“The case of Billy Caldwell, the 12 year old with epilepsy whose vital cannabis oil medication was confiscated by Border Force officials to comply with UK drugs laws, provides one of those illuminating moments when a longstanding policy is revealed to be inappropriate, ineffective and utterly out of date.
That our border officials, with so much to deal
with to prevent the smuggling of arms, people, wildlife and much else, should
be expected to make off with a medicine that contains a tiny quantity of the
psychoactive element in marijuana but had clear benefits for a boy with severe
seizures, is beyond ridiculous. It suggests that official intransigence is now
at odds with common sense.
Over the weekend, the Home Office sensibly backed
down and returned Billy’s medicine. By doing so, it implicitly conceded
that the law has become
indefensible. It must now be asked whether Britain should join the
many other countries that permit medical-grade
marijuana, or indeed join Canada in preparing for a lawful,
regulated market in cannabis for recreational use as well.
Under successive governments it has been assumed
that there has been little alternative to trying to win a war on drugs,
cannabis included. Medical advice to ministers has always stressed that limited
use of soft drugs can lead to harder drugs and addiction. It has also been one
of the taboo subjects of British politics at a senior level, on which taking an
alternative view has been regarded as indicating a tendency to weird,
irresponsible or crazily liberal opinions.
It’s time to acknowledge facts, and to embrace a
decisive change that would be economically and socially beneficial, as well as
rather liberating for Conservatives in showing sensible new opinions are
welcome.
First of all, as far as marijuana, or cannabis, is
concerned, any war has been comprehensively and irreversibly lost. The idea
that the drug can be driven off the streets and out of people’s lives by the
state is nothing short of deluded. Surveys of young people attest that they
find it easier to purchase cannabis than virtually anything else, including fast
food, cigarettes and alcohol. Everyone sitting in a Whitehall conference room
needs to recognise that, out there, cannabis is ubiquitous, and issuing orders
to the police to defeat its use is about as up to date and relevant as asking
the army to recover the Empire. This battle is effectively over.
Some police forces, recognising this and focusing
their resources on more serious crimes, have stopped worrying about it. When a
law has ceased to be credible and worth enforcing to many police as well as the
public, respect for the law in general is damaged. We should have laws we
believe in and enforce or we should get rid of them.
Just as bad is the next unavoidable fact, that
where prosecutions still take place they create burdens on the criminal justice
system for no appreciable gain. Tens of millions of pounds are still spent each
year in forensics, legal aid, courts, prisons and probation services. Estimates
of the savings involved from ending the prohibition on cannabis vary, but can
easily add up to about £300 million a year.
In the meantime, something of decisive importance
has happened, which for me has tipped the balance of argument. The grey zone of
something being illegal but not effectively prevented has permitted the worst
of all worlds to arise. The potency of drugs available on the streets has risen sharply in recent
years. This has led to an increase in dependency and health
problems, but of course people are reluctant to seek help for using drugs that
are still illegal. The overall result is the rise of a multi-billion pound
black market for an unregulated and increasingly potent product, creating more
addiction and mental health problems but without any enforceable policy to do
something about it. The only beneficiaries are organised crime gangs. It is
absolutely unacceptable to allow this situation to continue.
A major change in policy is therefore
necessary. The licensing of medical products, such as Billy Caldwell’s oil, is
already allowed in Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, the Netherlands and
most of the US. Adopting the same approach would be a step forward. But the
Canadian parliament is now on the verge of agreeing something much more
radical: a legal, regulated market for cannabis for recreational use.
The proponents of this in Canada have been clear
from the outset that a legal market will involve licensed stores selling
cannabis of regulated strength, with a strict prohibition on sales to teenagers
and no relaxation of laws against other and more powerful drugs. The expected
benefits include reduced harm and addiction for users, a major reduction in the
black market, less pressure on police and courts and tax revenues running into
billions of dollars. If this works, it sounds more sensible than the current
position.
Can British Conservatives be as bold as Canadian
Liberals? We ought to be.
After all, we believe in market forces and the responsible exercise of freedom,
regulated as necessary. We should prefer to provide for lawful taxes than
preside over increased profits from crime. And we are pragmatists, who change
with society and revise our opinions when the facts change. On this issue, the
facts have changed very seriously and clearly.
For Tories who cannot quite bring themselves to
admit that this is all necessary, I leave you with the story of one of our
great heroes, William Wilberforce. One of the fascinating aspects of writing a
biography of him was the realisation that he was, for his whole life from his
late twenties onwards, a daily user of opium. He lived when the dangers of
addiction were only just becoming recognised, but finding that opium brought
reliable relief from debilitating digestive problems, he recommended it widely
while going on to achieve the abolition of the slave trade and become one of
the most universally admired figures in British history.
I feel that Wilberforce would have spoken up very
quickly for the Billy Caldwells of today. And while not advocating the
recreational use of any drugs at all, I think it is right that people of all
persuasions should now focus on sorting out a failed policy and an
unsustainable law, and replacing both with new ideas that might just command
respect and success.
No comments:
Post a Comment