reconsiDer: TIDBIT
Britain has moved closer toward a rational drug policy as
Parliament reclassified marijuana. as of January 29th most marijuana offences
will be non-arrestable offences. The law passed with a 2:1 majority. Of
course the horrors created by prohibition of "harder " drugs will continue until
politicians move the laws against them in the same direction but at least they
are not following the U.S. example of hysterically demonizing marijuana. This
seems to be a sort of experiment to see if the harms caused by marijuana
prohibition can be reduced while politicians continue to talk tough about drugs
in general. It should be interesting to see how things go.
The
Guardian, (UK)
MPS VOTE TO DOWNGRADE
CANNABIS
MPs today backed the downgrading of cannabis as
ministers denied the move
amounted to legalisation of the drug.
The
reclassification of cannabis from class B to class C was backed by 316
votes
to 160, a majority of 156, despite Conservative warnings that it
would lead
more young people into hard drugs. The downgrading of cannabis
is now
scheduled to go ahead on January 29.
Junior home office minister Caroline
Flint said the change was part of an
"honest and credible" strategy to
tackle the scourge of drugs, denying it
was tantamount to legalising the
drug or would increase cannabis use.
Under the switch, cannabis will be
ranked alongside bodybuilding steroids
and some
anti-depressants.
Possession of cannabis will no longer be an arrestable
offence in most
cases, although police will retain the power to arrest users
in certain
aggravated situations - such as when the drug is smoked outside
schools.
The home secretary, David Blunkett, has said the change in the law
is
necessary to enable police to spend more time tackling class A drugs such
as heroin and crack cocaine which cause the most harm and trigger far more
crime.
Ms Flint told MPs: "This Labour government is absolutely right
to focus on
the most dangerous drugs, to intervene most vigorously in the
most damaged
communities and to seek to break the link between addiction and
the crime
that feeds it.
"And to reduce harm that drugs cause by
addressing the chaotic lifestyles
of those users who are harming themselves
and harming others."
Educating young people about the dangers of drugs,
preventing drug misuse,
combating the dealers and treating addicts were key
elements of the
strategy, she said.
Criticising the change, the
shadow home secretary, Oliver Letwin, said the
government's drugs policy was
now in a "dreadful muddle". He called it a
half-way measure aimed at
short-term popularity rather than a coherent
adoption of either the
decriminalisation philosophy of the Netherlands or
the more prohibitive
stance of Sweden. With most Tories absent from the
Commons in order to
attend the vote on Iain Duncan Smith's leadership,
there were barely any MPs
in the chamber, with those present complaining
that only one and a half
hours were allowed for debate.
Ms Flint told MPs it was important to have
an "honest discussion" with
children about drugs.
"They can see for
themselves the different effects of drugs, and therefore
if we are not
having honest discussion they will not listen," she said.
"This is not
about legalisation, it's about having to have a mature
discussion about
drugs, about the relative harms." She went on: "The right
strategy we must
use is what works. We must be honest and credible and rely
on science, not
prejudice." The treatment of all drugs as equally harmful
and dangerous
"lacked credibility" with young people.
"Individual police forces have
developed disparate policies on the policing
of cannabis possession based on
their own view of the relative seriousness
of the offence, leading to
inconsistency and a lack of proper political
accountability."
Ms
Flint said that by upping penalties for dealing hard drugs to 14 years
while
at the same time reclassifying cannabis the government would be
sending a
"very strong message" to dealers.
Reclassification would provide police
with an opportunity to put in place a
"consistently and properly
thought-out" approach to drugs and allow them to
redeploy officers to tackle
hard drugs.
But the powers of arrest in place for cannabis would not
apply to other
class Cs such as tranquillisers or anabolic steroids. "The
policing regime
will ensure that action is properly taken by police against
someone who is
causing a problem or needs help whilst avoiding needlessly
charging large
numbers of young people," she said. In a series of
interventions from the
back benches, MPs set out both sides of the argument
for downgrading cannabis.
Labour's Martin Salter said the government
would be doing young people a
"grave disservice" by allowing them to think
that all drugs were the same.
Fellow Labour MP David Cairns said heroin
was "far more damaging, far more
pernicious and far more destructive of
communities" than cannabis.
And Tory John Bercow asked the minister to
consider legalising cannabis as
"it must be desirable to break the link
between the soft drug user and the
hard drug pusher".
But Tory Graham
Brady claimed that cannabis was 10 or 15 times stronger
than 20 years ago
and that it was "perverse" to propose downgrading the drug.
Labour's John
Robertson warned that the message going out to young people
was that
cannabis was no longer as dangerous as it was before. Tory Ann
Winterton
insisted that "sophisticated measures do not wash" when trying to
get the
drug prevention message across. And fellow Tory Angela Watkinson
warned that
downgrading cannabis would lead to an increase in use of the
drug and act as
a "gateway" to harder drug use.
Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If you're not a member of
ReconsiDer and
would like to join, please fill out our membership application. And be sure to visit our
website.
This site contains copyrighted material
the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US
Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site
for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.