have a chance of winning a seat, they
go quiet.
Theresa May in her introduction to the
2010 drug strategy said, ‘people should
not use drugs, and if they do, they
should stop.’ The approach is infantile,
pandering to
Daily Mail
readers who
might clamour for the disembowelling
of anyone who cares for a stigmatised
community. What I’d like to see from a
new government is a grown-up
conversation about evidence-based
treatment and a new legal framework.
The current fiscal approach has
absolutely no sophistication or insight.
It is well known that for every pound
spent on treatment, around five
pounds is saved on healthcare, crime
and harms to the wider community. I’d
like to see an incoming government
join the dots and deliver care; the kind
that looks after people and saves
money, not the kind that squeezes the
vulnerable out of the system and
spends infinitely more mopping up
the damage.
I’d like to see services shaped by people
whose needs are not being met, as well
as those who have benefited. The
recovery agenda is pulling some people
forward but it is leaving too many
behind. I would like to see the next
government return to holding people
who need it, not pushing everyone
forward whether they are ready or not.
Last year drug-related deaths went up
by 32 per cent, but the treatment
system is more interested in tweaking
successful completion rates. I would
like a new government to look at drug-
related deaths as if they were the
deaths of people who mattered.
David Biddle, chief executive, CRI
Put simply, I want to see the progress
that has been made in improving
services over the past few years
maintained and built upon. Timeframes
for working with addictions can be
lengthy, therefore a reiteration of the
principles of the drug strategy and a
commitment to ensuring stability of
funding – possibly at a lower level – is
critically important.
I would also like to see public
recognition of the value that third
sector-organisations bring to fostering
quality and innovation in the provision
of services. The NHS public/private
debate has the potential to damage
the sector, and yet to date we have
been virtually invisible in the dialogue.
There needs to be a recognition that
‘not for profits’ operate from a
different value base to their private
counterparts, and that this ability to
offer highly effective interventions that
do not ‘drain’ money away from service
provision can be advantageous at a
time of enhanced budgetary pressures.
Policymakers need to stay focused,
maintain funding and keep pushing for
innovation and outcomes that justify
the investment.
Graham Miller, chief executive,
Double Impact
From a perspective of being a relatively
small, but well-established, voluntary
sector provider of recovery-oriented
services, we feel that a new
government should consider whether
the relentless cycle of re-
commissioning services every three or
so years really benefits the end user.
This process can place a significant
strain on the resources of smaller
organisations such as ours without a
fulltime, dedicated bid-writing team.
Short contracts do not always provide
partnerships with the time required to
really embed a new recovery culture or
delivery model to best effect for service
users. If services are to make a lasting
influence and contribute to the
origination and growth of recovery
communities, then the impact on
providers of this rapid cycle of change
needs to be reconsidered.
At the very least, the new government
could ensure that EU procurement
laws designed to make opportunities
more accessible for smaller
organisations – by dividing large
contracts into discrete lots – are
adhered to by commissioners.
Viv Evans, chief executive, Adfam
Fundamentally, I would like to see the
routine consideration of the needs of
families affected by drugs and alcohol
built into any drugs/alcohol policy
adopted by the incoming government.
The purpose of supporting families is
twofold – firstly, they need and deserve
support in their own right, and
secondly, well-supported families are
in a much better position to aid their
loved ones through their own journeys
of recovery.
So I’d like to see family support right
up there, both as part of an ambitious
treatment system and a vibrant and
innovative community sector. And to
back up this I’d also like to see, of
course, some spending commitment
that is much broader than ‘troubled
families’ – effective and sensitive
support for any family member in the
country, no matter where they live. We
are currently quite a way from this.
The field needs to stop obsessing over
the minutiae of recovery. Let’s all come
together to try and promote a coherent
voice to the ‘outside’. We need to keep
making the case for support for drug
users and their families, both in terms
of economics – it makes sense if you
do the sums – and compassion.
May 2015 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| 7
‘The field needs
to stop obsessing
over the minutiae
of recovery.’
break time?
Read the full version online at:
‘Politicians see
drug policy as a
lose/lose debate.‘
‘Policymakers
need to push for
innovation.’
