War on drugs must be reassessed
What may be startling, though, is the realisation that drugs are here to stay and that Ireland needs to re-think the manner in which the whole culture of their use and abuse is viewed.
Accepting that they are here to stay means that what was referred to as the "war" on drugs has been lost, at least insofar as the way in which it has been approached to date.
That was the cogent message from Ethan Nadelmann, director of the US-based Drug Policy Foundation, and a former adviser to the US State Department, who addressed a conference on drugs and homelessness organised by the Merchants Quay Ireland.
His advice is to spurn the American strategy in dealing with drugs, which has failed, and to look to the more progressive policies in Holland and Switzerland and, more recently, of Britain.
Put simply, Mr Nadelmann's message is to legalise cannabis here because, he insists, along with other international experts, most users do not venture on to hard drugs. Living with the reality of drugs entails a major re-evaluation of how we, as a society, deal with them.
What has to be done is to take the control of the supply of drugs out of the hands of criminals. But, while advocating the legalising of cannabis, he does not suggest that a similar policy would make sense in the case of other drugs, such as heroin.
For him, the bottom line is not so much about the people who use drugs but rather in reducing the cumulative cost of drug use for example, in terms of crime and ill health. Society needs to learn to live with drugs but at a minimal cost.
Mr Nadelmann also called for more investment in disadvantaged areas. Indeed, the conference was told that on any given night there are 4,000 homeless people in Ireland.
For the first time ever, the Homeless Agency, a State body, undertook a comprehensive survey of people living rough as opposed to homeless in Dublin. It transpires that there are normally 140 people in the capital who spend the night in sleeping bags or in doorways. That number would be considerably higher if urban areas outside Dublin were surveyed.
The argument posed by Mr Nadelmann is not a new one, certainly in relation to cannabis, and the realisation that it can be efficacious in medical conditions such as multiple sclerosis has helped changed attitudes towards it. Because of that, courts in Britain have of late tended not to convict people of cannabis-related offences where it was proved it was used for medical reasons.
In some aspects, attitudes have also changed here towards how we deal with drug treatment.
A decade ago, the provision of needle exchange sites or supplying methadone would not have been entertained.
Britain has taken the step of decriminalising cannabis, which is a move short of legalising it. The aim is to free up more police time to be better able to concentrate on what is considered more dangerous drugs.
Obviously, the Government and the garda authorities will follow with interest to see whether the development in Britain will be worthwhile.





