REDUCING THE DRUG TOLL

Harm Reduction Is Better Than Amnesties

Two more young people have died using ecstasy - and a third has been in
critical condition. Sensibly, the Metropolitan police called an immediate
amnesty. They appealed to clubbers who were still in possession of the drug
bought during a south London rave to hand in any tablets to help identify
suspected contaminants. Yesterday, on the completion of toxicology tests,
pharmacists concluded contaminants were not to blame. A much more basic
cause of death was being investigated: a lack of adequate ventilation on a
particular hot night with an inadequate supply of cold water. The tragedy
appears to have been triggered when the club was ordered to shut its side
doors at 3.30am because of complaints by local residents about the noise level.

The local council agrees that noise control officers were called, but
because of the police investigation into the deaths, will not comment
further. Earlier they had expressed confidence in the venue's new company
because of the im provements it had introduced - "permanent electrics, fire
alarms, toilets, emergency exits and CCTV". There were several items
missing from that list: the site itself (was it too close to residents?);
first aid teams standing by; sufficient bar staff to ensure an adequate
supply of water; and proper quality control of suspect drugs. Any Dutch
club would have been required to meet strict standards on these fronts too.
A new home secretary, who has already signalled a cautious welcome to a
more permissive police approach to cannabis, needs to look at ecstasy too.
At least 10% of people aged 16 to 29 have tried the drug. The energy it
provides means young people feel they are getting full value for rave entry
fees. Dutch pragmatism is saving lives. The drug is illegal, but users are
not prosecuted. State-funded drug advisory officers even go to clubs to
test the strength and purity of drugs being bought. Harm reduction is a
much more fruitful approach than belated amnesties.