Government knows more about science than scientists

One candidate for the new and improved ACMD

One possible candidate for the new ACMD

As previously reported by SSY, the government isn’t generally too keen on scientific advice when it comes to formulating drug policy. When the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, and independent body advising the government on drugs legislation, recommended against Cannabis being reclassified as a class B drug, the Labour government went ahead and done it anyway. When the same body said that Ecstasy, a class A drug, should be downgraded, they ignored that advice too. The former chair of the ACMD and SSY hero Professor David Nutt was even sacked after a pamphlet he produced said that alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than cannabis, LSD and Ecstasy. Now we have a new government, and they’ve finally come up with a solution to the fact that none of their drug policies agree with the scientific evidence – get rid of the scientists all together!

That’s right – if a proposed amendment to the Misuse of Drugs law passes, it will remove the requirement for scientists to be included in the committee. After years of ignoring all the evidence when it comes to drugs anyway, this policy looks like it could be signed into law. It’s a well known fact that policy on drugs is driven by the tabloid newspapers more than what is useful – this year’s mephedrone ban was brought in after a series of deaths reported in the media attributed to the drug. The most famous of these cases, the deaths of Louis Wainwright and Nicholas Smith, put huge pressure on the government to ban the drug – it was later discovered that they had not been taking mephedrone at all. By removing the need for scientists on the ACMD, the government is making an admission that they don’t care about science when they make decisions that criminalise thousands of people – only about pandering to the media lies and propaganda about drugs.

As SSY has always argued, legalisation and regulation, based on scientific evidence of harms, is the only sensible drug policy. Drugs would be purer and safer, production would be taken out of the hands of criminal gangs, and people could be given information about each drug’s harm that isn’t based on scare stories. Removing scientists from the ACMD further reduces its importance and relevance, and means the government can carry on doing whatever it likes about drugs without scrutiny from people who actually know what they are talking about. Whilst not all the scientists on the ACMD support legalisation, they support an evidence-based drugs policy – something that it’s obvious the government couldn’t care less about.

8 Comments

  1. Muzza says:

    Great post Liam

  2. Lydia says:

    Yaaaass good first blog!

    Fuck science, who needs it? I’m just going to go to the toilet now without using doors.

  3. Lovebug says:

    Great post mate!
    The governments official plan seems to be not to spend money on advisors and or on things like police to enforce the law (because they know its never worked.) Rumour has it they plan to occasionally shout “BOOOOO” really loudly and hope it will all go away.

  4. Rae Merrill says:

    It’s now time to legalize all drugs. If it’s legal to drink bleach then why should drugs be blacklisted?

  5. Rae Merrill says:

    Its now time for drugs to be legalized. People should be allowed to decide what’s right for them.

  6. Pavel says:

    Lydia I am guessing your saying fuck to the carpenters who built your door then.
    Rae lets just do that because we all know what people will decide the majority will most likely get fucked on drugs and destroy western civilization. There is no state of nature man is not an individual no should we try to make him win. What is best is that drugs are banned to insure good working practices. Governments don’t particualary like alchohol or cigarettes hence its continual attempts to ban it and individual religious groups and organisations attacking it. The fact is if the government could ban cigarettes and alchohol it probably would.

  7. Sarah says:

    Paul, fuck off, you’re so boring.

  8. Sarah says:

    Paul, your comments aren’t getting let through because you’re a troll who consistently comes on here to abuse people. You regularly post sexist shite, and we don’t allow posts about the Sheridan case through because invariably people like you are leaving them to be wind up merchant/sexist/abusive/lying/misinformed idiots. You’re really not a socialist, your regular posts prove that. The SSY blog isn’t only for socialists to discuss and debate things, other people can too so long as they are respectful and aren’t trolls. I’ve got a wee suggestion for you though, here’s a site where you can sit and post sexist crap, start flame wars and argue with other delusional leftie men with superiority complexes to your heart’s content: http://www.socialistunity.com