Pubdate: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 Source: Guardian, The (UK) Copyright: 2000 Guardian Newspapers Limited Contact: 75 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3ER, England Fax: +44-171-837 4530 Website: http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/guardian/ Forum: http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/BBS/News/0,2161,Latest|Topics|3,00.html Author: Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent WIDDECOMBE FORCED TO BACKTRACK ON CANNABIS Ann Widdecombe, the shadow home secretary, was yesterday forced to backtrack on her pledge of zero tolerance against cannabis users after seven shadow cabinet members mocked the policy by admitting they had used thedrug in their youth. In an extraordinary day of criticism from some of her most senior Tory colleagues, Miss Widdecombe admitted she had erred in presenting her much maligned pledge to have no truck with drug users. As what appears to be a battle between social liberals and authoritarians at the top of the Conservative party was being waged, the Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy added his fuel to the fire by becoming the first party leader to call for the decriminalisation of cannabis possession. Miss Widdecombe's hand appeared forced as Sunday newspaper headlines revealed top Tories - including the shadow foreign secretary Francis Maude - had admitted smoking dope. She then experienced a very public revolt within her party to her ideas. Peter Ainsworth, the shadow culture secretary, said her policy was "unrealistic" and suggested it was unhelpful that she had launched it without discussing it with the shadow cabinet. The former prime minister John Major also called for a rethink, while the Conservative vice-chairman Steve Norris said it was a tall order to expect the police to impose zero tolerance against a backdrop of falling police numbers. He also accepted that most young voters would disagree with Miss Widdecombe. Yesterday Miss Widdecombe said she intended to give the police only the option of imposing ?100 fixed penalty fines for drugs possession. Such fines would not constitute a full criminal record accessible to police. She stressed she would pilot her ideas of cracking down on small or medium drug sellers in one city before attempting anything nationwide. Under her proposed regime designed to deter cannabis users, she said: "The police could take you to court, as they can now, or they could fine you, as they cannot now, or they could let you off with a warning that is not an actual formal caution." She admitted: "The use of the phrase zero tolerance in this area was unfortunate because everybody has their own interpretation of what zero tolerance is. "I should have made it clear zero tolerance does not mean you come down on every single instance of possession. It means you challenge every instance, but the police have got to have the right to decide whether they do go forward. I was trying to ensure that where they did want to go forward, they have more teeth than now". She wanted to replace the caution fordrugs possession with the fine becausethe caution represents no real deterrentand few police wanted to pursuepossession through cumbersome courtprocedure. She said "It is a coherent policy that has come under such enormous pressurebecause the media interpreted it as thepolice invading private living quarters,raiding student premises and taking every joint." She said one of her most severe critics - the Police Superintendents Association - had "got completely the wrong end of the stick. "They thought they would have to do it on present resources, and secondly they thought it would remove all discretion". She also stressed that a fixed penalty fine would not represent a more serious criminal record than a police caution. It would not be a record for use by employers. She admitted the Conservative central office briefing paper accompanying her speech stating the fixed penalty fine would constitute a criminal record was technically correct, but "it would have been more accurate if it added that the record would not show in most checks in exactly the same way as a police caution. I am not introducing something that does not happen at the moment". Charles Kennedy, speaking on ITV's Jonathan Dimbleby programme, accused her of political hysterics, adding "she has performed a public service in the past few days by showing how far public attitudes have changed". He did not regard the shadow cabinet members or other recreational users of cannabis as criminals. Asked if this meant he believed the drug should be decriminalised, he answered: "Yes." But the Liberal Democrat manifesto would not pledge to end the outlaw status of cannabis. Instead, it will propose a royal commission to look into drugs law reforms. - --- MAP posted-by: Derek