also testifying for advocates for tougher drug laws. >> witness is on. >> on their way, sir. >> oh, right. okay. >> hello. >> hello. >> good morning, mr. brown. >> good morning. >> please have a seat. >> mr. brown, thank you for giving evidence to the commit's inquiry to drugs. mr. russell brand, you gave evidence, written evidence, to

this committee, which members of the committee have read. could i start with a point about what you say in your evidence, that you disagree with the legalization of drugs because you think that a deterrent effect is necessary? is that right? >> i don't feel entirely qualified to talk about legislation. to me, what's more significant is the way that we socially regard the condition of addiction. it's something that i consider to be an illness and therefore more a health matter than a criminal or judicial matter. i don't think that legalization is something, as i've said, particularly qualified to get into. i can see areas, in fact, where decriminalization might be considered useful and more efficient, you know, in countries like portugal or switzerland, where it's being -- where it seems to have had some

efficacy. but for me, it's more important that we regard people suffering from addiction with compassion and that there's a pragmatic rather than symbolic approach to treating it. and i think the legislative status of addiction and the criminalization of addicts is kind of symbolic and not really functional. i don't see how it especially helps. i'm not saying let's sh have a wacky free-for-all and people go around taking drugs. didn't help me much. you're a former heroin addict. >> yeah. >> briefly, could you tell us how you got onto drugs and how you managed to come off it and how many years you were on hard drugs? >> i see you've incorporated the word "briefly" into the question. as you know it's my propensity for ver bos ti. i became a drug addict i think because of emotional difficulties, psychological difficulties, and perhaps a spiritual malady. to me, taking drugs and

excessive drinking were the result of psychological, spiritual, mental condition. so they're symptomatic. i was sad, lonely, unhappy, detached, and drugs and alcohol for me seemed like a solution to that problem. once i dealt with the emotional, spiritual, mental impetus, i no longer felt the need to take drugs or use drugs. i got clean actually at chip summers' facility, focus 12, which is abstinence-based recovery. that's what we essentially believe in, is that if you have the disease or illness or addiction of alcoholism, the best way to tackle is not use drugs in any form like state-sponsored opiates like methadone or a legal substance like alcohol. we see no distinction between these substances. what we believe is that abstinence-based kroefr is the best solution for people suffering from this condition. and the support structures exist to get people to maintain recovery, abstinence-based

recovery. what we want is more research and funding into abstinence-based recovery and fill the people towards this new lifestyle, which actually, criminalization becomes less of an issue in my view because it takes people who often indulge in criminal behavior for their habits. was that brief enough? >> very brief. thank you. you were arrested roughly 12 times by -- >> it was rough. yes. >> -- by the police. and the justice system. >> mm-hmm. >> do you think that when you were arrested that you had the kind of support that you needed and people like you who were arrested being involved in drugs, the rehabilitation and the support that was needed to get you off drugs, how did the criminal justice system react to you after your arrest? >> from my experience speaking to people in the criminal justice system, from my personal experience being arrested, there's some confusion and ignorance around addiction. and it's quite understandable because a lot of drug addicts,

speaking personally, are anti-social. they are a strain on society. they necessarily engage in criminal activity. they're a public nuisance in many ways. i felt when i was arrested that, you know, the police were doing the necessary job of enforcing the laws of this country and they were doing what they had to do. but it wasn't until i had access to abstinence-based recovery that i was able to change my behavior and significantly reduce, all but obliterate my criminal activity, apart from the occasional skirmish. >> final question for me on this session, the number of legal highs that are available and the young people who seem to be able to take legal highs whenever they are banned or proposed to be banned, a new legal high emerges. do you think that this is something that does affect young people? is this now the drug of choice for young people? >> i don't know, because i'm not young enough anymore.

but i know that young people will always want to get high. and i think that what we need is a pragmatic approach to this. in a way for me, as i said before, keith, is insignificant the substance you use, whether it's alcohol, illegal street drugs. the legal status of a drug is irrelevant to a drug addict. if you're a drug addict, you're getting drugs. as for legal highs, we need to address the social, mental, and spiritual problems that are leading young people or people of all ages to taking drugs. what we need is research into abstinence-based recovery and more awareness. >> i'm conscious of those points. richard ferguson. >> currently working on a program about addiction and how it's viewed in society. what messages are you hoping to get across in that program? >> the message we hope to get across in this program is that maintenance of drug addiction through state-sponsored substances like methadone should only be deployed as part of a

reduction with the ultimate aim of abstinence-based recovery, that we need to start regarding addiction in all its forms as a health issue as opposed to a judicial and criminal issue, that we need to change the laws in this country and have more compassionate, altruistic, loving attitude to the people with the disease of addiction and recognize that these people with the proper help, access to the proper treatment, can become active and helpful members of society, like myself -- some would argue that point -- or perhaps more obviously, chip summers, with a criminal record longer than your arm, now runs a treatment center and has been clean 27 years. we don't want to discard people. we need to bring them into society, offer them treatment and once again neutralize this toxic social fret they offer as criminals, because they have to fund their habit, or even if it's a legal drug like alcohol, they're clattering into things, driving dlung. we need to offer them treatment and activate them and incorporate them into our

society. the message is one of pragmatism, altruism and compassion in all areas. >> thank you. we will have specific questions for you, but if you want to chip in at any stage, please feel tree to do so. is there anything you want to add -- >> i think he's explaining it fine. >> thanks, chip. chip runs the treatment center where i got clean. >> yes. we're coming on to him in a moment. >> puppet. he's the puppeteer behind each and every articulation. >> thank you. >> mr. brand, you've said that addiction is an illness. >> yes. >> but would you say that it's also fair to characterize it to a large extent as self-induced? >> not really. >> like many other illnesses? and also that it does carry with it victims, many people of who are on drugs commit offenses against other people, do they not? so it differs in that respect, as well, doesn't it? when one's looking at the

criminal justice system, doesn't one also have to have some compassion and consideration for the victims of crime where those crimes are committed by people under the influence of drugs? >> it's a very important question and one we need to address. of course the victims of a drug-related crimes are important and important and need to be taken care of. we were with chief superintendent graham bartlett the other day of susz es police, a wonderful man, a good, civic-minded je mnman. it's his belief that by regarding addiction as an illness, by offering treatment instead of a more punitive approach, we can take -- we can prevent people from committing crimes. just personally, i was a criminal when i was a drug addict by virtue of my addiction and the ways that i had to acquire money to get drugs. and chip was an armed robber. i hope you don't mind me telling them this. other people i've met, criminality is a necessary component.

now, of course we're not saying forget the victims, but i'm saying it's better to address the social situation pragmatically, and i think we all know this, by prescribing methadone to people, most people on methadone are using illegal drugs to supplement their habit. they're not addressing the root problems. we need to approach this the victims with respect where there has been criminal behavior, it needs to be dealt with correctly, but perhaps in the penal system itself we can offer treatment like the brilliant work done in various institutions and prisons. >> a carrot and a stick? >> i think what there needs to be is love and compassion for everybody involved. people committing criminal behavior, they need to be dealt with legally, but they need to be offered treatment, not just some hugging liberalism but because it deals with the problem and prevents further crimes being committed. addicts that get clean through one day at a time through

abstinence-based recovery generally speaking stop committing crimes. it's better for the victims, for the addict, and society. >> the role that celebrities play in society is not insignificant. i want to ask you whether -- >> i'd argue that it is insignificant, and that's why they play that role. >> perhaps it should be more than it is. but what i want to know from you, mr. band, is whether you think that having got out of the cycle of addiction -- >> yes. >> -- and i congratulate you. >> thank you. >> whether you would like to position yourself as a role model in society for those who might look to you as an example. >> as the great tupac shakur said, role is something people play, model is something people make. both of those are fake. what i want to offerauthenticit truth of this illness, our regard to the criminal components of it, in assisting victims and in the way we legislate and organize our society. i can't be responsible, as you know -- you've got whole

committees all the time about their reprehensible behavior of our media -- what the cipher of my image is used to represent in the media i have no control over. >> you do, because your behavior is some aspect of what's portrayed about you, isn't it? >> well, yes, of course. but how is this going to be written up? this could be written up as michael ellis is sprawled on a pin by the whit of brand or they could say the recalcitrant former drug addict rambled on. if you're reading "the telegraph," it will say one thing, "the socialest worker" will say another thing. >> abomination. >> what i want to offer people is truth and aauthenticity. celebrities, as we all know, is a vacuous toxic concept used to distract people from what's important, and in this case that's treatment of people with disease and addiction. >> mr. summers. >> as far as we were concerned, those people who are brave enough, who are both celebrities and recovering addicts, have a profound effect on the number of people who seek treatment

because it gives out a very positive message that recovery is possible. and when russell brand's book came out, the number of referrals to our treatment center was just, you know, hugely exaggerated because people suddenly discovered that treatment was possible, help was possible, and people could get better. it made a profound difference. i would hope that actually more people in the public eye, i suppose celebrities they are in the public eye, will come forward and have the bravery to do so because it does encourage people. >> a very positive role. >> absolutely. but of course come back far, as well, when people make a big fuss about being in recovery and then relapse. of course that's unfortunate. but we're fortunate with russell that he's maintaining a good recovery and that continues to be a good role model. >> you think more people need to know about things like cocaine production, where the cane comes from? look at colombia, look at the effects that the harvesting of cocaine was having on the people of colombia who are

extraordinarily poor and were forced to be involved in this kind of activity. do you think if there was more focus on where it all came from and how it affected communities, that would help stop people getting involved? >> no, keith. no more than the industrial consequences of oil production affect people using their cars. people don't care about that industry. people care about getting the results that they require. the illegality makes no difference. the consequences in the nation of origin makes no difference. i think what we need is to address the emotional, mental, and spiritual problems that lead to addiction. of course, any industry or the cocaine manufacturing in south american nations or whatever, as a consequence for their nations, but i don't think that's something that individual drug addicts are going to be affected by with their illness because they're normally on drugs. >> very much. >> i'd like to ask a question to mr. sumners. focus 12 has three high-profile patients. >> yes. >> mr. brand, da vitae and boy

george. that's something that was probably unthinkable about 50 years ago. >> yes. >> do you think that has led to the destigmatization of addict, or do you think it's led to a wider acceptance of drug use in society in general? >> i don't think it's encouraged people to use drugs. i think there have been some people who have made a -- some positive -- i was right in the middle of my answer. >> good space. >> the public is fine. yes, mr. summers. >> i've completely forgotten where i was. >> high-profile patients and destigmatization. >> i think there are certain celebrities who have made a sort of positive message about drug use, which is it has not helped the situation at all. i think most people who get better from drug addiction are a very positive influence. but i think there are some celebrities, obviously, who have probably contributed to people

using drugs because they make it look glammous, they make it look interesting, and i don't suppose that helps. but i think as long as -- while they're using, they tend to do that, but if they stop using they obviously become a very positive role model. but i do think there are some celebrities who have made the matter -- i don't think on a national scale it's made a huge difference. one or two people who were influenced -- >> how do you pick your celebrities? >> i just -- the ones that get clean, i'll grab them. >> very helpful. nicola blackwood. >> thank you, chair. first, i'd like to congratulate you on your work on abstinence-based work. i think it's very effective and i share your suspicion about long-term methadone maintenance. but i was struck by your comments about the problems of highlighting drug use in communities. do you think that we're doing enough, or do you think that there's a risk that will harm

reduction-based approaches to drug education and giving a false impression, that there are some drugs which are staf if used correctly? >> i think we are not doing anything like enough, to give an honest answer to the providence of drugs. i think we are giving a rather clouded message about drug use. there's a lot more we could be doing about educating people about drugs. i don't think we address it and take it on board prommerly enough. and i -- yeah, i feel we should be doing much more, especially at an educational level. we should be giving honest education. i don't think there are many schools that are giving honest education to young people. we've been educating young people for 15 years, and it hasn't had a major influence on the amount of drug use. we need to change how we're doing the education with young people, in particular. >> how? >> by giving more honest information. no good just going into schools and saying drugs are bad, stop

it, because in each of those schools there will be people who are using cannabis, ek scstaecs. not all the schools but some will be. if you don't give people the good and the bad of drug use, they won't listen to you, because there are lots of people in schools who are smoking cannabis and not dropping dead. you have to give both the positive and the negative side of it. i don't think we're doing that. i think we're giving too much of the negative side of it, not giving honest information. >> thank you. doctor. >> thank you, chair. mr. summers, you're an advocate for these approaches. >> yes, sir. >> there was good evidence for methadone maintenance and high cost-effectiveness, fairly good for heroin maintenance, and a lack of evidence for abstinence. do you think that abstinence is the answer for everybody or are you arguing that there are people for whom it is a very good option? i think it is an admirable

aid for everybody. i think there's a really good purpose for methadone usage at a certain stage, but just to park people on methadone for four to seven years and more is criminal, really. just to keep people locked into that addiction, because methadone usage is a dependency, totally dependent. i think it has a role, but i think it gets overused and i think we tend to use it as a response for everything. we don't do enough to intervene. i think it would be an admirable aim for everybody. i don't think methadone usage is a good thing. i see very few people on methadone living good, stable lives. i think a lot who are using it are using other drugs on top. what i see is people who are abstinent lead good, clean, and decent lives, but obviously not

everybody can achieve it. >> counselor just asked really for both of you, because obviously we have finite resources to spend, if going to spend more money on treatment f we're going to spend more money on education, money has to be taken from somewhere. and one possible suggestion is that we spend less money on doing the policing of possession, for example, is that something you would support or would you see things in a different way? >> i think that's a brilliant idea, as a matter of fact. and i think these people within the criminal justice services that share that view. i think that yeah, you've got to appropriate these resources from somewhere and -- penalizing people for possession of drugs is costly and expensive. a good number of times i was arrested was simply for possession and the costs of that would be better spent on education and addressing and treatment. i think that would be a very sensible use of those redirected

funds. >> mr. somers. >> i feel like i'm in school now. i've forgotten the question. >> stick it into treatment. >> thank you for that translation. i think there's a lot of money wasted on small time possession of small amounts of drugs which is just part and parcel of using. i think there's a lot of police time wasted on that. and i'm not saying that we should legalized but i think if we could get rid of some of that, because that sort of just minor possession is part of the everyday life of being an addict. and you know, it would be -- i certainly think there is a difference between decriminalizing. i think treat it as a health issue but i'm not in favor of legalizing things but i think we waste a lot of money. >> you spent quite a lot of time. >> i did. >> also armed robbery to get

drugs. >> there is quite a gap between education and full blown addiction. and treatment for abstinence. in that gap you have first use and so on. and what you need is intervention during that period to prevent addiction and prevention and some of that prevention is perhaps first prevention and diversion programs. are you suggesting that we should be removing all spending on those intermediate steps in drugs policy? >> no. i think we should do better. >> thank you. i'd like to ask both the gentlemen, what are your views on dekrimalization or legalization of drugs. >> i'm not a legal expert, i'm saying that to a drug addict the legal status is irrelevant. it's at best an inconvenience. if you need to get drugs because you're an addict you're going to get it regardless of the legal

status. the more you waste in controlling that i do not -- there is a futility to. >> would you be in favor or not? >> yes, i would. i think that there is a degree of cowardice and willful ignorance around this condition. a good many people here, if you think about it we all know somebody affected by alcoholism or addiction, something we need to handle compassionately and pragmatically. the criminal and legal status i think sends the wrong message. i wouldn't stop banging the drum as i said to make drugs legal. myself i don't take any drugs and i don't drink. for me they are bad. i think we need to recognize the distinction that certain people have a condition or tendency that drugs and alcohol are going to ruin their lives. we need identify those people and offer the correct treatment. >> thank you. >> do you agree? >> i think there is a real argument for decriminalizing it so it gets treated like a health issue than a legal issue. however, i think there is a

massive difference between that and legalizing drugs. i think you find it difficult to justify the legal use of a lot of drugs. you can't really justify the legal use of heroin, crack cocaine, or any of those drugs. there is no medical or legal reason people should use those drugs. i think you would be hard pressed -- i think cannabis is probably the one you could make an argument for. >> but you wouldn't support the legalization of cannabis? >> i think it's the one most likely to be -- the one you've got a chance of kind of actually sort of putting forward an argument justification. i don't think there is any justification for legalization -- >> but if you legalize or decriminalize cannabis you're not taking away the problem. we've seen the other end where there is a serious organized crime issue and the narco terrorism issue which ruins people's lives. murders people, has people causes conflict in countries. i mean -- >> i'm not advocating the

legalization of cannabis. if there was any drug at all you could put forward an argument, cannabis is the one you've got the best chance with. but how on earth do you justify the usage of heroin or crack cocaine or anything like that. >> making it legal is not cherking, chips. i think there needs to be honesty and authenticity around this so that people in parliament don't look like they are out of touch. i think it's good that you're holding this committee but some of this information is already accessible. >> thank you. final question. >> yes. i think you both referred to a preference for ignoring what you describe as a more minor offending in relation to drugs. can i suggest to you that a lot of the more minor offending leads to some of the more major offending and that actually what one is doing if one is toing nor those types of offenses is to make the matter worse both for

society suffering under increased crime but also for the offender who would be less likely to learn the lessons of having been arrested and be more likely to get worse. >> being arrested isn't a lesson, it's just a blip. you need to demonstrate in a wearness of the situation, yes, in many ways the disease or the condition of addiction does exacerbate and if you start taking drugs it's likely you take worse and if you take expensive drugs you will end up committing crime. again, mate, what we need to identify is a degree of authenticity and compassion the way we deal with this or you seem like you don't know what you're talking about. you can tell what party they are in from the questions. what about the victims of the crime. >> i think all parties are interested in victims of crime. >> of course we are. that's what we say. we don't say ignore victims. >> i think we're running out of time. i have a final question.

>> time is infinite. >> for this committee. >> who is next. she may not show up. >> i have a final question for you. >> not quite a variety show. >> we have -- >> a little bit of variety though. >> mr. brant. >> mr. brand. you have 4.5 million twitter followers. having gone through addiction and then rehabilitation, what is your message to young people who want to get involved in drugs? what would you say to them about the effects it has? >> my message isn't for young people. my message is for people that have this condition of addiction. if you have the condition of addiction there is help available and i recommend abstinence based recovery. i think some can safely take drugs as long as it doesn't harm their health and i don't feel it's my business.

so just say no stuff. the kids were all taking drugs in the white house when they were visiting nancy reagan. a further demonstration. let's have an honest debate and funding for abstinence based recovery. >> mr. somers, you have anything to add. >> the excellent work you are doing. >> i tend to deal with what -- i get very muddled in all of the legalization, decriminal -- i tend to deal with the problem when it exists and i agree completely that when those people come into treatment they have damaged a lot of people in the public, they are harming at least four or five other people in their families who are distressed by that behavior and i try and prevent that and i think the best way of preventing that is ultimately abstinence treatment. that's when you stop causing harm to families, stop causing harm to the public. and that's your best chance because at the moment i see people who are not in abstinence programs continuing to cause distress to families and the

public. >> mr. somers, mr. brand, thank you. >> thanks for having us. >> thank you for your written evidence. >> thank you very much for coming. as you know, the committee is conducting an inquiry into drugs policy in all aspects of drugs policy. you have been critical of