Cannabis
Mr. Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what
assessment he has made of claims in the Police Foundation's report on the
results of cannabis decriminalisation in the Netherlands. [120448]
Mr. Charles Clarke: The committee of inquiry set up by the Police Foundation has produced a thorough report with a large number of recommendations and the Government will give it careful attention. However, the Government have made it clear that they do not support the Inquiry's recommendations on the re-classification or depenalisation of cannabis. The Government have a clear and consistent view about the damage which drugs can cause to individuals, their families and the wider community, the link between drugs and crime--and the corresponding need to maintain firm controls. The Government is opposed to any lessening of controls on currently illicit drugs but favour a wide-ranging approach--we see a need for a balance of policies involving supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction. The Police Foundation's report acknowledges that there are significant contradictions between Dutch drugs policy--under which small-scale possession and supply of cannabis remains illegal but the laws are not enforced--and international agreements. The Preamble to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961, states that effective measures against abuse of narcotic drugs require co-ordinated and universal action and that such action calls for international co-operation guided by the same principles and aimed at common objectives. The Government support these principles and have no intention of breaching their obligations under the 1961 United Nations drugs convention which commit the international community to working together against the illicit drug trade. It naturally follows from this that the Government also has no intention of allowing for the systematic non-enforcement of the law.
Reply from Charles Clarke MP, 20th October 1997, in response to a letter sent in May 1997
(Charles Clarke is the Labour MP for Norwich South.)
Thank you for your letter about the use of cannabis. Please accept my apology for the unusually long delay in responding. It seems that the answers to the issue you raised are as follows:-
a) What are the latest figures for arrests for cannabis offences and what percentage of all drug arrests were for cannabis only?
Figures for the number of people cautioned by the police or found guilty at court are not routinely collected centrally for any crime. However I do enclose a table showing the number of people found guilty, cautioned or dealt with by locking up for drug offences in the UK each year since 1985.
Of the 93,631 known offenders in 1995, some 82% (76,694) were involved in cannabis offences. The majority of these offenders were cautioned, found guilty or compounded solely for cannabis offences, but it is impossible to identify exactly how many.
b) How many people are presently imprisoned for cannabis offences?
The table enclosed shows that, as at June 1995, there were 1450 people in prison in England and Wales for offences including those relating to cannabis use. This is about one third of the total number of people imprisoned for drug offences.
As you can see the number of people in prison for drug offences rose rapidly - by one third - in June 1996, but a breakdown of the drug type is not yet available.
c) What is the average cost of taking a cannabis offender to court?
Figures for the cost of taking cannabis offenders to court are not available.
The average cost in England and Wales in 1995, of the prosecution for a summary offence (a less serious offences tried only in a Magistrates Court) was 200 - 300 pounds, and the cost for an individual indictable offence (a serious crime triable in the Crown Court) is 2000 - 3000 pounds.
d) What is the present UK budget for fighting drugs?
A Parliamentary Question last year stated that the "overall expenditure of the Government on tackling drug misuse across the Uk for 1993/94 was estimated at 526 million pounds. A later figure is not available and the components of this estimate are not given.
e) Does the Department of Health plan any specialised treatment for people who claim to have or have been diagnosed as having suffered from cannabis use?
I am not aware of any specialised treatment plans by the NHS for those suffering from cannabis use alone, however initiatives have been implemented to tackle the problem of drug misuse as a whole. At regional and local level, the main action has been the establishment of 'Drugs Action teams' and their local community networks, 'Drug reference Groups'. These teams were established by September 1995. Every team comprises senior professionals from relevant health and local authorities, and police and probation, and, where appropriate prison services. Some teams also include the voluntary sector, business and Customs representatives.
f) Is there any information available about non-cannabis additives or impurities in confiscated cannabis - are these substances analysed during forensic study of confiscated cannabis - and what are the health risks associated with such impurities compared with cannabis itself?
The Forensic Science Service, who are responsible for carrying out forensic tests on confiscated drugs, have informed me that material that is recognised visually as cannabis is tested analytically only to confirm the presence of the active chemical ingredient. The specimen is not tested for other adulterant materials unless it appears suspect. Thus material recognised as cannabis is not screened for a range of substances in the way that an unrecognised powder would be.
Concerns have been raised about the health effects of tar and carbon monoxide on those who smoke cannabis. In 1982 the Institute of Medicine in the US published a comparison sowing that cannabis smoke contains 70% more carcinogenics than tobacco smoke. The 'tar' from cannabis smoke has been shown to be carcinogenic by a number of research studies. These effects will be in addition to the effects of tobacco where a mixture is used.
Some medical experts claim that the drug remains in the body for 28 days and when smoked, cannabis delivers three times as much tar and five times as much carbon monoxide as cigarettes.
I trust this provides you with answers to your questions. Once again, thank you for writing.
Yours sincerely
Charles Clarke MP
E-Mail CCGUIDE