Much has been made of the fact that the Government is upgrading the classification of cannabis against the advice of the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs.
But just how reliable is the advice of the ACMD? From the way it is described in the media, you'd think it was an independent and unbiased group of experts qualified to sift through the scientific evidence on the impact of cannabis on physical and mental health. At the time that it initially recommended the downgrading of cannabis, I thought I'd check out exactly who had made the decision. This is what I found:
The ACMD has around 30 members at any one time, 28 of whom attended the meeting on the 25 January 2002 which agreed to recommend that cannabis be downgraded to a class C drug. Of these, at least 14 were leading figures in one or more of the following groups (all of which have pressed for a softening in the drug laws):
- DrugScope – Britain’s foremost pro-liberalisation pressure group
- The UK Harm Reduction Alliance – another pro-liberalisation pressure group, funded by George Soros
- The Methadone Alliance – Linked to the UKHRA, who want drugs not only liberalised but made available through the NHS
- Action on Hepatitis C – Another pro-liberalisation pressure group allied to UKHRA and Methadone Alliance
- The Runciman inquiry – An initiative of the leftwing Police Foundation, this was a high profile forerunner of the ACMD in recommending the downgrading of cannabis to a class C drug.
- The Association of Chief Police Officers – At the time, ACPO’s drug policy sub-committee has played a pivotal role in the campaign to downgrade the classification of cannabis.
There were no representatives from organisations opposed to the softening of the drug laws such as the National Drug Prevention Alliance or the Police Federation. Of the rest of the ACMD members, most worked for government drug enforcement or drug treatment services (many in senior positions of responsibility) leaving the ACMD in a poor position to advise on problems with the implementation of drugs policy. Very few of them were scientists.
As it happens, I'm highly sceptical as to whether drug classification makes a great deal of difference to the situation on the ground – not when the police are so reluctant to enforce the law on drug abuse and so many other 'minor' crimes. However, when the Government is seeking scientific advice it should get it from scientists not activists.
