GOVERNMENT MUST LISTEN TO EXPERT ADVICE ON CANNABIS - HUHNE
Commenting on reports that ministers will overrule the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs if it does not recommend the reclassification of cannabis, Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Huhne said: “There is no point in wasting
taxpayers’ money on an advisory body of experts if ministers ignore its evidence.
“If confirmed, this is an astonishing admission that the Government intends to steer policy by prejudice not proof. “The advisory council must take on board the increasing reports of the mental health effects of high strength cannabis, but ministers must be guided by the science and the evidence as assessed by the council.”
Now, call me old fashioned but I thought it was official LibDem policy to legalise cannabis. I was right. Lib Dem national policy is ‘to put the supply of cannabis on a legal, regulated basis’, ‘adopting a policy of not prosecuting possession for own use, social supply to adults or cultivation of cannabis plants for own use’… ‘repealing Sections 8(c) and (d) of the Misuse of Drugs Act so it is no longer a crime for the occupier or manager of premises to permit someone to use cannabis on those premises’ (Drugs Policy, agreed at Liberal Democrat spring conference, Manchester, March 2002).
Their latest policy briefing in drugs confirms this position, stating: ‘it is not in the public interest to prosecute individuals for possession of cannabis for their own use, cultivation of small numbers of cannabis plants for their own use, or social supply of cannabis’ (Drug Law Reform, Liberal Democrat Policy Briefing 10, January 2005).
The Lib Dems voted in favour of the downgrading of Cannabis to a “class C” drug, with their Home Affairs spokesman Mark Oaten saying: “I have come to the conclusion that this re-classification is a step in the right direction” (Hansard, 29 October 2003, Col. 347).
Lib Dem Mayoral candidate Brian Paddick, the former Borough Commander of Police in Lambeth, also believes Cannabis use should effectively be legalized. He said: “Arresting people for smoking dope is pointless” … “It's a waste of time, the war is lost” (The Guardian, 28 March 2001).
Although I disagree with them, these are perfectly legitimate views to hold. But they can't have it both ways. They can't argue for reclassification and legalisation at the same time. Either you consider cannabis a dangerous drug or you don't. So, Chris Huhne, which is to be?
28 comments:
So the Lib Dmes admit they made a mistake and that they have changed their mind. Surely a good thing ?
Now how about an apology from the Tories for Section 28 or Black Wednesday ?
No, they have done nothing of the sort. As I explain in my post, legalisation is still LibDem policy.
You would have to be stoned to be a Lib Dem.
You talk about "Shadow Home Secretary" as if it were an official position with a specific and formal meaning, rather than simply a useful descriptive term that an opposition party can use for its main home affairs spokesman. As you would probably put it: surely shome mishtake? ;-)
You're right to highlight the contradiction. I wish someone would gently remind Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne what our position is on cannabis. During the Lib Dem bloggers' interviews with the leadership candidates, I asked Chris Huhne if he supported legalisation, and he refused. I wasn't at the Nick Clegg interview, and he apparently said much the same thing. It's not really news that Lib Dem frontbenchers oppose legalisation, but I agree with you: it would be nice for them to either support the party's existing policy, or, if they disagree with it, admit that it exists and then campaign to have it changed.
It is a less black and white issue than you suggest, Iain.
The Lib-Dem position is that it should be legalised, but regulated, thus making it more difficult for the most dangerous strains of cannabis to be consumed, but possible to smoke milder forms. This is how the law works with alchohol - if you try to make spirits without a licence, you face serious consequences.
The problem with cannabis being class C is that all types of cannabis are partially legalised - the worst of both worlds in that criminals can still make money from it and that public health is harmed.
Surely, then, a more sensible position is that EITHER full legalisation with regulation OR harsher restrictions are preferable to the current situation.
Iain, I'm baffled. The Lib Dem press release that you have quoted merely states that the Government should follow the advisory council's advice. Indeed, the press release is based on the assumption that the advisory council will not recommend reclassification. So how is that the Lib Dems arguing for reclassification?
I agree that the tone is inconsistent, and the possibility arises that the advisory council might recommend reclassification, which would lead to the contradiction you think you have identified. But it's not there yet.
Norfolk
Since "Black Wednesday" was arguably the best thing that ever happened to our economy what's to apologise for? In any case I hadn't realised the Lib Dems, or whatever you were called in those days were anti ERM..
Give me strength. How many trillion words have been written about this? There is no news but even so. Take my advice and keep your traps shut. This is just the sort of xxxx that turns voters OFF
How many years must this fruitless debate last? When are governments going to swallow their pride and confess that there is no hope of winning the war on drugs?
Billions wasted on futile attempts to destroy the trade. Billions of pounds of crime as traffickers and assorted scum fight to control their markets and over-charged addicts (made ill by impurities, nutritional self-deprivation and poor hygiene)steal to get their fix. Billions of words and platitudes announcing that the war must and can be won. Thousands upon thousands of Afghans driven into the hands of the Taleban whilst the west struggles to meet demands for medical-grade morphine.
Nobody in their right minds would argue that American prohibition had a chance of success or was ever worth the candle. It's time to show some imagination and adopt a different method of controlling the varied evils which accompany the UNAVOIDABLE existence and supply of drugs.
Yours
A sincere but realistic tory.
Huhne is certainly right to point out that having asked for advice, Ministers then ignore it, so what's the point of asking.
Iain Croydon Central, you've got to be a shoo in. After all no chance of you being a wife beater. Go on give it a go!!
No thank you. I'm not applying for seats for the foreseeable future.
Party policy is now whatever the leaders think will shine with the public. Sod policy documents and conferences.
"We are the masters now"
The Lib Dems have been calling themselves 'shadows' for many moons now Iain! come on now concentrate on politics this side of the pond!
Shadow Cabinet appointments etc etc etc.
They should be told in no uncertain terms by the speaker...but he aint got a clue!
Fine post Iain..one of your best
( And Norfolk has missed the point )
"They can't argue for reclassification and legalisation at the same time."
Actually we can, because if you read the policy you'd know that it recognises that legalising cannabis would be in breach of a number of international treaties we've signed.
As for if the front bench is running away from this policy, I'm afraid they are and have been since Mark Oaten's day. This isn't news; both Huhne and Clegg were footshuffling on the issue during the leadership interviews.
As it happens, I don't think the existing policy is wrong (clearly unlike Nich); it's interesting how at the time there was a real sense that the centre of public opinion was gravitating in this direction. I seem to recall the Telegraph of all papers making positive noises about it.
I don't know if that is or isn't still the case, but certainly the political class are backtracking on it.
Blunkett's reclassification policy was relatively successful and the scare stories about skunk being 20 times more powerful than "old" cannabis has been exposed, by Ben Goldacre and others, as a fraud. Doubtless the party is due for another battle on this.
I do accept one point from Clegg and Huhne though: the recent Science select committee proposal calling for classification to be based on science rather than political expediency is sound (so long as we don't forget that you can never get an entirely politics-free view from an advisory board). If they set about changing party policy to this, they'd probably win and I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it.
Actually James as I understand it the international treaty issue is a ruse. The various treaties are not intended to prevent use, or even domestic production, but to prevent international trading in narcotics affecting a state's ability to control its own production.
So our policy, recognizing that it's perfectly possible to produce cannabis domestically, would not breach any international laws so long as it continued to outlaw the cross border traffic in cannabis.
My understanding may be wrong, but that's my reading of the international treaties on narcotics.
‘it is not in the public interest to prosecute individuals for possession of cannabis for their own use, cultivation of small numbers of cannabis plants for their own use, or social supply of cannabis’
Of course it is not. Police would leave the force in droves if they were forced to spend their time arresting and prosecuting the millions of otherwise law abiding cannabis smokers.
Re the Lib Dems calling them 'Shadow X' debate. The official Parliament website seems to agree with them, so I'm afraid you're being incorrectly pedantic on this one Iain!
http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/libdems.cfm
Jock: I think it's more complicated than that because of our membership of the Common Market. Relax the law here and it will have an impact on the distribution of cannabis across the EU. That's why, as I understand it, reclassification and decriminalisation are as far as we can go.
Although I don't like Paddick, or agree with him about very much at all, when he says “Arresting people for smoking dope is pointless” … “It's a waste of time, the war is lost”
then he is completely and unarguably correct. Trying to enforce the incredibly widely flouted law on cannabis is as pointless as trying to ban beer or scotch would be. If you do not accept that the war is lost then you are totally ignoring the stark reality and are simply in knee jerk punitive mode.
"But they can't have it both ways. They can't argue for reclassification and legalisation at the same time. Either you consider cannabis a dangerous drug or you don't. So, Chris Huhne, which is to be?"
Emmm, you do realise that you've got more chance of getting blood out of a stone than a straight answer to that question from Chris Huhne Ian? But it would be good to hear you continually pressing for an answer nevertheless - after all, people deserve an answer.
I'm not convinced the Lib Dems are actually a liberal party any more, in fact, as a liberally minded person, I'm not even sure I can still vote for them. Wouldn't touch the Conservatives or New Labour with a barge poll though.
Of course you can support legalisation & recelassification at the same time. If you believe full legalisation wouldn't get through Parliament you accept reclassification as a practical alternative. I am sure there are some Tories who would prefer to leave the EU but that does not mean they cannot support reducing the present burden of regulation.
Some years ago the LibDem conference voted, against the leadership's wishes, for an examination of whether cannabis should be reclassified. Michael Howard immediately appeared on TV to denounce the Lib Dems on the grounds that even talking about talking about any sort of reform would lead to disaster & Jack Strw replied that his views were less wishy washy.
I was proud to be a Lib Dem then - they lived up to their name.
Just legalize Cannabis and it's Seeds and all that comes with it. Christ. People that want to prohibit cannabis strengthen illegal drug dealers with this.
Hi,
The main issue with cannabis that NO ONE has touched on in politics is
CONTAMINATION
Most 'Skunk' sold on the streets has been sprayed with silica, Industrial Etchant Spray Contamination, tiny glass shards. This is to make it look more THC and also to weight the weed down.
This has been going on since the governments crack down on grow-ops since last september.
Putting Cannabis to Class B again will just make the situation worse .
Many dealers are giving the very worse contamination to college kids as they are the less experienced.
The health cost to the nation is going to be great.
See - http://thepoorhouse.org.uk/beware_glass_grass
There are lots more info on the web about this
It's about time the government actually mentioned this. Many many people haven't even heard of this.
Thanks for leaving that post, I didn't know about it being sprayed with that stuff.
I guess good weed being sprayed with the glass spray is just the result of greedy criminal dealers who just don't care about the harm they're causing. If it were legal this wouldn't be happening, but it's not, and that proves that prohibition isn't based on any genuine concern for public health.
Politicians are pretty repulsive when it comes to drugs, they won't talk about it and they won't face up to failure. But sooner or later failure is going to have be faced up to - prohibition is a failure. I doubt I will even vote now, why bother, they're clearly all pretty much the same?
i agree that cannabis should be legalized as there is not point wasting mney on arresting people for minor crime . also i belive the only reason that the government will not legalize it is the fact that it cannot be taxed
I have just signed the LCA's cannabis votes pledge on PledgeBank.com http://www.pledgebank.com/cannabis-votes
The pledge is that I WILL vote in the General Election but NOT for any candidate that wants to keep cannabis illegal regardless of their party or any other policies they may have.
The Lib Dems can be very confusing on this, it's so hard to get straight answers out of them without double-talk and spin. But since I've promised to do this I'll be contacting my Lib Dem candidate nearer the election. I've got a feeling finding out where they actually stand on the issue might be a bit like pulling teeth!
Post a Comment