Liberal Vision

New drugs Tsar appointed: “cannabis should be legalised”

Today we have been told that Prof Les Iversen has replaced Prof David Nutt as the chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) on an interim basis (12 month contract).

This is the same Prof Iversen who was quoted back in 2003 as saying…

“…There have been no deaths to date caused by the use of cannabis….Cannabis should be legalised not just decriminalised because it is comparatively less dangerous than legal drugs alcohol and tobacco”

In the wake of Professor Nutt’s sacking, (and five members of the panel resigning in protest at the sacking) Alan Johnson was forced to publicly confirm his commitment to the independence of Government advisers. Unfortunately, that’s not quite how it came across today. On radio 5 Live’s Victoria Derbyshire show earlier, the new Drugs Tsar (or dont we use that term anymore?) seemed to be pulling back from the sentiments he expressed back in 2003- siting that things “have changed” since 2003. Would that be his appointment to the chair…. and/or the Government sacking of his predecessor I wonder?

Meanwhile Professor Nutt has not let the grass grow under his feet (bad pun I know). He has now created a rival  ”Independent Council on Drug Harms”. Somehow I dont think that the word “Independent” in the title is there by accident. The rival council will be joined by four of the five ex-ACMD members who resigned when Prof Nutt was sacked, and five members of the current ACMD. The professor said that his new group would provide independent scientific evidence about the effects of drugs, and that its “goal” was to supplant what the ACMD was doing. He certainly seems to have attracted an impressive line up and attracting five members from the current ACMD must be considered a coup.

For those of us seeking honesty from the scientific community this has to be a good thing. It will certainly concentrate the minds of the ACMD when making future recommendations. But overall this is a sad endictment on the Government and its treatment of its advisers that we have arrived at the position of having TWO panels tussling for power on the issue of drugs.

Only muppets or puppets need apply

Following the news earlier this evening that the “Drug Tsar” Prof David Nutt has been sacked for…. well…. speaking the truth, and Alex Wilcock’s excellent observation that only liars need now apply for the newly vacated post,  I am left wondering just how brazenly totalitarian this government can get?

And I know that people can get hot under the collar about the misuse of words such as “totalitarian” . So be clear. I do not use that particular word lightly. We are witnessing political authority attempting to exercise absolute and centralized control over every aspect  of our lives. We, the people, are subordinate to the state. Dissent is demonstrably being suppressed. If that is not the definition of totalitarian – then someone please explain what is.

Today it’s the head of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs being summarily sacked because the authorities did not like the findings of his research. And when they ignored/distorted that evidence-based advise, he refused to keep silent, and was dimissed.

It was just a couple of  weeks ago that we saw Ed Ball’s dismissing the Commons cross-party select committee conclusion to reject the appointment of  Maggie Atkinson as England’s next children’s commissioner. Why did they reject her? Because “We just didn’t think she had the independence of mind to stand up to a secretary of state who loves to get his own way”. Needless to say Mr Ball’s stuck two fingers up to the committee and appointed her anyway. 

I hesitate to raise the question of what really happened to David Kelly when he crossed the government. Perhaps, as posted earlier on this site, Professor Nutt should consider himself lucky that it was just a sacking.

As for the rest of us – we will have to take everything the government, or it’s so-called experts, says with an even bigger pinch of salt. Or actually just assume it’s a lie. That’s probably the safest bet here on in.