The UK control and drugs treatment mafia has been a disaster.

There is an ever increasing consensus within the UK and Ireland that drug addiction is an illness, however this consensus breaks down somewhat when the question what type of illness is raised. The medical profession (and the politicians) who love to put people and the illnesses we suffer from into neat boxes, claim it is a psychiatric problem.  Whilst others, mainly those outside the State sponsored drug treatment mafia, regard such a diagnosis as bordering on the ridiculous if not down right dangerous. For if a drug addict is suffering from a mental health problem, then why not those who are addicted to nicotine, as the dangers of smoking tobacco far out weigh the self harm caused by taking heroin or cocaine, as to can being obese and many other types of behavior which these days have come to be regarded as anti social. 

Personally I find it abhorrent to place those who become addicted to illegal drugs under psychiatric care, as it reeks of the past and is all to reminiscent of the USSR, where those who were judged by people in positions of power of behaving in an anti social manner, were placed in psychiatric institutions. This group not only included drug addicts and alcoholics, but also political dissidents who refused to accept the Soviet Union was paradise on earth. 

Never the less this is the road UK government and opposition parties have chosen. The Brown led New Labour government recently released a Green paper which said that all drug addicts receiving Incapacity Benefit must place themselves on a drug treatment program or loose their benefits. Currently all State financed drug treatment programs are overseen by a psychiatrist, think about the implications here, if the addict wishes to continue to receive the benefit he/she is entitled to, they will have to see a psychiatrist, thus by doing so they become officially someone who suffers from a mental health problem. Talk about if the cap fits!

How deep this tabloidese belief that all drug addicts are mad, bad or sad has sunk into the UK control and treatment drugs Mafia was demonstrated recently when the head of the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NTA), Paul Hayes, said in an interview that “mental health difficulties tend to come with people who are drug-dependent.” In reality there is no real evidence to base such a statement on, true, like the general population some drug addicts have mental health problems; and long term cocaine and amphetamine use undoubtedly induces psychosis, but this is due to the cocaine and speed, not mental health problems; and once the users ceases to use these drugs their psychosis gradually recedes. In fact the number of drug addicts suffering from long term mental health problems is in all probability little different from the population as a whole. I say in all probability as organizations like the NTA have never carried out any long term research into this matter, despite its head speaking in the aforementioned manner.  

It looks very much like there will be a change of government in the not to distant future and when this happens it is drug addicts who will find themselves in the firing line. The warning signals are already out there, as the advocates of prohibition and the mad, bad or sad theory have clearly caught a whiff of a changing of the guard and are attempting to catch the ear of the incoming administration. After David Cameron set in motion the Conservative party's Social Justice Policy Group, headed by Iain Duncan Smith it published its 'Breakdown Britain' report. 

A lengthy document examining the causes of social breakdown and poverty, the report concluded that an "explosion of addiction" was a major factor in fostering wider social exclusion. The possibility that policy might change direction under a future Conservative government was also mooted when it asked if current policy was "treating the symptoms rather than the causes," and concluded that treatment was currently being pushed in "the wrong direction, preferring maintenance to recovery."

What this will mean on the ground will be yet another attempt to enforce prohibition by throwing money at the law enforcement agencies, prison system and judiciary, Indeed David Cameron has already said he would provide space for 5000 more prisoners in UK jails and as the majority of prison time is  drug related, it is not difficult to understand Cameron’s thinking.

To understand just how far members of the control and treatment Mafia have their heads up the politicians rear end, one only has to read the comments made by Ian Oliver, former Chief Constable of Grampian police and an independent consultant for the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. That senior police officers still have such a major say in drugs policy is in itself an indictment of the UK drugs strategy, for these are the very people who had responsibility under prohibition to stop the flow of illegal drugs hitting the streets of the UK and failed dismally. Rather than recognizing this and taking themselves off to spend their index linked pensions. They continue to inflict their failed theories on society whilst moonlighting as consultants to the drug 'treatment' mafia.

Oliver argues vigorously in a newspaper article against decriminalization of drugs on the bases that if this were to happen crack would become freely available. * What planet is this guy on, the reason many of us have concluded illegal drugs should be legalized and regulated is because crack cocaine and the other illegal substance ARE readily available in all parts of the UK. Indeed yesterday whilst driving through one of the more prosperous estates in my area, I witnessed what was undoubtedly a drug deal taking place.

What I find so worrying about Mr Oliver and his fellow prohibitionist’s is how they play fast and loose with the statistics to justify keeping their snouts in the prohibition gravy trains trough. Without producing a single verifiable statistic, Oliver claims that only 6% of the world population between the ages of 15-65 take illegal drugs. He also makes the breathtaking claim that a majority of those dependent on ‘drugs would opt for treatment aimed at freeing them from drugs," when he must know that all NHS treatment programs aim for this, whether the addict likes it or not. What he is really after is an end of maintenance prescribing, in other words he not only supports prohibition of illegal drugs but he wants to extend this to all drug treatment programs.

 Oliver seems oblivious to the fact that such nonsense has been tried in the past and  has proved disastrous for the majority of addicts in treatment, who found such a vigorous program to harsh to endure and found themselves back on the street in the hands of drug dealers.

Ian Oliver ends his article with a statement which I regard as one of the stupidest statements I have ever heard from a Prohibitionist, and believe me this is saying something.

“The cumulative effects of prohibition, combined with education and treatment during 100 years of international drug control, have had a significant impact in stemming the drug problem.”

 Prohibition of illegal drugs has been a disaster, both for society in general and the minority of individuals who develop problems due to their use of narcotics. For Oliver to claim otherwise either displays a startling ignorance, or he is being economical with the truth. Neither would surprise me as I have increasingly come to believe the prohibitionists and the illegal drug dealers and importers are part of the same coin; and serve each others interest, as both groups get a very good living from Prohibition.

* http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/21/drugspolicy.drugstrade