It is high time for a new debate on drug policy but politicians remain wary
IN 1952, Donald Macintosh Johnson, later the Conservative MP for Carlisle, published a study entitled “Indian Hemp: A Social Menace”. Even small doses of the drug could lead to violence and mental-health problems, he fretted. More than 60 years later, politicians from all Britain’s major parties are just as worried and resist legalisation. Yet the evidence in favour of making pot legal is as persuasive as ever.
The latest research suggests Britain could profit from decriminalising cannabis. A new report from the Institute for Economic and Social Research at the University of Essex evaluates the costs and benefits of introducing a licensed and regulated marijuana market in England and Wales. The most plausible model would mimic tobacco, with direct control of the product and suppliers, a ban on advertising, and plenty of health education.
If smoking rose by 15%, savings would be made in policing and the criminal justice system, among other places. Income tax revenues could rise as some smokers would be at work, rather than in jail. Once the costs associated with things like regulating the market and medical treatment for abusers are knocked off, the overall savings could be £361m ($574m) a year. On top of this the tax gain from levies on cannabis sales could reach as much as £900m.
Legalising cannabis would yield other benefits too. Many fear that smoking pot can lead to greater consumption of other drugs—the “gateway effect”—but licensing weed would also mean fewer people involved in the illegal drugs trade, offsetting those costs. Legalisation would not be risk-free. In the authors’ most pessimistic scenario, consumption soars by 40%, with a £1.4 billion crime wave fuelling the binge. They attach little weight to this, though: drug crime is more often linked to heroin users. So even if a lot more pot was smoked, savings could still hit £400m.
