Max Chambers

If we had a time machine and could take a stroll down our local high street twenty years ago, we’d discover a place alive with activity. As well as shoppers hunting through famous outfits such as Woolworths, JJB Sports and Comet, we might see queues snaking at the local bank branch, someone waiting their turn outside the telephone box and couples scouring the travel agents’ window for a last minute, cut-price deal. Today, it’s a different story. We can browse the entire planet’s products on our phones, make an Amazon purchase with the swipe of a finger and track our order online with precision. We can drive to out-of-town shopping malls or supermarkets where we can park, stay dry and get everything we need all in one trip.

Professor David Nutt, the former Chief Drugs Adviser to the Government, has sparked controversy again today by pronouncing that alcohol is more harmful than heroin, crack, powder cocaine and methamphetamine. His findings are based on a paper published today, which builds on a 2007 journal that explored the same issues. So, is Professor Nutt right? If he is, what should the consequences be for public policy and, in particular, our systems of drug classification and alcohol taxation?   To find out, it is worth returning to Professor Nutt’s 2007 academic paper.  The relative harm of drugs is measured according to nine meters, taking into account the various aspects of physical harm, dependence and wider social harms.

Policy Exchange has been arguing for some time that the Youth Justice Board  should be abolished, with its functions shared between the Ministry of Justice and local councils. It has just been revealed that the body will indeed be scrapped, despite rumours that the Justice Secretary tried to buy more time before making a decision on its future,  before eventually losing out to the Cabinet Office.  There will inevitably be concern at the news from various children’s charities and penal reform organizations who will argue that young offenders need to be treated as a distinct group. So, why did we argue for the YJB to be scrapped and what will it really mean for the future of youth justice?

Along with defence, there’s one other area where rolling back the state doesn’t come naturally to Conservatives: criminal justice. The massive cuts looming on the horizon for the criminal justice system would have been politically toxic for any party to deliver, but for the traditional party of law and order there will be a special discomfort.   Ken Clarke’s speech this morning was much less exciting for the penal reform/abolitionist lobby than the morning papers indicated.

Combating drug misuse in our prisons could be one of the best ways to cut reoffending. A prison sentence should, for a drug-addicted criminal with a  chaotic lifestyle, act as a form of respite – not just for the community, but also for the offender themselves. Yes - prison should be a place of punishment, but it should also be a chance to get clean.   An effective strategy to combat drug misuse in prisons means tackling drug smuggling and supply, while ensuring that the treatment regimes give prisoners the best possible chance of getting – and staying – clean.  The previous Government failed to do either.