Home Affairs Committee - Drugs: Breaking the CycleWritten evidence submitted by Simon Eldridge Lent [DP163]
This is written without prejudice or malice.
I am willing to give oral evidence.
I have a BSc (Hons) Network Systems this area of expertise has no relation to drugs.
Please take a moment to think about the words that you are using to describe the problem. Certain words are “loaded”, these words carry connotations with them that are not grounded in reality and tend to be more emotive. Examples of these loaded words are Cancer, Terrorism and Drugs. When the doctor tells the patient “you have cancer”, the first response of the patient is “I’m going to die”. We do not get a mild touch of cancer. Unfortunately when governments and their associate bodies use terms like “Drug Policy” and “War on Drugs” they fall into the same mindset. This usage of the generic term drugs relates to a wide variety of substances with varying degrees of harm, yet they are all combined into a single catch-all phrase with no separation of the actual substances involved.
I will attempt to provide my recommendation to the questions the Committee are looking at from a network engineer’s logical unbiased approach to dealing with a network.
Networks Relate to Connections
1. These connections distribute information. How and where this information gets to any point is determined by a person or team made responsible for the network.It is your decision on this delicate issue that may change how our UK network functions and its efficiency and running costs.
2. My recommendations for some changes to our network are listed in this paper. The extent to which the Government’s 2010 drug strategy is a “fiscally responsible policy with strategies grounded in science, health, security and human rights” in line with the recent recommendation by the Global Commission on Drug Policy.
3. Drug use and abuse can only be related to health issues, factual evidence for this is surely not needed as it is common sense that tells us so, so why is the Home office responsible for this policy?
4. The policy and administration is obviously being dealt with by the wrong administrator in the network and access rights need to be reassigned for efficiency. How can criteria for efficacy be set by the Home Office for an issue that is as stated a health issue.
5. The present position of the Government relies on prohibition. This is a highly expensive option and the only winners seem to be the smugglers, criminal gangs and arms dealers. It is also totally ineffective as witness the explosion of drug usage around the world. Fiscally it would be cheaper for Governments to buy the drugs from the farmers at source, thus eliminating the criminal enterprises and allowing the farmer to provide for his family. This would also free up the local police forces to concentrate on problems affecting their local communities. The very fact that drug production and supply are criminal activities is the very reason that criminal gangs and terrorist organisations find them so lucrative. If the growers and suppliers did not have to deal with criminals and criminal activity then there is no reason for Organised Crime/Terrorists to become involved thereby reducing crime and saving money. The added bonus is that the farmers at source will actually receive fair prices for their crops.
6. On a network for efficiency the drugs policy would be moved from the Home Office administration to the Heath Service administration to redress network traffic and balance the network load.
7. I have tried various drugs on my journey to get here, most being legal and others illegal. I have also used alcohol. A mind altering substance that for some reason has no classification or real regulation and is not considered a drug widely used and accepted in our network. This is problem that I am sure would be addressed, viewed and dealt with differently by the Health Service administration.
8. Should we not allow the Health Service administration to be assigned the management of the drugs and alcohol in our network freeing up time and energy for the home office to deal with other important issues such as the Policing and Immigration.
9. The present position of the Government relies on prohibition. This is a highly expensive option and the only winners seem to be the smugglers, criminal gangs and arms dealers. It is also totally ineffective as witness the explosion of drug usage around the world. Fiscally it would be cheaper for Governments to buy the drugs from the farmers at source, thus eliminating the criminal enterprises and allowing the farmer to provide for his family. This would also free up the local police forces to concentrate on problems affecting their local communities. The very fact that drug production and supply are criminal activities is the very reason that criminal gangs and terrorist organisations find them so lucrative. If the growers and suppliers did not have to deal with criminals and criminal activity then there is no reason for Organised Crime/Terrorists to become involved thereby reducing crime and saving money. The added bonus is that the farmers at source will actually receive fair prices for their crops.
10. It is obvious to all but the administrators of our network that alcohol is a drug and needs to have classifications and policies set by the Health Service. The Government has access to a large amount of expert advice yet it chooses to ignore this and pursue policies which are contrary to the advice given. This was put forward in a paper by Professor Nutt, an expert and professional in the drugs field. Professor Nutt compiled a list of drugs showing the harm caused but since this showed that alcohol and tobacco came at the top of list (most harmful) the report was dismissed along with Professor Nutt. If the government is serious about gathering information and reforming the drug policy then it has to listen and take on board the findings of these reports.
11. If all drugs were legal and dispensed the policing of drugs would not be needed and budget for policing could all be dedicated to crime and not wasted dealing with people who are in need of medical expertise. The present position of the Government relies on prohibition. This is a highly expensive option and the only winners seem to be the smugglers, criminal gangs and arms dealers. It is also totally ineffective as witness the explosion of drug usage around the world. Fiscally it would be cheaper for Governments to buy the drugs from the farmers at source, thus eliminating the criminal enterprises and allowing the farmer to provide for his family. This would also free up the local police forces to concentrate on problems affecting their local communities. The very fact that drug production and supply are criminal activities is the very reason that criminal gangs and terrorist organisations find them so lucrative. If the growers and suppliers did not have to deal with criminals and criminal activity then there is no reason for Organised Crime/Terrorists to become involved thereby reducing crime and saving money. The added bonus is that the farmers at source will actually receive fair prices for their crops.
12. Our network has had a great deal of misinformation released into it regarding all drugs. Surely it is the Information must be fact based and issued by the Health Office, not by a uniformed Home Office that cannot see that alcohol is a drug. I am confident that 99.9% of the British public if asked would confirm alcohol is a drug if asked.
13. The health and safety of our network in relation to Drugs is without doubt in the hands of the wrong official administration at the present time. The illegality of drugs creates an underground network that drives prices up and quality down. If drugs were a doctors concern and not a police matter sick people would be helped and not imprisoned thus releasing a lot of funds and resources required for incarceration in the present network structure. If legal the connection to organized crime and terrorism would disappear as the government of our network would have new funds raised from the sale of drugs to enable an injection of funds for dispersal to where it might be needed.
14. Our Network must support its Global network and look at our partners for factual evidence of how the various policy changes in each have worked so as we may see how effective individual states policy may help in the administration of our network.
15. Transferring the drug policy administration to the Health Service as has been suggested the Health Authority should be given a leading role in determining drug policy. The whole system should be taken out of the hands of the police force, and placed with Government Bodies that understand the problems. A Licensing Regime along the lines of the existing policy governing alcohol and tobacco could be introduced. This will have a massive effect on releasing Police resources and minimise the criminal aspects of the policy.
16. Possible solutions, a transference of power to the health authorities, a reclassification of drugs depending on the level of harm and a licensing regime to generate income which can then be used in other areas of the policy including education and control.
February 2012