Druglink interview

Baroness Molly Meacher

Events worldwide prompted Baroness Meacher to try to move the drug law reform debate on in the UK. Interview by Harry Shapiro

How and why did your All Party There have been developments have a coalition government and the Parliamentary Group (APPG) for worldwide and various countries Liberal Democrats are very much on side. Drug Policy Reform come about? have unilaterally instituted reform Having got our report out with very clear to a greater or lesser extent. But as recommendations we feel we now have It came about because we decided you have just said in this country, a policy platform. Now we can engage there was a need for a global debate neither this government nor the with the politicians and this is what we on drug policy, that this country was last (apart from the blip around are going to do over the next period and never going to move unless there was what I hope we can achieve, and I am a wider move towards reform and we cannabis reclassification), have not completely pessimistic about it, is therefore organised an international even engaged in the debate, let a cross-party initiative on drug policy, meeting in Parliament in November alone been open to any ideas of because this is not a party political issue 2011 attended by members of the Global change. Recent reports including nor should it be. Commission on Drug Policy including the Home Affairs Select Committee a former President, also Ministers report and others, have just been and ambassadors from nine Latin dismissed. We have a drugs minister who is American Countries and five European a Liberal Democrat. Have you had Countries. That seems to have played But I believe we may be at the tipping any hint that he is willing to engage some small part in stimulating the Latin point. Paul Flynn asked a question at in this in any way? American initiative by the countries Prime Minister’s Question Time about that were actually at our meeting, drug policy and the PM replied that on Well, let’s put it this way, Nick Clegg as most particularly Mexico, Colombia, legal highs we need to look carefully at Leader of the Liberal Democrat Party Guatemala, and Uruguay. And then it the evidence on what will work best. has certainly indicated that there is a seemed as we began to organise that Now you can say, ‘so what?’ but actually need for a review of drug policy. That’s meeting that we needed a status. We we have a perspective on this and we important. I don’t think the Labour Party had an informal group of 30 peers which believe that legal highs are a non-toxic will move unless it’s on a cross party was established in February 2010. In way into a reform of drug policy. That’s basis. But according to the journalist Ian February 2011, we created this APPG so why we did our inquiry into legal highs. Birrell, the cabinet has been discussing that the international meeting was being All our witnesses said you can’t look at its stance and he thinks that it makes organised by an APPG (with Release and legal highs without looking at all the sense for the Tories to embrace reform as other NGOs) rather than just 30 peers. drugs because most of the legal highs some Republicans in the States are now are substitutes for cannabis or ecstasy. doing. He used to be a speech writer for So will the government engage? We David Cameron. There is an awareness

6 | Druglink March/April 2013 that there is a shift of opinion across the Daily Mail readers are much more open and doesn’t make any sense. And just Western world, I’m not talking about to reform than you would think and banning these anyway, only stimulates Russia or the Far East, but in Europe and that could be a serious tipping point. the development of a whole lot of new the US. So let’s not assume that nothing And in relation to that, we published our ones. will happen in the next few years. report on 14th January. And since then there have been three full page articles in the Daily Mail. Yes, they misquoted But surely Government can just OK, but thinking about this issue in me spectacularly and made me look a take the view, ‘we will just keep terms of ‘tipping points’, the point complete idiot, but the third of those adding these new drugs to the at which government is willing to articles looked at Tim Hollis’ evidence to Misuse of Drugs Act’. What’s the engage in the subject of reform, our Inquiry and quoted him extensively problem? In South America, clearly for the and I thought for Daily Mail readers to Colombians, the tipping point is read all this from a very senior police The problem as we saw it, was that by that the violence they experienced officer about drugs and how useless doing this, all you are doing is potentially it is to just to keep banning one drug putting more and more people through is now hitting countries in after another was a very useful. So I the criminal justice system which is Central America prompting some ask myself, ‘Is something significant crazy. If the police stop somebody with serious and very understandable happening?’ a white powder, neither the person discussion about reform across the nor the police know what it is. As Tim whole region. The situation is very Hollis from ACPO said, this is a mess different for us in the UK. Looking at your report, in essence for the police; the law is effectively you are saying that legal highs unenforceable. So we have to sort this In this country, there are two factors should be made safer for young out; we need a review of the Misuse of which could contribute to bringing about people to use. But all the statistics Drugs Act and we need sensible policies a tipping point. One is the squeeze on for drugs are on the way down around legal highs. If you had some funding and the other is the views of and successive governments have kind of legal ecstasy-type drug available, young people on drugs. There is also made smoking in public next to properly labelled about dosage with general public opinion. I think the information about drinking water and so Transform poll is interesting (see page impossible and are trying to curb on, it would be much, much safer. So we 4). The fact is that a majority of people binge drinking. So doesn’t your would want to see these drugs put in a would support either decriminalisation plan go against those trends in lower class D and regulated. or legalisation of cannabis. public health? Parliamentarians of all political parties My understanding is that the main fall have always been terrified of being But as we saw with mephedrone, has been in cannabis use in the last few soft on drugs, now if you at least did some people were switching to years, but over the same period there something about cannabis, you would be has been a spectacular rise in the use of using it because it was ‘purer’ than seen as responding to public opinion. I legal highs. And that is not a good thing. amphetamine or cocaine and has went to a meeting recently at an Oxford We should not be celebrating a reduced since caused numerous problems college where after a show of hands, all use of cannabis, if all that is happening which suggests that purer does but three thought our views on reform is that people are using something even not equal safer. If you had in were correct. less understood, more dangerous. effect, government sanctioned recreational drugs and somebody died, you can imagine the uproar. But if you took that argument say One of your recommendations to a WI meeting in Gloucester, you was for the Temporary Class Drug Which is why the New Zealand wouldn’t get the same show of Orders to be renamed Drug Supply government is proposing that it should hands, would you? Control Orders. Can you explain be the manufacturer that has to prove the relative safety of the product, No. But I’m talking about young people. If that? produce all the information about political parties want to appeal to young The good thing about the temporary possible side effects and harms, present people then they need to start thinking banning orders as they are called, is that this to government via the ACMD for about some of these things, because they do not criminalise the user. So if a rationale scientific decision about at the moment they seem really out of you extend that out, if there is a really classification and not one driven touch. dangerous legal high, OK ban it until by political fear of public opinion. you understand what’s going on – don’t The process would be like any other But in this country, we have a automatically after 12 months put it into medicine. The pharmaceutical company particularly voracious tabloid the Misuse of Drugs Act and criminalise has borne all the cost, you get a product the user. And just giving the ACMD a made here rather than in China. The press and I am wondering whether year to consider it is nothing like long whole market would change. for politicians, the views of young enough. The ACMD told us that they people will trump say The Daily can only look at two or three drugs in a Mail. year anyway and most of these will take much longer to get to the bottom of. So To download the APPG report on legal Except the Transform poll did refer to a year was just plucked out of the air highs go to www.drugpolicyreform.net Daily Mail readers in an interesting way.

March/April 2013 Druglink | 7