Remember the government's "consultation" on the future of its drugs policy? It was billed as being one of the biggest consultations ever held. The consultation, Drugs: Our Community, Your Say was launched on 25th July 2007 and communicated through the Home Office website. The full consultation document contained 52 questions with free-response text boxes. 5,000 copies of this document were issued to key stakeholders throughout the country. In addition to the full document, a shorter set of seven questions was published in leaflet form, aimed at a more general public audience. 300,000 leaflets were printed and distributed through outlets such as doctors’ surgeries, libraries and police stations. All this, including online submissions, produced a stunning 1,020 responses. Yep, just 1,020 from a UK population of nearly 60,000,000. Unbelievable, well done HMG, you really caught the public imagination there. Sorry for the sarcasm. When it happened UKCIA called it a sham, seems we were right. The IPSOS - Mori evaluation of this massive public consultation excercise is here (1M PDF)
|
DreadheadsIf you thought (as UKCIA did) that the first attempt to run a Dutch style cannabis coffeeshop in the UK was "the Dutch Experience" in Stockport at the turn of the century, you, like us, were wrong. We set the record straight with the story of Dreadheads - here. PragmatismWhatever politicians and the police might try to tell you, cannabis is not really a "controlled drug", prohibition prevents any real controls. A pragmatic approach to law reform challenges this use of doublespeak. Instead it argues that the potential risks should form the basis of the regulatory approach. UKCIA is a pragmatic cannabis law reform campaign for a drugs policy based on proper control and regulation of the commercial supply, coupled with effective harm reduction measures. Cannabis
pragmaitism and the case for law reform - Read more August 13th - Drugs policy "cannot work"Ex-government drugs director of the Anti-Drug Co-ordination Unit, Julian Critchley, has gone public in admiring that the drugs policy of prohibition cannot work, saying he now believes legalisation is the only way forward. This is yet another bombshell against our failed drugs policy He said: "wishing drug use away was "folly" and that there was "no doubt" there would be a fall in crime as a result of legalisation. "The argument always put forward against this is that there would be a commensurate increase in drug use as a result of legalisation," he said. "This, it seems to me, is a bogus point: tobacco is a legal drug, whose use is declining, and precisely because it is legal, its users are far more amenable to government control, education programmes and taxation than they would be were it illegal."
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brown makes a fool of himself on youtube The prime minister explains why cannabis is illegal and alcohol users need help in reply to a question about tobacco. Brown on youtube (newsblog) |
Cannabis Grit weed ContaminationApril 2008 New contamination danger - lead - read more.It used to be assumed that herbal cannabis was unlikely to suffer from contamination but this is no longer true, the workings of prohibition have managed to create the economic circumstances which have lead to the mass contamination of supplies. How did this happen? Before summer 2006 cannabis was readily available due to a number of large scale cannabis farms. Operation Keymer, which was widely trumpeted in the press, either busted them, or more likely sent most to ground, creating a shortage virtually over night. It wasn't long before this shortage was filled from another source, only this time the cannabis was contaminated. How dangerous is this contamination? The answer to that is no-one knows, it's a totally unmeasurable unknown. The only sensible advice is really very simple: Don't
sell grit weed The only way to ensure you have pure cannabis is to grow it yourself or to know someone who does. The government's warning is welcome, but of course it doesn't highlight the cause of the problem (their own policy) and tries to use the danger as an argument against cannabis use. Contamination isn't a problem caused by cannabis, it's a problem caused by the law.As contaminated supplies are used as an indication of "success" for the war on drugs, it's clear that the government is happy to deliberately create extra unmeasuarable dangers in its effort to deter use - no other government policy sets out to do that. Yet the health warning was issued because the government accepts it has a duty of care to warn people about the danger it caused. Joined up policy making this isn't!
|
||||||||
|
Page
designed and maintained by UKCIA
|
