Hyde Park, 20th April 2013

The Hyde Park 420 event on 20th April 2013 was not a success for the British cannabis campaign.  It may have been an enjoyable social event for some but its effect has been to associate the legitimate campaign for cannabis law reform with the spectacle of hundreds of children smoking weed in public.

This is not the way to advance our cause and those responsible for organising and promoting children and teenagers to participate have shot themselves in the foot.  Responsible adult users and particularly those who need cannabis as medicine have been seriously set back by this event.

It’s not surprising that the media coverage was largely negative.  Estimates of attendance range from a few hundred to 10,000.  Neither is true.  I don’t know but from the photographs and having attended other events in the same location I would guess at around 5,000.  That’s not the point though. What it has done is present the British cannabis campaign as irresponsible and juvenile.  That makes it all the more difficult to complain about the media stories and, more importantly, to achieve positive, supportive  coverage.

Nevertheless, CLEAR submitted formal complaints to the BBC about its website article and about Mary Brett’s appearance on Radio London’s Vanessa Feltz show.  We have also made a PCC complaint about the Daily Mail’s coverage.

Website complaint

This article is unbalanced and gives credence and space to wildly inaccurate, sensationalist and scaremongering comments from Mary Brett. No counterbalancing information is given.

Cannabis cannot by any scientific or medical evidence be described as ’dangerous’. It is a generally benign substance although it does offer some potential for harm, only if used by children. This is clearly shown by the vast amount of published, peer reviewed evidence on the subject. Compared to almost any other substance it is far, far safer – much safer than aspirin according to the government’s chief drugs advisor, Prof Leslie Iversen.

‘Skunk’ is a specific strain of cannabis. It accounts for a tiny fraction of the market, not 80%. It is the same substance as was around in the sixties and seventies and it is nonsense to suggest otherwise.

To describe any strain of cannabis as ‘horrific’ is absurd and has no basis in science, medicine or any evidence. That the BBC gives Ms Brett licence to distribute her false, misleading propaganda is a disgrace.

 Radio London complaint

The opportunity given to Mary Brett to advance a line of argument that is disproven by all published research was disgraceful.

Her casual use of the word skunk as a derogatory and scaremongering term was inaccurate and misleading. Skunk is a single strain of cannabis which accounts for a fraction of a percent of the cannabis used in the UK.

The THC percentage figures given by Ms Brett were inaccurate. The allegation that cannabis “dumbs the brain down” is false and has no basis in evidence. In fact, cannabis promotes neurogenesis in the hippocampus and has been used for millennia by artists and writers as an aid to creativity.

It was inaccurate to claim that all people in Hyde Park were teenagers. There were people of all ages, many of retirement age and many who use cannabis for medicinal purposes. There is no scientific basis for describing cannabis as dangerous. Compared to all other drugs, even aspirin, it is far less harmful. Evidence proves that in the UK alcohol is six times more likely to be associated with mental health problems than cannabis.

Ms Brett was also allowed to misrepresent two studies concerning the Lambeth cannabis experiment in the same way as recently published in the press which has been challenged by the authors of the studies and are subject to PCC complaints. It is absolutely false to state that more ‘kids’ are in treatment for cannabis than for alcohol. Ms Brett is a misguided promoter of false science and has no place on the BBC.

We have yet to receive a response concerning Radio London but Laura Ellis from the BBC News website has replied:

I have looked again at the story and I believe it is a balanced and factual account of the event – a mass gathering at which hundreds of people were breaking the law as it currently stands.

We feature a range of comments, including a tweet from the London Cannabis Club. There are also clear links to a picture gallery of the global marijuana march, which includes information about the potential medicinal aspect of cannabis, as well as an article with the headline ‘Cannabis makes pain more bearable’.

Best regards, and thanks for your feedback which is much appreciated.

We’re not leaving it there though!

Dear Ms Ellis,

I am dismayed at your response to my complaint which fails to address the issues I raised at all.

As for your suggestion that it is a “balanced” account of the event, that is preposterous and just does not stand up to analysis.

Your response and indeed the article itself is predicated on your description that it was “a mass gathering at which hundreds of people were breaking the law as it currently stands”.

Is that how you would have covered a protest about the ‘bedroom tax’ or changes to planning law? Of course not. You would have looked at the issues involved, not just resorted to prejudice and dismissal of widespread public concern about the injustice of the present laws against cannabis.

I am afraid that your response really shines a light on gross bias and distortion of this story in the BBC. A recent Ipsos MORI poll shows 53% of the British public want cannabis legalised or decriminalised: http://transform-drugs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/new-ipsos-mori-poll-shows-53-of-gb.html

What is truly appaling though, which you have completely overlooked and is in brazen defiance of the requirement on the BBC to be balanced is your unchallenged repetition of Mary Brett’s falsehood and misrepresentation of the scientific evidence about cannabis.

In my original complaint I referenced specific inaccuracies but you have simply ignored them. I am afraid your blandishments cut no ice. Such misleading, inaccurate and prejudiced coverage is what we expect from the Daily Mail but not from our national broadcaster which is paid for out of public money.

Please address my complaint properly. If you will not publish a prominent correction and apology and re-balance your coverage, I fully intend to take this to the Editorial Complaints Unit.

BBC Responds To CLEAR Complaints On Cannabis Coverage - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

Bonkers

The wonderful news today is that Cameron and his cronies, Paul Dacre, Rupert Murdoch and the Barclay brothers have been outwitted, outnegotiated and trumped.  We shall have a new system of press regulation, independent of the press and of politicians and, crucially, it will be underpinned by law.

The Butcher Of Truth

The liars, cheats and abusers that form the Fleet Street mafia have been dragged kicking and screaming out of their ivory towers and Lord Leveson’s recommendations will be implemented in full.  This is a great day for Britain!

The Bitch

The problem with press regulation has always been the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), a fundamentally corrupt institution that has always acted in the  interests of the press and has proved itself worse than useless even in the most grievous cases of abusive journalism.  In the last two years CLEAR has been one of the most prolific complainers as we have tried to rein in newspapers’ ‘reefer madness’ and sensationalist, misleading treatment of the cannabis  issue.

The Barclay Brothers

Although the complaints officers and staff at the PCC are very helpful and Lord David Hunt, the chairman, is charm and reason personified, the commission itself  is simply a sham for protecting the  interests of editors and media owners.  In around 80 complaints, many concerning the most ridiculously inaccurate and misleading articles, we have not had one upheld by the commission. We have resolved a large number by negotiation with newspapers, facilitated by the complaints officers but once a complaint goes to the commision the result is a foregone conclusion.

The Bully

This is despite an Editors’ Code which is excellent in its scope and content.  There is nothing the  matter with the code at all, if only the commission would enforce it.  In practice, the commission sees its role as to find excuses why the code should not be enforced and makes endless qualitative judgements that an article or a claim is ‘not sufficiently’ inaccurate, misleading or distorted – with no regard whatsoever for tautology or oxymoron.

Anyone with any knowledge of the reefer madness that British newspapers are hopelessly addicted to will realise that not to have even one complaint upheld is conclusive proof that the commission is corrupt and not fit for purpose.

However, the Editors’ Code can go on and with this in mind, CLEAR has submitted a proposal to the Editors’ Code of Practice Committee for two amendments to the code.  We await the committee’s response with interest.

1. The PCC refuses to enforce the requirement not to publish ‘misleading’ information retreating only to the narrow test of ‘inaccuracy’. This means that, for example, if there is one scientific study showing that a camel can pass through the eye of a needle and this is presented as fact by a newspaper, despite dozens of other studies to the contrary, the commission will find there has been no breach of the code.

If the commission finds the code impossible to enforce then it needs to be re-drafted so that it can be.

2. The PCC refuses to accept complaints about headlines alone, stating that an article must be considered as a whole. This denies the reality that many readers read the headline only and that much journalistic effort is put into formulating headlines for precisely this reason. This is a licence for newspapers to publish ‘inaccurate, misleading and distorted’ headlines with impunity. It promotes sensationalism and must be changed.

A CLEAR Submission To The Editors’ Code Of Practice Committee - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

2012 was a tumultuous year which saw great progress in the development of the cannabis campaign and, most importantly, the introduction of responsible and intelligent legal regulation in Colorado and Washington state.

Derek Williams, CLEAR website editor and member of our executive committee, has already published an excellent review of the main events of 2012.  My purpose here is to look forward to what we aim to achieve in 2013.

I must, however, thank all those on the executive committee for their hard work, loyalty and courage:  Joel Dalais, Buster Dawson, Alan Hobday, Mark Palmer, Graham Smith, Jan Wells and Derek Williams.  Special thanks also to the CLEAR media team and all the Comment Warriors who have worked so hard to tell the truth and confront the media’s insatiable appetite for misinformation and scare stories about cannabis.

CLEAR is the largest membership-based drug reform group that Britain has ever seen.  Despite treacherous attempts to sabotage our work we have stayed focused, on message and we are the voice of responsible, evidence-based cannabis law reform in Britain.  Other groups represent the ‘stoner’ community but these are only a tiny proportion of the millions of  cannabis users in Britain.  CLEAR will continue to engage in the mainstream political process.  We will not discredit the arguments for reform by indulging in the sort of cannabis evangelism that has held back progress for so long.  There is more than enough evidence on our side without resorting to ‘hemp will save the world’ or ‘cannabis cures cancer’.  These distortions and wild exaggerations make fools of those who advance them.  Our arguments will always be based on science and evidence.

We have much work yet to do following the completion of the HASC drugs inquiry.  Much as with Leveson, its recommendations were the very minimum that could reasonably follow from the evidence yet were rejected out of hand by an out of touch, arrogant and incoherent coalition government.  Unlike Leveson, the evidence heard was partial, unbalanced and ruthlessly cherry picked to avoid upsetting the political establishment.  Most worrying was its absolute failure to consider the interests of the vast majority of non-problematic drug users and Keith Vaz’ shameful denial that medicinal cannabis was an issue it should have considered.  Despite us maintaining a dialogue with the committee for more than a year on medicinal use, it was only after the inquiry finished that Vaz claimed it was not within its remit.  Yet again, Home and Health are passing the buck back and forth while hundreds of thousands suffer and live in fear of punishment merely for seeking to relieve their pain or disability.

Our Comment Warriors campaign will continue and we intend to co-ordinate it with efforts to engage the new Police and Crime Commissioners in setting more intelligent priorities for law enforcement resources.

Our pledge never to allow untruths about cannabis to be published without challenge also continues.  We await with interest the replacement for the discredited and useless Press Complaints Commission.  However, whilst it remain the only avenue for complaints we will continue to use it.  We will also continue to make formal complaints to the police when officers step over the line from their duty into politicking and propaganda.

Joel Dalais will be heading up a new membership and fundraising drive.  We can do nothing without funding and the party still relies too much on executive committee members paying their own travelling expenses as well as giving their time for free.  We are in the process of applying for substantial, long-term funding from several grant-making institutions.

If the HASC drugs inquiry was our main focus through 2012, then in 2013 we have a plan to communicate directly with the general public and the media.  This will involve significant monthly expenditure, more than ever seen before by the cannabis campaign.  We will need your help and your money to make this succeed.

We also intend to ramp up our efforts to co-ordinate the lobbying of MPs.  Many have tried but failed to make this work effectively.  We aim to get in front of ministers within the coming year, to look in the eyes of those in charge at the Home Office and Department of Health and interrupt their game of ping pong with the issue of medicinal cannabis.

In order to develop these plans further we will hold a two-day strategic planning meeting later this month for the executive committee.  At that time we will also finalise plans for our first national conference which will take place in the spring.

Thank you for your support and encouragement through the past year.  Never before have the prospects for legalisation been so realistic.  This is entirely because of the professional, business-like approach taken by our colleagues in the US.  CLEAR is the only group pursuing reform in Britain in an equivalent and effective fashion.

By the end of this month we will have set out clearly what you can do to help. Please join with us, dig deep to provide the financial support necessary for success and let’s all have high expectations for what we can achieve.  I guarantee you that everyone at CLEAR will dedicate themselves and all their efforts as never before.

The CLEAR Cannabis Law Reform Campaign In 2013 - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

Contact: Peter Reynolds
Tel: 07880872022
peterreynolds@clear-uk.org

Reply to press@clear-uk.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – NO EMBARGO

The Independent’s Inaccurate Reporting On Schizophrenia Underlines Necessity For Tougher Press Regulation

In the week of the Leveson report, it is ironic that one of the supposedly ‘quality’ newspapers – The Independent – provided an example of why Britain needs far more effective press regulation.

The Independent ran a series of articles about schizophrenia as a follow up to publication of the Schizophrenia Commission’s report ‘The Abandoned Illness’.

However, it seriously distorted the evidence by vastly overstating the role of cannabis in development of the condition.  Its foreign correspondent, Patrick Cockburn, believes his son’s mental illness was caused by cannabis and has been presenting his opinion as fact since he published a book on the subject in 2011.  While there is evidence of correlation between cannabis use and schizophrenia, there is no proof of a causal link.  In fact, there is far higher correlation between schizophrenia and tobacco use but this has not prevented Cockburn from presenting dubious and, in some instances, clearly false evidence in support of his campaign.

The Independent’s reporting clearly breached the Editors’ Code. It published “inaccurate, misleading and distorted information”. It failed entirely to “distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact”. In fact, it did exactly the opposite, deliberately confusing the three to scaremonger, sensationalise and mislead.

Peter Reynolds, the leader of CLEAR Cannabis Law Reform, has submitted yet another complaint to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC).  However, it has consistently shown itself to be unable or unwilling to take an objective stance on complaints or to enforce the Editors’ Code.  Instead it seems to see its role as finding excuses for breaches of the code.

The editor of the Independent, Chris Blackhurst, has been outspoken in recent days in his opposition to tougher regulation of the press. This series of alarmist and misleading articles shows why editors cannot be trusted with self-regulation.

Peter Reynolds said:

“The truth is that newspapers play fast and loose with science and medicine all the time.  They twist and distort evidence to produce a more sensational story and when one of their senior journalists has an axe to grind and a book to sell then accuracy and responsibility go out of the window.  Schizophrenia is a dreadful illness but there is as at least as much evidence that cannabis provides beneficial therapeutic effects than that it is a negative factor.”

A full rebuttal of The Independent’s cannabis and schizophrenia scare story is available here: http://www.clear-uk.org/the-truth-about-cannabis-that-the-independent-refuses-to-print/

Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR) is a political party registered with the Electoral Commission under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA) to promote the cause of cannabis law reform, with the aim of replacing the anarchic mess of prohibition with a framework of real legal control which would allow proper control of the trade, ensure proper regulation of the product in terms of strength and purity and provide proper protection for vulnerable people such as children.

ENDS

If you would like more information on this topic or an other aspect of the work of Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR), or to arrange an interview with Peter Reynolds please contact him on 07880 872022
peterreynolds@clear-uk.org
or contact the CLEAR Press agent Derek Williams 07941 238908
press@clear-uk.org

Cannabis Law Reform, PO Box 674, Salfords, Redhill, Surrey RH1 9BN United Kingdom

News Release – The Independent’s Inaccurate Reporting On Schizophrenia Underlines Necessity For Tougher Press Regulation. - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

After the disgraceful misinformation and false science about cannabis printed in The Independent last week, I made direct contact with Chris Blackhurst the editor. He was gracious enough to invite me to submit an article or a letter for publication and so I set to and turned round 700 words in just a couple of hours.

Immediately the attitude changed.  There was no courtesy, no more interest, my calls and emails weren’t returned.

The Independent’s anti-cannabis campaign last week breached the Editors’ Code repeatedly.  It published “inaccurate, misleading and distorted information”.  It failed entirely to “distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact”. Actually it did exactly the opposite, deliberately confusing the three to scaremonger, sensationalise and mislead.

All this in the week when the Leveson report was published.  The Independent and all newspapers operate in brazen and blatant defiance of their spurious and insincere ‘self-regulation’.  It is a total failure and nothing but a licence for a corrupt press to print whatever it wants.

I am preparing a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission but I know what it will do.  It will do what it was designed for.  It will pay lip service to considering my complaint and then, instead of enforcing the Editors’ Code, it will find excuses for where it has been breached.

So here is the piece I wrote for The Independent.  It is the truth and it exposes the lies and deception that Mr Blackhurst printed last week. 

Throughout the world, rates of schizophrenia and psychosis have been declining for the last 50 years. Simultaneously, consumption of cannabis has skyrocketed. It is also true that average THC levels in cannabis have increased two or three fold since the 1970s, although stronger varieties of cannabis have always been available.

So any suggestion that cannabis causes schizophrenia or psychosis just doesn’t add up. Neither does the scientific evidence support this.

Professor Sir Robin Murray is only one of many eminent scientists working in this field and he holds the most extreme opinion which is why Patrick Cockburn only adduces his words as evidence. Others interpret the evidence very differently:

“Cannabis has been used safely for many thousands of years…there have been concerted efforts to demonise the drug’s use.” - Professor Tim Kirkham, psychologist, Liverpool University.

“I don’t think it causes mental illness. I have never seen a case of so-called cannabis psychosis.” -  Dr Trevor Turner, former vice president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

“I don’t see a lot of problem cannabis users…we’re not seeing a lot of cannabis users presenting for treatment.”  - Dr Clare Gerada, chair, Royal College of General Practitioners.

Perhaps the most valuable study, specifically about schizophrenia, comes from the University of Bristol in 2009 (Hickman, Zammit and Lewis). It is a review of all published evidence so, by definition, not cherry picked. It acknowledges that no causal link can be shown so looks at the risk involved. It shows that to prevent one case of schizophrenia or psychosis you would have to stop 7500 heavy users or 30,000 light users ever using cannabis in their life.

The risks are therefore infinitesimally small. To put the whole debate in perspective, there are 750 hospital admissions each year for cannabis but 3000 for peanuts. We spend £500 million each year on the criminal justice system for cannabis alone when perhaps it would be better spent stamping out peanuts?

Of course if you make the comparison with alcohol the gap is even wider Over one million hospital admissions each year with around 47,000 for mental health issues and alcohol is proven to be a direct cause of psychosis. The facts are that anyone in Britain is six times more likely to experience mental health problems associated with alcohol than with cannabis.

The truth is perhaps best expressed by Professor Terrie Moffitt of the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College who said in August 2012 “cannabis is safe for over-18 brains but risky for under-18 brains”.

This highlights the real issue. The disastrous policy of prohibition followed by successive governments means that in Britain we have more children using cannabis and the lowest age at first use in Europe. Why? Because the only ID a dealer asks for is a £20 note.

We urgently need to introduce legal regulation of cannabis in order to protect children, fight crime and enable police to concentrate on real wrongdoing instead of crimes that only exist because of a misguided and failed government policy. The UK cannabis market is worth in excess of £6 billion per annum. We consume more than three tons of cannabis every single day. All this is in the hands of criminals at present. Under legal regulation it would create thousands of new jobs and new tax revenue which could be spent on drugs education as well as schools and hospitals.

Professor David Nutt said recently that a legally regulated cannabis market could lead to a 25% reduction in alcohol consumption which would transform public health. It is of course the alcohol industry which is behind the continuing prohibition of cannabis. It is terrified of a healthier and safer alternative to its poisonous products.

Most urgently we need to allow doctors to prescribe medicinal cannabis, the evidence for which is now overwhelmingly positive. Apart from France, Britain is the only country in Europe which denies this relief to sick and disabled people. Remarkably though, Britain is the only country in the world that has licensed a pharmaceutical company to grow huge quantities of cannabis to make the medicine called ‘Sativex’, even though the Home Office says “there is no medicinal value in cannabis”. Sativex is an extremely concentrated form of cannabis containing 51% THC. Strangely enough, there is no warning label on the bottles claiming that it may cause schizophrenia or psychosis.

The Truth About Cannabis That The Independent Refuses To Print. - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

Reefer Madness Rehashed

Alexander Lebedev, Owner Of The Independent

The Russian billionaire and oligarch, Alexander Lebedev, also owner of the Evening Standard, definitely wasted his money on the Independent.  He is a man with a passion for newspapers, journalism and the bold principle of a free press.  He must have been beside himself with delight at the prospect of owning a quality British newspaper, no longer a broadsheet and only 26 years old, still with a whiff of genuine Fleet Street about it.

Mary Brett

This past week’s spurious, inaccurate, misleading and distorted “Schizophrenia – the cannabis link” series has finally exposed that the Independent is anything but. Its editorial last Wednesday brazenly asserted “…the role of cannabis as a cause of schizophrenia” - an absolute falsehood, something that no scientist would support and that is worthy only of an hysterical, prudish schoolmistress like Mary Brett or the sort of rag that publishes Kathy Gyngell and Melanie Phillips.

How A Quality Newspaper Became A Daily Mail Clone

Yes, the regression back to the  neanderthal, reactionary, sensationalism of the Mail looks to be almost complete.  The dog’s dinner that has been the development of the Independent’s design hasn’t helped.  The website is even worse.  Mail Online is much better and the only difference in content is that the Independent has fewer semi-naked women.  The quality of writing is variable between extremes.  The dunderhead misunderstanding of science, the distortion and manipulation of evidence solely to provoke the lowest common denominator of attention is shameful.

A Liberal Intelligent Woman Replaced By A Dullard Blair Sycophant

Rosie Boycott

In 1997, Rosie Boycott, editor of the Independent on Sunday wrote:

The irony, of course, is that one of the world’s most dangerous drugs, the one responsible for more crime, more lost hours at work, more broken families, more violence, more ghastly heartbreak, is freely available in every supermarket and corner store in the land. If alcohol is a tiger, then cannabis is merely a mouse. Alcohol is fine for those who can handle it. As a recovered alcoholic, I have experienced the terrible consequence of booze. Everyone has probably known someone whose life – or family – has been blighted by alcohol, heroin or cocaine. But they’ll know more people damaged by drink. Where alcohol is aggressive, cannabis is passive.

Certainly, no one has ever been disfigured by a joint. The truth is that most people I know have smoked at some time or other in their lives. They hold down jobs, bring up their families, run major companies, govern our country, and yet, 30 years after my day out in Hyde Park, cannabis is still officially regarded as a dangerous drug.

Of course, nothing has changed today.  Even the myth of the new ‘super strong demon skunk’ won’t wash because by 1997 it was already the predominant product on the streets.

10 years later though the Independent reversed its position in dramatic fashion. “Cannabis. An Apology” its huge headline screamed at the behest of the newly appointed golden boy, John  Rentoul, a Tony Blair acolyte, disciple and sycophant and a man with possibly the poorest understanding of science ever displayed in a British newspaper.

“25 times stronger” it shrieked.  Even Rosie got caught up in it.  It was “30 times stronger” as far she was concerned.  Utter nonsense of course.  Cannabis available today is on average two to three times stronger than that available in the 1970s.  Rosie did go a bit silly with “Unlike the old-fashioned cannabis of my youth, skunk makes people aggressive: they steal, break into cars and snatch phones.”, she wailed.  The following year the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs concluded “…evidence available to the Council does not suggest that cannabis use is a cause of acquisitive crime”.

At least Rosie retained her fundamental common sense: ”I do not believe that we can ever contain the drug trade by making outlaws of the users and by allowing criminal gangs to control the supply” but the editorial stance was now way up the reefer madness richter scale with five or six pages of hysteria, completely detached from and unrelated to science, evidence or rationale.

John Rentoul

Then last year, in response to the launch of Global Commission on Drugs Policy, Rentoul excelled himself with a display of crass stupidity, illiberal moralising and distortion of fact that Paul Dacre would have been proud of.  Once again the newspaper indulged in many pages of scaremongering and distortion of evidence.

Rentoul leapt at Professor Sir Robin Murray’s  entirely discredited COMT gene theory suggesting that up to 25% of the population has genetic susceptibility to cannabis triggered psychosis.  He concluded with the falsehood that “nowhere in the world has conducted such an experiment (decriminalisation) successfully, while the medical evidence against cannabis has mounted.”  So ridiculous is this statement that is is unnecessary to repeat the published, peer-reviewed evidence that has been cited on the CLEAR website many times over.  Rentoul has real difficulty in understanding science and the difference between proof and possibility.  Evidently, he also has no idea what is still going on in the USA, Eastern Europe, Holland, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Israel and many other places where decriminalisation or regulation is very successful.

Rentoul’s ultimate humiliation and the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen written by a supposedly serious ‘political commentator’ was:

“It is a bad thing that the drugs business is in the hands of criminals. My view is that it would be a worse thing if it were legalised, and regulated or administered by the government.”

Cheap Tricks. Brazen Falsehood. Roubles Gone To Waste

Last week the six month cycle came around again for the imaginative and creative Indy editorial team.  ’It’s cannabis this week.  What can we make up?’

Henry And Patrick Cockburn

Another re-hash. The formerly respected foreign correspondent, Patrick Cockburn, was wheeled out for the Christmas book campaign to promote his ‘Henry’s Demon’s‘, the tragic story of his son’s battle with schizophrenia.  Of course, it is possible that Henry’s schizophrenia was triggered by cannabis.  It’s more possible than that you might win the lottery jackpot this week but far less possible than that you might die from non-Hodgkins lymphoma.  In fact you’re between twice to twenty times as likely to suffer that fate as to develop schizophrenia associated with cannabis use.

None of these facts though can be allowed to stand in the way of a sensationalist story about the ‘demon skunk‘.

I had high hopes for Chris Blackhurst, the editor of the Independent appointed last year, but they have evaporated.

The Independent is a sham. It is not a quality newspaper. It is a scandal sheet, a low, dishonest, corruption of truth. The ignominious Independent.

Of course I make this judgement on the single issue of the Independent’s coverage of the cannabis issue.  On this I am an expert and the Indy’s position is indefensible.  If this is indicative of the accuracy and care that it brings to other issues then it can only be described as untrustworthy.  I cannot speak to every issue but any editorial team that is prepared to do such a shabby, sensationalist, cheap and inaccurate job as the Indy does on cannabis deserves no trust at all.

An outline complaint has already been submitted to the Press Complaints Commission concerning last week’s coverage.  A full complaint will be submitted shortly and published on this website.

The Decline Of The Independent - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
3rd September 2012

 CLEAR To Contest The Corby By-Election

Peter Reynolds, who was elected as leader of CLEAR in February 2011, will stand as a candidate in the forthcoming Corby & East Northamptonshire by-election, expected to take place on 15th November 2012.

CLEAR is a single issue political party which seeks an end to the prohibition of cannabis, most urgently by allowing doctors to prescribe it as medicine.  It also advocates a tax and regulate policy on cannabis which would minimise all health and social harms, provide far better protection for childen and contribute a net gain to the UK ecomony of up to £9.3 billion per annum.

Last week a major international study confirmed that cannabis could be harmful to children but the real news was that one of the authors, Professor Terrie Moffitt of the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College London, said: “…cannabis is safe for over-18 brains…”

Peter Reynolds said:

“We hope to be a focus for the protest vote against the main political parties.  The cannabis issue is a perfect example of how they are completely out of touch with the electorate.  They refuse to listen to public opinion. They refuse to base policy on evidence.  Instead they are more concerned with how they are portrayed in the media and with vested interests such as the alcohol and pharmaceutical industries.”

The present MP for Corby, Louise Mensch, demonstrated the blatant hypocrisy that pervades the political elite when she was recently questioned about her past drug use.  Effectively she said ‘Don’t do I as I do, do as I say’. Then, no doubt, she went off to consume the most dangerous, harmful and addictive drug of all in parliament’s taxpayer-subsidised bars.

The misinformation and dishonest propaganda against cannabis was highlighted in the Corby area recently when Northamptonshire Police issued a false statement to the media claiming that the odour released by cannabis plants has “carcinogenic properties”.  CLEAR submitted a formal complaint to the police and made several complaints to the Press Complaints Commission.  As a result, Northamptonshire Police issued an apology and corrections were published in the press.

CLEAR published independent, expert research in September 2011 which shows that:

• over 30% of all adults use cannabis in their lifetime
• over 3 million adults use cannabis at least once per month
• over 3 tonnes of cannabis is consumed in Britain every day
• approx £500 million pa is spent on the criminal justice system for cannabis alone

Peter Reynolds said:

“All the evidence shows that where adults have legally regulated access to cannabis, consumption by children is lower and age at first use is higher.  The only ID a dealer asks for is a £20 note.  Present policy is dangerous and irresponsible and creates an unregulated £6 billion black market.  Our political leaders have abandoned our children to organised crime because they are scared stiff of the tabloid press and of pressure from the alcohol industry.  As Professor David Nutt said recently, if cannabis was legally regulated than alcohol consumption could fall by up to 25%.  That would transform public health in Britain and save the NHS billions.”

An overwhelming quantity of peer-reviewed scientific evidence now proves the efficacy of cannabis as medicine in a wide range of conditions such as MS, Crohn’s disease, chronic pain conditions, particularly neuropathic pain and many others.  GW Pharmaceuticals has been granted a monopoly of medicinal cannabis in Britain with its 51% THC extract of super-concentrated skunk cannabis known as Sativex.  It is sold to the NHS at 10 times the price that organised crime sells cannabis on the streets.  Together with the Home Office and the MHRA, GW Pharma is engaged in a disinformation campaign claiming that Sativex is not cannabis and that it does not produce a “high” in patients who use it.  These dishonest claims are contradicted by the statutory product information.

CLEAR is a UK political party registered with the Electoral Commission.  With nearly 15,000 registered supporters it is now the largest membership-based drug reform group that Britain has ever seen. Its aims and objectives are:

1. To end the prohibition of cannabis.
2. To promote as a matter of urgency and compassion the prescription of medicinal cannabis by doctors.
3. To introduce a system of regulation for the production and supply of cannabis based on facts and evidence.
4. To encourage the production and use of industrial hemp.
5. To educate and inform about the uses and benefits of cannabis.

Much more information is available on the CLEAR website: www.clear-uk.org.

Taxing the UK Cannabis Market – the most authoritative, up to date, independent, expert research on cannabis in Britain: http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/TaxUKCan.pdf

A CLEAR Plan for the Regulation of Cannabis in Britain– a discussion document proposing a system of regulation for cannabis: http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/CLEARplan.pdf

PRESS RELEASE – CLEAR To Contest The Corby By-Election - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

CLEAR has challenged the newspaper coverage of cannabis in every form, of every type, at every level.  If the PCC had been able to enforce the Editors’ Code, which surely should have been its principal mission, then a great deal less misinformation would have been published.

As a consequence, policymakers would have been able to base their decisions on evidence rather than concern for the reaction of the press.  The principal culprit in this corruption  of drug policy is, of course, the Daily Mail.   Its editors, journalists and writers are responsible for a great deal of human misery and suffering, not to say the denial of personal liberty and the prevention of access to cannabis as medicine.  They have inflamed and misinformed public opinion and intimidated politicians away from evidence and towards scare stories.

CLEAR has brought the worst excesses of the press about cannabis under control.  Every editor in Britain knows that any inaccuracy will be challenged.  Although our complaints are rarely upheld, we hold the press to account.  Often a resolution has been agreed and we have had a letter or a correction published but even when our complaint has been rejected, we have forced editors to justify their actions and they have now become much more careful about what they publish.

There are two areas where we have been unable to enforce the truth, where deliberate misinformation still prevails.  These are where the replacement for the PCC must focus itself for there are lessons that apply in general for honourable and honest journalism

Firstly in headlines, which as every journalist knows, is the most crucial part of any story.  Many readers notice only the headline and may skim the body copy,  if they read it at all.  Editors and journalists know this very well.  Indeed, they rely on it.  The very essence of the journalist’s craft is in phrasing a headline.  It is where all effort and skill is focused.  Yet,  according to the PCC, a complaint cannot be considered about a headline alone.  This is the most blatant and crass hypocrisy by those professional journalists who sit on the commission.

Secondly, the clause of the Editors’ Code under which nearly all cannabis related complaints have been made states that newspapers must not publish “…inaccurate, misleading or distorted information.”  In practice though, the only word that is considered is “inaccurate“.  Thus, a complaint about the  headline “Monkees star Davy Jones on cannabis when he died”, fails both because because it is a headline and because it is strictly accurate, even if it is grossly misleading.  Simlarly, a complaint about the headline “Men sentenced after cannabis factory found in their home” fails despite the fact that the full story is that class A drugs, two handguns and a 100 rounds of ammunition were also found.

So, on both these counts, the practice of the PCC has provided the press with a way to publish misleading and false information with impunity.  Provided you confine a lie to a headline, you can say anything you want.  Provided you stay strictly accurate, you can mislead as far away from the truth as you wish.

I have discussed both these points with Lord Hunt, who is charged with creating the replacement for the PCC.  I know he understands these issues and I have confidence that he will do his best to devise a fairer process for the future.

In the meantime, it is a fact that headlines, particularly in the Daily Mail, can never be relied on as truthful.

It’s All In The Headline – Unless It’s A Complaint - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

So who do we need to focus on?

Certainly not on cannabis users.  Most have no wish to be represented.  Most simply want to be left alone to enjoy a quiet smoke or to alleviate whatever condition they suffer from in peace, without persecution or harassment.

CLEAR exists to advance an evidence-based argument to free, not “the weed”, but the people who choose, or need, to use it.

According to the most up-to-date, independent, expert research, there are three million regular users of cannabis in Britain.  That’s three million people who have used cannabis within the past month.  Just over 24,000 of them have the signed the HM Government e-petition calling for the legalisation of cannabis. It’s pathetic, isn’t it?

I believe those 24,000 people account for 80-90% of the “stoner” community, including medicinal and other activists such as you and me.  So where are the other 2.8 million?  In fact, where are the other 8 million occasional users?  Why aren’t these people standing up to be counted or, at least, ticking a box that says “legalise”?   Where are they? Are the figures wrong?

Divining the answers to these questions is the key to cannabis law reform.  It is the very essence of what CLEAR stands for.

We will make no progress by marches, demos, protests, “smoke outs”, not even by self-sacrificial martyrdom as exemplified by Winston Matthews, a gross injustice but a triumph of stupidity over reason.  A complete failure to recognise the way the argument needs to be put.

What we have to do is engage with government and with regulators.  We have to overturn the prejudice and misinformation of the media, which is why CLEAR’s work with the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) is so important.  Also, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which is crucial for the approval of medicinal products and which CLEAR has been negotiating with for over a year.  The Home Office, which is perhaps the most corrupt of British institutions, cannot be dealt with rationally or reasonably but needs to be manipulated or outwitted in the direction of common sense.

The HASC drugs inquiry is the only route worth pursuing at present.  It is the only hope for reform.  I am delighted to announce  that CLEAR has been invited to submit special, additional evidence based on our representations about the way the inquiry is being conducted.  We are being heard.

If you are serious about reform of the prohibition of cannabis then CLEAR deserves your support.  Obviously, we oppose the “reefer madness” mentality but also the opposite “crazy stoner” extreme which denies any harm or negative consequence of cannabis use and believes that “protest” will achieve something.  It won’t.  It is a distraction into social events for smokers – a waste of time.

CLEAR speaks for the 2.8 million regular users as well as the 24,000 that have signed the petition.  We are your best hope.  Please join today.

So Where Now? Where Should Our Focus Be Most CLEAR? - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

Follow the story through these articles:

Corby Police Claim Cannabis Odour Is Carcinogenic

Police Apology About Cannabis

UPDATE On The “Cannabis Odour Is Carcinogenic” Story

Whether this complaint will get anywhere remains to be seen but I do not believe we should let the police off the hook.  Whether it was an honest mistake or not, there should be consequences for those responsible.

—– Original Message —–
From: Peter Reynolds
To: !enquiries
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 4:03 PM
Subject: Complaint against Northamptonshire Police

Dear Sirs,

I wish to make a complaint against Northamptonshire Police concerning a statement made to the press and published in both the Northants Evening Telegraph and the Harborough Mail.

The relevant parts of the statement were:

“Police are warning that when cannabis plants reach the final stages of maturity the odour they release has carcinogenic properties…people who have plants in their home, especially anyone with young children, may be exposing their family to a health risk”.

This is inaccurate, misleading and false. It is politicking and propaganda of the worst kind and amounts to gross misconduct by the officer(s) concerned. It is scaremongering based on false science. It is terrorism used as a method of law enforcement.

I make the complaint in my capacity as the leader of Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR), a UK political party, of P.O.Box 674, Salfords, Redhill, RH1 9BN. I am acting on behalf of the victims of this misconduct who are members of CLEAR and who have been subjected to fear and distress by this false information. You have my permission to communicate with Northants Police about this complaint.

For the purposes of correspondence, please communicate with me by email.

A complaint was made directly to Northants Police on 6th March 2012, copy attached.

Det. Supt. Peter Windridge replied stating that this was an issue of “Direction and Control” and refused to record it as a complaint against individual officer(s).

I then engaged in correspondence with Kate Barrett, senior communications officer, who accepted that the information was misleading and apologised for the error.

I also made Press Complaints Commission complaints against both newspapers which were resolved when they published an apology and correction issued by Ms Barrett.

Although I appreciate the apology and correction issued by Northants Police, they do not go far enough. That such mendacious information can be circulating within Northants Police and that some officers clearly believed it to be accurate is a cause for great concern.

In making this statement the officer(s) concerned acted dishonestly, without integrity, fairness and impartiality. They abused their authority by making a statement which is misleading but which, as police officer(s), they know that the public will believe without question. They also acted in a way that discredits the police service and undermines public confidence.

I accept that the police have a duty to uphold the law as it presently stands, It is however entirely improper for them to engage in politicking, scaremongering and propaganda by the publishing of false information.

I would be grateful if you would deal with this complaint at your earliest convenience. I shall be happy to provide any further information required or to give oral evidence in support.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Reynolds

—– Original Message —–
From: Peter Reynolds
To: PSDMain@northants.police.uk
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 3:26 PM
Subject: Complaint concerning Corby police

Dear Sirs,

I am writing in connection with an article that appeared in the Harborough Mail on 3rd March 2012 under the headline “Drugs factory raided”. The article is still available online at: http://www.harboroughmail.co.uk/news/crime/drugs-factory-raided-1-3578914

I am the elected leader of Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR) a UK political party with almost 10,000 registered supporters. We recognise that the police are as much victims of the misguided policy of prohibition as any other part of society. We also recognise that you have a duty to uphold the law as it presently stands.

However, in the seventh paragraph the article states: “Police are warning that when cannabis plants reach the final stages of maturity the odour they release has carcinogenic properties.”

This is inaccurate, misleading and false. It is politicking and propaganda of the worst kind and amounts to gross misconduct by the officer concerned.

The article goes on to say that “…people who have plants in their home, especially anyone with young children, may be exposing their family to a health risk”.

Again, this is absolute nonsense. It is scaremongering based on false science. It must be corrected.

From the article it would appear that the officer responsible for these statements is Inspector Gary Williams.

Please will you ensure that appropriate disciplinary action is taken against Insp. Williams or whichever officer is responsible. We also expect Northamptonshire Police to issue an apology and a correction.

If such action is not forthcoming then this will be raised as a formal complaint with the IPCC.

A complaint is also being made to the Press Complaints Commission.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Reynolds

IPCC Complaint – Northamptonshire Police - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

Our discussion was wide ranging but at its core was clause one of the Editors’ Code:

“The press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures”

This headline in the Sun is a perfect example of how scurrilous journalism distorts the truth solely for the purpose of sensationalising a story in a grubby attempt to sell more newspapers.  It may be accurate but it is deliberately misleading.  The story is also on the Sun’s website.

In only the second sentence of the article it is made clear that “the drug was not a factor” but by then the damage is done, the association is created and once again cannabis is falsely demonised.

I do not hold out much hope for the success of this complaint as the PCC has a policy of not deeming a breach of the code on a headline alone.  This, of course, is grossly hypocritical as that is the very reason that so much time is spent on crafting headlines.  Every editor knows that it is the headline that delivers the message and many readers will read no further.

The Right Honourable The Lord Hunt of Wirral MBE

The good news is that Lord Hunt is a evidently a man of great integrity and understanding.  He surprised me with his knowledge of the science and medicine of cannabis .  I am confident that the new press regulation body will be a huge improvement on the PCC.  When it starts, I intend to submit repeat complaints to it about the more heinous examples of anti-cannabis propaganda which the PCC has failed to censure.

—– Original Message —–
From: Peter Reynolds
To: complaints@pcc.org.uk
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012 11:10 AM
Subject: Complaint against The Sun, issue dated 7th April 2012

Dear Sirs,

“Monkees star Davy Jones on cannabis when he died”, The Sun, 07-04-12

I wish to make a complaint concerning the above article. It is still available online at: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4243264/Monkees-star-Davy-Jones-on-cannabis-when-he-died-at-66.html

I make the complaint on my own account but also in my capacity as the Leader of Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR), a UK political party, of P.O.Box 674, Salfords, Redhill, RH1 9BN. For the purposes of correspondence, please use my personal address as below.

1. The article breaches clause 1.i) of the code in that it publishes misleading and distorted information.

2. The headline states: “Monkees star Davy Jones on cannabis when he died.” but in the second sentence of the article it says “the drug was not a factor”. Therefore, the headline, while strictly accurate, is clearly deliberately misleading. It distorts the truth for the purpose of sensationalising the story. The journalist and editor concerned know full well and indeed rely on the fact that many readers will take the message from the misleading headline without reading any further.

I would be grateful if you would deal with this complaint at your earliest convenience. I shall be happy to provide any further information required or to give oral evidence in support.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Reynolds

The Sun Monkeys With The Truth - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

This has been a terrible 10 days.  In fact, it’s been a pretty terrible year so far with the relentless hate campaign against me and the noisy trolling of  CLEAR by a small group of people who are angry, bitter and jealous of our success.  I am immensely proud of the way that, through all of this, CLEAR has continued to take the lead in the cannabis campaign.  It is CLEAR that has been putting out positive campaigning effort seven days of every week, of every month.

We now have a valiant and diligent team of comment warriors who take the truth to every corner of Britain, every day. Our PCC complaints are changing the way that the press behaves.  A year ago, could anyone imagine a letter like yesterday’s in the Mail on Sunday being published by a Paul Dacre newspaper?  We have forced them to start publishing the truth.

I have almost finished reading the drugs inquiry evidence and around 50% of all submissions cite CLEAR evidence.  This is an astonishing achievement of which we can be very proud.  We have mobilised people who previously would never have considered making a submission to a parliamentary  inquiry.  We are making change happen!

This is why a coup was attempted.  CLEAR is the most successful and effective cannabis campaign Britain has ever seen.  Those who attacked me wanted to take over what we have created because they can’t do it themselves.

It will take some days yet before the website is fully restored.  We will move it back to its proper domain name in the next day or so.  All membership data is safe.

Thank you to all those who have stood by CLEAR, even in the face of the most disgraceful and underhand plotting, scheming and sabotage.  We have lost some good people who were duped and led astray by the lies and propaganda.  What we need to do now is ramp up the campaign even harder, show that we deserve their trust and welcome them back to the party.

Thank you.

CLEAR Domain Name Secured. The Campaign Continues. - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

I really believe that change in our cannabis laws is imminent. Since the CLEAR campaign began the whole impetus for change has accelerated. Even those who are not supporters of CLEAR and who disagree with our policies have become more focused, more coherent and more active.

The impact we have had in the media with the Comment Warriors campaign and the Press Complaints Commission should not be underestimated. Those with a keen eye for progress should check the letters pages of this weekend’s Sunday newspapers. Our message is being listened to and heard.

It is the written evidence to the drugs policy inquiry that really excites me. So much of it recites CLEAR evidence and support for our policies but even when we are not mentioned, all the submissions that advocate reform deliver a coherent message. They cannot be ignored.

The cannabis e-petition has now been superseded. It was never going to reach the 100,000 signature target anyway. Even if it did, all that was offered was the possibility, maybe the probability, of a debate in parliament and the best we could have expected from that was for an inquiry – which is what we’ve got already.

I think the cannabis e-petition has probably been signed by 80-90% of the “stoners” or user activists but we know there are three million people in Britain who use cannabis regularly, so where were they?

These are people who don’t want to join the campaign but, undoubtedly, they’d like to see a change in the law and I believe that many non-users are now seeing the social and fiscal advantages of regulation instead of prohibition. These are the people that hold the power.

It will probably start with some sort of medicinal use and gradual relaxation of enforcement until it is actually formalised. In fact, that’s what ‘s already happening with Sentencing Council guidelines. It will be fascinating to see the impact of the US elections when drugs policy is bound to come to the top of the agenda.

We are getting there. I congratulate all who are involved in delivering our message with the invincible power of evidence and truth.

Change Is In Sight - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

A Mendacious And Evil Woman

The original complaint is here.

The Daily Mail has now corrected its article and published the following statement at the foot of the page (this article only appeared online):

“A previous version of this article referred to “an irreversibly cannabis-damaged psychotic teen”, we are happy to clarify that there is no scientific evidence that conclusively proves a causal link between smoking cannabis and psychosis.”

With reluctance I have accepted this as resolution of the complaint to the PCC.  It goes nowhere near far enough.  Kathy Gyngell is one of the most mendacious and evil writers on drugs policy that there is.  She makes Peter Hitchens seem like a pussy cat.  The association of the disgusting photograph of a young girl smoking heroin with a caption about cannabis is as foul, irresponsible, scumbag journalism as I have ever seen.

Regrettably though it was either accept this or put the decision in the hands of the weak and useless members of the commission itself.  Then we would have got nothing.  I conclude that it is better to have achieved this.

UPDATE On PCC Complaint. The Daily Mail, 9th January 2012 - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party

As a result of negotiations, the police corporate communications department issued an apology and a correction which has now been published in the Harborough Mail and the Northamptonshire Evening Telegraph.

Northants Evening Telegraph. 23rd March 2012

I have therefore advised the Press Complaints Commission that I consider the complaints against the two newspapers are resolved.

I believe the police need to do more though.  The fact that this appalling misinformation was issued and that there are police officers who clearly believed it is very worrying.  I am therefore escalating the complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

UPDATE On The “Cannabis Odour Is Carcinogenic” Story - CLEAR UK: Cannabis Law Reform Party