Basic HTML Version
SOUND INVESTMENT
Every pound spent on family support services in
the drug and alcohol sector saves the public
purse £4.70 in NHS and criminal justice costs,
according to new research by Adfam. An inde-
pendent social return on investment (SROI)
study commissioned by the charity, the first of
its kind in the sector, demonstrates the powerful
case to fund and expand family services, it
says. ‘This research provides sound evidence to
what we already know – that supporting families
makes both moral and economic sense,’ said
chief executive Vivienne Evans.
Full briefing on
the research available at www.adfam.org.uk. See
Family Matters column, page 13.
EVIDENCE EXAMINATION
The ACMD’s recovery committee (
DDN
,
January, page 18) has published its first
report, intended to ‘map out the terrain’ that it
will examine in more detail in a forthcoming
series of focussed reviews.
Recovery from drug
and alcohol dependence: an overview of the
evidence at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-
public-bodies/acmd/
IT’S MUTUAL
The first in a series of
Recovery resources
briefings to help commissioners and service
providers improve the recovery orientation of
their services is available to download from the
NTA website.
Turning evidence into practice:
helping clients to access and engage with
mutual aid
includes suggestions for practical
steps that services can take as well as tips on
developing dialogue with service users.
www.nta.nhs.uk
ESCAPED KHAT
Khat should not be controlled under the
Misuse of Drugs Act, the ACMD has
recommended after being asked by the
government to review the evidence. The herbal
product is chewed for its stimulant properties,
and its use is widespread in parts of the UK’s
Somali, Ethiopian and Yemeni communities.
‘The ACMD considers that the evidence of
harms associated with the use of khat is
insufficient to justify control,’ the council
stated.
ACMD khat report 2013 at
www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-
bodies/acmd
TREADING THE BOARDS
The stage version of Elizabeth Burton Phillips’
book,
Mum, Can You Lend Me Twenty Quid?
What Drugs Did To My Family
(
DDN
, October
2011, page 20) tours the north of England this
month, with a southern tour to follow in April.
Details of dates and venues at
www.drugfam.co.uk
Alcohol industry body the Wine and Spirit Trade
Association (WSTA) has launched a campaign
against the government’s plans to introduce a
minimum price per unit of alcohol. Evidence for
minimum pricing is based entirely on ‘modelling
projections’, says the association, which represents
nearly 350 drinks industry companies,
The aim of the
Why should responsible drinkers pay
more?
campaign is to ‘start the debate with ordinary
people about the impact of the government’s plans on
them’, says WSTA, which has launched a website where
people can sign an online petition or send a pre-written
letter to their MP via email or Twitter. The association has
also commissioned a ComRes poll, with nearly half of
those responding claiming they would ‘feel angry at
being punished for others’ irresponsible drinking’.
‘Evidence shows that there is no simple link between
alcohol price and harm and we do not believe that
increasing the price of alcohol will effectively tackle
problem drinking,’ said WSTA chief executive Miles
Beale. ‘Our campaign aims to warn the public that the
government’s plans to set higher alcohol prices will cost
responsible drinkers more. The UK already has some of
the highest alcohol prices in Europe, and given that
alcohol consumption has fallen by 13 per cent since
2004, these radical plans to increase the price of alcohol
4 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| February 2013
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
Drinks industry launches
minimum pricing fightback
News |
Round-up
NEWS IN
BRIEF
Decriminalise possession of all
drugs, urges all-party group
A report from the All-Party Group on Drug Policy Reform
has recommended decriminalising the possession and
use of all drugs, along with a system of regulated supply
– such as in licensed shops – of ‘those new drugs which
are the least harmful’.
The report is the result of the group’s inquiry into new
psychoactive substances, which began in 2011, and wants
to see a review of the Misuse of Drugs Act as well as the
removal of politics from decisions on drug classification in
the same way as with the ‘setting of interest rates’, as the
issues ‘involve scientific judgements and are too sensitive
for politicians to handle directly’.
It also recommends that a minimum of £1.5m be
made available to pilot ten club drug clinics across the
UK, and follows a report from the House of Commons
Home Affairs Committee at the end of last year that
called for a royal commission to be set up to look at UK
drug policy (
DDN
, January, page 4).
While the all-party group’s report acknowledges that
‘appropriate controls’ are necessary to minimise drug-
related harm, a ‘clear conclusion’ of the inquiry is that
‘banning drug use does not materially affect the overall
level of demand’ for drugs. ‘Drug policies which criminalise
young people generate higher levels of unemployment,
homelessness and relationship problems, and cost the
taxpayer considerable sums,’ it says.
Meanwhile a report from the British Medical
Association (BMA) has called for health to be put ‘at the
heart of the UK’s drugs policy’, with doctors leading the
debate in a move away from a criminal justice focus. It
also wants to encourage dialogue between the medical
profession, policy makers and the criminal justice system.
‘The BMA believes that drug users are patients first,’
said chair of the association’s science board, Averil
Mansfield. ‘We fear that too great a focus on
criminalisation is deterring drug users from seeking
medical help. While the medical profession would never
condone illegal drug taking, we believe that we should
show understanding of the illness of drug addiction and
respond in the way that we would with any other
medical problem.’
Towards a safer drug policy: challenges and
opportunities arising from ‘legal highs’ at
www.drugpolicyreform.net
Drugs of dependence: the role of medical professionals
at bma.org.uk
seem completely unfair, untargeted and ineffective.’
The Alcohol Health Alliance, however, accused the
industry of using the ‘tactics of Big Tobacco’ to
undermine evidence-based policy. ‘A minimum unit price
is a targeted policy that will impact heavy drinkers whilst
leaving the majority of moderate drinkers unaffected, and
the international evidence (from Canada) shows that it
works,’ said executive committee member Nick Sheron.
The Institute of Alcohol Studies, meanwhile, called the
campaign a ‘sinister attempt’ to block a policy that would
save lives and prevent crime. ‘To claim to be
“responsible” retailers on the one hand, but sabotage
public health initiatives with the other implies that the
motives of these organisations are purely profit-centred
with no regard for the health and wellbeing of their
customers,’ said policy director Katherine Brown.
Alcohol Concern chief executive Eric Appleby called
the campaign ‘shameful and cynical’, while the Faculty of
Public Health claimed that moderate drinkers may even
save money through reduced pressure on hospitals and
the police. ‘It makes sense from a health and a financial
perspective to everyone except those that make millions
from selling more alcohol to those that already drink too
much,’ said president Lindsey Davies.
www.whyshouldwepaymore.co.uk
See Alan Maryon Davis profile, page 18