Nigella - Let he who is without sin.....

I was intrigued to hear that the fraud case involving the Grillo Sisters was still being discussed on the radio this morning. When was the last time that a witness in a theft case has been put on public trial in the way Nigella Lawson has been? Let us be perfectly clear about it, she has been guilty of one thing and one thing only.She is guilty of having more money than sense. To fail to notice that £600,000 has been removed from your bank account shows that her and Charles Saatchi had a bit too much dosh for their own good.

However that is not the thrust of what she is being pilloried for. The press have the knives out because Nigella has admitted being partial to the odd spliff and has apparently taken cocaine seven times if you believe her or at every possible occasion if you believe the two sisters, who used the excuse that she was off her nut to go on a spending spree with her credit card. I don't really understand the Grillo's defence, which was that it was ok spending all her dosh, as we covered it up from Charles Saatchi?

Anyway, what is obsessing the media is whether "brand Nigella" has been damaged. I've met a few journalists over the years, I've not met too many who are saints. I do wonder how they keep a straight face as they stick the knives in. When I try and decide whether someone is a bad or a good person, I generally judge them by how their actions affect the rest of us. There is absolutely nothing in the coverage of Nigella that indicates anything other than the fact she has at times found it difficult to cope and has succumbed to the desire to get off her head. She lost her first husband, John Diamond to cancer. John Diamond used to write a diary of his struggle in the Daily Star. At the time I used to buy the paper simply to read his column. It was fascinating. His struggle was harrowing, losing his tongue and losing his ability to enjoy food. If I was in his shoes, I would do what I could to enjoy myself. If you know you are going to die soon, you might as well go out with a bang. I've no idea whether I would become a cokehead, but until you've been in that position, I really think you shouldn't judge. So what was Nigella to do? Could she disapprove or could she support him and go along for the ride. You may disagree, but I'd hope if I was in her position, I would take the role she did of supporting her husband and not turn my nose up and say "don't be so stupid, die in pain and misery".

When John, passed away she put the Charlie away. It stayed away until she was in a period of extreme stress. Unlike many marriages that fall apart, the disintegration of Nigella's was on the front page of the papers. We all shared in the way she was treated. There is no argument that she has been under stress. Does that excuse anything? Well if she was going out bashing people up, I'd say no, but who hasn't had some sort of lapse when they are stressed. Before we judge Nigella, lets ask whether we've ever done stupid things in times of stress. As it says in the bible, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

I don't think anything Nigella has done, as revealed by the press, shows her to be anything other than a normal person, albiet a rather rich and at times silly one. She is probably one of the few celebrities I'd be quite happy to spend an evening at a dinner party with, not least because at least you'd get a decent bit of dinner. On Christmas day, lets not forget who Jesus preferred the company of, the sinners. Give me Nigella any day rather than the two faced hypocrites who snipe at her.

Lets Do Drugs?

I was listening to the radio today and it appears that there is a recommendation that Ecstasy is downgraded from a class A drug to a class B drug. It appears the government has refused to listen to this advice. What are we to make of this? Well personally I don't really understand the difference between the classifications. Surely something is either illegal or it's not. If you were to ask the majority of parents if their child should go to prison for possessing a small amount of illegal substances, most would say no. If you asked them whether a dealer selling their child an illegal drug should go to prison, you would probably get a different answer. We all know that some drugs are illegal. The question we should be asking is what are we trying to achieve? Why are drugs illegal?

If I were to ask you why drugs are illegal, you'd probably say "To stop people taking them". The trouble is it doesn't. If we are inclined to take procure and take drugs, we will. The law doesn't change that, it just makes the trade uncontrollable. It also makes it extremely lucrative for criminals. Policy towards drug misuse needs a radical overhaul. Firstly we should decide exactly what we are trying to achieve. Secondly we should decide what is realistically achievable. Once we've figured that out, then we should design our rules and regulations.

So what are we trying to achieve? Well as I see it there are two major downsides to taking drugs. Firstly they can be detrimental to your health. Secondly they can seriously damage your financial situation. I've had close friends who've died through drug misuse and close friends who've lost their livelyhood/house/car etc through drug misuse, so I'm well aware of the downsides. Our aim should be to minimise the damage to individuals and the effect on society in general. What is realistically achievable? I don't believe we'll ever live in a drug free world. I think that realistically all we can do is the following :-

a) Remove the profit element of drug distribution for criminals
b) Minimise the health risks for drug users
c) Educate people as to the risks of drug use
d) Provide support mechanisms for drug addicts
e) Control the supply and quality of drugs
f) Ensure that drugs are as hard as possible to obtain by young people

Making drugs illegal achieves non of the above. Legalisation would by an extremely risky option, although I believe it would be preferable to the existing system, in as much as the criminal elements would be removed. I have been convinced by the arguments for controlled legalisation. I support a system whereby anyone over 18 could legally purchase drugs, providing they have registered as a drug user. This would enable users of addictive class A drugs (such as Heroin) to purchase the drugs in Boots. With chip & PIN technology the amounts could be monitored, reducing the possibilty of resale. Illegal sale would be monitored and enforced by customs and excise. Profits from sales would pay for the scheme. It would be possible to undercut the criminal elements controlling the trade and ensure proper quality control. The vast majority of profits for drug barons are made through hardened users and if this lucrative market was destroyed, then the risks would no longer be worthwhile.

A licensing scheme would also bring users within the system. Their health could be monitored and their quality of life improved. As with other medical conditions, those unable to work would receive the drugs on presciption (under supervision). I firmly believe that this will reduce crime.

As to education, I'd like every child to understand what taking up drug abuse as a hobby means. If you get really good at your hobby, you could lose your life, your home, your dignity. Over 90% of prostitutes are addicted to hard drugs and generally the hard drug usage came first.

Finally we need to decide what constitues an illegal drug. I'd abolish the class A/B/C system. It just confuses people. I'd say that we agree that Alcohol and Tobacco are legally accepted in the UK. These have downsides, but we tolerate these.

I'd say that any drug which causes less damage than these statistically should be legal. Any drug which causes more damage becomes illegal. If you want to take them, you register, pay a fee, get information about there effects, and if you still want to damage yourself, that's your choice as an adult. If you sell the drugs on, you go to prison. If you want to come off them, you enroll in a program and when you are clean you deregister. You'd divulge your usage on a CRB form, so if you want to become a bus driver, you have to clean your act up.

I know it's not a perfect solution, but it's not a perfect world. In my opinion only a pragmatic approach will work.