Speech by Simon Hughes MP, Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary, proposing motion on Drugs at Liberal Democrat Conference in Manchester on 9 March 2002

It is a privilege to be opening this very important debate.

Important to hundreds and thousands of people in the country Important for effective criminal justice.

Important if we are serious about improving law and order

This is a debate that a previous conference asked for It follows a very serious piece work by a Federal Policy Committee working party

And to Joan Walmsley who chaired it, to all the members of the committee, the staff and to those who gave evidence we say thank you. The report is in front of you. I commend it as a balanced, realistic and well argued report. And out of this report, the motion comes to conference to set out the direction which the policy committee and I believe is right for the party to take. I hope therefore we can make a decision on the motion as a whole today whatever decision we reach on the three options.

I should make clear that the policy paper is our formal response to the Runciman report on reform of UK drugs laws, which is what we were asked to produce. The Runciman report did not seek to cover all drugs issues and nor do we today. Therefore, international production and trade in drugs are among the matters we expect to return to on a future occasion. This paper therefore is about changes in the law and policy which could be brought about now in the UK.

The UK is a signatory to international conventions on narcotics. As a party committed to international agreement wherever possible it would therefore be wrong for us to propose changes to law nationally which would be in breach of our obligations internationally. Our proposals on criminal sanctions for using drugs are explicitly framed, on advice, to be compatible with international law.

Conference, let’s be absolutely clear. We are not naïve about the dangers of drugs in our society. Our liberal philosophical tradition does mean that we believe that government should only seek use coercion against the individual to prevent harm to others or society as a whole.

This paper is consistent with that philosophy. But this is not a paper which is philosophically motivated. This is not a debate motivated by some simplistic libertarian notion that anything goes. It is motivated by the real and pressing need for a more effective policy to reduce the widespread harm and destruction caused by drugs.

It is about the sort of personal tragedies we have again read about and seen in national newspaper in recent weeks. Or all too real examples such the constituent who came into my surgery before Christmas who had spent 14 years trapped in desperate addiction. And thousands of people like them.

We understand the powerfully destructive effect drugs can have. Liberal Democrats are absolutely committed to find ways to reduce that harm and destruction.

The fact is that current drugs law are not working The UK has one of the most punitive approaches to drugs in Europe. But according to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Abuse the UK has one of the highest levels of drug use and misuse in Europe.

Over half of 16 year olds have tried an illegal drug. One third of 16 to 24 year olds have used an illegal drug in the last year. Nearly one is five will have used illegal drugs in the last month. More worryingly One in eight 11 to 15 year olds will have used illegal drugs in the last year; One in ten will have used illegal drugs in the last month It is estimated that there 270,000 hard drug users in the UK. The average age for heroin use has gone down in the UK (it is now 26) whereas in other European countries it has gone up, notably in the Netherlands (where it is now 39).

The greatest increase in hard drug use in the UK in recent years is among the under 21s. The number of convictions for drug offences has risen sharply. Yet the number of ‘hard’ drug addicts has rocketed. Whether because of the social impact, the financial impact, the link to crime, there is a growing realisation, not only in this party, that drugs policy must be reassessed.

The current law nether adequately deters people from drug use nor effectively maximises the chance of effective treatment. If the law is not working then how should we approach reform? I know that we will be having this afternoon a real debate. We as a party are not afraid have this debate in an open and honest way. But while there will be some differences of specific position today , I believe there are key principles in this paper which from today Liberal Democrats will all feel increasingly confident to support – and with which the country will increasingly agree.

Treatment and prevention should be the priority for individuals who use drugs. By contrast, the criminal law should be directed at the organised thugs and pushers who run the illegal drugs trade. Harmful drug use should be responded to primarily as a health issue.

We need a more intelligent response to the users, and potential users, of drugs - we should be getting users off drugs not into prison. Education and treatment need to be the priority. There is nothing more self defeating than making those who seek or are referred for treatment for their drug problems to wait weeks and often months. It is simply madness when it is not just in the individual’s in interest to get treatment as soon as possible, it is also in society’s interest to break the cycle which links drugs and crime.

By contrast, the sharp end of the criminal law should be focused on the rough end of the drugs problem. As we are regularly told the criminal justice resources are overstretched. The overstretched police, the courts and prisons should be used to deal with the organised, often ruthless and relentless criminals who make their livings from harmful trade. To help break the link between drug users and the crime they resort to to pay for their habits, and to break the link between drug users and the criminals who sell their drugs. Specifically, to focus treatment on users and break that link, we propose specialist heroin prescription and treatment clinics we are proposing that simple possession alone of class B or C drugs will not result in a prison sentence, and we propose focusing a greater proportion of resources on treatment and education Specifically to focus the criminal law on the real criminals:

We propose to introduce a new offence of dealing we want to allow the selling of drugs near children to be an aggravating factor in sentencing. we support legislation to confiscate the proceeds of these crimes Just as habits and patterns of behaviour and new drugs come on to the market so of course of the law must respond. Policy must be evidence based.

Moving on from our longstanding call for a Royal Commission we propose a new standing Drugs Commission which would report on legal as well illegal substances and undertake regular independent audits of policy and their social impact.

We do not pretend to have all the answers and recognise that policy needs to move on with time. Nonetheless we believe that there are immediate reforms need to make the law more credible, enforceable and effective. To increase respect for the law, to stop unnecessarily criminalizing otherwise law abiding people, and to help break the link between drugs and crime, we therefore propose that small scale cannabis possession, cultivation and social supply, by adults, should no longer be prosecuted.

The evidence is that cannabis does less harm than many other current illegal drugs, let alone legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco. With so many people using cannabis regularly it is self delusion to pretend that prohibition is working. With amendment 1 in front of us today, conference needs to decide not only whether cannabis should be decriminalised but whether the time has come to seek international agreement to be able to go on to regulate and legalise as well.