STRATEGIES TO TACKLE DRUG ABUSE

From Councillor Dennis Ramshaw

Sir, Drugs and the Law is a major contribution to a vital debate. I
submitted written evidence to the Police Foundation inquiry and made
the point to the Government's drugs "czar" Keith Hellawell that he was
unwise to quickly dismiss chunks of the report out of hand.

He would have done better to have listened to reaction to the report
and taken account of views before announcing his decisions.

No one can be sure of the best way forward on drugs; no one has a
monopoly on knowledge or concern. That is the great value of the
inquiry which produced Drugs and the Law. It provided a significant
opportunity for more daylight to be shone on to the subject. We should
all welcome that, because 30 years after the Misuse of Drugs Act the
situation is bleak. The country is awash with drugs selling at low
prices.

Thirty years of letting the police make the running has not got us
very far, because reducing the use of drugs is not police work. It is
a health and education matter. Reducing the supply of drugs by getting
convictions against drug dealers is a job for the police. They should
stick to it and become better at it.

Yours faithfully, Dennis Ramshaw (Member, Essex Police Authority),
County Hall, Chelmsford CM1 1LX. April 1.

From Mr Brian Galipeau

Sir, Professor Peter Fellgett (letter, March 31) points out that
alcohol was very much linked with crime in the 1920s in the US until
it was decriminalised. The Police Foundation report on drug abuse does
not recognise that the drugs scene has now reached the "speakeasy"
phase of prohibition, when alcohol was freely available yet illegal.
Proposing unspecified tougher action against dealers while signalling
less action against their customers is unjust and irrational.

I believe that in the short term the criminal justice system should
fight the speakeasy culture. In prohibition it is just to require at
least a statutory fixed minimum fine for everyone in possession of
illegal drugs, with a rising scale for quantity and repeat offences.
It is the passing of drugs to friends and workmates that gets people
started on drugs, and there must be no distinction between that and
trafficking.

We do need a new strategy, but it is too soon to set up a royal
commission on illegal drugs, because the Government does not yet have
the political nerve to give it the terms of reference it would need to
challenge prohibition and chart a course though the international
treaties that tie us into it.

Yours sincerely, Brian Galipeau, Old Barbican Cottage, Barbican Hill,
East Looe, Cornwall PL13 1DZ. March 31.

From Dr Alan McLean

Sir, Simon Jenkins (Comment, March 29) is to be congratulated on his
criticism of our absurd drug laws, but I cannot agree with his
labelling of heroin as a very dangerous drug.

The dangers of heroin are related solely to its illegality. Addicts
use impure drugs of unknown strength, inject with filthy syringes and
often rely on prostitution and crime to pay for their habit. The
provision of pharmaceutically pure heroin for addicts removes these
miserable, dangerous aspects of addiction.

Conversely, heavy cannabis smoking is associated with lung cancer and
is probably a more dangerous drug than heroin when taken long term. I
urge your indulging readers to try cannabis cookies instead.

Yours faithfully, Alan Mclean, 3 Broomknowe Terrace, Kilmacolm,
Renfrewshire PA13 4HT. March 29.