Analysis of political opinions

among drug users (UK 1998-2000)

Atha MJ, Davis S & Blanchard S (2001)

Independent Drug Monitoring Unit (IDMU Ltd)

Abstract

Reported political views and voting intentions of UK drug users were studied in anonymous surveys of 1153 cannabis users during 1998, 2172 in 1999 and 2352 in 2000 (Total 5677). The data included voting at the 1997 General Election and if an election were held ‘tomorrow’, with reasons for their choices, and attitudes to a range of legislative drug policy options.

Over 40% of Labour supporters among users at the 1997 election have subsequently changed voting intention, with a large swing to the Green Party. Health and environmental issues are the main determining factors in deciding the votes of drug users, however the evidence suggests that drug policy to have become a much more significant factor in deciding voter intentions.

While there is widespread support for cannabis law reform, and strong opposition to current government policies, the majority of users reject wider legalisation of all drugs, or an unregulated free market in cannabis. Most state that a change in the law would neither increase nor decrease their level of use.

Friends, and other drug users, are not only the most common source of drug information, but are also regarded as the most credible by users. Government Ministers, officials and police are considered the least credible source of drugs information.

1. Methodology

1.1 Anonymous questionnaires were distributed at a range of outdoor festivals and other events during 1998, 1999 and 2000 as part of the IDMU Regular Users, series of drug surveys, all valid forms received by the closing dates were entered on to a database, subsequently exported for statistical analysis (Statview v5.0).

1.2 Respondents were asked to indicate how they voted in the 1997 election, and how they would vote in a general election ‘tomorrow’. They were also asked to indicate (by circling options) the main reasons for their actual and intended votes. They were further asked to indicate how they rated a specified list of drug legislation policies on a 0-10 scale.

1.3 The survey was not intended to form a representative sample of all cannabis users, as several batches of forms were distributed in Green-related festival sites or by Green Party activists, thus one would expected that ‘Green’ voters would be overrepresented among our sample.

2. Party Politics

2.1 Of the three main parties, Labour was overwhelmingly supported at the previous election by those who voted, with just under 29% of users electing the present government. The Liberal Democrats came in second place at 11.4%, 9.4% claimed to have voted ‘Green’, with the Conservatives trailing badly under 3%. . However, 44% of respondents did not vote, either because they refused to do so, were unable to vote (underage), or were not interested. The ‘Legalise’ option is attributable to a handful of candidates standing on pro-legalisation tickets, and would reflect the presence of a number of pro-cannabis activists within the sample.

2.2 Intended voting patterns showed a substantially higher level of support for the Green party, with over a third of respondents expressing support. Labour support was at 17%, ahead of the Liberal Democrats on 14%, with the Conservative party supported by only 2.4% of respondents.

2.3 Comparing past allegiance with voting intentions, it would appear that over 40% of Labour voters from the last election had switched allegiance, with the Green Party and to a lesser extent the Liberal Democrats the beneficiaries. The Conservative party, from a very low base, also lost much of what little support it had at the last election. The increase in Green support may be illusory, reflecting a lack of candidates in the General Election, and tactical voting to oust the Conservatives. The proportion who do not vote has decreased by nearly a quarter, suggesting that drug users may be becoming more politically active. The haemorrhaging of Labour support, maybe half a million votes across the UK, probably reflects the strong anti-drugs and anti-cannabis stance taken by the current government since the 1997 election.

2.4 Long Term Trends?: It is instructive to compare these results with data from a comparable sample taken in 1984 during the Thatcher administration, at the height of the Miners strike, but before the ‘Battle of the Beanfield’ and active government opposition to the festival movement. The popularity of the Greens (Ecology) in 1984 was similar to the expressed intention in 1998, and the Labour party appears marginally less popular in 1998 than 14 years earlier when in opposition.

2.5 The proportion of respondents reporting having voted Labour in 1997 has declined steadily from 25% in 1998 to 27% in 2000, and similarly the recalled ‘green’ vote has declined - possibly reflecting changes in recruitment locations in 1999 and 2000. The higher number of ‘Nationalist’ (SNP/PC) reports in 2000 is no doubt derived from a larger than usual sample of Scottish residents.

 

Voting History of Cannabis Users (1998-2000)
Last Election	1998		1999			2000			1998-2000
Party	n	%	n		%	n		%	n		%
Labour	347	34.6%	563		27.8%	575		26.7%	1485		28.7%
Conservative	38	3.8%	65		3.2%	45		2.1%	148		2.9%
Lib Dem	176	17.5%	217		10.7%	200		9.3%	593		11.4%
Green	125	12.5%	192		9.5%	171		7.9%	488		9.4%
SNP/Plaid Cymru	19	1.9%	22		1.1%	48		2.2%	89		1.7%
Underage	22	2.2%	193		9.5%	189		8.8%	404		7.8%
Did not vote	271	27.0%	737		36.4%	884		41.1%	1892		36.5%
Legalisation	5	0.5%	16		7.9%	3		0.1%	24		0.5%
Other	8	0.8%	19		9.0%	36		1.8%	63		1.2%
Total	1003	100%	2024		100%	2153		100%	5180		100%

Voting Intention of Cannabis Users (1998-2000)
Last Election	1998		1999			2000			1998-2000
Party	n	%	n		%	n		%	n		%
Labour	173	17.7%	319		17.0%	308		15.6%	800		16.6%
Conservative	18	1.8%	54		2.9%	43		2.2%	115		2.4%
Lib Dem	186	19.0%	230		12.3%	273		13.8%	689		14.3%
Green	313	32.0%	637		34.0%	612		31.0%	1562		32.4%
SNP/Plaid Cymru	25	2.6%	22		1.2%	53		2.7%	100		2.1%
Underage	39	4.0%	87		4.7%	81		4.1%	207		4.3%
Will not vote	202	20.7%	483		25.8%	548		27.8%	1233		25.6%
Legalisation	11	1.1%	11		0.6%	6		0.3%	28		0.6%
Other	11	1.1%	29		1.5%	50		2.5%	90		1.9%
Total	977	100%	1872		100%	1974		100%	4823		100%

Change in Voting Intention of Cannabis Users (1998-2000)
	1998	1999	2000	98-00	1984		84-00
Party	%	%	%	change	n	%	change
Labour	-16.9%	-10.8%	-11.1%	-12.1%	112	18.3%	-1.7%
Conservative	-1.9%	-0.3%	0.1%	-0.47%	26	4.2%	-1.8%
Lib Dem	1.5%	1.6%	4.5%	2.84%	26	4.2%	9.6%
Green	19.6%	24.5%	23.1%	23.0%	205	33.4%	-1.4%
SNP/Plaid Cymru	0.7%	0.1%	0.5%	0.36%	*	n/a	n/a
Underage	n/a	-4.9%	-4.7%	-3.51%	*	n/a	n/a
Will not vote	-6.3%	-10.6%	-13.3%	-11.0%	*	n/a	n/a
Legalisation	0.6%	-0.7%	0.2%	0.12%	*	n/a	n/a
Other	0.3%	-7.5%	0.7%	0.65%	245*	40.0%	n/a

Notes:

Last Vote: Other included communist, socialist, BNP, looneys, Natural Law, Referendum (3) Did not vote included spoiled ballots (4). Underage included those who expressed preferences. 150 gave no response

Next vote: Other includes - ‘any far left’, class war, communist, socialist, looney (3), Natural Law, Referendum, ‘me’, Radical Party (italian respondent). Will not vote includes 5 intending to spoil ballots. 176 gave no response.

* 1984 data: Asked respondents to circle party closest to own political beliefs. Libdem included SDP/Alliance, ‘Other’ category consolidated ‘other socialist/communist’, SNP/PC, Nat Front, Anarchy, Not interested, Don’t Know and a write-in option. Original raw data not currently accessible for direct comparisons.

 

 

 

 

3. Reasons for voting

3.1 Respondents expressed a wide range of reasons for their past vote or current intentions, including the negative (dont trust ‘x,y or all of them’, tactical voting, Tories out etc), the practical (not registered, no green candidate) the principled (Referendum party, anarchist, socialism/workers rights), and the silly or obscure ("I was on LSD", "nice suits", "Yogic Flying"). Many respondents chose a range of the listed options.

3.2 Past vote: Health & Education was the main reason, closely followed by environment. Half as many (14%) cited the economy, with drug policy a deciding factor for one in nine respondents, followed by constitutional issues (9%). Defence, Crime and European policy were each cited by less than 5% of respondents. Nearly four in ten respondents cited other factors to have influenced their vote.

3.3 The relative importance of drug policy on determining respondents’ 1997 vote has doubled from 11.1% of respondents in 1998 to 22.4% in 2000.

3.3 Next vote: The most significant factor in influencing voting intention was environmental issues, now cited by 52% of respondents an increase of 18%, Health & Education was slightly down by 6% in second place (31%), followed by drug policy (24%, up 6%), and the economy (21% down 1.6%). Fewer respondents cited ‘other reasons’. Defence had doubled in significance (from a low base), possibly reflecting increased international tension, and constitutional issues had become more important, possibly reflecting devolution and the future of the House of Lords. All of the listed options showed slight or significant increases in importance, with fewer other issues (largely relating to the previous government) a major factor. The apparent increase in the prominence of drug policy may reflect an real increase in the politicisation of users following the active government support for prohibition policies, or may reflect the fact that this was a survey targeted at drug users, with policy options to consider, raising the profile of the issue in the mind of the respondent.

 

Main Policy Issues influencing vote or voting intentions of cannabis users (1998-2000)
	Last Election					Next Election
Reason	1998	1999	2000	Total	%	1998		1999	2000	Total	%	% Chge
Economy	116	230	225	571	22%	132		245	249	626	21%	-1.6%
Health/Educ	212	388	350	950	37%	211		401	335	947	31%	-5.8%
Env’ment	209	363	307	879	34%	331		650	593	1574	52%	17.8%
Constitut.	74	118	114	306	12%	92		150	134	376	12%	0.5%
Crime	29	75	68	172	7%	34		93	100	227	8%	0.8%
Drug Policy	90	192	194	476	19%	163		280	295	738	24%	5.8%
Defence	18	71	58	147	6%	35		101	85	221	7%	1.6%
Europe	38	134	104	276	11%	39		176	123	338	11%	0.4%
Other stated	317	417	363	1097	43%	148		610	241	999	33%	-9.8%
Base	810	881	864	2555	100%	740		1160	1117	3017	100%	0

Note: As many respondents gave more than one reason, columns cannot be added together to form totals.

 

 

 

4. Attitudes to Alternative Drug Policy Options?

4.1 Support among cannabis users is highest for policies which would distinguish between cannabis and other controlled drugs. Cannabis legalisation (78% for - 8% against) and decriminalisation of cannabis alone (73% - 12%) attracted the widest levels of support.

4.2 Equal numbers supported and opposed an unregulated free market in cannabis or other drugs, with 38% in favour and 38% against, 30% being strongly opposed. Prescription (61% - 17%) and licensing systems (50% - 23%) both received lukewarm approval.

4.3 The status quo was roundly rejected (5% - 83%), as would be increased penalties for all drugs (3% - 91%), these options were strongly opposed by 77% and 88% respectively. However, there was a majority against the legalisation of all drugs (30% - 57%) with 50% strongly opposed, and a substantial minority (22% - 63%) would support increased penalties for (unspecified) ‘hard drugs’.

Ratings of drug policy/legislative options by cannabis users 1998 and 2000
Policy	Total	Mean rating	Strong positive (8-10)		Weak positive (6-7)		Neutral (5)		Weak negative (3-4)		Strong negative (0-2)
	n	(1-10)	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
Legalise Cannabis Only	2945	7.6	1982	67%	328	11%	377	13%	69	2%	189	6%
Decriminalise cannabis possession, not supply	2790	7.0	1696	61%	327	12%	432	15%	71	3%	264	9%
Free-market	2555	5.0	780	31%	199	8%	649	25%	192	8%	773	30%
Licensing	2571	6.0	952	37%	341	13%	675	26%	157	6%	446	17%
Prescription	2610	7.3	1379	53%	233	9%	539	21%	117	4%	342	13%
Legalise all drugs	2785	3.5	680	24%	174	6%	350	13%	193	7%	1388	50%
Medical Use Only	1687	5.1	547	32%	171	10%	411	24%	104	6%	454	27%
Stay the same	2466	1.4	95	4%	35	1%	282	11%	148	6%	1905	77%
Increase penalties all drugs	2509	0.8	58	2%	31	1%	128	5%	87	3%	2205	88%
Increase penalties hard drugs	2521	0.9	440	17%	133	5%	351	14%	132	5%	1465	58%

4.4 Users were asked to assess how a relaxation in the cannabis laws would influence their use of the drug. Most respondents (78.5%) stated their level of use would be unchanged, and less than 10% of users believed their consumption would increase.

Expected Changes in Level of Cannabis Use if Law was Relaxed
Stated use would	2000		1998			Overall
	n	%	n		%	n		%
Increase	195	9.5%	95		9.5%	290		9.5%
Decrease	54	2.6%	14		1.4%	68		2.2%
Stay the same	1625	79.3%	771		76.8%	2396		78.5%
Don't know	175	8.5%	124		12.4%	299		9.8%
Base	2049	100%	1004		100%	3053		100%

 

5. Sources and Credibility of Drug Information

5.1 In 2000, respondents were asked to rate the reliability of a range of listed sources of drug information, and to list those which they considered major sources of drug information for themselves.

5.2 The influence factor (I) represents the product, for each source, of the number of respondents reporting that as a major source of information (n(M)), multiplied by the mean credibility (C) of that source, expressed as a percentage of the total, i.e.

I1 = C1n(M1)/ S (C1n(M1)+C2n(M2)+Cnn(Mn)).

Credibility of Drug Information Sources
Source of	Credibility		Major Source			Influence
Information	Mean (0-10)	No of reports	n		%	%
Friends	7.77	1620	1422		60.5%	40.2%
Drug Users	6.48	1318	643		27.3%	15.2%
Magazines	5.43	1432	558		23.7%	11.0%
Scientists	5.75	1396	297		12.6%	6.2%
Pro-reform Campaigners	5.69	1348	291		12.4%	6.0%
Family	4.32	1532	362		15.4%	5.7%
Television	3.21	1502	426		18.1%	5.0%
Broadsheet Newapapers	3.72	1439	250		10.6%	3.4%
Internet	5.41	1273	131		5.6%	2.6%
Anti-drug Campaigners	2.32	1401	145		6.2%	1.2%
Doctors	5.30	1410	59		2.5%	1.1%
Teachers	3.00	1402	102		4.3%	1.1%
Tabloid Newspapers	1.57	1497	120		5.1%	0.7%
Police Officers	2.38	1419	27		1.1%	0.2%
Drug Czar	1.85	1212	21		0.9%	0.1%
Government Ministers	1.43	1405	27		1.1%	0.1%

 

5.3 Friends are overwhelmingly the major source of information, both in terms of the numbers of respondents reporting friends as a major information source, and in the credibility for the user of friends opinions. The next most credible and frequently cited source was other drug users. Other sources with positive (credibility ratings (over 5/10) were scientists, pro-reform campaigners, magazines, the internet and doctors (although doctors were, surprisingly, one of the least commonly cited major sources of drug information).

5.4 At the other end of the scale, Government Ministers were considered the least credible source of information, rivalled only by the drugs czar (the least commonly reported source) and police officers. Other sources with negative credibility included tabloid newspapers (the second least credible source behind ministers), anti-drug campaigners, television, broadsheets, and family members.

6 Conclusions

6.1 Recreational drug users are alientated from the political process to an alarming degree. A high (and increasing) propotion of users report no intention to vote at the coming election, many citing total disillusionment with politics and politicians of whatever persuasion.

6.2 Support among drug users for the Labour Party has fallen substantially, with four in ten former Labour voters in 1997 no longer supporting the party. There is a substantial and consistent swing towards the Green party, which is the only major political party in the UK to offer unequivocal support for a program for drug law reform.

6.3 Current Government drug policies lack any credibility or support from the people they are ostensibly designed to protect. Government ministers and the UK Anti-Drugs Co-ordinator have the lowest credibility rating of all sources of drug information.

6.4 Doctors, in particular, appear to be an underused resource in disseminating drug advice, being considered credible by users, but rarely cited as a major source of drug information.

6.5 Drug users overwhelmingly support law reform, particularly legalisation of cannabis. However, a majority oppose legalisation of all drugs, roughly one in four users would consider drug policy a major determinant of their voting intentions.

6.6 If a major political party were to include legalisation of cannabis as a manifesto commitment, this could result in up to a million additional votes, and may also reduce the abstentionism prevalent amongst younger citizens as a whole. © IDMU publications 11-5-01