The cost of the war on drugs has been detailed - and commented on - from an unexpected quarter: by the Herald's Michael Duffy, who in my book is somewhat right of center; unexpected since righties normally rant and rave about getting tough on drugs, throwing everything they have against drug dealers and users etc. 

I think it is safe to say normally the Right is not terribly interested in arguments for the decriminalisation of illicit drugs. Anyway, good on him to research the issue and provide a tally - the total is something like $4.7b per annum … that's $4,700,000,000 … hmmmmm!

He then goes into the obvious questions: Is there a point in fighting the war on drugs? Is it cost effective? Does it achieve what it sets out to achieve? The answers are no, no and no. It is widely acknowledged that the drug problem has not declined, even though world wide huge resources are thrown against it. And looking at the issue of prohibition from a cost-benefit angle, it also is acknowledged that there aren't any benefits.

So the next question is inevitable:  What would happen if prohibition were repealed? If drugs were decriminalised, would the savings in law enforcement, policing and imprisonment be wiped out by additional health costs due to increased use? Evidence from countries like Portugal and the Netherlands, which have in effect decriminalised drug use, suggest there would not be a big jump in drug use. Duffy assumes, therefore, that the level of drug use would remain about the same. Hear, hear! And what would happen to pricing? Prices would drop a lot; hard drugs to about 5 to 20 percent of current prices, marijuana to about 25%. 

One has to assume three things now: 1) It would be hardly worth while to produce and sell drugs illegally, the criminal element would probably be alleviated if not eradicated. 2) Legal drugs (dispensed through pharmacies, like all other drugs) would be taxed and thus provide revenue for dealing with drug related health issues. 3) Drugs would be cleaner and safer to use and drug education would be part of the distribution cycle, i.e. health and social problems would improve.

Wow … so what are we waiting for? Methinks this is a no-brainer! Are there any arguments against decriminalising drugs?