Freedom of Information request shows only 0.01% of population affected by anti-social behavior from legal highs as Lambeth Council puts in place borough ban

legal_high

Lambeth Council’s ban on legal highs comes on the back of a consultation which shows that only 35 people who responded said that they have been affected by antisocial behaviour linked to legal highs.

With a population of 310,000 in the the borough, this works out at 0.01%.

This figure is balanced against 125 people who said that they had not been affected in any way.

The borough became the first in the country last month to put in place a ban on all legal highs. These include any legal substance that is able to stimulate the nervous system.

A Freedom of Information request [pdf] submitted by Brixton Buzz also shows that the heavy-handed policy was put together on the back of only 173 people responding. This works out at a figure of 0.05% of the total population.

Out of those 173 respondents, 49% said that they haven’t experienced any anti-social behaviour issues in their area linked to legal highs. This compared to a lower figure of 43% who answered yes.

The key figure that our Freedom of Information request throws up is that 63% of respondents supported a ban on legal highs. This still only adds up to 107 people – 0.03% of the population.

This 63% figure is the one that Lambeth Council has chosen to spin out to the media, showing an apparent borough wide support for the ban on what is a perfectly legal activity.

The month long consultation ended on 13th July. Cabinet wasted no time in approving the authoritarian measures just two weeks later.

The consultation was originally framed around litter and alleged anti-social behaviour that laughing gas may – or may not – lead to. This has somehow led to a blanket ban on ALL legal highs.

The consultation itself was very poorly executed. It ran for just a month, with some of the questions restricting the scope for an answer.

The online form only allowed a small number of characters to be entered. If you want a proper discussion about the use of legal highs then don’t try and limit the conversation.

This extreme measure by Lambeth Council only became possible under the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime & Policing Act 2014 [pdf]. This essentially allows local authorities to start policing their own boroughs.

Lambeth councillors trained to identify residents that 'throw spanners in the works'

It is no surprise that it is the Nu Labour Lambeth Cabinet that has been the first in the country to take up the offer of controlling the fun that residents may want to have in their own private lives.

Cllr Jane Edbrooke, the Cabinet member for Neighbourhoods declared:

“It is our duty to keep our residents safe and this new order should deter people from supplying and using legal highs in the borough.”

Cllr Edbrooke didn’t state that only 35 people out of population of 310,000 responded to the consultation with a similar view to hers.

The Labour group at Lambeth Council has actually shifted the Tory government’s stance on legal highs even further to the right.

Central government is currently thinking through a ban on the production of legal highs, yet still recognising that these substances are perfectly legal for people to take.

Lambeth Council however thinks that it knows best, and has taken the dogmatic stance of actually banning residents from an activity that is perfectly legal.

The consultation started by setting the framework under which the legislation would then be formed:

“Over the past 12 months, Met Police along with our Enforcement Officers have noticed a significant increase in littering of canisters (whippets) that contain nitrous oxide, otherwise known as a legal high.”

It seems that Cllr Edbrooke and her colleagues are concerned with the litter problem that a perfectly legal activity can sometimes lead to.

Cllr Edbrooke confirmed this in the press release that announced the ban on a legal activity:

“The litter and antisocial behaviour associated with certain legal highs has also blighted areas like Vauxhall and Clapham and now we have the power to do something about it.”

If the problem is one of littering, then why not focus the efforts on encouraging residents to use public bins? It seems incredibly draconian to crack down on people enjoying themselves using legal substances, all in the name of litter enforcement.

Would you face a £1,000 fine for dropping a beer can or an empty packet of fags in Lambeth? These are also legal highs, and ones that have far more serious health implications than laughing gas.

The definition of a legal high that is being used by Lambeth Council states:

“Substances with the capacity to stimulate or depress the central nervous system.”

This would include a tester tin of Dulex paint.

Brixton Splash gets ready to celebrate its tenth birthday on August 2nd, 2015

Anyone who was present at events such as Brixton Splash over the summer months will know that such a blanket ban will be impossible to enforce.

Residents come out to these events to enjoy themselves. Perfectly legal activities such as drinking alcohol, smoking tobacco and inhaling laughing gas are the norm for some residents.

We would be interested to see what people felt most threatened by during Splash – alcohol abuse, or friends sharing a laughing gas balloon.

The ban removes the opportunity for many young people living in the borough the chance to enjoy themselves carrying out a perfectly legal activity. It also shuts down any reasonable debate about the use of drugs, legal or otherwise.

Evidence exists showing that trying to ban legal highs will have the opposite affect, leading to an increase in use. This was the case for both Ireland and Poland.

Sainsbury's waters down alcohol licence for Stockwell Square, yet still asks for 7am selling time

Meanwhile Cllr Edbrooke doesn’t have such an authoritarian streak when it comes to alcohol. As a member of the Licensing Committee, she voted in favour of the new Sainsbury’s opposite Stockwell station having a 7am alcohol licence.

The previous licence when the shop traded as Jacks was for 11am. The Met Police argued against the 7am licence.

Cllr Edbrooke’s remit as Cabinet member for Neighbourhoods includes:

“Leading on crime reduction programmes, working closely with the police to keep Lambeth residents safe and secure.”

Please donate to Brixton Buzz

To ensure editorial independence, Brixton Buzz accepts no advertising, sponsorship or funding. If you’d like to contribute to our running costs, you can donate here. Thank you.

2 Comments on “Freedom of Information request shows only 0.01% of population affected by anti-social behavior from legal highs as Lambeth Council puts in place borough ban”

  1. When Public Spaces Protection Orders, Community Protection Notices etc were first mooted, there were many concerns expressed about local authorities exceeding their remit in the same way they had done with ASBOs. Central government promised to “lock in” safeguards against this, but obviously didn’t bother as Lambeth is just the most recent in a line of local authorities attempting to use the new orders for “social engineering” purposes.
    As for Lambeth’s shonky and wholly self-serving manipulation of data in support of their social engineering, it’s hardly surprising. Lambeth almost always decide what they’re doing before the data is in (see Station Rd and Atlantic Rd arches, Loughborough Jn traffic measures, demolition of Cressingham Gdns estate etc ad nauseam).

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.