Decriminalising drug use could drastically reduce crime and improve health, the outgoing president of the Royal College of Physicians has said.

Sir Ian Gilmore said the laws on misuse of drugs should be reviewed and that their supply should be regulated.

He had formed his view after seeing the problems caused by dirty needles and contaminated drugs, the BBC’s health correspondent Adam Brimelow said.

The government said it did not believe this was the right approach.

In a parting e-mail to 25,000 RCP members, which Sir Ian said expressed his own views rather than those of the RCP, he wrote that he felt like finishing his presidency on a “controversial note”.

He endorsed a recent article in the British Medical Journal by Stephen Rolles, from the think tank Transform Drug Policy Foundation, which argued that the policy of prohibition had harmed public health, encouraged organised crime and fuelled corruption.

Sir Ian told the BBC: “Everyone who has looked at this in a serious and sustained way concludes that the present policy of prohibition is not a success.

“There are really strong arguments to look again.”

Sir Ian said he had had a longstanding interest in the subject, stemming from his work as a liver specialist.

During that time he said he became used to seeing intravenous drug users who had developed hepatitis C, and people coming into A&E units “day-in and day-out”.

‘Nail in the coffin’

He argued that many of the problems health staff encountered were the consequences not of heroin itself, but of prohibition.

In his e-mail, Sir Ian wrote: “I personally back the chairman of the UK Bar Council, Nicholas Green QC, when he calls for drug laws to be reconsidered with a view to decriminalising illicit drugs use. This could drastically reduce crime and improve health,” he wrote.

In his recent report to the Bar Council, Mr Green said there was growing evidence that decriminalising personal use could free up police resources, reduce crime and improve public health.

Danny Kushlick, from Transform, said Sir Ian’s comments were “another nail in prohibition’s coffin”.

He went on: “With a prime minister and deputy prime minister both long-standing supporters of alternatives to the war on drugs, at the very least the government must initiate an impact assessment comparing prohibition with decriminalisation and strict legal regulation.”

‘Extremely harmful’

In a statement the Royal College of Physicians said a joint report in 2000 with the Royal College of Psychiatrists had called for much greater investment in research and in treatment programmes.

The RCP said it was hoping to review the report’s findings under its new president, Sir Richard Thompson.

A spokesperson for the Home Office said: “Drugs such as heroin, cocaine and cannabis are extremely harmful and can cause misery to communities across the country.

“The government does not believe that decriminalisation is the right approach. Our priorities are clear; we want to reduce drug use, crack down on drug-related crime and disorder and help addicts come off drugs for good.”

Bookmark It

Britain could get its first ever privacy law to stop judges creating one by stealth through the courts, a justice minister said.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Lord McNally suggested that the right to privacy could be enshrined in law after a number of celebrities were awarded so-called “super-injunctions” to gag the press.

But campaigners for freedom of speech will fear that any new privacy law could frustrate investigations by journalists that are clearly in the public interest, such as The Daily Telegraph’s inquiry last year into MPs’ expenses.

Lord McNally, a Liberal Democrat minister in the Ministry of Justice, was speaking after a spate of gagging orders on the press — which have been criticised in some cases for protecting the wealthy — were ordered by the courts.

Injunctions and super-injunctions — so called because even their existence cannot be reported — have been used by sportsmen such as golfers Colin Montgomerie and Tiger Woods, and John Terry, the former England football captain, to protect their privacy.

Last Friday, a leading Premier League footballer won a High Court injunction to prevent the publication of claims about his private life.

Lord McNally said: “There has been a general consensus that a new piece of legislation that clarifies, consolidates and removes some of the more dangerous aspects of the way case law has grown up is something that is desirable.”

The Coalition last month announced a consultation on a new defamation bill, claiming that the courts were restricting freedom of expression. The Bill would cover the growth in “no win, no fee” libel cases and build on an existing private members’ bill on libel law reform that was presented to the House of Lords in May by Lord Lester of Herne Hill, a Lib Dem peer.

However, Lord McNally suggested in an interview with The Daily Telegraph that the new legislation would go further, in effect creating a privacy law.

He conceded that there were concerns that a privacy law had been created through successive rulings by judges. Some, such as Mr Justice Eady, have been heavily criticised.

Lord McNally said: “There was a danger that we were getting towards having privacy law by judicial decision. If we are going to have a privacy law it should be openly debated and freely decided by Parliament.”

The number of injunctions, in which a court orders a newspaper not to publish a story, has risen since the 1998 Human Rights Act. Lord McNally said that the newer “super-injunction” was “something that has caused concern and is something that will be dealt with”.

The Master of the Rolls, the most senior civil court judge in England and Wales, has set up a committee to examine the use of super-injunctions and other injunctions which impact on press freedom.

Lord McNally said super-injunctions were “something that has grown up by stealth, rather than by considered desire of Parliament and therefore they will be in the sights when they look at the reform of the law”.

The new legislation would be a “consolidation” and “clarification” of the case law that will “hopefully remove some of the more onerous aspects of the way that case law has grown up”.

The Government could set up a joint committee of both Houses to take evidence in public “which would get us the balance that is needed”, he said.

Hearings could take place next year, and proposals form the basis of a new Bill in the Queen’s Speech next autumn. The legislation could be on the statute books by 2012, he said.

Any new Bill would build on the work of Lord Lester, whose private members bill suggested that libel claimants will have to demonstrate “substantial harm” to their reputations if they want to sue successfully in the courts.

Lord McNally said a privacy law would not go as far as in France, where the media is heavily restricted.

“For us, the collected wisdom is that our law as it stands is slightly out of kilter, has encouraged a certain amount of libel tourism and does need an overhaul,” he said.

Bookmark It

A major law firm has been talking about its difficulties in gaining work visas for new trainees as a result of the new cap on UK work visas for non-EU migrants.
Norton Rose says it has had to turn away a number of Indian interns after falling foul of the new cap on UK work permits for people from outside the EU. It has also failed to secure a work visa for one of its trainees.

The rules have meant that firms that are used to attracting talent from abroad have been given much lower quotas for work permits available to them. Any firms that obtained six or more UK work permits between July 2009 and March 2010 have been told they are now allowed 15 per cent fewer Tier 2 visas, which are the ones required to bring in trainees and transfers from abroad.

Norton Rose is the latest firm to express concern about the UK immigration cap. The company, along with several other high profile law firms, has strong links with Indian universities and would regularly carry out recruitment runs to India to select the most talented individuals to train internally.

Bookmark It

A cashier is facing a lengthy jail term after admitting stealing a massive £1.7 million from a leading law firm.

Louise Martini, 36, lived a secret double life while systematically raiding the accounts of Birmingham solicitors Williamson & Soden.

She pretended to her own husband that she was a high-flying, highly-paid accountant taking home up to GBP70,000 a year.

But in truth she was a lowly cashier, earning little more than £20,000.

Martini, from Solihull, West Mids, apparently created the pretence in order to explain to her husband why she had so much money.

She became wealthy by repeatedly stealing from her former firms accounts. In total, she took a staggering £1,634,582 before being caught.

Martini is now facing a considerable jail sentence after pleading guilty to theft and money laundering at Gloucester Crown Court.

She claimed she used a large chunk of the cash to help her husband with his struggling businesses.

Mr Martini, of Inkberrow, Worcestershire, was himself originally charged with having laundered some of the stolen money.

But West Midlands Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that all charges against him are in the process of being dropped.

Bookmark It

The Birmingham legal jobs market has been hit by the news that international law firm Eversheds are set to outsource around 100 jobs.  The company has decided to allocate several jobs based in the city to some of their headquarters abroad. Offices in Cardiff and Leeds could also be hit by the move.

The move marks the second times in the space of the year that the company has decided to make redundancies in the UK. Last year the company cut 95 secretarial jobs.

Commenting on the decision, Eversheds managing director Lee Ranson revealed:

“It’s important that any major law firm continues to adapt in line with changes in both our sector and the wider marketplace.

“We’ve worked over the last eight months to look at how best to deliver some of our HR and finance functions. This proposal would enable us to put in place a cost efficient, innovative and robust solution, which safeguards quality and enhances client service.

“It’s always regrettable when potential redundancies are a part of such a process and we will of course be consulting with all those members of staff who may be affected by this announcement.”

Bookmark It

The Football Association may have experienced a challenging World Cup with calls for Capello and several senior players to go, but it seems that it’s the FA’s legal team that has seen sweeping changes.

Following the departure of senior solicitor Rhodri Lewis to take up the post of head of legal affairs at the Welsh Rugby Union, the FA has decided to review its whole legal team.

The body are planning to make some major changes, including the fresh vacancies of senior commercial solicitor and senior litigation solicitor. The new legal team will also benefit from a major restructuring into three business units – commercial, litigation and company secretarial.

Bookmark It

The news that youth unemployment has hit record levels is alarming (Warning of a lost generation, 12 August), but unfortunately will come as no surprise to the thousands of young people in Britain who are unable to find a first job, despite having successfully completed their degrees. The economic situation means that more candidates than ever are chasing a limited pool of graduate roles. But equally worrying are the number of young people who are unable to gain practical work experience due to the current rules on interns’ pay.

At present, companies offering unpaid or expenses-only internships risk leaving themselves open to legal challenges, due to rules that stipulate that such work must be paid. While internships would ideally include a salary, often an unpaid or expenses-only basis is the only way firms can offer these valuable opportunities, particularly in the current economic climate. The risk of litigation means that firms are simply unable to continue hosting interns. While the pay requirement was intended to reduce inequality in accessing internships, this rule has backfired by leaving even more graduates languishing at home, becoming demotivated by the day.

Practical steps by the government, such as establishing a new legal category of interns within employment law and allowing unpaid interns to claim jobseekers’ allowance, would enable firms to keep offering these opportunities, and ensure graduates get a key first foothold in the world of work.

Bookmark It

The number of students chasing training contracts this summer has rocketed with several leading law firms reporting a 50 per cent jump in applications.

DLA Piper received 1,538 applications for training contracts starting in 2012 across all its English offices. This compares to just 1,080 for positions commencing in 2011. DLA Piper typically hires 85-90 trainees per year meaning that around 18 students are chasing each position.

Meanwhile, approximately 730 students applied to New York-giant Weil Gotshal & Manges representing a 50 per cent increase on last year.

Newly merged Hogan Lovells, which only received 1,000 applications in summer 2009 after it closed its trainee recruitment programme, has also reported a healthy jump in applications and is now back in line with its previous record of around 1,700.

The firm’s director of legal resourcing Clare Harris said: “Last year was a very odd year as we saw a dip in the amount of applications. I think this was to do with the deferrals and the general state of the jobs market. I think a lot of candidates were just put off applying and have now re-entered the market.”

Elsewhere, Denton Wilde Sapte has seen its training contract applications jump by 40 per cent. Herbert Smith, meanwhile, confirmed that its training contract applications are up 16 per cent on last year with 1,750 students chasing training contracts at the City firm.

Allen & Overy, Berwin Leighton Paisner, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Norton Rose and Slaughter and May has also reported increases in training contract applications.

Commenting on the statistics one graduate recruiter said: “One possible explanation for this is that many of the students who put off applying for training contracts last year because of redundancies and deferrals have re-entered the jobs market. As such this year we’ve seen more applications from students who have just graduated or finished the Legal Practice Course.”

However, not all the firms interviewed by Lawyer2B.com posted an increase in training contract applications. Addleshaw Goddard, Baker & McKenzie and Olswang all said their numbers were static with each firm receiving between 1,700 to 2,000 forms.

The deadline for submitting applications for training contracts starting in 2012 passed on 31 July.

Bookmark It

The UK’s leading law firms are retaining more of their trainee solicitors after qualification as the economy picks up.

Legal Week said that retention rates for September, based on the number of qualifying trainees due to stay on, were more than 80% on average for the UK’s top 30 law firms, a significant increase on September 2009.

However, there have been reports of concerns about the potential impact of public funding cuts on the sector and on staffing levels at the Crown Prosecution Service.

The Public and Commercial Services Union, which represents civil service and government agency employees, said it feared that the Ministry of Justice was facing cuts of £2bn from its £9bn annual budget over the two years following October’s comprehensive spending review.

The plans could place the jobs of 15,000 of the Ministry of Justice’s 80,000 employees at risk, the union warned.

Bookmark It

The Government began consulting today on whether the legislation should end up on the scrapheap as part of its review of red tape.

The regulations were brought in under Labour for employers with 250 or more staff in April this year and were due to be extended to smaller businesses next spring. They give staff the right to request time off to undertake study or go on a training course, with employers having to formally consider the request before turning it down.

However, the BCC warned the legislation was costly and confusing, and paved the way for “disgruntled employees” to take their employer to tribunal over a “bureaucratic” procedure that may not have been followed properly.

Adam Marshall, director of policy at the BCC, said: “We strongly believe that the Time to Train regulations should be scrapped in their entirety. The process obligations they impose on smaller businesses are inappropriate, costly, and poetntially confusing when they are combined with other legal obligations.”

John Hayes, Further Education and Skills Minister, said: “We believe it is important that all regulations are properly scrutinised and we are therefore interested in hearing views on the future of this right and its role in promoting training in the workplace, which I see as vital to our economic success.”

Bookmark It