logo
Sadiq Khan is right: Britain must decriminalise cannabis – or remain in the dark ages

Sadiq Khan is right: Britain must decriminalise cannabis – or remain in the dark ages

The Guardiana day ago

Yet another attempt to inject sanity into Britain's archaic drug laws has failed. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, last month accepted Lord Falconer's modest proposal to decriminalise the possession of small amounts of cannabis. He was stamped on yet again by that citadel of reaction, the Home Office, and its boss, Yvette Cooper. Falconer's distinguished group of lawyers, doctors and academics did not suggest legalisation. They simply argued that treating people using cannabis as criminals served no purpose. It confused soft drugs with hard, was racially biased in its enforcement, diverted police time from more pressing matters and denied help to those who needed it.
An old game of media interviews is to ask politicians if they have ever taken drugs. Prime ministers from David Cameron and Boris Johnson to Keir Starmer, as well as the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, have either admitted to taking them or refused to deny it. Politicians feel that what the middle classes do at university is harmless fun. If it happens on a council estate, however, it is a route to prison.
The reality is that the divide in Britain is not between those 'in favour' of cannabis and those against. It is between those who care about the impact of criminalisation and those who don't, a subset of whom merely want to sound macho. Decriminalisation in one form or another has been proposed for a quarter of a century. In 2000 the Police Foundation committee on drugs, of which I was a member, advised downgrading cannabis from a class B to a class C drug and in effect decriminalising it – but politicians never followed through. This was despite a poll by the Mirror in 1997 showing that almost two-thirds of the public were then in favour of decriminalisation.
In 2004 cannabis was reduced to class C but not decriminalised. Then, in 2009, Gordon Brown played tough and returned it to class B. The then home secretary sacked the government's drug supremo, Prof David Nutt, for even breathing the word reform. By 2010 there were 43,000 convictions a year for drug possession, more than half of them for cannabis. An internal government report recommended decriminalisation in 2016 but was suppressed. The government even denied a freedom of information request, as if national security were at stake.
The more studies and inquiries recommended reform, the more Whitehall dug in. Courts and jails became increasingly clogged and have remained so ever since. The hottest market for cannabis in Britain is now his majesty's jails.
The UK is adrift in the western world in still wasting billions on its 'war on drugs'. Half of US states have legalised and licensed cannabis, including cities such as New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. In California there are cannabis cafes, cannabis farming estates and even cannabis sommeliers.
Of course there have been problems, not least with hard drugs in libertarian Oregon. New York's licensing system has not worked, with illegal outlets outnumbering legal ones. But no one wants to go back. As it is, more Americans today smoke cannabis than tobacco, including an astonishing five times more among those aged 18 to 34. There has been no noticeable collapse in American people's health. Even Donald Trump favours legalising cannabis for personal use in his home state of Florida.
Other countries, such as Canada and Uruguay, have legalised cannabis. Many more have decriminalised possession, including Portugal, the Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland, Spain and, as of last year, Germany, where individuals can grow and use small quantities.
Plenty of British police forces have also gone down the Falconer route to some degree. There has been de facto decriminalisation in Durham and a number of other forces, as well as a successful but not repeated Metropolitan police trial in Lambeth, south London, in 2001.
Other countries have researched, experimented and innovated. They have found ways to handle cannabis without disaster. Many places, such as Colorado, have taxed it and seen a boost in local revenue. Strong cannabis, or skunk, is bad for you but large numbers of Americans are clearly finding cannabis preferable to tobacco. It is not going away, any more than alcohol or cheeseburgers.
British home secretaries behave like the politics addicts they are. They close their eyes and ears and scream. The real issue in Britain is not drugs. It is the systematic ruining by the state at vast expense of tens of thousands of young lives each year. The damage is done not by cannabis, but by criminalisation, which draws young people into gangs that deal it and from there towards hard drugs and imprisonment.
The result is that society suffers a monster misdirection of police resources. Violent crime in London has increased almost every year for the past decade. There has been a rise in sexual assault, car and phone thefts and petty fraud. Shoplifting in London rose by an extraordinary 54% last year. Imagine how much time the police would have were they not spending so much of it stopping, searching, and testing people for drugs.
Volunteers struggling to combat drug use – defying the government by testing drugs at music festivals, combating Glasgow's drug problem and keeping children out of county lines – have known one thing for the past quarter century. Whatever needs to be done about drugs, the criminal law as enforced in Britain is a useless answer. Police forces and charities have tried to advance decriminalisation against rigid opposition from Whitehall. As for elected mayors and local discretion, forget it. Westminster's contempt for local democracy is unrivalled. The truth is that what is lacking is not more reports or more brains, it is more guts. On drugs, Britain is still in the dark ages.
Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump sends Bessent and Lutnick to haggle with Chinese on tariff war after Xi chat
Trump sends Bessent and Lutnick to haggle with Chinese on tariff war after Xi chat

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump sends Bessent and Lutnick to haggle with Chinese on tariff war after Xi chat

Three members of Donald Trump's cabinet will meet with Chinese officials in London on Monday in an effort to deescalate or resolve the unprovoked trade war which Trump started with Beijing two months ago. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he was 'pleased to announce' that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Lutnick would travel to London along with U.S. Trade Representative Jameson Greer for a sit-down with 'Representatives of China, with reference to the Trade Deal.' He added: 'The meeting should go very well. Thank you for your attention to this matter!'

Is Sir Keir Starmer a Right-wing extremist?
Is Sir Keir Starmer a Right-wing extremist?

Telegraph

time25 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Is Sir Keir Starmer a Right-wing extremist?

Is Sir Keir Starmer KC – Left-wing human rights lawyer, former director of public prosecutions, and Labour Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – a dangerous Right-wing extremist? Common sense, evidence and reality say emphatically not. Government materials issued as part of Prevent training programmes give a less clear answer. The Prime Minister's warning that uncontrolled migration risks turning Britain into an ' island of strangers ' would appear to risk falling foul of the definitions used in a Prevent course taken by thousands of public sector professionals with a duty to make referrals to the scheme. This defines 'cultural nationalism' as a type of extreme Right-wing terrorist ideology, including the belief that 'Western culture is under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups'. Sir Keir is no more an extremist than any other writer who has expressed concern over the unprecedented scale and pace of migration and cultural change in recent years. Why, then, has the Government risked labelling him as such? The short answer is that, riddled with political anxieties over the composition of terrorism in Britain – 80 per cent of the Counter Terrorism Police network's live investigations involved Islamism in 2023, compared with 10 per cent for the extreme Right – Prevent has given the appearance of loosening the definition of the latter in order to provide an artificial 'balance' to its work. As the Shawcross Review found in 2023, the programme has adopted a 'double standard' when dealing with Islamists and the extreme Right. The results have been farcical, with an 'expansive' definition of Right-wing extremism capturing 'mildly controversial or provocative forms of mainstream, Right-wing leaning commentary that have no meaningful connection to terrorism or radicalisation' even while Prevent funded organisations whose leaders have publicly made statements 'sympathetic to the Taliban' and referred to militant Islamists as 'so-called 'terrorists' of the legitimate resistance groups'. Such absurdities might be overlooked if Prevent had also proved ruthlessly effective at preventing atrocities. It has not. Prevent has failed to identify dangerous and violent suspects on multiple occasions, including Southport killer Axel Rudakubana, who was referred and dismissed on three occasions before carrying out his attack. A deradicalisation programme that seems to show less interest in deradicalising potential terrorists than in policing Right-wing thought is unfit for purpose. It beggars belief that two years after the Shawcross Review we are once again having the same conversations. Prevent must be reformed – or if incapable of change, dismantled entirely.

Labour spends £35k on pub beer mats to boast about minimum wage rise
Labour spends £35k on pub beer mats to boast about minimum wage rise

Telegraph

time26 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Labour spends £35k on pub beer mats to boast about minimum wage rise

Labour spent more than £35,000 of taxpayer cash on beer mats in pubs advertising the increase to the national minimum wage, a minister has admitted. The Government sent out promotional material to pubs across the country to tell workers that the minimum wage and national living wage were going up. Justin Madders, the employment minister, rationalised the £35,580 expense as he said the beer mats offered a 'unique opportunity to engage audiences in a social, high-dwell environment where financial conversations naturally occur'. The red and pale blue beer mats were government-branded and said: 'Millions got a pay rise.' 'National minimum and living wages went up on 1st April', it added, and displayed a barcode for customers to scan for details on how to 'make sure you're getting paid correctly'. The employment minister responded to a written question by Richard Holden, the shadow paymaster general, about the cost of the drink mats. He said: 'The cost to advertise in pubs using beer mats was £35,580, which was approved at official level.' He confirmed that the advertising push was approved by the Cabinet Office, and came out of the 2025 National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage campaign budget of £650,000. He added: 'The 2024 campaign saw an increase in reach to eligible workers. However, recognition remained low, reinforcing the need for bolder, more engaging formats for the 2025 campaign, which expected to deliver an estimated 3.2 million impressions. 'It offered a unique opportunity to engage audiences in a social, high-dwell environment where financial conversations naturally occur. 'This setting encourages discussion and word-of-mouth sharing about rate changes and offers an effective nudge for audiences to 'check their pay'.' 'We will be ruthless' Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have both pledged a war on waste in Whitehall, with the Government having taken such moves as freezing government credit cards and abolishing NHS England. The Prime Minister said in October: 'We will also be ruthless in clamping down on government waste, just as we will be ruthless on clamping down on tax avoidance ', emphasising the intention to show so the British people that 'every penny counts'. He added: 'Every single person in this country had to do that during the cost-of-living crisis and government must be no different.' The national living wage for those aged 21 and over rose from £11.44 per hour to £12.21 per hour, an increase of 6.7 per cent. The national minimum wage for those between 18 and 20 went up from £8.60 to £10 per hour, a 16.3 per cent boost. The Government has also begun to name and shame firms that do not pay their workers the appropriate wages, demanding they pay back what they owe and in some instances a further financial penalty.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store