A bankrupt morality

This is a fine example of the Morning Star's value in putting the daily news in perspective.

The government's action in sacking Professor Nutt is indeed intolerant to sensible decision-making and, as Professor Nutt said, part of a drugs policy based on moralism.

However the kind of morals to which new Labour subscribes, where people are imprisoned for possessing some drugs, including ectasy - which kills less people than Aspirin - is surely questionable, not just by Professor Nutt and his fellow scientists, but by anyone who has any idea of the true situation regarding illegal drugs today.

The government's policy is dictated by the likes of the Daily Mail and "middle England," who it thinks - wrongly, surely - are impressed by a "tough stand" against illicit drugs.

This is by no means the first time that the government has chosen to ignore scientific evidence.

For example, in a documentary shown on BBC2 on February 4 2008 a survey using scientific evidence showed that "alcohol was more dangerous than ecstasy."

According to the programme's findings, alcohol is the fifth most dangerous drug after heroin (first and illegal), cocaine (second and illegal), barbiturates (third and legal) and methadone (fourth and illegal).

Ecstasy in fact ranked 18th in the survey, although it is an illegal "class A" drug, and was therefore shown to be less dangerous than cannabis, flatliners, LSD and anabolic steroids - all illegal drugs.

Jim Jepps sums up this anomalous situation perfectly.

We should indeed be asking whether prohibition works and whether doling out greater and greater punishments has any deterrent effects.

Jim Dymond
Aldershot