London, Drugs and You – the Role of Elected

Members

May 11th 2009Facilitated by David MacKintosh and Sara McGrail

“No more of Whitehall assuming it has all the answers. No more of Local Government relying on central guidance as a crutch, always waiting to be told what to do, seeing the statutory minimum as the extent of its ambitions. No more of the public’s views being overlooked or requested as a mere afterthought” Hazel Blears, 2008

LDPF Home Office Research Exploring local implementation and management

of the Drugs Strategy Identifying opportunities to improve the fit

between national and local strategy Exploring the relationship between solid local

delivery and central accountability Identifying the support needs of elected members

(and senior officers) in effectively governing the strategy locally

Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain 1998 - 2008 Use of illicit drugs and frequent use amongst young

people has fallen Use of Class A drugs has stabilised after a period

of sustained increases Treatment capacity has doubled, waiting times

down Growing number of offenders are pushed into

treatment from the criminal justice system Drug-related crime has fallen by around a fifth

London Context Class A use (heroin,cocaine, ecstasy)

higher in London than national average Other drug use in line with national average 79,000 problem drug users (heroin/crack) 40% of DIP tests positive (range 32% to

48%) 60% of current and former IDUs have a

BBV

Drugs: Protecting Families and Communities 2008 - 2018 Replaces and builds on the previous ten year

strategy published in 1998, updated in 2002 Sets out an overarching framework of objectives,

which extend the approach taken in the previous strategy

Contains first of a series of three year action plans, which will run alongside the Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review cycles and associated PSA targets

Picks up issues of mainstreaming and localism

What is in the new strategy?Four central themes:

- Protecting communities through robust enforcement action to tackle drug supply, drug related crime and ASB

- Preventing harm to children, young people and families affected by substance misuse

- Delivering new approaches to drug treatment and social reintegration

- Public information campaigns, communications and community engagement

The View From The Ground Scepticism about the achievements Lack of Community Impact - for more than a

quarter of people, drug use or drug dealing is a very big or fairly big problem in their area

Fall in drug related recorded acquisitive crime is slowing

Disconnect between central and local partnership No leadership

Current Controversies

Harm Reduction - Abstinence

Community - Residential

Education - Prevention

Mainstream - Ringfenced

Real Challenges, Real Opportunities

“should receive a rapid improvement in their overall health and their ability to work, participate in training or support their families”

“approaches..which have the flexibility to respond to circumstances”

“those leaving and planning to leave treatment to have packages of support to access housing, education, training and employment”

Some Initial Findings from the Research

Need to improve understanding of the drug-related problems that affect communities

Reinforce local ownership of the solutions and actions necessary to tackle drugs

Improve national leadership A greater focus on families and earlier intervention - tackling social

exclusion, crime, worklessness and other contributory factors to problematic drug use

A greater focus on helping people in treatment to re-integrate with families and communities

Stronger local governance Statutory responsibility for Local Authorities, Police and PCTs to

embed action on drugs in mainstream local work. Better support for and linkages with local members nationally

What We Would Like From You …

*Information & Ideas*

Information and Ideas How are elected members and the communities

they represent currently involved in local drug strategy?

What are the risks of involvement - what are the potential benefits?

How could elected members be more involved - who should make this happen?

What support and information do elected members need to exercise their scrutiny role effectively?

Further Information David MacKintosh

david.mackintosh@cityoflondon.gov.uk Sara McGrail

sara.mcgrail@btinternet.com

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/ldpf