The new UK drug strategy is aiming to reduce drug-related crime through the largest ever increase in funding. However, the strategy will also be imposing tougher consequences – including curfews and the removal of passports and drivers licences.
The UK’s new drug strategy will inject a record £780m into rebuilding the drug treatment system as part of a plan to combat drug and alcohol misuse. The UK Government has stated that the strategy is designed to cut crime and reduce both the supply and demand for drugs by getting more people into treatment.
The plan will invest £15m over three years for drug testing on arrest, £5m toward an innovation fund, and £9m towards the new “Tough Consequences” out of court disposals scheme. This scheme will see civil penalties imposed, such as fines, curfews, and the temporary removal of driving licences or passports.
The response to the announcement has been mixed – with positive responses to the plans regarding support for drug users, but concerns regarding the suggestion to remove passports and driving licences.
UK non-profit drugs advisory committee, Drug Science, previously submitted evidence for the Dame Carol Black review on addiction treatment services which helped to shape the new strategy. The organisation responded to the plan, stating that it welcomes the Government accepting aspects of the review.
Speaking to Psychedelic Health, David Badcock, chief executive of Drug Science, commented: “We’re encouraged that the government recognises the importance of well-funded addiction treatment. That’s long overdue. But what this strategy doesn’t do is address the most fundamental issue of all.
“Quite simply, if we continue to only view drugs through a lens of ‘criminality’ we’ll get nowhere. Successive drug strategies have failed users and taxpayers for precisely this reason, and problems have become even more entrenched.
“So we urge the government to change its approach completely, and to adopt a rational, evidence-based approach of drug control. Stigmatising users helps nobody. Misinformation about the real harms of substances helps nobody. And what we need, instead, is drug policy based on healthcare, empathy and facts.
“It’s also vital that we remove the stigma of certain drugs for medical research purposes. Drugs like psilocybin could prove to be hugely beneficial for all kinds of therapeutic reasons. But if we continue to view these substances as inherently evil, dangerous or criminal – then we will never get to the truth.”
In its published response, Drug Science stated: “The major positive outcome appears to be a focus on the use of treatments rather than punishments to reduce drug use and harms. This suggests the government has at last caught up with the scientific community in understanding that addiction is a medical rather than a criminal issue and that criminalising drug users [as opposed to drug dealers] only perpetuates a cycle of use that drives more into drug dealing and hence more drug users.”
However, the organisation believes that abstinence-only approaches are worrying, as for most people “this approach comes with a greatly increased risk of death from accidental overdose when they relapse. So other policies must be pursued in parallel.”
Three of these parallel policies Drug Science has highlighted include: investment into research for new treatments to promote abstinence; the development and provision of new approaches to treatment; and, encouraging pilot programmes for safe injecting rooms which are proven to save lives.
The organisation gives psilocybin as an example as an alternative approach to treatment for tobacco and alcohol addiction, and MDMA or ketamine as an example for alcoholism.
Drug Science stated: “Trials in opioid and cocaine addiction are now a priority and given the UK leads the world in this research, psychedelic addiction treatment studies should be commissioned here asap. Also as the controlled status of these drugs makes research unnecessarily complicated and difficult these should be rectified as recommended by Drug Science and the CDPRG.”
Read the full statement from Drug Science.
The Green Party Drug Policy Working Group has also responded to the announcement, stating is “both astonished and extremely concerned by the government’s new 10 year plan aimed at dealing with drug use in our society.”
It states: “We support the reinstatement of (some) funding for medical interventions for problematic drug use and the focus on public health – and would like to see these commitments go further.
“However, many of the initiatives listed are against evidence and will cause harm. Stigmatising a mythical corrupt middle-class drug user ignores the scientific evidence and goes against the principle of harm reduction.
“Proposals to remove passports and driving licenses from class A drug users are unevidenced and divisive; a show of ‘tough on drugs’ political theatre. We know from years of the failed “war of drugs” that criminalising drug use does not reduce use or improve health and wellbeing outcomes.”
As part of the strategy, £300m will also be invested to crack down on illicit supply chains and criminal gangs profiting from the trade in unlicensed drugs, using funding to try and breakup county lines, which see the exploitation of young children across the country.
Drug policy reform group, Volteface, commented: “There is some slight confusion that Dame Black famously remarked that we cannot police our way out of the drugs crisis.
“It is therefore dumbfounding as to why the government has placed such an emphasis on crime and policing. If the government wants to be tough on county lines, then it must address the conditions that enable young people (mostly boys) to fall into exploitation.
“There must be a bigger focus on drug education and surrounding measures like reopening youth clubs and giving kids a better opportunity. It is no surprise that the bulk of those being exploited are from poorer backgrounds, and often have difficult family lives. The key benefit to the strategy is the emphasis on diversion, even if the government has decided to refer to such measures as “tough consequences”.”
[activecampaign form=52]
