Transform transformed - our new strategy and structure

Transform’s Board has recently carried out a comprehensive review of the organisation and the challenges we face over the next few years.

It has become clear that attaining a rational drug policy cannot be achieved by an exclusive focus on the Home Office and relevant politicians. To accomplish change we need to engage with opinion formers and decision makers on a much wider basis. We need to achieve policy climate change. Transform’s Board has agreed to prioritise work over the next five years in three key areas.

Firstly we will be highlighting the international dimensions to drug policy. Drug policy in the UK and other states is underpinned by a number of international treaties that are based on the principles of prohibition. The harms caused by drug policy and the ‘war on drugs’ are international, with the trail of harm generated by prohibition stretching from producer countries, through transit nations to user countries. In all cases these harms are disproportionately experienced by the poorest and least powerful members of society. As well as highlighting these international consequences within Transform’s work we will be looking at developing a number of alliances, that will include both organisations based and operating in other countries and UK organisations who work internationally.

Secondly Transform will be focusing on promoting wellbeing as the key paradigm for drug policy. In partnership with a number of academics we are looking at developing methodologies that allow the wellbeing impact of both existing and proposed drug policy regimes to be evaluated. This work will underpin our continued campaigning for the transfer of drug policy responsibility away from criminal justice agencies to public health authorities. The law enforcement strategies central to current drug policy generate considerable additional harms and have clearly failed. A public health and wellbeing approach to drug policy would be much more effective. However, to achieve this we need to build a wide coalition within the heath and allied professions in support of such an approach.

A major aspect of this work will be supporting the development of the Drugs and Health Alliance (DHA). The DHA is a coalition of agencies campaigning for drug policy to move away from failed criminal justice approaches and instead adopt a public health approach. Transform provides the secretariat for the DHA and in that capacity has recently received funding from the Pilgrim Trust which has enabled us to recruit Francesca Solmi as its co-ordinator. Francesca has a BA in International Relations from Sussex University and a Masters Degree in International Relations and Health Policy from SAIS – Johns Hopkins University. Before joining the DHA she worked with the World Health Organisation on Child Environmental Health issues. She has also interned for the Food and Agricultural Organisation in Rome, and for the United Nations Development Program’s liaison office in Washington DC. Francesca will be based in London and will be working for the Drugs and Health Alliance 2.5 days per week.

Thirdly we will be focusing on the economic impact of prohibition based drug policies. We will be carrying out or commissioning a number of studies to identify the cost of existing policies; both to public finances and to the wider economy. These will be supplemented by further work identifying the benefits of alternative policies based on legal regulation and control. This strand of our work will set out the strong economic case for adopting rational drug policies and further broaden the coalition supporting drug policy reform.

In addition to this refocusing of our research and campaigning work we have reviewed how we are organised and established a new organisational structure. This structure will see Transform’s staff organised into three teams, Research, Policy and Communications, and Operations. The Research team will be responsible for developing Transform’s ‘product’ both through directly produced work and by managing commissioned research projects. Steve Rolles, who has been the lead author of all our major publications would become the Head of Research and will work with Emily Crick our Research Associate. Steve is based in London and Emily in Bristol.

The Policy and Campaigns team will disseminate our material and communicating the case for change. Danny Kushlick moves to a new post as Head of Policy and Communications to head up this team and will be working with Martin Powell, our new Communications Associate. Martin brings with him extensive experience of working in the charitable sector having spent over ten years at environmental and international development campaign groups including Friends of the Earth, the World Development Movement and as Co-Chair of the Jubilee Debt Campaign. Martin has a degree in applied chemistry and a postgraduate diploma in environmental science, policy and planning. Office based volunteers, student placements and interns will supplement these teams. Francesca Solmi the DHA’s co-ordinator will be based in this team.

The third team, Operations will focus on Transform’s funding and organisational management. A new post of ‘Director of Operations’ is being established with overall responsibility for management of the organisation. This post will work closely with Jane Slater, Operations Co-ordinator and they will both focus on human resources, funding, finances and project management. John Moore is currently filling this post on an interim basis.

The new strategy opens up a range of exciting possibilities for Transform and the restructuring utilises the strengths of our staff, enabling us to maximise Transform’s impact and influence.

DHA publishes drugs strategy consultation submission

The DHA today published its submission to the Government's deeply flawed consultation process. The submission can be read in full here (pdf format) (html format). Below is the accompanying covering letter.

Dear Sir/Madam

Please find enclosed/attached the submission from the Drugs and Health Alliance (DHA) to the Drug Strategy Consultation Paper 2007, Drugs: Our Community, Your Say.

The Drugs and Health Alliance (DHA) is a group of organisations and individuals who support an evidence-based, public health-led approach to dealing with illegal drugs. The consensus statement, to which all the member organisations have signed up to, is available on the DHA website: http://www.drugshealthalliance.net/ (please refer to this website for further information and a regularly updated list of member organisations).

The DHA was established in 2006/07 in part to encourage constructive input into the drug strategy review process and related consultation. As stated in the DHA consensus statement, it is our view that problems with UK drug policy ‘are perpetuated by the Government's failure to conduct an evidence based review of the progress of the UK drug strategy and its failure to consult with informed public opinion’. The DHA represents one such body of opinion.

We sincerely believed that the review and consultation process would be a genuine opportunity for open dialogue with key stakeholders, that the successes and failures of the last 10 years would be objectively reviewed, and that actual change in both the focus of policy and decision making infrastructure was a real possibility. This belief was the spur for the formation of the DHA. We have been disappointed to see that the process so far has not met any of these expectations and we have outlined our specific concerns in introduction to our submission.

We make this submission despite these concerns in the hope that the relevant policy makers will give due consideration to its contents. We also hope our concerns about the flawed review and consultation process can be responded to accordingly, by delaying the new strategy publication and instigating a process in line with what everyone in the drugs field had hoped for and expected (regardless of their policy positions).

We aim to continue with the process of engagement and would welcome the opportunity for DHA representatives to meet with relevant officials and ministers to present our ideas for achieving a more just and effective 10 year strategy that puts public health and harm reduction at the heart of policy development and implementation.

Yours faithfully, on behalf of the Drugs and Health Alliance members

The Council of Europe adopts convention on promoting public health in drug control

.
The Council of Europe, representing 47 member states and a population of over 800 million people, has adopted a convention on promoting public health policy in drug control. This move marks a very positive evolution in international drug policy thinking; away from the heavy handed enforcement focus of old school prohibition, towards an more evidence based public health focus for future pan-European policy. The full text is reproduced below.

Whilst the convention's power is essentially rhetorical, it is reassuring that the broad thrust of the convention has been supported by UK, Sweden and other traditionally more dogmatic / enforcent oreiented European states (although some compromise is evident - in terms of supporting enforcement e.g. point 11.8 - there's also a clear acknowledgement in the preamble that supply side efforts have been costly and ineffective and that a public health and harm reduction paradigm should be the focus of future policy).

The convention arrives at a timely moment in the evolution of both domestic and international drug policy with the UK and UN's ten year strategies being held up to scrutiny and a window of opportunity opening for new thinking to help shape the next ten year strategies. The convention is also a welcome endorsement for the Drugs and Health Alliance with which it shares many core principles.

For a European convention on promoting public health policy in drug control

Resolution 1576 (2007)1

1. Drug addiction is a complex biological, psychological and societal problem. Scientific research and practical experience have made it possible to broaden our knowledge of it. Increasingly, this improved knowledge allows the implementation of a drugs policy focused on preserving public health, for individual addicts and for society. Although many scientific questions concerning dependency remain unanswered, the aspects linked to public health, the effectiveness of prevention and of medical treatments and improved protection of society against the resulting health risks are now better known.

2. Since the late 1960s, considerations of public health have played an increasing role in pragmatic, evidenced-based drug policy-making in many member states of the Council of Europe. The right to health provides the cornerstone principle on which such considerations are based. This right is recognised in the Council of Europe acquis (Articles 11 and 13 of the Revised European Social Charter) as well as in numerous other international and regional human rights treaties. It grants every individual the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health, defined by the World Health Organization as a state of complete physical, mental and social wellbeing.

3. A number of key public health responses to “problem drug use” have emerged in past decades, including substitution treatment, needle exchange programmes and psychosocial treatment. These measures have had a marked effect on the successful long-term rehabilitation of drug users and their reintegration into society. The resultant benefits have been felt by society as a whole, through reductions in the incidence of criminal behaviour, reduced costs for health and criminal justice systems, reduced risks of transmission of HIV and other blood-borne viruses, increased productivity and ultimately reduced drug use levels.

4. However, these responses have so far been employed only on a fragmentary basis across Europe. This is despite the fact that their utility and cost-effectiveness is now widely documented. According to estimates cited by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), for example, every dollar invested in opioid dependence treatment programmes may yield a return of between $4 and $7 in reduced drug-related crime, criminal justice costs and theft alone. When savings related to health care are included, total savings can exceed costs by a ratio of 12:1.

5. Moreover, recent world trends have provided additional proof of the abject failure of efforts to reduce the production and supply of drugs. The current illegal drugs market in Afghanistan, the world’s largest producer of heroin, provides ample evidence of the ineffectiveness to address the drugs problem in a comprehensive manner. Despite six years of military action to restrict the poppy crops in the country, the United Nations have confirmed that poppy crop production in Afghanistan has increased by 60% for the year 2006-2007 compared to the previous year.

6. Steps being taken in the European Union as part of the EU Drugs Strategy 2005-12 aim to achieve a high level of health protection by complementing EU member states’ action in preventing and reducing drug use and dependence and drug-related harm to health and society. In particular, the strategy places a high priority on improving access to a range of public health orientated responses that can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with drug dependence. However, it is clear that special efforts need to be taken in relation to Eastern Europe and Central Asia, where political and infrastructural obstacles have hindered the implementation of such responses. The escalating HIV/AIDS pandemic in these regions provides an added urgency to this imperative: 80% of HIV cases with a known route of transmission in Eastern Europe and Central Asia are due to injecting drug use.

7. The geographic sphere of influence of the Council of Europe makes it the ideal forum to undertake such efforts and send an unequivocal signal giving a framework to its member states to develop public health-orientated responses to problem drug use. In pursuit of this end, which has been emphasised by the Pompidou Group and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the Parliamentary Assembly calls upon member states to work together to design a convention promoting public health policy in drug control. This convention should complement existing legal instruments in the areas of drug control, human rights and public health. It should consolidate scientific and medical knowledge in a framework document which may form the basis for the design of national drug strategies.

8. The Council of Europe convention should be predicated on the following three inter-related objectives to:

8.1. promote, as a fundamental human right, the right to health in the context of problem drug use;

8.2. clarify the scope of the right to health as it applies to problem drug use;

8.3. help identify good practices for the operation of the right to health as it applies to problem drug use, at the community, national and international levels.

9. In pursuit of these objectives, the convention, which should be complementary to the existing framework of national drug policies, should incorporate the following four elements:

9.1. prevention and education, including measures targeting the special needs of marginalised and vulnerable groups;

9.2. treatment, covering a range of treatment methods, including substitution treatment and needle exchange programmes, and incorporating a psychosocial component as integral to the various treatment methods;

9.3. rehabilitation and social reintegration, including treatment alternatives to imprisonment and labour market rehabilitation;

9.4. monitoring and evaluation, aimed at identifying best practices.

10. Insofar as many of the negative consequences of drug use are felt at local levels, the convention should also seek to reaffirm the principle of subsidiarity, by encouraging consideration of the ways that more local government agencies may act effectively. In this way, it is intended that health-driven drug policy responses be guided by scientific evidence as well as local conditions.

11. In order to promote the effective implementation of the convention, the Assembly calls on member states to:

11.1. extend the scope of drug demand reduction programmes, assess them and disseminate the best practices assessed;

11.2. improve access to prevention programmes in schools and make them more effective;

11.3. improve prevention methods and the detection of risk factors in certain target groups, especially young people, as well as the dissemination of these data to the professionals in order to implement early intervention programmes;

11.4. ensure that targeted treatment, re-education and social reintegration programmes are available and accessible. These programmes should incorporate tested psychosocial and pharmacological strategies, and include drug addicts not reached by existing services with particular attention being paid to specialised services for young people, and rehabilitation of drug addicts in the labour market;

11.5. develop further alternatives to imprisonment for addicts and the setting-up of prevention, treatment and reintegration services for prisoners;

11.6. improve access to harm reduction services and treatment and set up programmes preventing the propagation of the AIDS virus, hepatitis C and other blood-borne diseases and endeavour to reduce the number of drug-related deaths;

11.7. encourage research into the factors underlying dependency and such questions as the effects of certain drugs and effective health measures;

11.8. implement operational enforcement programmes in order to reduce the production of heroin, cocaine and cannabis, as well as synthetic drugs and trade in them, in particular by devising operational joint programmes, collecting intelligence on third countries involved in manufacturing and trading in such drugs, sharing best practice and exchanging information;

11.9. devise and implement measures targeted at money laundering and the seizure and re-use of financial products connected with drugs, in particular through exchanges of information and best practices;

11.10. encourage co-operation with international organisations such as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the EMCDDA, as well as with civil society and community groups from areas most affected by problem drug use;

11.11. encourage the creation, in national parliaments, of mechanisms and structures which promote public health responses to problem drug use in the national context, such as all-party parliamentary groups;

11.12. provide appropriate financial support.

1 Assembly debate on 3 October 2007 (33rd Sitting) (see Doc. 11344, report of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, rapporteur: Mr Flynn). Text adopted by the Assembly on 3 October 2007 (33rd Sitting).

Drugs minister gives a masterclass in drug policy spin and evasion

Vernon Coaker discusses the drugs strategy in this week's Drink and Drug News, providing a masterclass in drug policy spin. We have almost 1000 words, completely devoid of any meaningful content, but resplendent with evasion, waffle, process success and statistical slight of hand, dressing up failure as success. Here is the article with added commentary from Transform (in Bold).

We invite Home Office minister Vernon Coaker to give us insight to his approach to revising the Drugs Strategy. He explains his direction of travel.

This week I am looking forward to national tackling drugs day, a chance to celebrate the wonderful work that often goes on, often unsung, around the country. On Wednesday, groups in places as diverse as Camden, Durham, Blackburn, Milton Keynes and Ceredigion will highlight the dangers posed by drugs and the work that goes on to tackle this menace.

Drugs as a 'menace'. All drugs? This from 'I have a drink now and again ' Coaker.

A drug treatment centre will be officially opened in Barking and Dagenham, there will be information stalls across the country and Gateshead will host a concert with a song, called ‘Kick It’, written and performed by a former drug user.

Whilst it is absolutely correct to celebrate the excellent work done by many drug service providers, what we have here is essentially an exercise in diversion. On numerous occasions we have seen politicians asked searching questions about drug policy only to completely ignore them and respond with a list of local initiatives like anti-drug songs at events in Gateshead.

It's content free waffle, classic ministerial bluster that entirely ignores the requirement for them to engage in meaningful debate around the wider systemic failures where they have occured during the last 10 years of the drug strategy. The strategy's many critiques - notably from the Police Foundation (2001), the Home Affairs Select Committee (2002), The Number 10 Strategy Unit (2003), Transform (2004), the Science and Technology Select Committee (2006), the RSA (2007) or the UKDPC (2007) remain resolutely un-mentioned here. Instead we have two more paragraphs of this guff:

On Wednesday drug action team partnerships will be organising events to support the day, from police crackdowns, information stalls in supermarkets, sports activities for young people to balloon releases to mark the numbers of people in treatment, and football and rugby matches featuring people involved in the effort to tackle drug misuse.

This from the Government that allows alcohol brands to aggressively market alcohol to children and young people through football, rugby and other sports sponsorship, despite the emergent alcohol related public health and social disorder crises that eclipse anything related to illegal drugs. Drug menace indeed.

In all, six ministers will be out and about, demonstrating just how much of a priority this government places on tackling drugs and reducing the harms they cause. I will be leading the ministerial activity by opening a new treatment centre in Barking and Dagenham. Alongside other ministers, I will be playing a football match against Lambeth North Positive Futures scheme and the Hull-based charity, Dads Against Drugs to launch the Tackling Drugs Changing Lives Awards 2007.

This smacks of doing keepy-uppey whilst Rome burns. Millions are suffering as a result of failing policy and the actively counterproductive effects of an enforcement led response to a public health problem. And our drugs minister is off to playing football to celebrate 'success'.

This isn’t just talk (no its waffle): since 1998, when we launched our ten-year Drug Strategy, this government has made tackling drugs a top priority. We have backed our strategy with unparalleled investment of over £9 billion in enforcement, education, early intervention, and treatment.

So, you've thrown loads of money at the problem. Good, but has it been effective? Unsurprisingly Coaker claims that:

We have spent this money well: overall drug misuse has fallen by 16 per cent since 1998 while the misuse of Class A drugs has stabilised.

As explored in another recent blog entry, this sort of claim is playing very fast and loose with the available statistics, which can easily be cherry picked and massaged to show success, even when the reality is somewhat different: Total Class A drug use appears stable because the fashions for ecstasy and LSD have moved on. But these, according to most analyses, are two of the least harmful Class A drugs - probably mis-classified by a couple of alphabetic increments. The two drugs the Government has repeatedly said it is most concerned about are heroin and cocaine, because they are responsible for the lion’s share of secondary crime harms – (that £16 billion a year in crime costs the Home Office keep mentioning). This is where the real enforcement push has gone, but these are also the two drugs where policy has fared the worst: having risen steadily and dramatically in the case of cocaine, or in the case of heroin, risen up until 2001/2 and then stabilised. There is no good way to spin this – a dramatic rise or stabilisation at a perilous and unprecedented high is NOT a policy success, especially when the key strategc goal of ten years ago – which literally billions of pounds has been thrown at - was a significant reduction. All the other ‘successes’, the marginal falls in ecstasy, amphetamine, LSD, cannabis use and so on, pale into insignificance next to this monumental disaster where it really matters.

I am particularly heartened that drug misuse among young people has fallen by over a fifth in the last ten years.

Again, as discussed elsewhere in the blog we can use the same tables to show that, for example, the proportion of 11 year olds reporting ever using drugs has risen by 1400% since the start of the drug strategy. Hardly cause for popping the champagne.

More and more people are entering and staying in drug treatment. Nearly four-fifths of the 181,000 people who underwent drug treatment programmes in the last financial year completed their programmes.

Process indicators again. Meaningful outcomes, such as the shockingly high reoffending rates, are completely ignored (because they are mostly very bad indeed). Throwing money at treatment services can easily give you good throughput numbers, but says nothing about outcomes. Coaker should be given an award from the cherry pickers guild.

Despite these successes, I am keenly aware the debate over drugs remains highly charged and the challenge for government is to navigate a way through competing demands. I fully understand the strong emotions involved; but too often the debate is framed in extreme terms – some people argue for legalisation while others argue for tough enforcement – leaving little space for a rational debate in the centre ground. For example, in recent months we have heard from people who think drug legalisation would be the answer to solving the social problems associated with drug misuse. On the other hand, I do not have to go far to hear from people who call loudly for even tougher enforcement against drug dealers and drug users.

Since Transform is the only organisation in the UK calling for legalisation and regulation I have to assume Coaker is, to some extent at least, talking about us. He mentions legalisation three times in this short piece, which I have to take as a promising sign that they are worried – they see the rational arguments for pragmatic moves towards regulated markets as a threat to the crumbling prohibitionist status quo. His response: to portray the position as an extremist one by equating it with the get tough enforcers, and then failing to engage with the critique of prohibition's failure or the detailed and nuanced debate about alternative policy, as espoused in Transform's (amongst others’) analysis.

Coaker's comments closely echo those made by Roger Howard a few weeks ago on 5Live, launching the new UKDPC:

“There are some very simplistic solutions put around. One argument is: let's legalise everything. Well we've only got to look at alcohol and tobacco, and the huge problems that are there. There is no simple solution there. The other school says bang 'em all up, put 'em away and throw away the key. That doesn't work either. We need to have a mature debate.”

These comments represent defensive positions that are based on undermining others who think differently. Ironically they actually entrench the perception that there is a polarised debate in the minds of the public, even though this reflects media rather than intellectual debate in this area . This is particularly galling for Transform given that this apparently polarised scenario is entirely different from that portrayed in our published materials, clearly unread by either Coaker or Howard. Moreover, Transform has recently been one of the founder members of the Drugs and Health Alliance – that, as part of its attempt to engage a 'mature debate' and attempt to navigate the 'centre ground' avoids the prohibition/regulation debate altogether. Furthermore, 'legalisation' is neither an ideological position nor an end in itself. It is a process of moving from the straight jacket of prohibition to flexible and responsive systems of public health-led regulation of different drug markets based on evidence of effectiveness. And thence to genuine attempts to address the underlying problems that lead to drug misuse.

Others will refer to drug policies abroad, whether in the Netherlands, Sweden or the United States, and say we should adopt the extreme policies of zero-tolerance or legalisation. Each country has to tailor the drug strategy that is appropriate to its own culture, history and traditions.

And out of the three countries mentioned the UK basis it policy on that of the one that is the most spectacular disaster: the US. And, not forgetting the Government’s desire to get tough on ‘causes’ of problems – it was the UK and the US who propped up the bottom of the league table of twenty one industrialised nations for child wellbeing in a recent UNICEF report.

But the truth is that any drug strategy cannot succeed without a comprehensive approach that focuses on enforcement, education, early intervention and treatment. Tough enforcement stops criminals and takes harmful drugs out of circulation;

No it doesn't – drugs are demonstrably cheaper and more available than ever before, not that Coaker would mention this widely acknowledged fact. Added to which, all the evidence-based analysis shows that it is the very enforcement of supply side prohibition that creates the gargantuan criminal drugs market and the wealthy gangsters who run it (See the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit drugs report 2003).

education empowers young people with knowledge of the harms caused by drugs; early intervention with vulnerable groups in order to prevent them from becoming drawn into drug misuse and treatment improves individual lives, and cuts crime and anti-social behaviour.

One sentence I wouldn't disagree with. Shame though that two thirds of the drugs budget goes into futile and counterproductive enforcement and interdiction efforts. The very initiative that serves to marginalize further the vulnerable groups that Coaker claims to be so keen on helping. Which leads nicely into the most shameless bit of spin in the entire piece:

Our latest figures show that more than 15,300kg of cocaine and 2,200kg of heroin were taken out of the supply chain in 2005/06. Almost 200 illegal criminal gangs were disrupted and £30 million of drug related assets were seized.

Coaker fails to mention here, of course, that the illegal drugs trade is created in the first instance by the UK’s commitment to global prohibition in the first instance. It is the futile attempt to eradicate production and supply in the face of rampant demand that has gifted one of the largest commodities trades on earth to organized criminals (again, see Tony Blair's Strategy Unit drugs report 2003).

That matters. I know, when I meet people in my constituency and elsewhere, that people want tough action on dealers, the people who drag down their communities.

Whilst I'm quite sure that Coaker's consituents care about dealing in their communities he is being dishonest and willfully misleading when he suggests the impressive sounding seizures and the number of criminal gangs disrupted will make the slightest bit of difference. Seizures have been consistently shown to be entirely irrelevant to overall supply, (which in an unregulated and highly profitable market, will always keep pace with demand, as has been explored numerous times on this blog). Drugs, as already discussed, are acknowledged - even by the Home Office - to be cheaper and more available than ever before, and suggesting supply side success in this context is, to my mind, the most shameless and deceitful of all the Home Office drugs spin. Supply controls have spectacularly failed by any reasonable measure and dressing this shocking and expensive failure up as success does the debate about 'what works' no favours at all.

However, as a former teacher I know that drug education has a significant role to play. We no longer wag the finger at young people and tell them simply not to do drugs. Instead, through the multimedia FRANK campaign, we empower young people by warning them of the harms caused by drugs and the risks involved with drug misuse, targeting vulnerable young people who are most at risk and providing specialist interventions for young people with developing drug problems. This approach has paid dividends with drug misuse falling among young people. After a decade of success, we are looking to renew our Drug Strategy and will shortly consult on the way forward for coming years.

If they already think, before any real review or consultation process, that the last strategy was 'a decade of success', what hope is there for any fresh ideas or real change?

I want to hear fresh ideas on how we can enhance the drug strategy, but I am clear that I want to focus on what works: enforcement, education, early intervention and treatment. In talking to drug treatment professionals it is evident to me that drug classification is important in setting out the legal framework for drug control. It has stood the test of time

Given the battering the classification system has taken by the Police Foundation, the Home Affairs Select Committee, Drugscope and Turning Point, the RSA report, Coaker’s own senior advisors published in the Lancet, and most devastatingly by the Science and Technology Committee last year – this comment about 'standing the test of time' is nothing short of risible. It also comes after John Reid rejected a review of the system, that had been recommended by everyone from the previous Home Secretary, the ACMD, various select committees, NGOs, indpendent policy commissions – in fact everyone who has ever been asked who is not Vernon Coaker or John Reid.

and I want to focus on the most important aspects of tackling drug misuse: how we can enforce the law against dealers and supplies; how we can empower our young people with knowledge of the harms illegal drugs cause; and how we can provide treatment most effectively so that even more drug misusers are treated for the benefit of them and their communities.

This strategy has worked and I want to enhance it. I remain fully committed to our strategy of enforcement, education, early intervention and treatment, focusing at all stages on harm reduction. Working together, we can reduce even further the harm caused by illegal drugs.

Rounded off with some tried and tested platitudes and repetition of existing policies.

I have to say this does not inspire confidence that the consultation process for the new strategy will be a meaningful one, or that anyone who suggests any change in the preordained 'direction of travel' will be listened to. If this is the level of engagement and honesty we can look forward to, we should all be extremely worried.

thanks to Drink and Drug news

Drugs and Health Alliance: Launches Today

Our criminal justice approach to drugs has failed. The priority is public health, says new alliance of drug charities

A new Alliance of drug charities launches today in London, calling on the Government to put public health, harm reduction and tackling poverty and exclusion at the heart of UK drug policy.

The Drugs and Health Alliance (DHA) is a group of organisations and individuals who support an evidence-based, public health-led approach to dealing with illegal drugs. An overwhelming body of evidence shows that the criminal justice-led approach to illicit drugs at home and abroad increases harms associated with their production, supply and use, whilst public health-led approaches consistently reduce harm. For many years there has been reluctance from the voluntary sector to criticise policy, because of their reliance on government funding; problems that are perpetuated by the Government’s failure to conduct an evidence-based review of the progress of the UK drug strategy and its failure to consult with informed public opinion.

In 2007, the UK ten-year drug strategy comes to an end and a window of opportunity opens. DHA supporters want to be included in the policy development process to assist in putting in place an effective strategy for the next decade.

Where:
Romney Room
Royal Society of Arts (RSA)
8 John Adam Street
London WC2N 6EZ

When:
Thursday 3 May, 11:00 am

To attend:
contact 0117 9415810

Danny Kushlick (Director, Transform Drug Policy Foundation) spokesperson for DHA said:

“Ten years ago the Government brought in an ex police officer (Keith Hellawell) as drug czar, to head up the UK drug strategy. A decade down the line, the evidence of the failure of our enforcement-led approach is all too apparent. In no other area of policy-making would we dream of criminalising recreation on the one hand and disadvantage and distress on the other. DHA is calling for the upcoming drug strategy to reallocate resources away from enforcement and towards a public health approach to drugs. It is truly criminal that the Government has not seen fit to publicly audit the enforcement approach to drugs and compare it with health interventions.”

Professor Gerry Stimson (Executive Director of IHRA) said:

"This government's first war was a war on drugs – one that rumbles on with a growing role call of casualties. The mistake was to move responsibility for drugs policy to the Home Office rather than the appropriate health agency, and to downgrade health targets whilst focussing almost exclusively on crime reduction. It's time to refocus drugs policy, and get back to dealing with the evidence of what works at reducing harm for users and the wider community."

David Liddell (Scottish Drugs Forum) said:

“The UK has one of the highest drug problems per head of population in Europe. It’s therefore crucially important that any new strategy recognises the causal factors of poverty and exclusion as an integral aspect that we must address if we are to make a substantial impact on the problem in the years ahead.”

Martin Blakeborough (Director Kaleidoscope Project and member of the Advisory Council on Misuse of Drugs) said:

“Kaleidoscope believes the health of drug users must be the priority and therefore welcomes the launch of DHA. It is clear that in the past ten years the priority has been community safety at the expense of the basic health care and human rights of illicit drug users. The upcoming review of UK strategy provides the opportunity to change this.”

Sebastian Saville (Executive Director Release) said:

“It is becoming increasingly apparent that more and more mainstream groups now readily accept that many of the harms associated with illicit drug use are in fact caused or exacerbated by the present legal system, rather than the drugs themselves. The ‘crime reduction agenda’ has meant that civil liberties and public health have increasingly taken a back seat in drug policy. It is time for a change.”

Daren Garratt (The Alliance) said:

“The Alliance is proud to be a partner, supporter and contributing member of the Drugs and Health Alliance. The Government's 10-Year Drug Strategy and its continued focus on the target-driven criminalisation of drug use and drug users, has only proved to increase the harm, stigma and alienation experienced by one of the most marginalised sectors of our communities. We welcome the work of the DHA and call for a pragmatic, non-discriminatory, evidence based drug policy that reestablishes the holistic health and social needs of the individual drug user as its core objective.”

Paul Crawford Walker (SHA) said:

“As a public health practitioner the launch of DHA is very welcome as the public health community has long realised that the only sensible approach to drug misuse policy is one which involves a public health perspective and framework rather than a repressive criminal justice one. I am confident that the Alliance will make a real difference to how drug misuse is regarded and dealt with in this country."

Debra Lapthorne, Director of Public Health, Plymouth said:

“Plymouth Public Health Development Unit is pleased to be contributing to the DHA. We welcome the inclusive approach the DHA represents and look forward to a time when some of the most marginalised and stigmatized groups in our communities can enjoy sustainable well being. The Public Health approach which the DHA embodies gives a real opportunity to deliver drug policy based on sound evidence rather than fear and prejudice.”

Neil Hunt (UKHRA) said:

“The 10 year strategy has brought important improvements but leaves much undone. For a supposedly 'evidence-based' drug strategy we have a dearth of evidence. There is an urgent need to examine and evaluate more progressive approaches to preventing drug problems that move beyond the current, crude enforcement approach. At the same time, we need to strengthen and refine the assorted harm reduction-based treatment approaches that have been shown to work."

Notes to editors

Media contact: Danny Kushlick 07970 174747

For further info: www.drugshealthalliance.net

Member organisations:
The Alliance, the Beckley Foundation, the International Harm Reduction Association, the Kaleidoscope Project, Release, Transform Drug Policy Foundation, the Socialist Health Alliance, Plymouth Public Health Development Unit and the UK Harm Reduction Alliance.

Individuals:
Dr Brian Iddon MP, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Drugs Misuse Group and a member of the Science and Technology Select Committee.

Drugs and Health Alliance Consensus Statement

The Drugs and Health Alliance is a group of organisations and individuals who support an evidence-based, public health-led approach to dealing with illegal drugs. An overwhelming body of evidence shows that the criminal justice-led approach to illicit drugs at home and abroad increases harms associated with their production, supply and use, whilst public health-led approaches consistently reduce harm.

For many years there has been reluctance from the voluntary sector to criticise policy, because of their reliance on government funding; problems that are perpetuated by the Government's failure to conduct an evidence based review of the progress of the UK drug strategy and its failure to consult with informed public opinion.

In 2007, the UK ten-year drug strategy comes to an end and a window of opportunity opens. DHA supporters want to be included in the policy development process to assist in putting in place an effective strategy for the next decade.

1998-2007 An overwhelming criminal justice approach:

• Prioritisation of crime reduction over harm reduction
• Over-reliance on enforcement as a route of entry into treatment has operated to the detriment of many problematic users
• Enactment of Drugs Act 2005 and Serious and Organised Crime Act 2005
• Commitment to inflexible and outdated UN Conventions on Drugs and harshly enforced domestic drug laws has created and exacerbated harm
• The consequence of which is punishment and stigmatisation of some of the most vulnerable and excluded members of society

2008-2017 Putting health first:

Drugs are a complex international, social issue that demand a strategic management approach, not a blunt criminal justice one. We believe that a comprehensive, joined up approach to drug policy development and implementation can only be realised if the drugs brief is taken out of its almost exclusive position in the Home Office, enabling us to develop a policy that is truly cross-departmental and placed within a public health framework. This shift would:

• Put public health and harm reduction at the heart of UK drug policy
• Facilitate the development and implementation of evidence based strategies that are more effective at reducing harm
• Deliver improved value for money on drug strategy budgets, as measured against key public health and criminal justice indicators
• Enable more effective cross departmental planning, less shaped by emotive, politicised criminal justice agendas (including health bodies sharing crime reduction performance targets with criminal justice bodies)
• Reduce health inequalities and, by extension, reduce deprivation, improve life chances and reduce offending (all of which are Home Office objectives)
• Reduce some of the counterproductive effects of the international and domestic drugs enforcement strategy

This would, in turn:

• Improve public health outcomes and protect the human rights of drug users
• Enable us to better address the social issues that underlie most problematic use
• Encourage effective efforts to reduce the progression from use to problematic use
• Direct resources into helping some of the most vulnerable and excluded members of society
  

DHA is calling on Government to;

• Prioritise public health goals
• Implement a truly cross-departmental, public health-led strategy and place the lead role in the relevant health agencies
• Commission an independent audit of outcomes against expenditure comparing public health with criminal justice approaches
• Hold an official cross-departmental consultation on the efficacy of criminal justice and public health approaches
• Reallocate drug strategy expenditure from criminal justice to public health

DHA also calls for:

A quadripartite select committee to be convened to conduct an enquiry into UK and international drug policy, the National Audit Office to conduct a value for money study of enforcement outcomes and the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs to review the drug strategy and suggest reforms.

What we plan to do:

The DHA will produce briefings and discussion documents, hold seminars and brief policy makers, press and voluntary sector organisations on the benefits of an evidence-based, public health-led approach to dealing with drugs.

What you can do:

• Join the DHA by signing up your organisation to thegrowing list of members - This can be done by contacting the DHA Secretariat on (0117) 941 5810.
• Become active within your field by campaigning for, and promoting the work and goals of the DHA.

.