From the editor-in-chief Do we really need more prohibition? Chris Fay Editor-in-chief chrisf@tsi.org.uk If anyone was still in doubt that the Psychoactive Substances Bill was pitched as a vote winner, as opposed to a problem solver, then the events of the last few days should put them right. Troubled from the start, the Bill was postponed at the eleventh hour following claims that the definition of a psychoactive substance was unenforceable. Poppers, also known as alkyl nitrite, were very recentlyexcluded after government advisers on the misuse of drugs determined the substance did not have a direct effect onthe brain. Users of what is, after all, a party drug popular in the gay community, might dispute this claim; they include Tory MP Crispin Blunt, whom I applaud for speaking his mind on thesubject. In doing so, he also raised a key point for trading standards professionals who are likely to enforce the Bill: how do you determine whether or not a substance is psychoactive, and how much will that cost? But before any of our more hedonistic readers volunteer their services, if we look at drugs enforcement at home and abroad it is starting to look like a moot point. Society is taking an increasingly liberal attitude towards users and the war on drugs at street level is from the same school of propaganda that brought us the Psychoactive Substance Bill. After all, most enterprising teenagers can lay their hands on drugs regardless of the legal status. Durham police has recognised this and chief constable Mike Barton is the first senior officer to say what others must surely already be thinking: prohibition does not work; class A drugs should be decriminalised; users should get medical help; and small-time cannabis growers in his patch will no-longer be pursued. Be warned, Mr Barton has also recently suggested that he might introduce police cats,* so maybe we really do need the Psychoactive Substances Bill after all... Thanks for reading. *In fairness to Mike his views on police cats come in a heart-warming response to a five-year-old girl who wrote to him and suggested the idea.