08 Jan Why is the evidence in favor of a legalized and regulated cannabis market ignored by the British Government?
Why is the evidence in favor of a legalized and regulated cannabis market ignored by the British Government?
On the 12th of October, 2015, an e-petition signed by over 220,000 people (at the time) was brought to debate in the House of Commons, after being initially rejected on the government petition page. It was in regards to making the “production, sale, and use of cannabis legal” (Owen, August 2015). After over two hours of debating, The Minister for Policing, Crime and Criminal Justice, the Rt Hon Mike Penning declared that whilst useful, “I cannot support the petition”(Westminster Hall, Monday 12 October 2015) and thus, for the moment, the hopes of many were dampened as the government threw out the debate.
But why? With an overwhelming amount of positive evidence in support of legalizing both medicinal and recreational cannabis, what logical reason could there be for not doing so?
Let me first contextualize the situation. The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 became a defining legal act in terms of drug classification (A, B, and C respectively) and their accompanying penalties (Misuse of Drugs Act 1971). And whilst illegal in Britain since 1928, this marked the beginning of the United Kingdom’s war on cannabis in full force. Initially classified as a class B drug, in league with other such substances as amphetamines and codeine, misjudgment and misclassification go back to the very origins of cannabis as a Criminal Justice issue in the UK. For five brief years in the UK, between 2004 and 2009, it was reduced to a Class C Drug, indicating it being less dangerous, and removing penalties for possession. In 2008 the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), published a paper which was requested of them by the Home Secretary The Rt Hon Jacqui Smith in July of the previous year. In the second paragraph of the opening page of the report it states that the “majority of the Council’s members consider – based on its harmfulness to individuals and society – that cannabis should remain a Class C substance.” (Cannabis: Classification and Public Health, April 2008) One year later that recommendation was disregarded and cannabis was elevated back to Class B, and the threat of being arrested solely for possession resurfaced. Interestingly, this report was then mentioned in the government’s response to the petition, serving as evidence in support of their decision… But it’s not all bad.
Positive evidence for legalization is abundant. In 2011 the IDMU (Independent Drug Monitoring Unit) published a research paper which estimated, at the time, that the UK cannabis market at street level was worth roughly £5.9 billion (Taxing the UK Cannabis Market, August 2011). The study goes on to estimate, after averaging the data they have from the seven years prior to its publication, and accounting for potential added costs should regulation come about, that the net benefit to the taxpayer would be in tune to £6.9 billion (with their minimum estimation at 3.4), based on the market size at the time.
It’s not all about the money, you say? I agree. There are public health concerns associated with cannabis regulation. In the government’s response to the petition put forward in October they said “cannabis is a harmful drug that can damage human health” (Home Office, October 2015). However, a study conducted by the University of Pittsburgh, (Bechtold et al, August 2015) spanning more than 20 years and following over 400 young males, beginning at the average age of 15, found that there was “little to no evidence” that their marijuana use impacted on the prevalence of mental, or physical health problems. And whilst I accept that this is but one study and is by no means definitive, I could quote research for hours in support of just this fact. In the interests of an unbiased argument, I accept that there are studies which illustrate the opposite, and that there may be some threat of long term health effects, particularly that of schizophrenia and psychosis. Having said that, I would like to quote David Nutt, former Chairmen of the ACMD “to prevent one episode of schizophrenia, we would need to stop about 5,000 men aged 20 to 25 years from ever using the drug”, as indicated by his research (Nutt, D October 2009). Whilst this is not something that can be ignored, nor is that a definitive number, it speaks as to the scale of the problem. Peter Reynolds, former president of Clear UK, a campaign and lobbying group for cannabis reform, voice a similar opinion when I spoke to him, saying “I’m not saying health harms don’t exist, but in relative terms, they’re not major”. I will admit as well there have been longitudinal studies, illustrating things such as “patients with first episode psychosis were more likely than controls to have used cannabis on a daily basis” (Freeman, February 2015). However, there is also a positive argument to be made for cannabis in terms of public health, in its medicinal potential. On the US National Cancer Institute’s website (www.cancer.gov) it states that “cannabinoids may inhibit tumor growth by causing cell death, blocking cell growth, and blocking the development of blood vessels needed by tumors to grow” as well as that “cannabinoids may be able to kill cancer cells while protecting normal cells.” (both phenomena were observed in either a laboratory or animal test) And its palliative effect has been observed in countries which allow medical marijuana for years as being beneficial for those suffering from multiple sclerosis as well as patients combating the damages of chemotherapy. Peter told me in a survey conducted on Clear UK members, “one in three” say that they use if for some medicinal aspect, which accounts for roughly two percent of the UK population.
I spoke with the Chairman of LEAP UK (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), Neil Woods on the issue. LEAP is an international organization, which campaigns for the regulations of all drugs, and started off in the United States, today, LEAP has a presence in over 20 countries across the globe. He helped illuminate the murky depths of the political psyche into which I delved, he told me one of the predominant issues is that in the UK “politicians don’t see it as a mainstream issue” except for those in the Lib Dem Party. This point is reinforced by the fact that only 14 of the potential 650 MPs attended the debate. Furthermore he informed me that when speaking with one of the Shadow Ministers recently, he was told that the Labour party had been badly affected in the polls after their decision to change Cannabis to a Class C, and so had “no desire to engage with it politically”. Due to the nature of the government, in focusing on what they perceive the public to think to be the most important topic at any given time, Neil believes that change “must come from the public up” and I agree. In a political landscape which is comprised of promises of reform and need for change, before driving solidly to the middle of the road upon reaching power, the only way that we the people will see real change in the UK in terms of cannabis, and truly drugs as a whole, is if there is a large enough outcry from the public that it is non-ignorable. Mr. Woods believes even more so than that however, that it is the media’s perception of cannabis and its support of prohibition which needs to change. He was hopeful that with the decline in hard print newspapers in the UK, and more specifically with right-wing leaning publications, the public will be forced to traverse the internet more for their news and thus come across more forward thinking, open minded sources of information on the topic which will give people an honest, unbiased account of the realities in terms of the potential within cannabis reform. From speaking with him the point was made to me of potential downsides of an improperly regulated system being put in place, he used the example of California in the States, describing as “wantonly capitalist”, the process by which larger corporate dispensaries for the distribution of medical marijuana take advantage of their larger market share to push out smaller local dispensaries from areas, saying that the system in place is “more concerned with making money than people’s needs”. Neil left me with some words of hope, saying that he believes “we will win when we get the media reach. As our numbers rise politicians will be forced to listen”
Public safety, and especially the safety of young members of society, is another area in which the ending of prohibition could help vastly and in a number of different ways. First and foremost, availability to young people, drug dealers do not require ID, and subsequently it is much easier for young people, those which studies show are more at risk to the potentially adverse effects of cannabis, to acquire marijuana than it is for them to acquire alcohol. A regulatory method acts in the favor of protecting more vulnerable members of our society, not only by keeping it out of the hands of younger people, but also by keeping people who wish to purchase it out of the company of drug dealers, and consequently more detached from the sphere of organized crime. Mr. Woods said that regulating the cannabis market “would have a huge impact on the profits of organized crime“and undoubtedly he is right. Admittedly reducing the criminal’s coffers by an amount even as vast as £6 billion will most likely not cripple them, it would certainly hamstring them for a time. Peter Reynolds supported this argument when I asked him what some of the potential benefits of ending prohibition would be, stating “The biggest benefit would be the tackling the criminal market and all the harms that come from that”. Also whilst there isn’t a direct connection between them, Peter informed me, in Colorado since their opting for a regulated and legal market “traffic accidents have fallen, all crime has fallen, violent crime as well has dropped”, just an interesting correlation to ponder on.
Conclusively, there is no single answer as to why the British Government ignores the issues presented by current cannabis policy. Whether it is a lack of willingness to accept it as an important issue, or the skewed view of many media publications, the war between pro and anti-reformists will continue until the views of the media are purified and the opinion of the public is allowed to ring out. To leave you with one last bit of perspective into the British Media’s viewpoint on prohibition, in 2008 the international drug reform group Transform published a magnum opus in terms of how all drugs can be regulated and controlled called , The Blueprint. The document was launched internationally on the same day and garnered governmental backings and newspaper articles the world round, but not a single British newspaper mentioned it. I implore you to take a look.
Owen, J, Petition, Make the production, sale, and use of cannabis legal, Available from https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104349 (August 2015)
Westminster Hall, Monday 12 October 2015, Hansard, Available from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm151012/halltext/151012h0001.htm (October 2015)
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Available from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/38/section/2 (May 1971)
Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, Cannabis: Classification and Public Health, Available from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/119174/acmd-cannabis-report-2008.pdf (April 2008)
Independent Drug Monitoring Unit, Taxing the UK Cannabis Market, PP 10-14, Available from http://clear-uk.org/media/uploads/2011/09/TaxUKCan.pdf (August 2011)
Bechtold, J. Simpson, T. White, H,R. Pardini, D. Chronic Adolescent Marijuana Use as a Risk Factor for Physical and Mental Health Problems in Young Adult Men PP 6-9, Available from http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/adb-adb0000103.pdf (August 2015)
Home Office, Government Responded, Available from https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104349 (October 2015)
National Cancer Institute, Questions and Answers About Cannabis, Available from http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/patient/cannabis-pdq/#section/_3 (September 2015)
Nutt, D, Estimating drug harms: a risky business? Centre for Crime and Justice, Studies Kings College London, London, Available from: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/Estimating%20drug%20harms.pdf (October 2009)
Freeman, T, Potent questions about cannabis and mental health, Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/pb/assets/raw/Lancet/pdfs/14TLP0613_Freeman.pdf
Final Wordcount, Including Quotes, and in text references:
- Deduct roughly 200+ words for quotes and references.
For some reason I cannot make the National Cancer Institute any smaller.
