Tory Government to take hard line on drugs
A CONSERVATIVE Government would take a hard line on drugs with addicts potentially forced to go "cold turkey", the Shadow Home Secretary has signalled.
Speaking exclusively to The Journal, Chris Grayling appeared to back an "abstinence" policy as well as tougher action against dealers and stop young people taking drugs.
Many heroin users take methadone to try and overcome their habit, but Mr Grayling suggested they also became addicted to that.
"We are looking quite hard at drugs policy at the moment because there are some really contradictory pressures. It is one of those areas where there isn't a simple answer.
"The situation with a kid of 15 who smokes a single joint is superficially very different to a 30-year-old heroin addict. But there are some real facts that we have to be taken into account.
"One is that there is real evidence to suggest that in some cases, not in all, that joint is the start of something that leads to addiction later on," said Mr Grayling.
He said many doctors were alarmed at the number of young people with serious mental health problems after taking cannabis.
"We need to deter and them to treat and rehabilitate. And in particular we need to try and get the message across to young people that it is just not worth it because of the damage it does," said Mr Grayling.
He called for an end to the "absurd" situation of prisoners becoming addicted or failing to kick their habit while in prison, saying rehabilitation should be possible.
"We have got to be realistic about the scale of the challenge, but drugs are destroying lives.
"We need an asbentince-based approach to treatment. I think it is going to be yes in that respect we have got to be tougher.
"There is increasing evidence to suggest that the current approach of stabilitation is not actually working, it is actually leaving people with their addictions.
"It is merely containing them and leaving their lives just to rot on," said Mr Grayling.
And he demanded tough action against drug pushers, saying: "We have got people in this county caught dealing heroin just let off with a caution and that is madness."
UPDATE: Mr Grayling is now comparing parts of the UK to The Wire tv programme, which shows a no-holes barred view of life in America.
Older/Newer
« "Question mark" over Scottish justice secretary over Lockerbie | Chateaux Midden: Train evesdropping »


My feed
















Chris GraylingâÂÂs scorched earth policy against users of some drugs (and not others) is no different to the sort of irrational intolerance we normally associate with the BNP. Whilst this âÂÂwar on drugsâ rhetoric has washed with the electorate for years, now the majority of professionals working in the field know that these same old policies are simply not working, and they are not working because they are ill-conceived and unequal against drug users of all kinds. Having made the classic âÂÂgateway drugâ error of associating cannabis use with later heroin use, he then goes against all of the evidence that it is cannabis rather than alcohol which is causing the real harm to todayâÂÂs youth. Both these ideas fail to recognise that the cause of these negative consequences is essentially prohibition, for it is prohibition that creates the unregulated market in drugs and the dire consequences of some persons using drugs of very poor quality in a context of secrecy and mistrust. Heroin use is no more associated with cannabis use than it is with alcohol and tobacco misuse. It is discriminatory to classify all use of âÂÂcontrolled (under the law) drugs as misuse, when responsible use is possible and indeed commonplace as governmentâÂÂs have recognised in official reports.
Irreverence for the law is a facilitated by the application of biased administration of the law, and hypocritical demonisation of certain drug habits â such rhetoric couched in much more tolerant terms for abusers of alcohol than cannabis and other controlled drugs. Destroying yourself on heroin is no less preferable than doing so on alcohol. A harmful drug need and ought not be prohibited if it could be controlled more effectively. It is impossible to know of the actual harmfulness of a drug itself (as opposed to the harm caused by the prohibition of a drug affecting the way in which the drug is used and it's dangers associated with a non-regulated supply chain.
If Chris Graying really had the welfare of the nation at heart he would be asking why a relatively safe drug such as cannabis is seen as a vital drug issue, as opposed to alcohol, which causes more social harm to society and yet is actually excluded as is tobacco) from the legislation to protect society from the misuse of drugs. The answer must be that tolerance is the key to preventing misuse (of any drug) and the harms associated with an unregulated market in some drugs and not others. Frankly, it may well be a good thing if the market for alcohol could be undermined by the introduction of competing drugs such as cannabis. We could then free the individual users from the mindless persecution that sees home growers of cannabis facing jail, whilst offering consumers the protection to kill themselves with tobacco and cause social-upheaval with alcohol abuse in addition to the huge health-carte costs associated with both of these drugs that all our governments seek to ignore. This simply is not good enough for our present, let alone our future government.
What Darryl Said :)
Our government only serves itself and big business.
The present hypocrisy is justified with propaganda against cannabis.
The government and tabloids only alienate more and more people as we know they are lying.
The misuse of drugs act is there to protect people, not aid prohibition and its lies.
So why not protect the people, ban the two main killers Alcohol and Tobacco as they kill more people than all the illegal drugs put together.
Wait a minute , didn't we try that before and it shoved alcohol and tobacco into the hands of organised criminals?
Pretty much the same way as all drugs are now?
Prohibition helps the criminal and gives them a target market.
It also forces up the price of illegal drugs making them lucrative for the dealer.
The WAR ON DRUGS IS EXPENSIVE PROPOGANDA
Legalize and regulate all substances, then educate people not to do it.
We did that with alcohol and tobacco, and it worked.
Stop demonising people for what they want to put into their own bodies.
Its a personal choice, and not the governments place to dictate.
Otherwise we are not truly free.
Drugs of all kinds were used since the dawn of humans.
Only in the last 100 years has our "government's" decided to demonize some but not all.
I think George Orwell's "Animal Farm" sums it up best.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others...
Must agree with the first comment. The Conservatives have no new ideas about how to tackle drug misuse in our society other than repeat the failed ones of the last 40 years. The discriminatory laws against some drug users and not others in our society ie alcohol users and cannabis users for example is obscene while being hypocritical and morally offensive.
Our current state of prohibition cause more harm to all levels of society in far greater proportion than the drugs themselves.
Just look at the methadone prescribing for example here we have a synthetic version of heroin that is not only as addictive but much harder to stop using.Clean unadulterated heroin in a correct dose is actually less damaging to the body than alcohol. I am not suggesting for a minute than anyone use heroin but by keeping heroin illegal and allowing the quality control and distribution to be controlled by violent gangsters actually places more of our citizens in danger of lsoing their lives than if it was regulated and controlled. Portugal reduced heroin deaths from by 50% by legalising personal psoseion and providing clean needle centers. By doing this they also helped far many come off heroin than the above short sighted policy of the Conservativ
This is pretty shocking stuff suggesting the tories will happily bully the stigmatised.
He is talking a lot of dangerous rubbish eg the number of people who go from one joint to a serious drug problem is minute, all these people have been norn too, why not head it off there?
Any causative link to mental health problems seems to be minimal too, according to the research.
People could go 'cold turkey' now, they choose not to, why would they choose to be forced to do it by a 'treatment' organisation?
Why not go evidence rather than abstinence based?
I ought to clarify one point - alcohol and tobacco are not excluded from the legislation as I suggested, they are just so in practice, ie the govt choose to not include them in the schedules of drugs to be controlled (which does not mean prohibtion)despite the fact that the law does require their inclsion as drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act, so the govt has failed in its dut there, and now we still hear about cannabis, E, GBL as being the scourge of our nation.
I was considering voting Tory at the next election. This article has made my mind up for me, I will NOT.
Nice to see the good old reefer madness rubbish is still recited by ignorant politicians. There is no evidence that cannabis causes mental health problems whatsoever, as the journal Schizophrenia Research showed in June. There is evidence that alcohol does, however.
I wholeheartedly endorse Darryl's comments above.
My God
Is this idiot actively suggesting the UK should carry on doing what its been doing for the last 80 years regarding illegal drugs..
Drugs are more wide spread and cheaper than ever right now 'because' we've done exactly the same thing time and time again!
Holland has had the strongest forms of cannabis, even 'skunk' on sale for anybody over 18 to buy and smoke in coffee shops for 40 years..They have fewer cannabis smokers and much fewer hard drug users and in a 2007 study by the UN children's organisation, Unicef, came top of a league table for child well-being across 21 industrialised countries.
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6360517.stm
The same year, Trimbos (Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction) surveyed 10,000 Dutch schoolchildren. The study shows a small, but consistent decline in cannabis use - 20 per cent of those aged 15-16 had tried it, and 5 per cent smoked it regularly. Less than one in 1,000 had tried heroin.
The same year the European Drug Monitoring Center found 40 per cent of British children the same age had tried cannabis, and one in 50 had used heroin.
The prohibition of cannabis and hard drugs simply does not work, we need to follow the Dutch and move cannabis away from hard drugs and street dealers, all evidence from the Dutch over the last 40 years proves this works at reducing the amount of people using hard drugs.
If you support the prohibition of cannabis and other drugs your 'supporting' the dealers that sell drugs on our streets to our children.
Is given 'complete' control of drugs to unregulated criminals real the best solution the tories can come up with?
America the 'world leader in the drug war' has the highest prison population in the world because of their failed war on drugs. 70% of those are drug related crimes and of those drug crimes 90% are for possession only.. and they still have one of the highest drug use figures in the world..
but, they've seen the light..
13 states in America have legalized cannabis use for medical and recreational use, in those 13 states you can have in your home up to 26 plants for your personal use and can carry up to an ounce on the street with no prosecution. And figures there have shown that teen use in those states is going down.
Portugal decriminalised ALL drugs 10 years ago and the figures are amazing, drug use across the board has gone down.
In Spain your legally allowed to grow your own cannabis plants, they have much less drug use than the UK.
Alcohol alone, every year, kills more people in the UK than ALL illegal drugs
Tobacco kills 4 times as many people than alcohol
and those two drugs are legal..
Same old rubbish from the Tories...
Drug prohibition makes the situation worse - and only somebody with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, or somebody with very little knowledge concerning the realities of drug use, would support such a stupid, unworkable policy.
I think it is important to correct these mad ideas with legal action, for make no mistake, under our current law it is illegal to irrationally discriminate between groups and certainly it is not the purpose of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 to miss out the majority of drug users whilst scapegoating the minority. See www.drugequality.org
Correction to my earlier post "Having made the classic âÂÂgateway drugâ error of associating cannabis use with later heroin use, he then goes against all of the evidence that it is cannabis rather than alcohol which is causing the real harm to todayâÂÂs youth." Please insert "and claims" after 'evidence'. Ie, I should have said: "Having made the classic âÂÂgateway drugâ error of associating cannabis use with later heroin use, he then goes against all of the evidence and claims that it is cannabis rather than alcohol which is causing the real harm to todayâÂÂs youth."
www.drugequality.org
I'm wanting to make more corrections; it was a poor edit on my draft first submission.
Chris GraylingâÂÂs scorched earth policy against users of some drugs (and not others) is no different to the sort of irrational intolerance we normally associate with the BNP. Whilst this âÂÂwar on drugsâ rhetoric has washed with the electorate for years, now the majority of professionals working in the field and INDEED MUCH OF THE PUBLIC AT LARGE know that these same old policies are simply not working, and they are not working because they are ill-conceived and unequal against drug users of all kinds. Having made the classic âÂÂgateway drugâ error of associating cannabis use with later heroin use, GRAYLING then goes against all of the evidence AND CLAIMS that it is cannabis rather than alcohol which is causing the real harm to todayâÂÂs youth. Both these ideas fail to recognise that the cause of these negative consequences is essentially prohibition: for it is prohibition that creates the unregulated market in drugs, THE ONSET OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR and the dire consequences of some persons using drugs of very poor quality / UNKNOWN STREGNTH in a context of secrecy and mistrust. Heroin use is no more associated with cannabis use than it is with alcohol and tobacco USE OR misuse. It is discriminatory to classify all use of âÂÂcontrolled (under the law) drugs as MISUSE. Responsible use OF ANY DRUG is possible and indeed commonplace as governmentâÂÂs have recognised in official reports.
YOUNGSTERS ADOPT AN IRREVERENCE for the law, facilitated by the biased administration of the law, and hypocritical demonisation of certain drug habits â IE much more tolerant terms for abusers of alcohol SUCH AS KEITH FLOYD AND JIM MORRISON than cannabis and other controlled drugs. Destroying yourself on heroin is no less preferable than doing so on alcohol. A harmful drug need and ought not be prohibited if it could be controlled more effectively. It is impossible to know of the actual harmfulness of a drug itself (as opposed to the harm caused by the prohibition of a drug affecting the way in which the drug is used and it's dangers associated with a non-regulated supply chain.
If Chris Graying really had the welfare of the nation at heart he would be asking why a relatively safe drug such as cannabis is seen as a vital drug issue, as opposed to alcohol, which causes more social harm to society and yet is actually excluded as is tobacco) from the GOVERNMENT'S INTERPRETATION OF THE legislation to protect society from the misuse of drugs. The answer must be that tolerance is the key to preventing misuse (of any drug) and the harms associated with an unregulated market in some drugs and not others. Frankly, it may well be a good thing if the market for alcohol could be undermined by the introduction of competing drugs such as cannabis. We could then free the individual users from the mindless persecution that sees home growers of cannabis facing jail, whilst offering consumers the protection to kill themselves with tobacco and cause social-upheaval with alcohol abuse in addition to the huge health-carte costs associated with both of these drugs that all our governments seek to ignore. This simply is not good enough for our present, let alone our future government.
Europe is moving towards integration of alcohol licences. This will be like a dream come true for responsible drinking!
I canâÂÂt help but laugh as I read this stuff. All do is smile ! ha.
This is wonderfull blog to share the information,NCPLH comments and as well as Security sites Issue which is SIA managing very well on indevidual with in The UK
I like about the NCPLH comments I am Comletly agreed
hey,this is one of the best posts that I’ve ever seen; you may include some more ideas in the same theme. I’m still waiting for some interesting thoughts from your side in your next post.