UPROAD OVER PLAN TO SEIZE DRUG (CANNABIS) HOMES

THE home secretary has sparked a row with fellow ministers by proposing to
allow police to seize the homes of cannabis users if they are deemed to be a
"serious nuisance".

Leaked cabinet papers reveal David Blunkett's plans to amend his Anti-social
Behaviour Bill so that police could close and seal premises associated with
soft drugs for up to three months.

Under the original plans the police would have power only over "crack
houses" or sites linked with class A hard drugs.

In a letter to cabinet colleagues, the home secretary says he has been
"convinced" of the need to extend the powers to class B and C drugs, which
include amphetamines, barbiturates, anabolic steroids and some
tranquillisers.

The documents reveal that his plans have encountered opposition from the
health and housing departments. They have warned that the plans would send
out "confusing messages" to youngsters, alienate black people and mean
having to find new accommodation for those whose homes have been seized.

Blunkett's move also appears to fly in the face of his pledge to downgrade
cannabis from class B to C, which some have interpreted as an easing of the
law on "recreational" use.

Last night the Home Office appeared to backtrack after the plans were leaked
to The Sunday Times. A spokesman said they were something the home secretary
had been "looking at" but was unlikely to take forward.

But in a letter to John Prescott, chairman of the cabinet domestic affairs
committee, dated June 4, Blunkett admitted that parliament was split on the
issue but said he has been persuaded to widen police powers.

"Reflecting on this debate I am minded to make a government amendment to the
bill to strengthen its powers to include all classes of illegal drugs," he
wrote.

"This would ensure that where such premises are associated with serious
nuisance related to class B or C drugs they could be effectively controlled
using these powers.

"I have become convinced that such an extension also offers an appropriate
additional control to premises used for illegal drug supply, such as
'cannabis cafes'.

"Where the production, sale or use of class B or C drugs is associated with
serious nuisance, these premises could then be closed, as with premises
where class A drugs are involved. The intent of the power remains the same
- -- to rid communities of serious nuisance and protect them from the dangers
of drugs. Where there is serious nuisance it should be irrelevant what
class of drugs is causing it."

Melanie Johnson, the new public health minister, expressed doubts about the
plans. "I have serious concerns about the possible impact that the extension
of these powers to class B and C drugs may have, as suggested," she wrote
last Monday.

"The main objective of the national drug strategy is class A drugs, ie
cocaine, crack, heroin and ecstasy. Focusing on a wider range of drugs could
divert priorities and funds away from the tackling of class A drugs, which
evidence shows costs the greatest amount of harm. It could also send
confusing messages to young people about which drugs cause the greatest
dangers and harms.

"Young people or members of black and ethnic minority communities in
particular may react very negatively if they believe the premises they use
are targeted by these new powers. This may result in hostility towards wider
local action on drugs, to public order issues or towards local drug
prevention or treatment services."

A further salvo has been fired by Lord Rooker, the housing minister. In his
response, dated June 12, he wrote: "Class B and C drug use is less often
associated with problems of serious nuisance. In order for the power to
remain properly targeted there must be no weakening of this serious nuisance
criterion.

"How many additional properties do you estimate will be subject to closure
in this wider power? There will also be a possible requirement to house
people made homeless and for temporary management of property during this
period."

Yesterday Blunkett's plan was criticised by race campaigners. Lee Jasper,
race adviser to Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, said: "This sounds
like a gimmick. The sheer scale of class C drug use would mean huge amounts
of people could effectively be evicted. But this is not only an ethnic
minority issue as class C drug use is widespread across all communities.

"At the same time the government is declassifying cannabis, it is
introducing draconian levels of punishment for possession. This approach is
completely inconsistent."

In July 2002 Blunkett announced cannabis would be reclassified from class B
to C after senior police officers complained of the time wasted by officers
in dealing with comparatively minor users of the drug. The changes are still
going through parliament and are likely to take effect later this summer.

Instead of a blanket downgrading of the offence of possession, police will
still be able to arrest drug users in circumstances such as refusing to hand
over the cannabis, threatening violence or smoking it in plain sight of
children. The reclassification means police can issue on-the-spot warnings
as opposed to formal cautions, thus freeing up resources for combating more
serious drug use.

The leaked correspondence between the ministers

David Blunkett, home secretary, June 4 "The intent of the power remains the
same - to rid communities of serious nuisance and protect them from the
dangers of drugs. Where there is serious nuisance it should be irrelevant
what class of drugs is causing it."

Lord Rooker, housing minister, June 12 "There will also be a possible
requirement to house people made homeless." Melanie Johnson, public health
minister, June 16 "I have serious concerns...members of black and ethnic
minority communities in particular may react very negatively if they believe
the premises they use are targeted."