Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-10-Speech-4-092"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030410.4.4-092"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The use of drugs, be they hard or soft, takes people away from useful activities and renders them less healthy. It would therefore be wonderful if drugs did not exist or if no one had any need of them. The reality is unfortunately different. International agreements that oblige states to apply zero tolerance are not going to produce a drugs-free world. Many young people experience the use of soft drugs as an inalienable freedom and there are also profiteers who happily make people dependent on the use of expensive hard drugs. A ban on soft drugs simply leads to young people rebelling and eases their move onto the use of hard drugs. I defend the Dutch system not because I am seeking a high point of individual freedom, but because it helps prevent insoluble problems. My Group of the European United Left has introduced two extremes to this debate. Mrs Schröder is making herself the mouthpiece of rebellious youth and defending total freedom without any regulation by government. Mr Alyssandrakis as a traditional Communist can see only dangerous drugs barons who must be mercilessly eliminated. Both are telling part of the truth, but saying nothing about the rest. Mrs Buitenweg’s report proposes a good middle way, one with which we in the Netherlands have acquired good experience. I have supported this way thus far and will continue to do so."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples