Government Responds to David Nutt Sacking Petition

[kryst]

(http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page22548)

The Government's Response to the Sacking of Professor David Nutt

We received a petition asking:

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to re-instate Professor David Nutt.”

Details of Petition:

“On 30 October 2009 the Home Secretary sacked the Chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. Professor Nutt has expressed politically unpopular opinions such as - “Alcohol ranks as the fifth most harmful drug after heroin, cocaine, barbiturates and methadone. Tobacco is ranked ninth” and “Cannabis, LSD and ecstasy, while harmful, are ranked lower at 11, 14 and 18 respectively.” Drug policy should be based on science not hysteria. Scientists expressing their honestly held expert opinions should not find themselves in fear of losing their jobs. Professor Nutt should be re-instated immediately.”

Thank you for your e-petition which calls for the reinstatement of Professor David Nutt as Chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

In his statement to the House of Commons on 2 November 2009, the Home Secretary informed the House that he asked Professor Nutt to resign as Chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs because he had lost confidence in Professor Nutt’s ability to undertake this important role.

The Home Secretary recognises that the advice of independent scientific advisers is essential to the Government’s work. The role of such advisers is to provide independent advice to Government based on their professional, scientific expertise.

The role of Government is to consider that advice carefully, along with all other relevant factors, such as public perceptions, and it is for Parliament to endorse or reject the Government’s decisions where appropriate.

The Chair of the Council has to be able to accept those decisions and continue his work as an adviser to, rather than a critic of, government.

Members of the Council of course have the right as academics to express their views on drug risks. What they cannot do is lobby against the decisions taken by ministers in relation to drugs.

The Government accepts that its commitment to evidence-based policy making on the important issue of drug misuse and in many other areas can only continue with high quality scientific evidence underpinning it. Principles on scientific advice to Government to ensure effective engagement between the Government and those who provide independent scientific and engineering advice are currently out for consultation. A revised, agreed set of rules governing scientific advisory bodies will then be put into practice by the Government in its dealings with all such bodies.

In relation to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, the Home Secretary has agreed specific ways of working, supported with mutual commitments. These are set out in a joint statement that was issued on 10 November 2009, following his meeting with the Council. They agreed that it is important to concentrate efforts on ensuring that the best advice is available to government on drug misuse with the common purpose of reducing drug-related harms in the UK.

Professor Les Iversen was appointed in January 2010 as interim chair for 12 months.

[oioioi]

Another successful petition.

[skaarlaw]

so basically they just said that they acknowledge the petition and they refuse to do it because they are just scientific advisors and what the government says is true

ohh i love this democracy

[truedruid]

Originally Posted by skaarlaw

so basically they just said that they acknowledge the petition and they refuse to do it because they are just scientific advisors and what the government says is true

ohh i love this democracy

If you have a problem with a decision the government make then it must be taken down the correct route. You must not just uproar, you need to gather people with the same opinion and put your view on paper. Then the government will consider your application, then politely tell you to FUCK OFF, and that they run the country because we thought we voted them in.

Gordon Brown said today when ask if he was a bully, "no I don't think I'm a bully I sometimes get angry but doesn't everybody?" No we don't, if we do we are arrested and sent to anger management classes, because if you get angry with someone you can be misinterpreted as bulling. Not our beloved leader, if he is wrong he get angry and says he right, who going to stand up to someone who can basically ruin your life. He needs to go.

[djhooker]

typical automated response i'd expect to get.