Drug fears should be in perspective
Mar 11 2008 by Our Correspondent, Huddersfield Daily Examiner
WHILE the media would have us believe problems caused by drug taking is greater in this country than elsewhere, this is not the case.
I am not suggesting drugs do not do irreparable harm to individuals; their families and the community, merely that we are not alone.
Critics of policy makers rarely give them credit for the thoughtful work they have done in this regard over many decades. The reason we have one of the lowest HIV rates in the world is their foresight in providing free exchange of needles and other drug paraphernalia. This initiative was scorned by many who believed it would encourage the habit, however there is no evidence to suggest this is true and from a public health perspective this has been a huge success.
The provision of free substitute substances to heroin addicts by the NHS also had the potential to make a substantial impact. Had this been policed correctly I believe it would also have had a positive influence. Unfortunately, this was not the case as over-prescribing by GPs brought the system into disrepute. There was no control over addicts who began trading prescribed drugs for the real thing.
One of the policy measures within this Government’s first 10-year drugs strategy in 1998, which I helped compile, was to set new guidelines for doctors and pharmacists. This has had a very positive effect in reducing the illegal market in legally prescribed substitute drugs and reduced the number of deaths.
Another hugely successful policy was the provision of treatment for individuals entering the criminal justice system.
This was a bold move on behalf of government, who held themselves open to the criticism of being soft on criminals. The philosophy was simple - people were committing crimes to feed drug habits. Cure them of this and you would reduce crime - it worked. Every £1 spent on treatment saved at least £10 on crime.
Recent research alleges more money has been allocated to the treatment of criminals than to non-criminal addicts. One organisation even suggested addicts should commit crime in order to receive treatment. If this is true I cry shame on the government as during my time as drugs tsar the treatment budget for the general population was 20 times that of the criminal justice system.
I also believe they have substantially reduced the budget allocated to educating children against the dangers of substance abuse. I say this because when announcing their new strategy they proclaimed they would spend money on this venture. They can take no credit for this either. Back in 1998 sufficient money was allocated to train teachers; adopt new programmes; measure their effectiveness and set standards for the inspectorate. They have reneged on their promise.
Having said this I do applaud this government’s commitment to support a long term drugs policy. Although their new one differs little from the one it replaces - its main aims being to reduce demand; reduce harm and stem supply - it is comprehensive and still one of the best in the world. However, I do wish they had the resolve to address alcohol misuse. I pressed for it to be included 10 years ago and failed. The sooner they stop dithering on this issue the better for us all.
The publication of a new anti-drugs strategy is very important for each and every one of us and it is sad it had to be trivialised by the headline-grabbing provisions which were associated with its launch. This time we must insist the government puts its money where its mouth is and it funds the promises it makes in that document.
