Login Register

DRUGS INQUIRY: Should our drugs laws be changed?

By Leicester Mercury  |  Posted: March 12, 2012

  • Readers are being asked if they believe cannabis should be legalised. They are also being asked whether they believe highly-addictive drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine should be decriminalised

  • The head of the military police explains to Keith Vaz how cocoa grows in Columbia

  • Keith Vaz inspecting weapons use by Colombian military police on a visit to a jungle training camp

Comments (0)

The Leicester Mercury today launches an online opinion poll asking readers if they support a major overhaul of the country's drugs laws.

Readers are asked whether they believe highly-addictive drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine should be decriminalised.

They are also being asked if they believe cannabis should be legalised.

Responses to the online poll – on the Mercury's website – will feed directly into a major inquiry being conducted by the Home Affairs Select Committee, chaired by Leicester East MP Keith Vaz, and could shape the future of the country's drug laws.

Related content

Mr Vaz said the committee's review was the first of its kind in a decade and that the cross-party group of MPs had specifically chosen Leicester to take part.

He said: "Leicester is perfect because it is a city in the middle of England and we hope the things they tell us about their experiences of drugs will help us shine a light into the shadows.

"The big thing we can do in the UK is to reduce demand and the big question the committee is asking is how do we stop people wanting to take drugs."

Mr Vaz said there is a growing body of opinion that damaging and addictive drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine should be decriminalised. When people call for decriminalisation of heroin or crack cocaine, they mean for possession.

If the policy was introduced, addicts would not face criminal action when caught with either of the drugs. Instead, under a system favoured by people including Sir Richard Branson, addicts would be dealt with as people in need of treatment rather than criminals.

Heroin would be provided by the state and efforts stepped up to help users beat their addiction.

Such a move would also mean addicts would not be placed at risk of buying from criminals who often mix drugs with other – sometimes harmful – substances to increase profitability.

Dealers and people producing hard drugs would still be committing a criminal offence. Legalisation, which the pro-cannabis lobby argues for, would mean the drug could be sold legally, but with some controls such as those which govern the sale of alcohol and tobacco.

Dr James Treadwell, a criminologist at the University of Leicester, said: "This is a good time for a sensible and considered debate about drugs.

"More people are coming around to the idea that the war on drugs has failed and cannot be won even in the long-term.

"We know from the recession of the 70s and 80s that use of illegal drugs went up.

"During an economic downturn, people can feel a general despair and bleakness.

"Because of the economic problems, you may start to see more young people turning to heroin as a means of escape."

Mr Vaz and members of his committee visited Miami, in the United States, and Bogota, in Columbia, last week, to hear first-hand accounts of efforts in those countries to tackle the cocaine trade.

It is estimated that the majority of cocaine which ends up in cities such as Leicester originated in Columbia.

Mr Vaz added: "In countries like Columbia there is little or no choice for people to become part of the cocaine trade.

"Billions of pounds of tax payers' money has been spent fighting the drugs trade there, but the heroin is still flowing.

"We want to engage people in Leicester in this debate. It is the first time in 10 years that the committee has looked at drugs policy to this extent."


Question 1: Should possession of drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine be decriminalised? Add your vote to the poll on this page, right.

Question 2: Should possession of cannabis be legalised? Click here to add you vote.

SEND IN YOUR VIEWS: Write and tell the Home Affairs Select Committee what you think

As well as taking part in our online survey, Mercury readers can contribute to the Home Affairs Select Committee’s inquiry by answering the following questions.

1. In general, do you believe the drug laws in this country are a) too liberal b) about right c) not liberal enough?

2. Which drugs do you believe are the most prevalent in Leicester?

3. Is drug-related crime such as burglary or shoplifting a problem in Leicester?

4. Do parents have enough information about so-called legal highs?

5. Is the Government too slow to ban legal highs?

6. Is sufficient drug education provided in schools?

7. Do you believe ex-addicts should provide drug education in schools?

8. At what age do you believe drug education should begin in schools?

9. Do parents know how to discuss drug issues with their children?

Send answers to the office of Keith Vaz, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA.

Related article:

'Put the dealers behind bars for much longer'

Read more from Leicester Mercury


max 4000 characters
  • concernboston  |  March 30 2012, 3:03PM

    oh come on, drugs are bad, and the government should be doing to stop it, full stop, dealing growing using, whats the difference, they all do you harm.

    |   -3
  • Martin8  |  March 13 2012, 12:22PM

    by Toddy2010 Tuesday, March 13 2012, 12:10PM "The poll on this site certainly doesn't agree with you martin, 64% agree they should be decriminalised. Are you taking something?" End of the debate....

    |   -4
  • Toddy2010  |  March 13 2012, 12:10PM


    |   7
  • Martin8  |  March 13 2012, 11:52AM

    Most people here feel these illegal drug should not be legalised, end of debate!

    |   -5
  • howtodothis  |  March 13 2012, 9:40AM

    "The issue ought to be one of harm - what harm has the person in possession done, if any, to anyone else - and have they posed a direct threat. No harm = no victim - then there ought be no crime. People should be allowed to grow their own cannabis for their own use in their own home, without interference from police or Government. If nobody else is involved then it ought be no business of others - that is called the Right to a Private Life and it is a legal entitlement. Then controlled and licensed outlets for sale to adults, with credible advice and information, quality control and tax on profits. That would go a long way to taking dealers off the streets and towards stopping drug use cross-over. It would also enable those in medical need to grow or buy their plant material - after all, cannabis is a plant - it does not need factories to grow it!"

    |   8
  • malcolmkyle16  |  March 13 2012, 9:15AM

    For God's sake stop blindly following us! During alcohol prohibition, all profits went to enrich thugs and criminals. Young men died every day on inner-city streets while battling over turf. A fortune was wasted on enforcement that could have gone on education, etc. On top of the budget-busting prosecution and incarceration costs, billions in taxes were lost. Finally, the economy collapsed. Sound familiar? It's possible that many of the early Prohibitionists did not actually intend to kill hundreds of thousands worldwide and put 1 in every 30 American adults under supervision of the correctional system while bringing shame upon what was once a shining beacon of liberty and prosperity. But predictively similar to our "Great Experiment" of the 1920s, this foolish and counter-productive 're-run' has once again spawned rampant off-the-scale criminality, corruption, a bust economy, mass unemployment, the world's highest incarceration rate, a civil war in Mexico, an un-winnable war in Afghanistan, and an even higher rate of drug-use (both legal & illegal) than in all other countries that have courageously refused to blindly follow us down this sadomoralistic, dystopian rat hole. Should we wait for complete and utter economic ruination before demanding a return to sanity and the restoration of our unalienable­ rights? Surely it's high time we all stood up and told our dysfunctional government that we're totally pooped at being abused, beaten and jailed in order that unconscionable Transnational Corporations - and their Media Enablers - can continue to dupe, addict and poison us for obscene profits. According to the CATO Institute, ending prohibition would save an annual $41 billion of expenditure while generating an estimated $46 billion in tax revenues. - http://tinyurl.com/23qe5no

    |   8
  • danielf2012  |  March 12 2012, 11:31PM

    i think that cannabis should be allowed but as for crack cocaine and herion to be decriminalised i strongly disagree with it. Cannabis is very popular i dont think that it should be kept illegal as people with certain illness use it to ease the pain away, cannabis is normally used of 50percent cannabis and 50 percent nicotine it is just like saying should nicotine be illegal as that it bad for your health that gives you cancer, lung disease and all sorts and you mainly smoke cannabis, where as for crack cocaine and herion you use needles and you snort it and there are other way but it shouldnt be said that injecting drugs into your blood stream should be allowed as that is to much, we have to remember young children are reading this and for them to think injecting needles and snorting things is ok then that is wrong, yes the same goes for cannabis but surely if its not a crime to smoke a ciggerette and thats what cannabis contains when smoking then why should people not be allowed to smoke it. CANNABIS SHOULD BE LEGALISED BUT AS FOR THE OTHERS THEY SHOULD NOT BE DECRIMINILISED!!!

    |   -3
  • Sanj_C  |  March 12 2012, 11:14PM

    Prohibition of drugs has failed....not only has it failed but it has made the situation worse than it ever would have been. It has served to empower criminal gangs who exploit the failure of international and national drugs laws. I am now 36 and have campaigned for the legalisation of drugs for 20 years. As a 16 year old I realised that prohibition was a failed paradigm, I used things like facts, evidence and statistics to support my case but the opposition just used misinformation, propaganda and sensationalism...I was ridiculed for many of those 20 years but finally the world is waking up and realising that prohibition is evil and harmful, even more so than the drugs it seeks to control! If you disagree I ask one simple question....show me the evidence to prove that prohibition has had a positive effect? Decriminalisation is a ridiculous notion, it is the worst possible solution as it leaves control of the supply in the hands on criminals. Legalisation is the only real solution, actual control and regulation of the supply as well as the consumption is the only way we will combat against the harms. We have already had experiments of doing this in the UK, as recently as the 1990s there was a program that gave drugs to addicts. Read about Dr John Marks and the astonishing work he did with addicts in Widnes. Up until the mid-1990s, the clinic was run by consultant psychiatrist Dr John Marks, who advocated a form of treating drug addicts which involved giving them the narcotics they craved. The theory of 'harm reduction' held that while drug-users were kept away from the underworld and from the constant search for money and a 'fix', they could live more normal lives – limiting the damage they could do to themselves and society. The theory was based on a model used in the UK from the 1920s until the 1960s which became known as the 'British system' and the clinic saw remarkable successes. Between July 1988 and January 1990, the then-Cheshire Drug Squad began tracking the criminal records of 112 addicts who entered the drug maintenance program. It recorded a 93% drop in theft, burglary, and property crimes. HIV infection rate among injecting drug users was zero, and the incidence of death among addicts – normally 15% a year - was also zero. One side-effect which Dr Marks did not expect though, was a drop in new users. The police found that drug dealers simply stayed away from Halton because they knew the local addicts no longer needed their services. Read more go to: http://tinyurl.com/2fayqma

    |   5
  • bimple  |  March 12 2012, 10:49PM

    ""Heroin and crack cocaine should never be allowed to be legal for use. Why would you want a world full of legal high risk drugs? The damage it would cause people, my dad use to smoke 50 fags a day and his health is so bad now any drug over used equals bad results to health! x"" But cigs are FAR worse for your health than clean heroin.

    |   -1
  • Penrhos  |  March 12 2012, 10:13PM

    And here's some NHS statitics for the "cannabis sends you mad" brigade to chew on... Hospital Episode Statistics. Count of finished admission episodes (FAE) with a primary diagnosis of mental and behavioural disorders due to use of cannabinoids (ICD10 code F12) and alcohol (ICD10 code F10) Cannabinoids (F12) 2009-10 713 2010-11 799 Alcohol (F10) 2009-10 47,402 2010-11 47,287 Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The NHS Information Centre for health and social care. There are three million regular users of cannabis (Atha et al 2011) and 31 million regular users of alcohol (NHS Information Centre 2009). Therefore alcohol use is six times more likely to result in admission for mental and behavioural disorders. CBD - a constituent of Cannabis is actually an anti-pyschotic substance. If you don't believe me checkout http://tinyurl.com/bmurb4n Which proves cannabis in the hands of big business is perfectly safe and very profitable.

    |   5







      Yes: 54%

      54% of the vote

      No: 46%

      46% of the vote

      Poll is closed

      2819 people have voted.