You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Good topic, always comes back as an 'issue' every few years. But, there are much more dangerous synthetic drugs available now than the Ecstacy/Heroin/Coke of old e.g. Spice
Generally, i'm against legalisation in principle, but not in practice. More widespread use of community service orders would help (I think) in addressing an addict who goes shoplifting e.g. packing bags in Morrisons.
As for the dealers, they show remarkable organisation and marketing skills which could be put to better use in a well-paid job, with lower death rates!
Don't forget people always want the 'forbidden fruit'. So if cycling was illegal, everyone would be doing it!
FFS mushrooms grow out of the ground all over the country, the fact that picking them is a class A drugs offence is patently ridiculous.
What's even more ludicrous is that, as you say, picking them is a class A drugs offence. But get down on your hands and knees and graze them like a cow and you're good to go*.
It's as if whoever made up these laws was on shrooms or something.
*probably
As for the dealers, they show remarkable organisation and marketing skills which could be put to better use in a well-paid job, with lower death rates!
Pragmatic too. I used to help promote a club night and the one of the main promoters and I were just taking a stroll around the dance floor.
A voice in the corner called out 'Psst - want any pills. A tenner each...'
Promoter 'Err, don't you know who I am? I am one of the promoters'
Dealer, without missing a beat 'Oh sorry mate, didn't realise. £8 then...'
Was very funny...
Don’t forget people always want the ‘forbidden fruit’.
Part of the Switzerland approach to heroin usage / addicts. ( I do not know if its changed now but IIRC) they set up safe legal supply to addicts in a bureaucratic manner - so you could get your clean fix no problem ( and if pharacutical stuff is available no one wants street stuff) and you could take it in a safe place but the whole thing was done in a manner just to make it really dull and tedious. It kills the illegal market, you get few new recruits because the illegal market is gone, the users do not die or commit crimes. basically bore them out of heroin addiction
go to your local centre, its painted beige with a bored receptionist. Pick up your fix, go into a dull room with a cheap table and chairs with everything painted beige, have your fix and leave. takes all the glanmour and rebellion out of it and makes it deeply uncool
but the idea all cocaine users turn into violent offenders is nonsense.
Agree , out of the broad spectrum of users I know ( and I have been genuinely surprised by some of them ), it's the violent offenders who use it more regularly ( i.e they are violent offenders even when they haven't had any)
/with regards to drug testing, When we have used subbies on sites where they have regular drug tests, there are a heck of a lot them who don't turn up on a Monday ( can't think why 😉 )
A lot of the youth are buying their party drugs on the dark web these days - buy their stuff in bitcoin and get it shipped from mainland europe, apparently much better stuff and sometimes has dose indicated and even user reviews.
Makes a change from buying 3 for a tenner and hoping for the best back in my clubbing days.
Another aspect to the thesis " different drugs need different approaches" Heroin and sometime cannabis is used to blot out " shit life syndrome" Improve the lot of people and reduce heroin addiction.
indeed its actually hard to find impairment in driving after cannabis.
My best times on Gran Turismo....
If anybody wants to actually understand the subject rather than argue about it, just work your way through the Drug Science Podcasts with Prof Nutt.
The evidence is already stacking up on MDMA and physicadelics for therapy.
And the evidence against the WAR ON DRUGS is completely overwhelming.
First one is actually about alcohol. Turns out that just 1 unit is too toxic to pass todays tests... 1.3 million visits to hospital a year caused by it too.
they set up safe legal supply to addicts in a bureaucratic manner
Yeah, it wasn't designed like that, that was just a side effect of being...Swiss. There's aslo the issue that they chose well motivated addicts, there was "just" over a thousand of them for the entire country, and the clinics were free and run by well motivated staff.
Of particular interest in all of this is that they are considering confiscating the passports and driving licenses of middle class drug users as a away of punishing them in a way that affects their lifestyle.
This government have pretty authoritarian tendencies they seem pretty determined to end all freedom of movement particularly for their own citizens. Scary stuff!
Re: Cocaine and addiction.
I can only give my personal experiences. I used to take cocaine, not lots, but it quickly escalated. It was a way for me to deal with my only recently diagnosed self-esteem issues.
In my very limited experience, unlike heroin and tobacco which cause a physical addiction, coke is more of a mental addiction, it made stressful things like social events or just a stressful time in work much easier to handle, in fact it was just as much ‘fun’ in work on coke as it was clubbing. The downside was it made the idea of those time without coke much much harder to deal with.
People do obviously get very addicted to it by one method or other, no one thinks it’s normal to bankrupt yourself or have part of your nose fall out.
Of particular interest in all of this is that they are considering confiscating the passports and driving licenses of middle class drug users as a away of punishing them in a way that affects their lifestyle.
I reckon you’d be safe betting your house that in a years and not a single person, middle class or otherwise, will have had their driving license or passport confiscated.
It’s just one of those ridiculous brain-farts that politicians like Boris like to blurt out to tickle the tummy of the Mail headline writers and the hang’em and flog’em brigade that read their tawdry rag
It’s like Priti Patels wave machines and jet skis in the Channel. Utter and complete nonsense designed purely for consumption by gullible idiots
Interesting
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/dec/06/which-top-uk-politicians-have-admitted-to-drug-use
Its really funny how they got such rubbish drugs that the drugs did not work!
takes all the glanmour and rebellion out of it and makes it deeply uncool
That isn't really your average Heroin user though,certainly not based on growing up in Dundee.
Its really funny how they got such rubbish drugs that the drugs did not work!
And they wonder why the general public think they're liars and untrustworthy? I reckon most adults below the age of 60 in this country have taken illegal drugs at some point in their lives, and the vast majority would say they had a good time or had some positive experiences from them. So all these politicians saying they didn't work, regretted it or that it was a mistake are talking utter bollocks, and yet they don't seem to realise that the public can see straight through it.
anyone remember professor David Nutt and this chart
of course he was sacked by the government http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8334774.stm
I reckon most adults below the age of 60 in this country have taken illegal drugs at some point in their lives,
Significant % maybe but most? I doubt it. The stats show 10% ish used some illegal recreational drug in the last month IIRC
Did they do a corresponding chart for benefits caused to users / others?
I suspect it'd turn out that The Shamen were right and that Es are actually quite good.
Sorry just noticed TJ had already mentioned David Nutt
And they wonder why the general public think they’re liars and untrustworthy?
I doubt they do, more likely they think we're so stupid that we believe them
The middle classes won't have their passports and driving licenses taken, because they can afford a lawyer to stop it. The working classes however.....
It only takes a moment's thought to understand why most politicians are not honest about their own drug experiences.
They have more to lose than they have to gain. And you are not their target audience.
What makes me laugh is that we just had a report published a couple of days ago about the trouble at Wembley last summer.
It describes how the police were powerless to stop thousands of drunken hooligans openly snorting Coke all day long at a showpiece event in the countries capital city
Now they’re telling us those same authorities are going to eradicate 2000 criminal gangs, all across the country and stop them supplying drugs
Yeah, right
What Wembley showed is what everyone who’s ever been in a town centre in the last ten years knows. Drug use is now absolutely endemic right the way across society and another ‘war on drugs’ is completely pointless and doomed to failure right from the off
anecdote time from my "bohemian" youth
amongst my peer group I have had one person die from heroin OD
On friend die from cocaine and alcohol
2 friends with ruined lives from alcohol addiction
One friend with serious health issues from cocaine and alcohol
One friend with serious mental health issues ending in his death - alcohol and cocaine
No obvious harm for the party pills or cannabis users many of whom have had high level careers in the professions and public service ( bar one lad who had serious lifelong mental health issues and thats a whole other discussion)
I have an incredibly supportive, nurturing, and nonjudgmental circle of friends now and I do wonder if the empathy gained in their younger years has helped nurture this attitude
I reckon most adults below the age of 60 in this country have taken illegal drugs at some point in their lives
Then you'd be wrong. One of the more difficult statistics for those of us that want to relax drug laws is that making these drugs illegal has, to a large extent, put people off trying them. Alcohol, has rates of as much as 80-90% of the population over 14 having tried it, smoking is up there as well, will stats like 40-60% of all adults having tried it. Illegal drugs is something like 1-2% with weed at 3-10% of the population
Lots of the drug laws are incoherent and problematic. Making drugs illegal however is routinely successful all over the world as a way of preventing drugs with serious harms entering the population at large.
Edit: there's an Australian study that showed that 30% of first time cannabis users stopped using just because it's illegal.
weed at 3-10% of the population
In 2019/20, 29.6 percent of people in England and Wales aged between 16 and 59 had used cannabis at least once during their lifetime, compared with 23.6 percent in 2001/02. During the provided time period, 2014/15 was the reporting year with the highest share of adults advising they had used cannabis at least once in their lifetimes, at 31.1 percent.
From here
https://www.statista.com/statistics/976850/cannabis-use-in-the-uk/
I'd guesstimate 30-40% of the population have dabbled with illegal drugs at some point.
Not all the oldies are as hip as Steves' Nan y'know.
Agree with binners that the removal of PPTS and DLs will not/very rarely happen. Certainly not the target of middle class users. Mainly because so few of them ever get caught with drugs because they never have to deal with the police (involuntarily). Less affluent users on the other hand...
However I agree with the need to tackle supply chain misery. A lady moved in next door to us a couple of years back. After a few months it was clear something odd was going on as we never saw her leave the house other than to put the bins out. So I was already a bit concerned about her. Suspicions confirmed when the skunk smell started wafting down the chimney into our dining room. Which explained the incessant rumbling which had been constant for months. They'd knocked though into the chimney for the extractor fan and unknown to them it was coming into our house.
Got the cops to come round low key for them to check it out and they raided it a couple of weeks later. Single Vietnamese lady had been in the house for 6 months straight. Whoever set it up had bypassed the electric meter so it was obviously a massive fire risk too. It's absolutely rife in towns and cities all over the UK. The reality is that if you buy weed in the UK, there is a very good chance it comes from a trafficking/modern slavery victim forced to live like that. And no one with a conscience would want to fund the kind of people who are involved in that kind of business.
Making drugs illegal however is routinely successful all over the world as a way of preventing drugs with serious harms entering the population at large.
Really? Really?
Heroin usage has increased massively in the UK over my lifetime from rare to commonplace. Prohibition has failed - Senior cops know this - the folk that wrote your pi4evce from the tory group know this, the data all supports this.
all prohibition has done is increase the harms done to folk from drug use
Prohibition was the major factor in leah Betts death
I wonder how it would affect the taking of other drugs if they(in the UK) legalized and sold openly ecstasy and cannabis.
professor David Nutt and this chart
I can account for about 12 of those, and probably a few that aren't on it, like chlordiazepoxide 😆
Really? Really?
Yeah, really. It's more complicated than that, but since about 1912 when the first international conventions controlling opium were introduced the stats are pretty consistent all over the world. Especially so in richer OECD countries. Having said that there's no correlation between drugs use and harsher penalties, but overall, controlling the supply of drugs with known harms has meant that relatively speaking fewer people in the population have tried them or have routine access to them. Yes we have a heroin problem, but we have a smaller heroin problem that otherwise we would've
That's not to say that some of the drugs on the class 1 register have no business being on it. (mushrooms and MDMA for example) but controlling things like heroin and cocaine with laws preventing their widespread sale have mostly worked.
Sorry nickc - thats just pure nonsense.
You are making a conjecture with no supporting evidence that drug prohibition has reduced drug usage whereas there is good date from the Netherlands and other countries the opposite is true
there is good date from the Netherlands
There's also good data from the Netherlands that show it's policy has produced the largest cocaine market in Europe and pretty much all the MDMA production, all of that is controlled by very violent gangs.
There’s also good data from the Netherlands that show it’s policy has produced the largest cocaine market in Europe
Nothing to do with having gigantic international ports and a central European location then eh.
controlling things like heroin and cocaine with laws preventing their widespread sale have mostly worked.
😂😂😂😂🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Wow. You do read some nonsense on here but...
I grew up in Manchester in the 90's. It was rife then and even more so now after my last visit a few years back. The sixth form i attended was brimming with availability of ecstasy, speed and cannabis. If anyone was lucky enough to go to Amsterdam for a long weekend, they'd come back with all sorts!
I find Nicks stats highly dubious....
I now live in rural Surrey and it still goes on behind closed doors and even in the local. You can see it a mile off in a country pub! 🙂
I'm tending to go with TJ on the prohibition doing a lot of damage. I think most try it, most grow out of it and those that choose the wrong fork in the road it never ends well. The answer would be to somehow make people not want to try it, but i would guess it's hardwired into the psyche the need to transcend oneself! God knows where to start with fixing the problem?
God knows where to start with fixing the problem?
Accept that people want to get high. Remove the harms from prohibition. Treat it as a healthcare / social issue not a crime and punishment issue
Be pragmatic don't moralise
controlling things like heroin and cocaine with laws preventing their widespread sale have mostly worked.
Depends what you mean by "worked" though, surely the end goal shouldn't be to stop people taking drugs, but to stop people being harmed by drugs. In that regards "controlling" these things has made things much worse.
While it is more difficult to get drugs than if you could buy them in WH Smiths, it's not that much harder, like others have said, people just buy them over the internet. Anyone can do it (or so I've heard).
The Netherlands experience with heroin addiction. Back in the 70s similar levels to the UK. They adopted the decriminalization of cannabis and a system for heroin users of state supply and safe shooting galleries. this massively reduced the market for illegal heroin. The average age of their heroin addicts gets older every year. because a) there is a safer alternative for folk that want to get high so that fewer people start taking heroin, b) they do not die from ODs or dirty gear c) petty crime massively reduced. d0 fewer people become addicted as heroin is hard to get illegal ( small illegal market) and cannabis is available for those that want to get high
In the UK we went down a punitive route. the illegal market prospered. More young folk become addicts. the age profile is younger and petty crime to get money to feed the addiction is rife
We now have a far greater number of heroin addicts than they do
Which one worked - prohibition or liberalisation?
Accept that people want to get high. Remove the harms from prohibition. Treat it as a healthcare / social issue not a crime and punishment issue
I agree, but we have to be aware as a society that drugs like heroin have huge issues and not just for users, but for their families and communities. If we are to legalise them, then we have to be prepared for their abuse. I work in a GP practice and I see the effects of alcohol abuse, from where I'm sitting we're just adding to that already difficult situation. The other issue is that in all situations were drugs have either been decriminalised for users (Portugal) or made legal in entirety (California and Cannabis) the criminal gangs haven't disappeared, in fact it's made no difference at all.
While it is more difficult to get drugs than if you could buy them in WH Smiths, it’s not that much harder
This is the reality of drug availability in the UK after decades of prohibition
Illegal drugs 'almost as easy to get as pizza'
I was reading that the drugs available at the moment are both purer and cheaper than ever as the country is literally awash with them.
To carry on repeating the same exercise, simply throwing more money at it, and expecting a different result is utter madness
This latest ‘crackdown’ will have zero effect on the availability of drugs on the streets, no matter how much macho posturing on dawn raids Boris does
Which one worked – prohibition or liberalisation?
The Netherlands has essentially the same prohibition laws around heroin that the UK does. You know that right? You can get years in prison for selling hard drugs
I agree, but we have to be aware as a society that drugs like heroin have huge issues and not just for users, but for their families and communities
almost all of these ill effects are down to prohibition with heroin. A heroin user with a clean supply they can afford causes very little harm to themselves or society. William Burroughs etc
No one here is advocating open sale of heroin just taking a pragmatic course that reduces harm to individuals or society
The Netherlands has essentially the same prohibition laws around heroin that the UK does. You know that right? You can get years in prison for selling hard drugs
do you even read what others write?
They have state supply for registered addicts with safe shooting galleries. this has broken the illegal market
they have alternative drugs available freely so folk do not end up taking heroin
simply put dutch policy on drugs has reduced the number of heroin addicts hugely, removed much of the harm to individuals from heroin use and reduced much of the harm to society. heroin usage is now rare in the netherlands
while sensible ( but far from perfect) drug policy in the netherlands has seen massive reductions in heroin usage, deaths and addiction related crime. In the same time in the UK we have seen massive increases in heroin usage and the harms surrounding it
so which policy has worked best?
I work in a GP practice and I see the effects of alcohol abuse, from where I’m sitting we’re just adding to that already difficult situation
Decriminalising drugs doesnt mean making the rules as lax as with alcohol.
It can be still be fairly heavily restricted although that does have the problem of still giving space for the gangs to operate.
With regards to California a major part of the issue there is the halfarsed implementation with the difference between state and federal laws which means its hard for them to get proper banking facilities. As such even the legal places tend to have lots of cash on hand and hence are good targets for robbery.
The current approach has failed though and having hobocop doing cosplay isnt going to change that. We need a method which works and controlled legalisation seems the best option.
this has broken the illegal market
Really? In 2006 there were 20,769 drug crimes registered by public prosecutors (says Wiki) What the Netherlands does do is spend huge amounts of money of rehabilitation and facilities. It also has a zero tolerance policy for drug crimes, the age of users is going up, but the laws on prohibition are the same as the UK.
almost all of these ill effects are down to prohibition with heroin.
Everybody thinks so, but the experience of Portugal is that decriminalisation has made little to no effect on users experience
A heroin user with a clean supply they can afford causes very little harm to themselves or society. William Burroughs etc
what you mean is. We hope and think some users will be OK, because that's based on treating people with addiction now. we know for a fact some won't be able to use heroin at all safely, and we'll have to have plans in place for dealing with those folks. Same as we do now for alcohol. We have no real idea of how many people will try it, or use it, or abuse it if it were to be made legal.
I think the laws we have now don't work. In so much as we need to do something different, I'm in complete agreement with you. But the fact is where drug reform has happened it hasn't for various reasons, had the intended consequence. Where we differ is that I don't think it's going to be as easy as lots on here seem to think, is all.
It won't be a white Christmas in Northampton
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-59493377
yes really nickc my sister is an investigative journalist in the netherlands and has looked into it a lot. How many of those drug crimes were heroin addicts getting money for a fix?
Why you keep on making rebuttals to points I have not made is beyond me.
we know for a fact some won’t be able to use heroin at all safely, and we’ll have to have plans in place for dealing with those folks.
Yes - and I have outlined a plan that we know works
while sensible ( but far from perfect) drug policy in the netherlands has seen massive reductions in heroin usage, deaths and addiction related crime. In the same time in the UK we have seen massive increases in heroin usage and the harms surrounding it
so which policy has worked best?
That’ll be the Netherlands, teetering on the edge of being a failed narco-state 😉
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/20/netherlands-becoming-a-narco-state-warn-dutch-police
Kilo - thats not about heroin!
The halfway house of decriminalisation of cannabis has not been without ill effects and thats one of them
Illegal drugs is something like 1-2% with weed at 3-10% of the population
Well clearly I hang around with a load of reprobate hedonists. Where have those figures come from cos I don’t believe them.
the criminal gangs haven’t disappeared
In most cases countries have opted to decriminalise possession and use but not supply so it stands to reason that the gangs haven’t disappeared. In places where they’ve tried to legalise and regulate supply they’ve been too expensive or restrictive with the same result. Obviously it requires some experimentation to find the right balance. It’s a problem of implementation rather than the goals being wrong.
Indeed Dazh
This is why I say we shuld look to what other countries have done, learn from it, take the best bits and the bits that work and avoid their mistakes
hence IMO a full legal market in cannabis
With heroin a state controlled medically supervised supply
Etc etc
One other aspect of this is it would free up huge amounts of police time to deal with other issues. In some [parts of the UK 50+% of all crime is heroin addicts looking for money for a fix. Imagine a policy that could reduce crime by 50%?
Everybody thinks so, but the experience of Portugal is that decriminalisation has made little to no effect on users experience
Citation needed. I thought there was pretty clear evidence Portugal's policies had lead to better outcomes. Your view certainly seems very one-sided. If you were arguing the picture is mixed it might be more credible.
Eg
If we are to legalise them, then we have to be prepared for their abuse
Ah yes, the abuse that will start once they are legalised, that definitely isn't happening now. 🤦♂️
In some [parts of the UK 50+% of all crime is heroin addicts looking for money for a fix. Imagine a policy that could reduce crime by 50%?
Have you a reference for that ( curiosity not arguing).
And the day after they announce their latest crackdown in the war on drugs, the figures show that alcohol related deaths went up by 19% last year. The largest increase on record.
What are the government proposing to do about that?
The awkward truth is that as alcahol and tobacco are already legal, making them illegal will cause an uproar, and parhaps more importantly, the govenment enjoys a healthy cash injection from the taxes applied to them, so if they made them class A on health grounds, that lost tax income would have to be pilfered elsewhere somehow.
And we'd see a huge black market in moonshine run by 'gangs' just like we see with illegal drugs currently, with all the issues that wider sociatal issues that criminality brings with it.
Thanks to the states already running that particular social experiment, we already know what prohibition looks like. And they've also done the one with some bits dry and other bits not and that seems to work equally well. As in, folk just go elsewhere for their weekly poison.
What are the government proposing to do about that?
Build a seven lane motorway bridge from Lowestoft to Margate.
@kilo - not sure if TJ has a UK reference but this paper describes stats for Australia, US in the Intro:
the definitions of crime are probably not consistent between different studies. I think often it is "acquisitive" crime or "property crime" that is quoted. But 2/3rds of Scottish murders are linked to drugs: https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,more-than-twothirds-of-scotlands-murders-are-drugrelated.
But my gut feel is >50% of criminal offences reported to, or prosecuted by the police will be road traffic matters so the "headline" is probably wrong in terms of all crime.
I thought there was pretty clear evidence Portugal’s policies had lead to better outcomes.
Some pretty impressive gains regarding health outcomes for some users, counter intuitively some drug users are now getting longer sentences (some custodial) depending on the quantity of drugs in their possession, the laws made no difference to criminal activity which is still a different set of laws. Confusion around the public body responsible for drug rehabilitation has reduced the impact of social improvements seen at the start.
it's complex. I agree, it's mixed, and not as clear cut as I first said.
I'd have to search for the crime thing but yes it was 50% - 75% of petty crime not including road crime in some localities
Its the muggings, the housebreakings, shoplifting, that sort of thing. the stuff that blights localities
If you are a heroin addict you need a couple of hundred pound as a week minimum to support your habit. Crime is the only place to get that money and to get £100 you need to steal £1000 worth of stuff.
While working alongside the police every shoplifter and housebreaker I saw was a heroin addict. I didn't see a single one who was not
Tell you what...How about not only removing passports and driving licences, how about removing the right to vote as well.
Think the Government has missed a trick there...
Old news stories I haven't read them in depth
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/drug-addicts-commit-half-of-property-crimes-1393516.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1846910.stm
Tell you what…How about not only removing passports and driving licences, how about removing the right to vote as well.
Think the Government has missed a trick there…
Would that include voting in Parliament?
Cheers to poly & tj, it’s not so much that drugs feed crime stats I was curious about more if heroin had held off crack as the poison of choice, a crack’n’smack cocktail seems a popular choice.
Kraak n Smaak
Saw this on the News last night but with the volume turned down.
Assumed it was just another opportunity for Boris to indulge in a bit of cosplay. Looks like I wasn't wrong.
Looking forward to the War on Crime being announced, accompanied by Boris in a Batman suit and PP dressed up as Robin.
A good summary of the whole ridiculous charade in today’s Guardian
The Tories don’t want a modern drugs strategy – they prefer outdated macho rhetoric
This purportedly groundbreaking new drug strategy admits that the current policy is not working, and then promises to continue heedlessly with its failed vision
They know it won’t have any impact. They don’t care. This is simply designed to appeal to their hang’em and flog’em base
I'll also bet the rehab money promised never ends up in rehab at all
This isn't really a question of the harm drugs will cause, the legal status has very little effect on availability really, so it's a moot question.
The question is why would you leave billions of pounds in the hands of criminal gangs.
Cause that's the true effect of prohibition. It's an utterly baffling stance. It makes no logical sense.
I’ll also bet the rehab money promised never ends up in rehab at all
The wording on the BBC north west news last night was telling.
They were reporting that there ‘could’ be additional money for drug rehab services in the region.
Shall we take bets on the chances of any of it ever materialising?
Shall we file it with those 40 new hospitals?
As for Boris, it's just waffle, he'll do nothing.
tbh, I can see the like of cannabis being legalised anyhow within about 10 years. They've sold off everything, so they'll need to look to other sources to make money.
Shall we take bets on any of it ever materialising?
If it does it will be delivered by someone Serco with Dido Harding in charge, and will cost millions to run some drop-in treaemt services no one can actually access. These will be quietly shelved 3 months later citing a lack of demand, but with all the money mysteriously gone.
I wonder will it be like the sus laws, just another excuse to be roughing over kids? Every failing PM needs a war.
A good summary of the whole ridiculous charade in today’s Guardian
The Tories don’t want a modern drugs strategy – they prefer outdated macho rhetoric
Without taking anything away from the Grauniad, you can replace the word "drugs" with pretty much any word you like, and it's still valid. Picking some biggies at random:
The Tories don’t want a modern trade strategy – they prefer outdated macho rhetoric.
The Tories don’t want a modern foreign policy strategy – they prefer outdated macho rhetoric.
The Tories don’t want a modern immigration strategy – they prefer outdated macho rhetoric.
A very valid point.
The continuation of the Brexit Britain strategy of returning everything back to some indeterminate point in the past that probably didn’t actually exist anyway