More government scientists resign over drugs row Nutt sacking
Monday, 2 November 2009
Nutt sacked: Scientists quit in protest after Professor David Nutt was forced to resign
More pictures
Print
Email
The government's hardline stance on illegal drugs appeared to be unravelling yesterday as two more scientists on its advisory council quit in protest at the sacking of their chairman, Professor David Nutt.
Dr Les King resigned from the 21-member Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, saying Home Secretary Alan Johnson had denied Professor Nutt's right to “freedom of expression”.
He was followed by Marion Walker, the council representative from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. There were predictions last night that more departures would follow.
Professor Nutt was forced to resign on Friday after he repeatedly criticised the government for ignoring scientific evidence on drugs presented by the council which he chaired. Over the weekend, he predicted there would be further resignations and said most members were “extremely angry” over what had happened. He added the position of scientists on the council was “untenable”.
The row was sparked by Professor Nutt's comments that ecstasy and LSD were less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes. He also criticised the decision to upgrade cannabis to class B.
He has returned several times to these themes in public statements, to the irritation of ministers.
Dr King, former head of the Home Office's Drugs Intelligence Unit, said: “Professor Nutt may be an adviser but he's still got the right to say what he likes.”
The government had the right to reject the council's advice but its attitude towards the council had changed “very recently”.
The council was being forced to operate to a “pre-defined political agenda”, he said.
“It's being asked to rubber stamp a pre-determined position. If sufficient members do resign, the committee will no longer be able to operate.”
Lord Winston, the Labour peer and broadcaster and renowned former fertility specialist, said yesterday he was “very surprised and disappointed” at Mr Johnson's decision to sack Professsor Nutt.
He accused the government of a “knee-jerk” reaction and warned it would be ignored if it gave advice to the public that did not take account of scientists' opinions. Defending his decision to sack Professor Nutt, Mr Johnson said he had “crossed a line” from providing advice to political lobbying. “You can do one or the other. You can't do both,” he said.
Sir Liam Donaldson, the government's Chief Medical Officer, appeared to lend support to Mr Johnson's view when he told BBC's Andrew Marr that Professor Nutt's situation had been “very controversial”.
“These things are best sorted out behind the scenes,” he said.
Post a comment
Limit: 500 characters
View all comments that have been posted about this article
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP address logged and may be used to prevent further submissions. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by BelfastTelegraph.co.uk's Terms of Use.
Posts submitted in UPPERCASE letters will be rejected.
What happened to freedom of speech? Don't they have freedoms in the UK? He has a right to speak the truth. I wouldn't be surprised if more people walked out. Sounds like a communist country to me.
Posted by Angie | 04.11.09, 01:40 GMT
surprise surprise, all this government want to do is hear what they want to hear. They are not democratically elected and we just bide our time til theyare elected from office. Bad luck Mr Nutt, I'm not sure if I agree but I'm prepared to listen to your opinion unlike the the Brown, Milliband, consortium. However if its any consolation the people are 100% behind you.
As an aside its disgraceful that the speaker has failed to allow investigation of the alledged fraud committed by numerous house flipping politicians. Not so?
Posted by Ali Nicol | 02.11.09, 23:42 GMT
Of course Mr Johnson doesn't want his advisors drawing the public's attention to the serious and real dangers of alcohol and tabacco...two big government money spinners through heavy taxation!
Posted by Dean | 02.11.09, 19:08 GMT
Heartily agree with Bill and WH. Drug education in our schools is merely propaganda pupils know when they are being lied to or when 'facts' are being exagerrated. Another example of profit determining policy.
Posted by Fran | 02.11.09, 16:47 GMT
People need to ask themselves why the present Home Secretary, previous Home Secretaries, and the Prime Minister, are all wanting us to be misled when it comes to the harm that different drugs cause to ourselves, our children and others.
There is overwhelming evidence available to demonstrate, without question, that tobacco and alcohol are much more dangerous drugs than cannabis and ecstasy. One only has to compare the death rates. I am not saying that cannabis and ecstasy are not dangerous, because they are, but it is clear that they are not as harmful as tobacco and alcohol. Many young people and adults already know this to be the case, that is why they take drugs like cannabis on a regular basis without harm.
The present government, as with previous governments, has had a very cosy relationship with alcohol and tobacco companies. They also have a very cosy relationship with companies who sell alcohol at unbelievably cheap prices, such as Tesco.
We only want the truth!
Posted by WH | 02.11.09, 12:12 GMT
Finally, a voice of reason. Stand tall Professor as you are 100% correct on all fronts. If you give children informed, truthful choices, 99% of the time they will make the right choice. There is use, and then there is abuse, and it applies to many things besides drugs and alcohol. The war on drugs must end.
Off topic.. If the people reading this don't believe that cannabis has no medical uses, Why would the USA goverment issue a patent for it in 2003? Google it!
Posted by Bill | 02.11.09, 11:20 GMT