The Prohibition of illicit drugs is a foolish and non winnable war against comparatively harmless substances.

Otherwise intelligent people, on reaching high political office, often seem pre-programmed to abandon independent thought and end up behaving like imbeciles;  others might be less generous and regard such folk as lackeys of powerful forces with the power to lobby central government successfully.


 Members of Tony Blair’s cabinet acted in this way when in 2003 they overwhelmingly supported Blair’s infantile and criminal decision to support President G.W.Bush illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.  A decision which they must have known was against the wishes of a majority of those they represented and also against the advice of the UK’s main European allies. 

Home Secretary Alan Johnson’s recent decision to fire Professor David Nutt, his senior adviser on illicit drugs and chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs(ACMD) also falls into this category. Prof Nutt was sacked because he made the decision to go public after the Blue Labour Government, without any scientific evidence, reclassified Cannabis from class C back to class B, only a short time after they had previously reclassified it from class B to class C. 

By taking this decision, Professor Nutt accused ministers of "devaluing and distorting" the scientific evidence available about Cannabis, and ignoring the advice of the ACMD. It is impossible to argue with Nutt’s point here, for no new scientific evidence was brought forward during the short period of time Cannabis was classified as class C. 

Although at that time, the British media was suddenly full of scare stories about skunk and cannabis use being linked to mental health problems. Some newspapers went as far as to say that heavy users ‘may’ become schizophrenic, despite not providing a shred of medical evidence to back up this claim. But then they didn’t need it with Blue Labour in power, for when the Murdoch press says jump, both the Blair and Brown governments have always replied, “How high.” 

Just because Cannabis is involved here, which 90% plus of the UK population consider comparatively harmless, this does not mean this is a tale without victims and lives ruined. For the reclassification of Cannabis will mean ever more users and small dealers will end up in jail. The reclassification of Cannabis, once again means if a user comes before a beak who is having a bad day, they can under the new legislation be sentenced for a single spliff to upwards of five years imprisonment.

A young acquaintance of mine was recently sentenced to 18 years for conspiracy to import Cannabis. True he new what he was doing, he bet the house and lost, nevertheless, when you look at the lesser sentences handed down for far more serious offenses, rape, manslaughter and child molestation. Eighteen years for attempting to import what the majority of the population and the governments own scientists and medics regard as a comparatively harmless drug, seems to me to be a major crime in itself. Shame on the judge who sent this young man away for the best years of his life, (The more so if he himself smoked cannabis whilst at university) and shame on the politicians for giving him the power to do so.

One of the points Pro Nutt has repeatedly made of late, and which undoubtedly played a major role in him becoming persona non grata at the top table. Was he was not prepared to mislead the public about the harmfulness of drugs, he believed strongly illicit drugs should be classified according to the actual evidence of the harm they cause; and he pointed out that drugs like alcohol and tobacco caused more harm than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis.

As I wrote in a previous article on this subject, powerful forces are at work opposing those who wish to see the UK’s draconian drug laws liberalized. Sadly, because the media and their political gofers have managed to mire almost all public debate about illicit drugs around the simplistic formula of good and evil. (Illicit drugs and those who have anything to do with them evil, those who support and enforce prohibition, good) Thus with this sacking, Alan Johnson has bowed without a fight before the powerful tobacco and alcohol lobby, which is linked through self interest to big media interests, especially the reactionary Tanoys known as The Sun and Sky News.

If you add in the Police Federation, whose members, perhaps understandable, prefer to be members of a drug squad , etc, rather than walk the beat on a Friday and Saturday night in a UK town or city, which is full of helpless and often violent drunks. The legal profession which these days gets a great deal of work from those who are charged with illicit drugs crimes. Those who work in the often fraudulent drug treatment industry, the majority of whom are tied to the governments purse. The jailers who lock up otherwise law abiding people who have been convicted of drug offences. Customs and security service officers. The Royal Navy personnel who have a comfortable tour in the warm Caribbean waters on the pretext of searching for 'drug running boats.' The Squadies who are charged with burning the only cash crop produced by many Afghan peasants. Plus the countless other professions who gain they're living from the flotsam of the illegal drugs trade and of course the government of the USA. 


When you take all this into account, you get an idea why 'lazy and venal' politicians are willing to sacrifice the ‘collateral damage’ caused by the illegal status of otherwise comparatively harmless drugs.

By the way, I have not even mentioned the enormous sums the big South American drug cartels set aside to corupt politicians around the world to keep legalization off the statute books. It is said to be equivalent to that paid by the alcohol and tobacco industry to lobbyists. But that is where we came in.