Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20
- 24)
TUESDAY 9 JUNE 2009
PROFESSOR JOHN
STRANG
Q20 David T C Davies: Do you have
any views as to why increasing numbers of people are using cocaine?
Is it to do with the price or availability or social changes?
Professor Strang: In a way what
is puzzling is why it occurs in some countries and not others
and in some cities to a greater extent than others. Part of that
is to do with trade routes; part of it is also to do with price
and availability. Beyond that I am struggling, along with the
rest of the world.
Q21 Mr Winnick: Professor, the Chairman
asked you at the beginning of the session about any increase in
cocaine and apparently, from information which we have, the use
of cocaine is now more than four times higher than it was, say,
ten years ago. Does that surprise you?
Professor Strang: It does not
surprise me. I was aware of those changing trends. I come back
to my earlier response that one has to hold those two sets of
data in one's mind simultaneously: the changing prevalence of
use, what is occurring with the general population. The British
Crime Survey also breaks it down into the adult population as
a whole and I frighteningly see that "adult" takes you
up to 59, which makes me very nervous now. It separately gives
you young people, which is up to 24. You can look at those two
different bits and then you separately have lots of people having
an impact on the treatment system saying "I'm in a mess,
can you help me with it?". You have to be familiar with both
of those and to reconcile the two.
Q22 Mr Winnick: May I put this point
to you? Critics of the existing law say it does not simply work
any more. I am not necessarily taking the same view. They point
to the United States in the 1930s and say "Look what prohibition
did for alcohol. It gave every motive for gangsters to make huge
profits" and the rest of it. Moreover, if drug dealers had
a vote in the House of Commons, they would certainly vote in favour
of the existing law. Do you take a view yourself that existing
legislation simply is not working and in some respects is even
counterproductive?
Professor Strang: I think you
are taking me way outside my area of particular expertise. If
I may again say, during the course of your deliberations this
drug policy and public good book should come out at the end of
the year and has a whole section about how one looks at legislation,
legal frameworks and looks at the different case studies around
the world of countries which have chosen to vary it. The only
point I would add at this stage is that it is not as simple as
having prohibition or legalisation. The law may be an ass, but
it can sometimes be quite a subtle ass, to quote one of my colleagues.
You can look at ways in which you apply the law which may be less
draconian than they were, issues about the extent to which severe
prison sentences or mild prison sentences or custodial versus
non-custodial sentences are different from a binary view that
it is either completely legal or completely illegal.
Q23 Mr Winnick: Could it be argued
in favour of the existing position that it might at least deter
some people who do not want to break the law, though all the evidence
seems to suggest that people would take cocaine and other drugs
regardless of any prohibition?
Professor Strang: There is no
question that the illegality of a substance is a major deterrent
to its use, whatever different commentators may say. All of the
evidence is that that is part of what does have a deterrent effect
and one would have to presume that if legal constraints were taken
away the level of use would almost certainly increase.
Q24 Mr Winnick: Do you believe that
to be the case?
Professor Strang: Yes. Certainly
we know that with other similar addictive substances like alcohol
and tobacco, as you alter constraints, price constraints as well
as social constraints, the population level of use goes up and
down. I would presume that the same is as true in this marketplace
as in those marketplaces.
Chairman: Professor Strang, thank you
very much for your evidence today. It may well be that during
the course of our inquiry, which begins today and will go on until
October of this year, we may need to write to you about certain
information or you may feel it is appropriate to write to us based
on some of the evidence that you may hear. We would be very happy
to hear from you. We are very grateful to you for coming to give
evidence today.
| 
