Stoking the fires of drug controversy

The discussion of illicit drugs policy is littered with controversy, stoked by strong feelings on both sides and full of assertions that fundamental morality is at stake. Those who support prohibition and have a clear view of law enforcement as the answer need not read this book, as they will find little to relate to.

The authors have a long record of challenging the current international philosophy of prohibition, stemming as it does from the muscular nationalism of Teddy Roosevelt, who convened the Shanghai Conference in 1909. That policy has been honed and developed with US leadership in successive international treaties of 1912, 1926, 1961, 1971 and 1988. Richard Nixon’s invention of the politically potent “War on Drugs” in 1972 is given attention in its Australian incarnation “Tough on Drugs”. The book is readable, rather than scholarly, and tells of the folly of this ideological commitment in terms of failed outcomes. Its assertions are not referenced, but the authors speak from a position of authority after years of contributing to the debate. It is an easy read.

The book urges the separation of cannabis markets from heroin and cocaine, but is critical of half-hearted decriminalisation when legalisation, with regulation, taxation and health advice about cannabis, would be far more appropriate. The rationale is compelling. It argues clearly that the major problems for society from illicit drugs — crime, corruption, disease and overdose deaths — are primarily the consequences of prohibition rather than the drugs.

Misleading advocacy and misuse of naltrexone are well discussed. There is little coverage of cocaine and amphetamines. Although occasionally repetitive, it is worthwhile reading for all concerned citizens, including politicians, medical practitioners and parents. It is good value as a paperback entry to a difficult area of public policy.

David G PeningtonEmeritus Professor, and Past Chairman Victorian Premier's Drug Advisory Council Melbourne, VIC