More drugs

After I'd written this post, I wrote to my MP along those lines, and got a stock response detailing the government's drugs policy, without engaging with my points. I'm not surprised and didn't think I'd get anything else. I assume that MPs who simply delegate their views to the government either don't have enough time to research the matter themselves, more or less agree with the government's position, or more or less disagree but don't want to say anything because it's not worth their ministerial career or the disunity.

If it's that they don't have the time, I hope they could be persuaded to have a more involved opinion. There are many high-profile people who have called for a rethink about drugs policy. Vicente Fox called for legalisation after he left office, and his incumbent successor is in favour of a debate. Not satisfied with prohibition are a quite a few ex-police chief superintendents, and then there are ex-heads of medical bodies, and government drugs councils. Recently an ex-home secretary and a current chairman of the bar council advocated legalisation, and amazingly in 2005 David Cameron advocated legalisation, not just decriminalisation. These are illustrious opinions, and what forms them and why they change is definitely worth careful consideration. I think it is the remarks made freely and frankly that have more value, but people are often reluctant to make such remarks while in office. I think MPs need to be more circumspect about supporting a policy that might be shaped by pressures which lead to such reluctance.

I don't think it's purely academic what MPs think in the face of alarmist headlines and public opinion. It certainly isn't in the case of the death penalty, the EU, and other matters. Once MPs have found safety in numbers, they can help provide a drip of momentum that will eventually convince the public that we need a radical rethink on drugs.