- Joined
- Jan 23, 2013
- Messages
- 30,591
WOULD AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND DECRIMINALIZE DRUGS?
By Liam Turbett
Sep 12 2014
In Scotland, the current set-up means the Scotish government deals with its own policing and addiction- treatment services, but the legal status of drugs is still a matter for the UK government. However, this country might not be part of the UK for much longer; if there’s a "yes" vote next week, independence will follow, and the Scottish Parliament will become accountable for policy in a range of new areas.
While there may have been a global trend toward relaxing drug laws as of late, the UK has been resolutely marching in the opposite direction. From the knee-jerk mephedrone ban to upping cannabis to a schedule-B drug. Then there was the bizarre prohibition of khat earlier this year. Government policy has often appeared to be more about placating the hang-'em-and-flog-'em brigade—the types who share hysterical reports about "what the teens are doing these days" on Facebook—than making any constructive efforts to reduce the potential harm drugs can cause.
So if the laws around narcotics do suddenly become the domain of the Scottish National Party, what are the chances of a more pragmatic, evidence-based approach? Could Scotland’s broadly center-left consensus mean a future of decriminalized cannabis, with Scottish exporters standing at the UK border firing bricks of weed south into Berwick-upon-Tweed? Or would an independent government end up just as stubborn and regressive as the current British coalition?
Few would dispute that drugs are an issue in Scotland. Though we may finally have cast off Trainspotting-era perceptions of being a country populated exclusively by baby-killing heroin addicts, Scotland is still among the worst in the world for drug-related crime and deaths, and has been branded the narco “capital of Europe."
Campaigners for independence have aggressively focused on the failings of successive UK governments, particularly on emotive subjects like poverty and the rise of food banks. Yet drugs have barely featured in this narrative—presumably because they’re a contentious topic and not exactly a vote winner among the general population. In fact, the Scottish government’s extensive white paper contains little more than a paragraph on the subject, stating that full powers over classification will allow for “coherent” decisions to be made, with no real indication of what this might mean. When I asked if they could expand on this, a Scottish National Party spokesperson was unable to comment due to the referendum’s “purdah” period, telling me to come back after the 18th.
Instead, I thought I’d look to the failures of the Westminster system to see what kind of mistakes an independent Scotland could learn from. Undoubtedly one of the UK's biggest blunders in this field was firing the head of one of their own scientific advisory bodies for pissing them off with some studiously researched facts that they weren’t happy with.
Continued here http://www.vice.com/read/what-would-drugs-look-like-in-an-independent-scotland-374
By Liam Turbett
Sep 12 2014
In Scotland, the current set-up means the Scotish government deals with its own policing and addiction- treatment services, but the legal status of drugs is still a matter for the UK government. However, this country might not be part of the UK for much longer; if there’s a "yes" vote next week, independence will follow, and the Scottish Parliament will become accountable for policy in a range of new areas.
While there may have been a global trend toward relaxing drug laws as of late, the UK has been resolutely marching in the opposite direction. From the knee-jerk mephedrone ban to upping cannabis to a schedule-B drug. Then there was the bizarre prohibition of khat earlier this year. Government policy has often appeared to be more about placating the hang-'em-and-flog-'em brigade—the types who share hysterical reports about "what the teens are doing these days" on Facebook—than making any constructive efforts to reduce the potential harm drugs can cause.
So if the laws around narcotics do suddenly become the domain of the Scottish National Party, what are the chances of a more pragmatic, evidence-based approach? Could Scotland’s broadly center-left consensus mean a future of decriminalized cannabis, with Scottish exporters standing at the UK border firing bricks of weed south into Berwick-upon-Tweed? Or would an independent government end up just as stubborn and regressive as the current British coalition?
Few would dispute that drugs are an issue in Scotland. Though we may finally have cast off Trainspotting-era perceptions of being a country populated exclusively by baby-killing heroin addicts, Scotland is still among the worst in the world for drug-related crime and deaths, and has been branded the narco “capital of Europe."
Campaigners for independence have aggressively focused on the failings of successive UK governments, particularly on emotive subjects like poverty and the rise of food banks. Yet drugs have barely featured in this narrative—presumably because they’re a contentious topic and not exactly a vote winner among the general population. In fact, the Scottish government’s extensive white paper contains little more than a paragraph on the subject, stating that full powers over classification will allow for “coherent” decisions to be made, with no real indication of what this might mean. When I asked if they could expand on this, a Scottish National Party spokesperson was unable to comment due to the referendum’s “purdah” period, telling me to come back after the 18th.
Instead, I thought I’d look to the failures of the Westminster system to see what kind of mistakes an independent Scotland could learn from. Undoubtedly one of the UK's biggest blunders in this field was firing the head of one of their own scientific advisory bodies for pissing them off with some studiously researched facts that they weren’t happy with.
Continued here http://www.vice.com/read/what-would-drugs-look-like-in-an-independent-scotland-374
