The Development and Implementation of Drug Policy in England 1994-2004. Phd Thesis, Middlesex University
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Middlesex University Research Repository An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Arnull, Elaine (2007) The development and implementation of drug policy in England 1994-2004. PhD thesis, Middlesex University. [Thesis] This version is available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/7983/ Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University’s research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners unless otherwise stated. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). They may not be sold or exploited commercially in any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s). Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author’s name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pag- ination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award. If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. See also repository copyright: re-use policy: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/policies.html#copy The development and Implementation of drug policy in England 1994 -2004 A thesis submitted to Middlesex University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Elaine Arnull School of Health and Social Sciences Middlesex University December 2007 CONTENTS Abstract Acknowledgements Glossary 1 Introduction 2 Contextualising drug policy 3 Research methods, process and analysis 4 Developing a drug policy -1994 -1997 5 Implementing drug policy -1998 -2004 6 National interviews - developing drug policy 7 Local interviews - implementing drug policy 8 Conclusions Appendices A Example letter sent to 'national' policy makers B The interview schedule for 'national' policy makers C Copy of Research Ethics Form D Example email sent to 'local' policy implementers E The interview schedule for 'local' policy implementers Bibliography Publications and papers 'Drug policy and performance management - a necessary evil?' (Forthcoming) Druas: Education, Prévention and Policy The Importance of Partnership' (with Patel, S) (2002) Criminal Justice Matters Spring 47:26-27 9 A paper présentée! at the Social Policy Association Conference 2000 A paper présentée! at the British Criminology Conference 2000 3 ABSTRACT This thesis is a study of drug policy in England between 1994 and 2004. It focuses on five areas: - how drug policy was developed, why partnership forms were chosen as the mechanisms by which to achieve implementation and the impact of that décision, the relationship between the centre and localities, partnerships as new forms of governance and whether tnstitutional resilience has been observed. The research used a multi-method approach comprised of three components: a literature review; an analysis of documentai^ sources, including the three key drug policies, and original, empirical research. The latter was undertaken with two separate groups, the first responsible for drug policy development and the second for policy implementation. Tackling Drugs Together (TDT,1995) was developed by a small group of people who successfully exploited the opportunities open to them and who were observed to have used ail of the 'factors' identified by Levin (1997) in their capacities, as civil servants, politicians and members of the voluntary and campaigning sectors. They were 'motivated' to achieve change (from their institutional, personal or organisational position) and used the 'opportunities' and 'resources' open to them to do that. They did not however form a 'policy network' (Berridge 2006; Duke 2002; Sabatier 1998; Wong 1998; Hughes 1997). Those developing TDT (1995) chose partnership forms (Drug Action Teams - DATS) as a mechanism for implementation, because they provided an answer in a complex social policy area, allowing a wide variety of organisations to be brought together. In addition, the concept was associated with newness and dynamism. The direction of drug policy, post 1998, is linked to New Labour's wider social policy perspective - incorporating a focus on communlty and social 4 responsibility. On the whole, DATs have supportée! this direction. Their relationship to the centre has in general been positive, whilst responding to a strong performance management framework. DATs have accepted this for the benefits it brings; and highly functional DATs have learned to adapt policies to their own local needs. Their sophistication, functionality and structure indícate that they have become new forms of governance (Newman 2001). This does not mean however that the old institutions have disappeared; they have shown resilience (Klein 1993) and adapted to the changes, working within a partnership, performance management and regional framework. The thesis makes a contribution by focussing on drug policy development and implementation. Through the examination of the impact of the partnership and performance management approaches over a décade, it illuminâtes other social policy areas and New Labour changes, especially within the area of governance, developing our understanding of institutional change and resilience. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank many people for their help and support with this thesis. I am grateful for the support and guidance of my supervisor throughout most of the research, Professor Susanne MacGregor, especially for her understanding, encouragement and constructive criticism. I have also been helped by Betsy Thom and Tony Goodman, my most récent supervisors, who both had to get to grips with the thesis at quite a late date. I would like to thank my fantastic work colleagues, who must have wondered when this research would end: they are Susannah Eagle and Shilpa Patel. Most of ail I would like to thank my husband and daughter for their immense support through everything, their belief that I could do it and their acceptance of the disruptions caused to our family life. I would also like to thank my parents who have always supported my educational efforts; I am only sorry my Dad did not get to see this finished. Finally, I would like to thank my grandparents who gave me constant support and encouragement and my grandfather who inspired me with a love for learning and enquiry. 6 GLOSSARY ACMD - Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs ACPO - Association of Chief Police Officers APL's - Autonomous Policy Leaders (Wallis and Dollery 1997) ASBOs - Anti-Social Behaviour Orders CAD - Communities Against Drugs Fund CARAT - Counselling - Advice - Referral - Assessment - Throughcare (team) CDCU - Central Drugs Coordination Unit CDRPs - Crime and Disorder Réduction Partnerships CEO - Chief Executive (Officer) CJIP - Community Justice Intervention Programme CJIT - Community Justice Intervention Teams CJS - Criminal Justice System CSR - Comprehensive Spending Review DATs - Drug Action Teams DDACs - District Drug Advisory Committees DoH - Department of Health DIP - Drug Intervention Programme DIR - Drug Interventions Record DPAS - Drug Prévention Advisory Service DPI - Drug Prévention Initiative DRGs - Drug Référence Groups DRR - Drug Rehabilitation Requirement DSD - Drug Strategy Directorate DTTOs - Drug Treatment and Testing Order EAZ - Education Action Zone GOs - Government Offices HAs - Health Authorities HAZ - Health Action Zone HO - Home Office ISDD - Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence IV - Intravenous (drug use) 7 KPIs - Key Performance Indicators LAs - Local Authorities Localities - used to denote the local área and / or DAT, as opposed to the 'centre'. LSPs - Local Strategic Partnerships MPs - Member(s) of Parliament NDTMs - National Drug Treatment System NPM - New Public Management NTA - National Treatment Agency NHS - National Health Service NTORS - National Treatment Outcome Research Study ODPM - Office of the Deputy Prime Minister PCTs - Primary Care Trusts PM - Prime Minister RDMD - Regional Drug Misuse Datábase SCODA - Standing Conference On Drug Abuse SEU - Social Exclusión Unit SLAs - Service Level Agreements SRA - Social Research Association TDT - Tackling Drugs Together TDTBBB - Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain UKADCU - UK Anti-Drugs Coordinaron Unit UKDPC - UK Drug Policy Commission Yots - Youth Offending Teams 8 Chapter one - introduction Research aims and questions The thesis is a case study of drug policy development and implementation over a décade (1994-2004). It looks at why drug policy took the form it did and includes a discussion of how it was subsequently shaped by implementation, as well as other historical and social factors. My interest in this area developed from my rôle in policy implementation in the early stages of Tackling Drugs Together (TDT, 1995) and ongoing professional work since then. This also meant that I had a familiarity with