘malum prohibitum’, that is a wrong that we have invented, at the expense of ‘malum per se’, that is something that is inherently wrong, in itself, such as theft or assault.

The demand for cannabis is huge. According to the largest ever study on the subject, we consume more than 2800 kilos of it every single day in Britain. It’s utterly naïve and absurd to think this demand can be turned off or suppressed – and indeed, why should it be for consenting adults? It’s the futile attempt to suppress it that causes so much harm.

And let’s be clear, even though the cannabis laws are barely enforced at a personal level now – thank heavens the police recognise what a waste of their resources it is – prohibition still supports and promotes the criminal market and all the harm it causes and the other crime it finances. As I set out in my book, ‘100 year of Bad Drugs Policy’, to be published next year, the cannabis market is the most reliable source of regular cashflow for criminal gangs. It incorporates human trafficking, modern slavery, child exploitation and
funds the smaller but much more profitable trade in heroin and crack. It provides the working capital for every other type of crime you can imagine. And all because politicians, enjoying their taxpayer-subsidised drug consumption rooms in Parliament, have decided, on the basis of no evidence at all, that you should be stopped from enjoying a joint or a brownie or easing your aches and pains without the bother or expense of a prescription.

So how do we regulate cannabis? I have already published a great deal on this, so has Transform, so have Conservative think tanks, so have Labour think tanks, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and others. And now we have the real-world experience of dozens of US states, Canada, the Netherlands, Malta, Luxembourg and Germany. We have a huge quantity of evidence.

Of course, there have been mistakes. California’s greedy politicians tried to impose taxation at a ludicrous rate which only supported the illicit market. They’re now fixing ii but as in all of this it’s unrealistic to expect immediate results. Undoing the harm of 100 years of prohibition takes time. But in Colorado, 12 years since legalisation, teenage use is now down 30%. 30%! In Canada, after just six years, 82% of all purchases are now made through legal channels. These are amazing achievements, which fully vindicate legalisation – and we, in Britain, have the opportunity to do even better!

So we have to repeal these laws against cannabis. They cause so much harm and our fears of dire consequences are illusory and now proven to be so by actual experience.

All we are currently doing is wasting time, our own time, police time, the time of the courts, the probation service and the time of all the people who are being hurt by the consequences of prohibition. And the money we are wasting, the lives we are wrecking, the terrible waste that this ludicrous policy causes every day is a tragedy.

These are my arguments for why we should repeal the laws against cannabis. I have more to add but now it is time for us to hear from Mr Hitchens.