Right of Reply: John Wadham
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Yesterday we reported that the Government was considering making anyone who was arrested for an indictable offence take a test for drug abuse. The director of the civil rights group Liberty responds
OF COURSE, it's easy to be cynical about any "law and order" proposal launched at a party conference - and even more so in a period when Labour is clearly concerned about being overtaken on the right.
But two decades of law and order rhetoric have produced no evidence that the erosion of rights plays any useful role in crime reduction. There is no reason to assume that the proposals for compulsory drug testing and treatment will buck the trend.
Forcibly taking a sample for drug-testing purposes is inevitably intrusive, involving samples of either blood or urine. This risks breaching the European Convention on Human Rights, brought into domestic law by the Human Rights Act, which comes into force next year.
Compelling people to undergo counselling and treatment is unlikely to be effective. Drug addiction removes autonomy. An individual who has made a decision to regain control of their life will respond to treatment quite differently from one who is merely undergoing treatment because they have been ordered to.
Tony Blair is absolutely right to say that drug-related crime urgently needs to be tackled. The Government has done some good work in drugs policy by diverting resources away from enforcement and into education, treatment and rehabilitation instead. The mystery is that it doesn't want to publicise this more. One can only assume that it is scared of looking "soft" in the law and order machismo contest.
Eroding rights does not crack crime. It's more likely to erode respect for the law - already at a low ebb in relation to drugs.
What we urgently need is a radical overhaul of our drugs laws, not more posturing. The Government should establish a royal commission to do just this. We've heard enough about being "tough on crime". It's surely time to return to the more useful idea of being tough on the causes.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments