This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/8335189.stm

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
'More to quit' in drug advice row Sacked adviser criticises Brown
(about 2 hours later)
The UK's chief drugs adviser is predicting there will be resignations after he was forced to quit for criticising government policy. The UK's former chief drugs adviser has accused Gordon Brown of reclassifying cannabis for political reasons.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson said the scientific independence of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs was undermined by Prof Nutt's comments. Prof David Nutt also predicted there would be further resignations from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs after he was made to quit as its head.
The professor most recently criticised the decision to reclassify cannabis to Class B from C. The professor said Mr Brown had "made up his mind" to make cannabis a Class B drug, despite evidence to the contrary.
His sacking has been criticised by some drug research groups and MPs. The home secretary said he had "lost confidence" in Prof Nutt, accusing him of "lobbying for a change in policy".
Prof Nutt told the BBC's Newsnight the confidence of government scientists had been undermined by his sacking and their work was being devalued. Earlier this week, Prof Nutt used a lecture at King's College, London, to say that smoking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness and it was actually less harmful than nicotine or alcohol.
"I hope there will be no more sackings but I would not be at all surprised if other members of my council resigned," he said. But on Friday he was forced to quit after receiving a letter from Home Secretary Alan Johnson who said his comments had undermined the scientific independence of the council.
"One has already told me he will resign and I wouldn't be surprised if others do." 'Absurd'
'Small risk' Prof Nutt told the BBC the government had ignored advice on cannabis "on the whim of the prime minister".
He told the BBC he stood by his claim that cannabis should not be a Class B drug, based on its effects. "Until Gordon Brown took office there has never been a recommendation about drug classification from the council that has been rejected by government," he said.
He described his sacking as an example of the government's "Luddite attitude" towards science and accused Gordon Brown of making "irrational" remarks about the dangers of cannabis. I think it's a lack of courage from government that is a big issue here Sir David KingFormer government chief scientific adviser class="" href="/2/hi/uk_news/8334948.stm">Profile: Professor David Nutt
Governments may well have good reasons for taking an alternative view... When that happens, then the government should explain why Sir Michael Rawlins, Prof Nutt's predecessor class="" href="/2/hi/uk_news/8334948.stm">Profile: Professor David Nutt "Gordon Brown comes into office and soon after that he starts saying absurd things like cannabis is lethal... it has to be a Class B drug. He has made his mind up.
But he denied that he had been trying to undermine the government's policies on drugs. "We went back, we looked at the evidence, we said, 'No, no, there is no extra evidence of harm, it's still a Class C drug.'
Earlier this week Prof Nutt used a lecture at King's College, London, to attack what he called the "artificial" separation of alcohol and tobacco from illegal drugs. "He said, 'Tough, it's going to be Class B.'"
The professor said smoking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness. Prof Nutt said drug laws should not be influenced "petty party politics" and compared them to interest rates, which are set by the Bank of England not the government.
In the past, he has also claimed that taking ecstasy is no more dangerous than riding a horse. In the same way, he said, an independent committee should be set up to rule on drug classifications.
"There's no point in having drug laws that are meaningless and arbitrary just because politicians find it useful and expedient occasionally to come down hard on drugs.
"That's undermining the whole purpose of the drugs laws."
'Absolutely wrong'
Prof Nutt said his council was "very, very upset by the attitude the prime minister took over cannabis" and one had already told him he would resign.
"I wouldn't be surprised if some of the them step down - maybe all of them will," he added.
Former government chief scientific adviser Sir Daiv King said Prof Nutt had "stepped over the line" in criticising politicians, but it was "absolutely wrong" of Mr Johnson to try to stop him making his opinions about cannabis public.
MARK EASTON'S UK We are witnessing a collision between science and politics - there may be significant fall-out Mark Easton BBC's home editor Read Mark's thoughts in full and the correspondence between Alan Johnson and Prof Nutt
"I think that the government has lacked courage in backing David's committee's advice," Sir David said. "I think it's a lack of courage from government that is a big issue here."
The BBC's Danny Shaw said Prof Nutt had accused the government of using the classification system as a tool to send out an anti-drugs message, rather than to rate drugs in terms of actual risk.The BBC's Danny Shaw said Prof Nutt had accused the government of using the classification system as a tool to send out an anti-drugs message, rather than to rate drugs in terms of actual risk.
If that was indeed ministers' intention then Prof Nutt said they should be honest about it, rather than pretend classification was based on real physical and mental dangers, our correspondent said.
'Inevitable decision''Inevitable decision'
Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said the sacking had been "an inevitable decision" after Prof Nutt's "latest ill-judged contribution to the debate".Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said the sacking had been "an inevitable decision" after Prof Nutt's "latest ill-judged contribution to the debate".
But Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the decision to sack the adviser had been "disgraceful".But Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the decision to sack the adviser had been "disgraceful".
Claudia Rubin from Release - a national centre of thinking on drugs and drugs law - said the expert should not have been penalised.
Harry Shapiro, director of communications at DrugScope, said: "It would be naive not to expect those tasked with giving advice on drug policy to generate some controversy and debate.Harry Shapiro, director of communications at DrugScope, said: "It would be naive not to expect those tasked with giving advice on drug policy to generate some controversy and debate.
"The Home Secretary's decision to force the resignation of the chair of an independent advisory body is an extremely serious and concerning development and raises serious questions about the means by which drug policy is informed and kept under review." "The home secretary's decision to force the resignation of the chair of an independent advisory body is an extremely serious and concerning development and raises serious questions about the means by which drug policy is informed and kept under review."
MARK EASTON'S UK We are witnessing a collision between science and politics - there may be significant fall-out Mark Easton BBC's home editor Read Mark's thoughts in full and the correspondence between Alan Johnson and Prof Nutt
Meanwhile, the Commons Science and Technology Select Committee has asked Mr Johnson to clarify why Prof Nutt was removed at a time when independent scientific advice was essential.Meanwhile, the Commons Science and Technology Select Committee has asked Mr Johnson to clarify why Prof Nutt was removed at a time when independent scientific advice was essential.
Phil Willis MP, Chairman of the committee, said: "It is disturbing if an independent scientist should be removed for reporting sound scientific advice."Phil Willis MP, Chairman of the committee, said: "It is disturbing if an independent scientist should be removed for reporting sound scientific advice."
Prof Colin Blakemore, professor of neuroscience at Oxford University and former chief executive of the Medical Research Council, said the government could not expect experts who serve on its independent committees not to voice their concern if the advice they give is rejected.
But Prof Nutt's predecessor at the ACMD, Sir Michael Rawlins, said ministers had rejected advice in the past and would continue to do so.But Prof Nutt's predecessor at the ACMD, Sir Michael Rawlins, said ministers had rejected advice in the past and would continue to do so.
He said: "Governments may well have good reasons for taking an alternative view... When that happens, then the government should explain why it's ignoring the particular advice and I think that's generally accepted as the principle."He said: "Governments may well have good reasons for taking an alternative view... When that happens, then the government should explain why it's ignoring the particular advice and I think that's generally accepted as the principle."
The former government chief scientific adviser Sir David King said Professor Nutt had "stepped over the line" in criticising politicians but he agreed with him that classification should be based on the best scientific understanding.