- Email: [email protected]
Drug refrom: high times, or massive comedown?
LEADERS
LOCATIONS UK Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1200 Fax +44 (0) 20 7611 1250 AUSTRALIA Tower 2, 475 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW 2067 Tel +61 2 9422 8559 Fax +61 2 9422 8552 USA 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451 Tel +1 781 734 8770 Fax +1 720 356 9217 201 Mission Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel +1 415 908 3348 Fax +1 415 704 3125 SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE For our latest subscription offers, visit newscientist.com/subscribe Customer and subscription services are also available by: Telephone +44 (0) 844 543 80 70 Email [email protected] Web newscientist.com/subscribe Post New Scientist, Rockwood House, Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 3DH One year subscription (51 issues) UK £150 CONTACTS Contact us newscientist.com/contact Who’s who newscientist.com/people General & media enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] Editorial Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Picture desk Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1268 Display Advertising Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1291 [email protected] Recruitment Advertising UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8652 4444 [email protected] UK Newsstand Tel +44 (0) 20 3148 3333 Newstrade distributed by Marketforce UK Ltd, The Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark St, London SE1 OSU Syndication Tribune Content Agency Tel +44 (0) 20 7588 7588 [email protected]
© 2014 Reed Business Information Ltd, England New Scientist is published weekly by Reed Business Information Ltd. ISSN 0262 4079. Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper and printed in England by Polestar (Colchester)
High time for drug reform New Zealand’s experiment will set the future of prohibition FOR many years, opponents of The stakes are high. If New drug prohibition have called Zealand’s experiment succeeds, loudly for radical reform, secure the already crumbling case for in the expectation that their ideas prohibition will be further would remain pie in the sky. Now, weakened. Governments around though, those open to reform – the world are watching this and including this magazine – are other attempts at legalisation facing what you might call a and decriminalisation. They “Liberal Democrat moment”. seem increasingly willing to look Just as the UK’s third political at alternatives to prohibition – party found itself suddenly thrust especially if they bring in new into government in 2010 after tax revenues. decades on the fringes, reformers “After decades on the are about to find out how their fringes, drug reformers ideas fare in the real world. will see how their ideas Fed up with the endless game fare in the real world” of cat and mouse between drug designers and the law, New If it fails, however, the case for Zealand has decided to set up reform will lie in ruins. And there a regulated market for new recreational drugs. Within weeks, is plenty of room for failure. One major unknown is whether drug New Zealanders will be living in consumption will rise, and if so, a society not dissimilar to the what will happen to New Zealand anti-prohibitionist ideal, with all society. Another is the problem of kinds of psychoactive substances legally available, quality-controlled drug combinations. People often take more than one substance at and out of the hands of criminal a time: when the market is gangs (see page 40).
flooded with numerous novel compounds – plus alcohol – the possibility of toxic combinations is multiplied. If New Zealand’s experiment fails, there will be wiggle room for reformers to argue that it wasn’t a genuine test of an alternative system: drugs that are currently illegal will remain illegal. But the take-home political message will be that legalising drugs doesn’t work and prohibition is the only way to keep people safe. Even if that is the outcome, the reform movement won’t have been in vain. For too long, drug policy has been guided by prejudice rather than evidence. Thanks to New Zealand – and to a lesser extent Uruguay, Colorado and Washington, which recently legalised cannabis – the evidence base is set to expand. It may be that, in the cold light of day, prohibition is the least worst option. But at least we will have tested the alternatives. ■
A recipe for what? SUCCESS is one of those things it is impossible to be against. Most people want it for themselves and their children, and will work hard to get it (what “it” is is open to debate, of course, but money and recognition are high on most people’s priorities). How best to achieve success is a highly contentious issue, however. Few politicians use the “s” word explicitly, but when they talk about “strivers versus skivers” or “equality of opportunity”, what they are really talking about is creating the conditions under which more people can succeed. On this issue, the old-fashioned left-right divide is still apparent. Broadly speaking, those on the
left emphasise the role of society and the state in supporting people and providing a safety net for those who don’t succeed. The right sees success as a reward for individual talent, gumption and, yes, greed. Both viewpoints have their merits (see page 30). What both sides seem to agree on is that equality of opportunity is a good starting point. That is hard to disagree with. But it is also hard to square with what is happening on the ground. In the UK, for example, the government talks about giving people the opportunity to succeed, yet is doing the opposite of what almost all the researchers contacted by New Scientist say
needs to be done. It is slashing preschool initiatives despite a vast body of evidence showing how important they are for future achievement. It is pushing a narrow, standardised school curriculum that favours a subset of children. And it is introducing more standardised tests, rather than letting children develop at their own pace. Coupled with rising inequality – a problem across the developed world – this would seem to be a recipe for failure. The real secret of highly successful people is often that they got a good start in life. Politicians who are truly interested in extending opportunity should take note. ■ 8 March 2014 | NewScientist | 5
LOCATIONS UK Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1200 Fax +44 (0) 20 7611 1250 AUSTRALIA Tower 2, 475 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW 2067 Tel +61 2 9422 8559 Fax +61 2 9422 8552 USA 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451 Tel +1 781 734 8770 Fax +1 720 356 9217 201 Mission Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel +1 415 908 3348 Fax +1 415 704 3125 SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE For our latest subscription offers, visit newscientist.com/subscribe Customer and subscription services are also available by: Telephone +44 (0) 844 543 80 70 Email [email protected] Web newscientist.com/subscribe Post New Scientist, Rockwood House, Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 3DH One year subscription (51 issues) UK £150 CONTACTS Contact us newscientist.com/contact Who’s who newscientist.com/people General & media enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] Editorial Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Picture desk Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1268 Display Advertising Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1291 [email protected] Recruitment Advertising UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8652 4444 [email protected] UK Newsstand Tel +44 (0) 20 3148 3333 Newstrade distributed by Marketforce UK Ltd, The Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark St, London SE1 OSU Syndication Tribune Content Agency Tel +44 (0) 20 7588 7588 [email protected]
© 2014 Reed Business Information Ltd, England New Scientist is published weekly by Reed Business Information Ltd. ISSN 0262 4079. Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper and printed in England by Polestar (Colchester)
High time for drug reform New Zealand’s experiment will set the future of prohibition FOR many years, opponents of The stakes are high. If New drug prohibition have called Zealand’s experiment succeeds, loudly for radical reform, secure the already crumbling case for in the expectation that their ideas prohibition will be further would remain pie in the sky. Now, weakened. Governments around though, those open to reform – the world are watching this and including this magazine – are other attempts at legalisation facing what you might call a and decriminalisation. They “Liberal Democrat moment”. seem increasingly willing to look Just as the UK’s third political at alternatives to prohibition – party found itself suddenly thrust especially if they bring in new into government in 2010 after tax revenues. decades on the fringes, reformers “After decades on the are about to find out how their fringes, drug reformers ideas fare in the real world. will see how their ideas Fed up with the endless game fare in the real world” of cat and mouse between drug designers and the law, New If it fails, however, the case for Zealand has decided to set up reform will lie in ruins. And there a regulated market for new recreational drugs. Within weeks, is plenty of room for failure. One major unknown is whether drug New Zealanders will be living in consumption will rise, and if so, a society not dissimilar to the what will happen to New Zealand anti-prohibitionist ideal, with all society. Another is the problem of kinds of psychoactive substances legally available, quality-controlled drug combinations. People often take more than one substance at and out of the hands of criminal a time: when the market is gangs (see page 40).
flooded with numerous novel compounds – plus alcohol – the possibility of toxic combinations is multiplied. If New Zealand’s experiment fails, there will be wiggle room for reformers to argue that it wasn’t a genuine test of an alternative system: drugs that are currently illegal will remain illegal. But the take-home political message will be that legalising drugs doesn’t work and prohibition is the only way to keep people safe. Even if that is the outcome, the reform movement won’t have been in vain. For too long, drug policy has been guided by prejudice rather than evidence. Thanks to New Zealand – and to a lesser extent Uruguay, Colorado and Washington, which recently legalised cannabis – the evidence base is set to expand. It may be that, in the cold light of day, prohibition is the least worst option. But at least we will have tested the alternatives. ■
A recipe for what? SUCCESS is one of those things it is impossible to be against. Most people want it for themselves and their children, and will work hard to get it (what “it” is is open to debate, of course, but money and recognition are high on most people’s priorities). How best to achieve success is a highly contentious issue, however. Few politicians use the “s” word explicitly, but when they talk about “strivers versus skivers” or “equality of opportunity”, what they are really talking about is creating the conditions under which more people can succeed. On this issue, the old-fashioned left-right divide is still apparent. Broadly speaking, those on the
left emphasise the role of society and the state in supporting people and providing a safety net for those who don’t succeed. The right sees success as a reward for individual talent, gumption and, yes, greed. Both viewpoints have their merits (see page 30). What both sides seem to agree on is that equality of opportunity is a good starting point. That is hard to disagree with. But it is also hard to square with what is happening on the ground. In the UK, for example, the government talks about giving people the opportunity to succeed, yet is doing the opposite of what almost all the researchers contacted by New Scientist say
needs to be done. It is slashing preschool initiatives despite a vast body of evidence showing how important they are for future achievement. It is pushing a narrow, standardised school curriculum that favours a subset of children. And it is introducing more standardised tests, rather than letting children develop at their own pace. Coupled with rising inequality – a problem across the developed world – this would seem to be a recipe for failure. The real secret of highly successful people is often that they got a good start in life. Politicians who are truly interested in extending opportunity should take note. ■ 8 March 2014 | NewScientist | 5