11/07/2013 Newsnight Scotland

message but whether it is a Tonight: Arts drug laws putting

lives at risk. Seven people have died in Scotland after taking a

fake Ecstasy tablets. Should we regulate drug so it can be done

more safely? Could Faslane be the corner of a Scottish field that

remains that ever British? Politicians are rushed to deny

suggestions that Bass might remain in the UK even if Scotland becomes

independent. Good evening. Police are warning festival-goers heading

to T in the Park about fake ecstasy tablets which have been linked with

the deaths of seven people in Scotland and another ten in

Northern Ireland. The pills contain a chemical called PMA, which is

more toxic than the usual MDMA. Some argue that if drugs were

regulated people would know what they were taking. Is drugs policy

Recreational drug use is a common practice. The manufacture and

supply of substances like Ecstasy is looked upon as a profitable

activity. Its status as a Class A illegal drug means the underground

nature of its manufacture means the people using it have no way of

knowing what they are taking. The danger has become reality after

police linked the deaths of seven young people in the West of

Scotland to a fake batch of ecstasy pills. The deaths have been put

down to the chemicals used to make the drugs. Ecstasy is properly

known as MDMA. That is substituted for a more deadly alternative - PNA.

The reason is not entirely clear. The dangers of the drug certainly

are. The drug is more toxic than MDMA. The effects take longer to

come on. If you have a pill with PMH in it, thinking it is ecstasy,

you might take one or two and you might not feel anything. You might

think it is weak and take another couple. The drug then kicks in and

the toxicity takes over. There are no easy answers when it comes to

tackling the problem. Some argue that because people will always

want to take drugs like Ecstasy, banning them may not be the answer.

The main recreational drug we used in this country is alcohol. A lot

of people do not want to use alcohol because it causes so much

damage. It is bad for the body bus- stop people use other substances.

They choose to use other substances. That has always been the case. To

deny the fact it is happening is crazy as a society. We are looking

at other countries where they are moving towards liberalisation of

some substances, such as cannabis and other things. Several countries

including Portugal, Austria and Spain ran drug checking services.

What about going further than that? The ingredients, which had

tragically killed people, would not have been in a tablet in a bottle

being sold in a regulated method. That is because the regulation

would have made sure nothing was in no substances which was not safe

and which did not do what the label said it should do. Her whether or

not the ecstasy is real, police. Had it is all illegal. What we're

trying to do is try to give people advice to protect themselves and

make sure they know the risks associated with Ecstasy at the

moment. The informed decision as far as I can see is not to take the

drug. Legislating is a whole other debate. That is about getting a

message out to be able to make sure they keep a safe and enjoy

themselves at the same time. -- they keep safe. Is the latest

deaths have once again highlighted the debate over the risks and

benefits of decriminalisation and regulation of controlled drugs like

Ecstasy. Law enforcement officials say it is a debate for another day.

They just want to make sure people are safe. I'm joined by Mike

McCarron from Transform Drug Policy Scotland, and from Edinburgh by the

former Chief Constable of Grampian Police, Dr Ian Oliver. Isn't this

very particular situation we are in rather an indictment of drugs

policy? If we're trying to get the attention of people who might take

the drug and so this particular batch is very dangerous, do not go

near it, wouldn't it be easier if we were not simultaneously telling

people that Cabot Ecstasy would be extremely harmful to them if they

took the ordinary stuff? -- Ecstasy. You have to remember that all drugs,

including prescribed medicine, over-the-counter purchases, illicit

drugs, they are all dangerous. Unless you take them with medical

guidance and supervision. Even then, there are side-effects you need to

be aware off. To try and say decriminalising of however you want

to say it would somehow make things safe there is absolute nonsense.

Does the basic message which the thirties put over on drugs, which

is that they are all dangers if you take them you could have very

serious health problems or even dive. -- the authorities. Thousands

of people across Britain do not take that seriously. When I joined

the police in 1961, drugs were a rarity. We have had a drug control

since 1909 when the availability of drugs in the United Kingdom were 5,

6, 10 times worse than they were now and there was widespread

dependency. To say jug control has been a failure is nonsense. -- drug

control. How much worse would it have been had we not try to control

them? When talking about T in The Park and saying, it is this or is

it not ecstasy Macro, what difference does that make? --

Ecstasy. These people would not have died had they taken the

ordinary drug. You are talking completely at odds with the facts.

It is not the first time there have been bad drugs on the market. It is

not that long ago that drugs were being cut with a cancer drug. This

has always been the case. The basic message must be that apart from

supply reduction you must educate people for a demand reduction. The

fact that people want to take recreational drugs - and there is

no such thing. It is not a justification by saying, let's test

them, it is ecstasy. You are OK taking that. It is not. It is a

I think will testing is not the answer but it is a step forward

which does make the use of that bit safer. That is what drug-users save

us do it will pick up the lethal components. -- say. There is a risk

but it is worth doing. Holland is a very good example. The National

Centre for Health and addictions has a laboratory. They deal with

hundreds of drug users every week. They test them and let individuals

know what is safe Oram said. They put that into a database. -- or

I know at Edinburgh in the 1980s had problems of their own. Just

because you were given fresh needles to make sure you did not

get HIV did not mean the also it is condoned you taking heroin. That is

a form of harm reduction which is simply there to save lives. That is

why drug testing today would actually help to save lives. It is

not the answer. That is why it thinks it is reforming the law,

which would be far more effective in keeping people say. As the

policeman said, that debate would take more than today. I am not

quite sure what your view is on this. You said it would not make

any difference. We are talking about a batch of pills passed off

as Ecstasy but they are a different substance. It is more dangerous

than MDMA. If you had the thousands of people you're saying are using

drugs queuing up at T in The Park or wherever else, the number of

contaminated drugs, I do not know how many are out there. If people

say it is Ecstasy, it is not safe to use it. To really think if you

suddenly legalise things and test them and say it is safe and that is

not saved, the bad guys will go away just because we have passed

regulations. It will not happen. That is a point. Another analogy is

cigarettes. Millions of people in Britain ignored the Government

advice and warnings on cigarettes. It does not mean the Government is

wrong in that it is bad. I think that all the substances are risky.

It is a choice that people have made a will continue to make. It is

the job of government to make that as safe as possible for the public.

The current situation is not serving that purpose. Deaths from

drugs generally in Scotland were at their highest ever. Going back to

what Ian Oliver said earlier, do you agree the war on drugs has been

a success in Scotland? No, I do not. The drugs industry now, over $300

billion a year, is now the third- biggest industry after food and oil.

It patently is not. Washington, Colorado have voted to legalise

cannabis. 25 different countries are experimenting with

decriminalisation. Over 50 countries have just commissioned a

major review looking at the future in different ways. The UN Secretary

General, Ban Ki Moon, has said that the next tee we must look at the

drugs policy and look at all options. Do you think there is a

The United States spends more on latest technology. To produce a

latest technology. To produce a modern professional force. One of

modern professional force. One of the does

the biggest

the biggest on

the biggest changes enforcement

the biggest changes was

the biggest changes was and

the biggest changes was and there

the biggest changes was on lot

the biggest changes was and there is

the biggest changes was and there is a

modern professional force. One of the biggest changes was on the

the biggest changes was on the roads.

modern professional force. One of the biggest changes was on lot

the biggest changes was on the roads. of

roads. The

roads. The self

roads. The Government

roads. The Government appointed

roads. The Government appointed bodies

the biggest changes was on the roads. The Government sacked

roads. The Government sacked like

roads. The Government sacked all

roads. The Government sacked all the

the the

the the so-called

the Traffic

the the so-called global

the Traffic Police,

the Traffic Police, xhishtion

the Traffic Police, 16,000

the Traffic Police, xhishtion Global

the Traffic Police, 16,000 officers.

the Traffic Police, xhishtion Global Commission

Commission on

Commission on Drug

the Traffic Police, 16,000 officers. Policy

And

Policy that

Policy that come

And replaced

And out

And replaced them

And replaced with

And replaced them false

And replaced them false information.

And replaced them with

And replaced them with They

And replaced them with They clearly

And replaced them with They clearly haven't

the Traffic Police, 16,000 officers. And replaced them with this

And replaced them with this US-

And replaced them with this US- style

style done

style done their

style done their homework

style patrol

style patrol force.

style patrol force. and

style patrol force. and the And replaced them with this US-

And replaced them with this US- style patrol force. New are

style patrol force. New recruits

style patrol force. New recruits were

were always

were always held

were monitored

were monitored up

were monitored up as

were monitored closely to make style patrol force. New recruits

were monitored closely to make sure they didn't take are Portugal,

were monitored closely to make sure they didn't take any bribes.

were monitored closely to make sure they didn't take any bribes. Many

people tried to give police Portugal people tried to give police

officers money, but from people tried to give police

officers money, but from the past many things were changed, nowadays

everyone knows that police officers don't take the money. everybody

pretends that it is. Do you really think that even supposing a

Government said we are going to break with the UN conventions and we

everyone knows that police officers break with the UN conventions and we

everyone knows that police officers don't take the money. But it

everyone knows that police officers don't take the money. But it is to

don't take the money. But it is to

don't take the money. But it is not

don't take the money. But it is not in

only the

only the

only the face

only the police

only the face of

only the police the

only the police that

only the police that became

only the police that became more

only the police that became more transparent.

transparent. The

transparent. The Georgian

transparent. The Georgian Government

Government opened

Government opened giant

Government opened giant public

Government opened giant public service

service palaces.

service palaces. Transactions that were once

were once under

were once under the

were once under the table

were once under the table were now Someone in the MoD is considering

keeping a little bit of Scotland for the union after independence. That

small plot is the Faslane nahhal base.

As you can imagine, this bit of flight flying went down badly with

the SNP. They barely got their indignation up to full splutter

before Westminster politicians rushed to disassociate themselves

from the idea. Can we have a debate on the dangers

and evils of it. The Westminster Government and the

front page of the Guardian bullying Scotland. Free peoples across the

world will condemn this and stand with Scotland in the name of

freedom. Since his question is occasioned by

the front page of the Guardian today, I hope he will be pleased to

hear the Government has commissioned, has not commissioned

contingency plans over Faslane. how well has this gone down on the

day Alistair Darling made his speech? I'm joined in the studio by

Lyndsey McIntosh of The Times and from Westminster by David Maddox of

the Scotsman. What's going on? have rarely seen the British

Government torpedo an idea as quickly as this one this morning.

You choose your cliches carefully? Yes and deliberately in this case.

The MoD have been floating this idea for sometime. I remember Peter Luff

hinting it sometime ago when he was a Defence Minister. I don't think

any of the higher echelons have taken it that seriously. The MoD,

despite what they have been telling us, about not making contingency

plans, have been looking at various contingency plans. What is

interesting is the speed with which they reacted this morning to

basically stop this story or to deny this story. I believe it was brought

on by Better Together telephoning Downing Street last night direct to

say "please deny this because this is going to cause us all sorts of

damage. " The implication of that is whoever has been talking about this

to the Guardian was probably a bureaucrat rather than a politician

because it is a difficulty to see what any politician's interest would

be in coming out with? Some politicians aren't in the loop.

There is an understanding about the sort of positive message, kind of

softly, softly, nice message, but they want to put out there, but a

great deal of them aren't in the loop on this. Right. OK, what did

you make of it? What was your reaction, presumably the

nationalists couldn't believe their luck? They couldn't, but the UK

Government response was more damning than the SNP's response as David

says, they came out shut it down so they pretty much killed off the

story, but also they gave us an insight into what they are thinking

post independence which they have been loathe to do so far. So

actually anything the SNP said on this after that almost was not

irrelevant obviously, but lost any impact.

Yes, all right. The other side of this David, it is a reasonable idea,

isn't it? Well, I mean, it is not an unreasonable idea in the sense that

certainly this has to be the short-term option or the short to

medium-term option in the sense that everybody now seems to agree if the

vote is independence, it will take a lot longer to sort out the nuclear

base. Sort to medium-term option it is clearly got to happen because you

know, whether they find alternative bases in some other part of the UK

like Milford Haven or somewhere, but so, yeah, it is not unreasonable in

that sense, but in terms of the long-term option, you know, you

know, it sounds like rank colonialism. I think the SNP will be

bringing this up time and again now. All right. Now, of course, the

timing of this, if you were Alistair Darling... You wouldn't be happy.

No. He made his ground breaking speech today which I'm sure everyone

was riveted by, but just in case they weren't, you can tell us

whether you thought he said anything new or interesting? I think if you

listen to to the whole speech and read the whole content of it, it

does mark a change in tone that that which was employed beforement there

are similar arguments. Things like we wouldn't have the soft power of

the UK as an independent country. But rather than saying we won't have

it, what he said today is "look how great it is that we have it at the

moment. " They are shifting.They have to. Why do they have to? The

polls would suggest doing what they are doing is working for them?

we seen a poll recently? Do you think the Better Together people

they have looked at their own polling and they are starting to

suffer because of this? I have no idea what their internal polling is,

but there has been a shift since the Scotland analysis paper came out

with the more scaremongering suggestions. Do you agree with that?

In speaking to the chancellor in the last couple of days and he is

confident about how things are going. He seems, the Chancellor

still chairs the Cabinet Committee on Scotland and the referendum. And

he seems to be surprised that -- at how successful it was.

You need to tell us more about what George Osborne thinks some other

time because we have run out of time.

A look at tomorrow's front papers. Security firms probed over offender

tagging. Osborne, "I won't raise taxes if the Conservatives win the

next election." And the Scottish Daily Mail, "couple set for pay outs