Ex - Ante Evaluation; Drug Classification

Question 1

This is a cultural strategy of…

Answer 1

Agenda Denial

Question 2

This is a cultural strategy of…

Answer 2

Agenda Denial

Question 3

Who was the professor (expert) who disagreed with government?
What was his position within government?

Answer 3

Professor Nutt Chair of the Drug Advisory Council.

Question 4

When was Professor Nutt asked to resign?

Answer 4

October 2009

Question 5

What specific drug did he also ask to re classify?

Answer 5

cannabis.

Question 6

What drug did he also ask to re classify?

Answer 6

cannabis.

Question 7

Who was the professor (expert) who disagreed with government?
What was his position within government?

Answer 7

Professor Nutt Chair of the Drug Advisory Council.

Question 8

When was Professor Nutt asked to resign?

Answer 8

October 2009

Question 9

In a ‘nutshell’ what did Professor nut claim about drugs and alcohol ?

Answer 9

ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol.

Question 10

What drug did he also ask to re classify?

Answer 10

cannabis.

Question 11

He called for a new way of classifying the harm caused by ….

Answer 11

both legal and illegal drugs.

Question 12

What did he put at the centre?

What is more dangerous than ecstasy because more likely to happen?

Answer 12

harm

more likely to fall of a horse than die from ecstasy so this is how it should be classed.

Question 13

He thinks harm is about…

Answer 13

the risk of harm being caused.

Question 14

How many stages in this cultural strategy of agenda denial?

Answer 14

Two stages

Question 15

What is the first stage in this cultural strategy of agenda denial?

Answer 15

The first stage is attacking the credibility of the group/ issue

Question 16

How did government attack the credibility of reclassifying drugs in this way?
What did they force Nutt to do?

Answer 16

Government used lots of different strategies to stop him talking about it and stop it reaching.
They forced Nutt to resign

Question 17

Were Nutt’s statistics and evidence false ?

Why was he kicked out then?

Answer 17

No.

Because although his reclassification was credible from a scientific viewpoint, it was controversial.

Question 18

It is a … based approach?

Answer 18

benevolence

Question 19

He showed how you could connect harm in terms of recreational drug use and what should follow that?

Answer 19

The way drugs are classified.

Question 20

The governments content of harm is a … value

Whereas Nutt’s content of harm is …. based

Answer 20

normative value; what we consider to be harmful, not scientifically harmful.
evidence

Question 21

What stage did the home secretary words reflect?

She was showing…

Answer 21

reflected stage 2 of agenda concern ‘showing symbolic concern for the public’

Question 22

Where the government just concerned with the harm based approach?
If no, what else were they concerned with?

Answer 22

No

more about what the reclassification would mean in terms of taxes, administration and criminal justice system.

Question 23

When would government consider reclassifying drugs based on harm?

Answer 23

if it was done in a vacuum with no spill over or knock on affects.

Question 24

If you reclassify drugs, what impact will this have?

Answer 24

impact on lots of different policy domains and your economy; problematic for any government or policy maker.

Question 25

The governments content of harm is a … value

Whereas Nutts content of harm is …. based

Answer 25

normative value; what we consider to be harmful, not scientifically harmful.
evidence

Question 26

Nutt is still a … in his field

Answer 26

technocrat and leading expert.