'Radical' change on drugs policy?

Before entering Number 10 Downing Street for the first time as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown promised “a new government” with “new priorities” and repeated the word “change” six times. What some describe as the most extensive cabinet reshuffle in 60 years was completed within hours.

A honeymoon period (e.g., a becalmed media and/or Opposition) is to be expected, but the phrase “a week is a long time in politics” is no less true for being the cliche it has become. Policy will shape public opinion, as much as obsession with style and how the new PM responds to “events” (already being tested) - so perhaps it was no surprise that the long awaited consultation paper on the next drugs strategy has been delayed. Due on 15th June the Home Office halted publication because the soon to be PM was taking “a close personal interest.”

The consensus among officials is that the PM's interest is a good thing, but views differ as to whether any changes to the document – and the future direction of travel on drugs policy - will be minor or substantial. Either way, the consultation (which must last a minimum of 12 weeks) may not start much before the end of July. A new drugs strategy is unlikely to be published until early 2008.

Speaking at the annual conference of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) on 19th June, Gordon Brown promised a “radical review” of the drugs strategy. He said, for example: ”…a new strategy needs to reach addicts earlier to get them into treatment, and we need to find what works best in getting them to stay the course. And drugs education needs to reach children at an earlier age in primary, as well as secondary schools, and to help families and communities protect them from the dealers and the gangs.”

Not much detail so far, but Gordon Brown is unlikely to promise a “radical review” unless he means it. It does not necessarily mean that there will be (immediate) radical change following the formal consultation, but it would be naive to rule it out – and the PM knows a potential hostage to fortune when he creates one.

It is difficult to read the runes on future drugs policy by those appointed to new cabinet and ministerial positions. Vernon Coaker MP continues as Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office and may well continue to have responsibility for tackling drugs, but at the time of writing (1st July) the Home Office website does not list individual responsibilities for the new ministerial team. Otherwise, all is change: a new Home Secretary and Secretary of State of Health; Caroline Flint MP, previously at the Department of Health with responsibility for drugs and alcohol, has moved to the Department of Work and Pensions...

But one cabinet change already looks to be significant: the appointment of Ed Balls MP (long-term adviser to Gordon Brown) as Secretary of State for the newly created Department for Children Schools and Families. Bringing together for the first time policy affecting children and young people, the new department's responsibilities include not only "working with the Home Office and the Department of Health on tackling drug use and with the Department for Communities and Local Government on youth homelessness and supported housing", but it will also "lead a new emphasis across government on the prevention of youth offending" [emphasis added!].

Is it surprising that Gordon Brown has, so soon, flagged an interest in drugs policy? On the one hand it could be read in part as a precautionary tactical position, demonstrating 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime' credentials before the Conservative Party possibly attempts to seize the agenda when it publishes the report of its Addictions working group. On the other hand, a politician with a keen interest (indeed passion) in tackling poverty and social exclusion cannot but be concerned about the causes and impacts of drug and alcohol misuse, and the marginalisation and stigmatisation of people dependent on drugs and alcohol, and their families.

Although both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have been prepared, at different times, to address the difficult issue of drugs policy, it may be naive to hope for less party political posturing and instead a growing consensus. But perhaps not: we live in potentially interesting times. There will be a lot to debate and discuss over the next few months.

There is at least one issue that new ministers with responsibility for drugs and alcohol should look at, and urgently, not least because it goes against the emphasis on improving the lives of young people and the importance of prevention – and that is the cut to the Young People’s Substance Misuse Grant. As we will be highlighting in the next edition of DrugLink magazine, the cut is hurting and is, basically, indefensible.