Soon the time has come to close this conference, and I’ve been asked to draw some conclusions.
But before I try to sum up these two days, I would like to give you a brief outline of the past year with ECAD.
I will also make a short break for commercials – after all we need to think about our sponsors.

The most frequent question I get from my friends regarding ECAD is: ”How is it going? Do you get any results?”
It is not altogether easy to answer these questions. My answer most often is a counter-question: ”Are you asking if the drug policies have changed, or if our organisation has developed?”

Regarding European drug policy, the tendencies are not unambiguously pointing in one single direction. In some countries the development goes toward a more restrictive, humane policy, and in other countries towards a more liberal view on drugs.
Drug combat must always be a long- term commitment. It is a hard, strenuous never-ending work. Giving up is not an option. Often the amounts of drug problems go in cycles in a society, with distinct ups and downs.
I believe the reason is quite simply that people get tired of the tough everyday work, which is necessary to keep the problems in check. Not everybody understands the importance of doing one’s own small part to achieve a good overall result.

I once had a boss, who told me a story with a moral, when I was being sent alone to Russia to set up a liaison office.
There was this journalist who would report on a construction site. He went to one of two workers who were busy carrying bricks. One of them looked tired and worn out, and the journalist asked him what he was doing. His short answer was - “I am carrying bricks.”
The journalist went to the other worker, who looked much more cheerful and content, and asked the same question. The other worker answered: “I’m building a house.”
The difference in the attitude makes all the difference when you have a long-term commitment. So even if some people think we are simply moving around a few bricks, we are in fact involved in building a house.

The construction of ECAD has now been going on for 12 years. It takes time to build a house and it takes time to build an organisation and a strong trademark.
That is my answer to the second question. The number of member cities may not have increased dramatically during the past year, but as an organisation, we have become much stronger.
I’m thinking of the strong networks ECAD has in the Balkans, in Norway, Sweden and Russia. ECAD is a solid partner for those with restrictive, humane drug policies.
It is not surprising that we are invited as co-organisers when a number of international organisations plan to have a conference in the European Parliament.
It is not surprising that the Drug Control Organ of Russia contacts us regarding their educational activities.
It is not surprising that the St. Petersburg State University wants ECAD as a partner in their regular education of drug specialists.

When 15 Asian countries were about to launch a new organisation, it was ECAD they contacted for advice.
When the Swedish National Drug Co-ordinator wanted to organise a series of seminars for judicial authorities involved in drug combat around the Baltic Sea, he contacted ECAD.
When plans to arrange the European Championship in Horse Jumping were taking form, ECAD’s Advisory Board was asked if they wanted to part of it. Even though horses weren’t exactly what ECAD is known for, the Advisory Board unanimously said "Yes". This naturally needs an explanation.
And here comes the commercial break. We shall now see a short film of 6 minutes from San Patrignano, Italy. ….

San Patrignano has a conscious thought behind arranging the European jumping championship. The aim is not only to organise a fine sports event. It is at the same time a great opportunity to convey a message. A message that we should never give up the fight for a dignified life for drug addicts, the road to which is a drug free life.
When I asked our friend in San Patrignano, why they approached ECAD, and furthermore asked us to be co-organisers, they stressed the importance of values, and a strong trademark.
Throughout the years ECAD has stood for a strong commitment to restrictive, humane drug policies. Both San Patrignano and ECAD strongly support the UN Conventions on Drugs as a invaluable backbone for an ordinary member of society.
I like sports. Big sports events are exciting. Even though horse sports may not exactly be my speciality, this competition feels like something quite unique.
It is namely, as Jim, our Chairman said yesterday, a Utopia that becomes reality. ECAD’s drug political opponents often criticise us for chasing a utopia. A drug free society or a drug free Europe is a utopia, as Helge Waal put it in his words.
If I had told you fifteen years ago that the European Championship in Horse Jumping would be organised in a drug treatment community solely by former drug addicts, many of them heroin addicts, everybody would have called it an utopia.
This utopia has now become reality, thanks to a number of committed individuals’ driving force and belief in the inner strength of their fellow human beings.

The war against drugs is lost, said Eva Joly.
Jürgen Storbeck said that it hasn’t even begun.
When it comes to decision making, the society is way too slow, and it takes too long to implement the decisions. The problems have further increased, since it seems that after 11/9, the politicians have forgotten about drug issues and only focus on combating terrorism.
It is correct to call it a war against drugs, said the President of Iceland in his speech. Counting the numbers of deaths and victims, the drug conflict isn’t far behind any other war.
Furthermore, this war uses modern, sophisticated methods, which is something we should keep in mind when we fight back.

Evgeny Royzman gave us an example on what happens with epidemic narcotic problems when the society doesn’t react in time.
Dagur Eggertsson told us that in Iceland, children under the age of 16 are not allowed to stay out after a certain time in the evening.
As a parent to a 15-year old, I find this legislation rather sympathetic. At the same time, I suspect that it would not go down very well in Sweden. I would probably be called a reactionary if I proposed this legislation.
In the far away Siberia, I might understand handcuffing a drug addict to radiator, if he was my close friend who wanted to stop his heroin abuse, and was simply nothing else I could possibly do. But there are other methods. So why should we settle with the second best?
When Sheriff Ruxton described her drug court, I gave some thought about what she did NOT say. Namely that there are other alternatives to the sanctions she prescribes.
In Sweden, for example, we also have a court with the power to sentence an addict to treatment. A treatment that is always drug free. If a person is about to destroy his life, the court can sentence him to 6 months’ compulsory treatment.
Jürgen Storbeck gave a comprehensive run-through on the international narcotics industry and its global network.
At the same time he did not think that combating the narcotic industry was the only solution to the society’s drug problems.
Royzman agreed with Storbeck. The fight must be fought from the grass roots, in your own neighbourhood, in your own city.

Eva Joly mentioned Cork in Ireland, and the Criminal Assets Bureau, as an excellent example on how the society can fight the drug barons who make enormous amounts of money from the victims of drugs.
The Criminal Assets Bureau is very successful. I’ve been in Cork myself to study their work. However, it has almost no effect on the drug abuse among young people.
Targeting the drug barons has a different goal. It is extremely important that nobody should get rich by this immoral exploitation. It is a threat against democracy, and leads to corruption of the society at large.
The drug abuse in society is however not greatly affected. According to Storbeck, daily doses which would supply 300 000 heroinists during a whole year were confiscated only in Afghanistan. Did it have any impact on the drug market? -
No.

In yesterday’s panel debate, the participants were asked about what they would do to solve the problems if they a billion Euros to spend. One of them had no answers to give. Not surprisingly, it was the participant with the most liberal attitude to drugs.
This is nothing new. I often meet drug liberals, who say that the fight against drugs is meaningless, that the case is lost, and therefore it is natural that they tend to administer the drug problems instead of solving them.
Of course this is not the only thing you can do. Throughout the history, there are lots of good examples on successful methods to combat drugs.
Paula Kokkonen said: “You have to target much younger people”. And Olga Kaverina added that you should spread the message that drugs are not in fashion.
Primary prevention is the most important field, said Radka Bartosova, supported by Mayor Ditlev-Simonsen saying that we don’t do enough in schools.
Every child has the right to live in a drug free society, said Lena Nyberg.
Everybody should have the right to treatment if I understood Vice Mayor Spitsyn right. But as Heiko Schneitler put it: - We shall give the drug addicts what they need, not what they want.

What, then, is my conclusion? I say, go back to the roots. Search your own hearts. And follow the simple slogan: It should be hard to use drugs and easy to get treatment.
And do remember that a drug free Europe is no more a utopia than that the European Championship in horse jumping is being organised by a group of former heroin addicts.

Thank you for your attention!

 
[< Back]