(from The Guardian - November 12, 1991)

By Melissa Benn

THERE is continuing debate over the most effective way of reducing drug-taking. Some people have argued that one solution is to reduce the criminal penalties for those who are found in possession of drugs - particularly so-called 'softer' drugs, such as cannabis, which they argue cause less harm than other 'harder' drugs. At present about 80 per cent of recorded drug offences are for possession or use of cannabis. Proposals for changes in the law, discussed since the 1960s, have been raised increasingly in recent years as the recorded use of drugs has increased, particularly among young people. The number of drug addicts notified to the Home Office increased by 20 per cent to almost 18,000 between 1989 and 1990. Most addicts were men aged between 21 and 34. Known cannabis offenders doubled from 1986 to 1990 - although this may be as much to do with increased police activity as greater use. Supporters of a change in the law come from a wide range of positions. Some argue for the legalisation of even the mos

t dangerous drugs - okay put just legalisation - because you will always have laws that hedge in drug taking ie relating to activities done while under the influence and the creation of a free market in their production and use. The former judge James Pickles argued on television earlier this year that all offences involving cannabis should be abolished. Earlier, he had called for the legalisation of both heroin and cocaine. Mr Pickles argued that adults should be allowed to damage themselves if they wish. To prevent them by law was an 'intolerable intrusion' on their freedom. In 1989, Dr Vernon Coleman, of the group Committee for a Free Britain, argued that if cannabis, cocaine and heroin were freely available through legal channels there would be few deaths from drug related activities. Many drug-related deaths, he said, were caused by criminals selling contaminated or poisoned drugs. Others have argued that the huge profits currently reaped by organised crime could be channelled back to more socially use

ful ends. According to Ben Whitaker, author of The Global Fix: 'If instead of outlawing drug use we licensed it, the money currently enriching this extensive underground economy could be channelled towards constructive public use; the courts, prison and police services would be relieved of a thankless burden.' The Standing Conference on Drug Abuse (SCODA) argues that the use of all drugs should be 'decriminalised' - in other words, that there should no longer be criminal penalties for possession. SCODA does not think that making drugs a crime helps to reduce drug taking. However, the group would like some legal controls to be kept - including bans on sales to those under 18 or on the use of drugs while using machinery or driving. Supporters of a change in the law cite what they see as positive trends in Holland, where cannabis is legal. There, the drug is available in 250 licensed coffee houses where it can be bought and smoked. A recent survey showed that only 1.8 per cent of Dutch 18-year-olds had used dr

ugs in the past year. A recent study of 13-16 year olds in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee showed that one in five of 1,197 pupils had already taken illegal drugs once. They also argue that when border controls within Europe are relaxed in 1993 there will be nothing to stop the influx of cannabis from Holland to the UK. Although possession of cannabis remains illegal in Britain, in practice the police have been more tolerant on possession in recent years. They now often give people formal warnings - or 'caution' them - rather than prosecute them. Home office finding this out for me In 1989, cautions were used in 39 per cent of cases of possession. although there is alot of local variation in police practice Home office finding this out for me The Government remains firmly opposed to any changes in the law. The Home Secretary, Kenneth Baker argued last June that, even in small doses, cannabis alters the way that users coordinate their muscles and perceive the space around them. This, he said, poses a risk to d

rivers and those using dangerous machinery at work or at home. Mr Baker also argued that there is strong evidence of that people progress from smoking cannabis to using heroin and cocaine. Although all three main political parties support the increased use of cautions for minor drug offences, none supports further changes in the law. The Labour Party says that the legalisation of dangerous drugs would be a disaster for third-world economies. The party's recent drugs consultation document said: 'Commercialisation of production would accelerate dangerous tendencies towards monocultivation (a dependence on growing drug plants) in producer countries.' This, in turn, would disrupt present patterns of mixed farming, by which food is produced for local markets. The Liberal Democrats are also against legalising banned drugs. But a spokeswoman said: 'The system so far has failed to deal with the problem of drug addiction. That is something we believe should be looked at.'