22 Nov House Of Lords Short Debate: Placing Health Rather Than Prohibition At The Heart Of Drug Policy.

Watch Here


“Cannabis currently sits in Schedule 1—the schedule for dangerous drugs with no medicinal value, believe it or not. This has become unsustainable, and I would say laughable if it were not so serious. We have abundant evidence to support a change of that schedule. The reason for urgency is that the current policy is contrary to the human rights of hundreds of thousands of patients with severe chronic illnesses who we know could benefit from this change.”

Full transcript here.

  • changenow

    no surprise there then,oh and thanks mr reynolds for ignoring my email it shows you care!

  • changenow

    no surprise there then, oh and thank you mr reynolds for ignoring my email, if you guys(the cannabis law reform group)arent interested in actual patients and the cause then we are all screwed!, And why delete my previous comment which was the same as this one?

  • rockstar

    Wasn’t it refreshing to hear good people speaking concisely about our appauling drugs policy and most importantly medical cannabis. It was expected that all partys would be on the same page. I was not surprised to hear how throughout the years this topic has been brought up time and time again, whilst the situation in our country continues to deteriorate. I was also glad to hear of the UN endorsing a harm reduction type approach instead of failed harmful prohibition.

    I was however slightly surprised that at the end of the debate all the evidence was ignored. The only good part of the ridiculous physcoactive substances act that decriminalised possesion of small amounts of drugs sounds like it will be changed with a more prohibitionist model rather than changing the missuse of drugs act that has far safer drugs to include decriminalising possession of small amounts of these.

    It has already been pointed out by the police that it would be unenforceable to criminalise these 500+ and counting dangerous drugs. I am not sure what their plan for this would be other than playing cat and mouse again. They can criminalise spice and mamba but another SCRA will be produced in their place. It will give manufactured of these drugs yet another route to market. We all know they are produced outside of our country, we all know the government can not stop supply or demand.

    To disregard masses of evidence from other countrys like portugal and switzerland saying it wouldn’t work in ours and giving no evidence themselves to show their reasoning or why it might not is the core of our countrys problem. Evidence was presented however retorted with child like jibberish.

    The response in general was much like a drawn out version of the home office response to the question put recently about the APPG report except with some choice sound bites that mean nothing and achieve less. It sounded very much like business as usual, and sadly that means consistantly breaking records for drug deaths in our country and causing untold harm to our people.

  • David Ball

    The way that the questions were answered by baroness Williams for the Home Office was padded out so that it wouldn’t sound like a direct refusal but but the intention still shone through. while welcoming the need for change the government has no intention of moving an inch. Have a look at these snippets from her response.

    “We have heard that United Nations officials at the special session called for evidence-based policies that promote public health. These calls are fully in line with the Government’s approach.” (Our policy is working and enlightened already)

    “Tough enforcement is a fundamental part of our drugs strategy, with action to restrict drug supply and reduce drug-related crime a key priority for law enforcement.” (Because drugs are illegal drug problems are best handled by law enforcement)

    “Sativex has been granted market authorization in the UK. The Government’s view is that cannabis should be subject to the same regulatory framework as applies to all medicines in the UK” (medicinal cannabis users cannot have cannabis because it doesn’t fit the regulatory framework, We already have Sativex so you cant say the government wont allow it)

    “My noble friend Lord Mancroft talked about decriminalizing drugs. I am afraid to say to him that we have no intention of doing that. They are illegal because scientific and medical analysis has shown that they are harmful to human health” (drugs are bad that’s why they are illegal)

    “Cannabis is controlled as a class B drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and, given that it currently has no recognized medicinal benefits in the UK, a Schedule 1 drug under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001” (the law is the law because it’s the law cannabis isn’t a medicine anyway) etc etc…