Your letters on the Hudson swimming pool in Wisbech and legalising drugs

Here are the letters from this coming Wednesday’s Fenland Citizen…

There are plenty of times you can swim

With reference to the letter from John Smithee last week, ‘Parents Should be Paying.

Having used the Hudson Swimming Pool during the 1970s and then again upon returning to the area I find it extremely good value.

Perhaps the writer is not a morning person but the early opening of 6.30am in the week, or between 9am-11am suits me well.

Perhaps the writer is not an afternoon person either as swimming is available 4pm-4.45pm also. Plus, there are Saturday and Sunday mornings, plenty of choice.

Swimming is a highly effective and versatile form of exercise that offers numerous physical and mental health benefits.

It provides a full-body workout, improving cardiovascular fitness, building strength and endurance, and is gentle on the joints.

The buoyancy of water supports the body, making it a low-impact activity suitable for people of various fitness levels and those with joint issues, from which we mere mortals benefit.

Does the writer wish to deprive the general public of the swimming pool and its associated benefits? If it were a private members club, an annual joining fee and monthly payments would seriously reduce the number of users, including myself.

It seems ironic that someone with left leaning views is pro privatisation.

Veronica Trubshaw

Elm

Drugs should be available from our pharmacies

I would like to comment on the letter about drug policy by Lavinia Powerstock in last week’s Citizen.

Campaigners, like me, who want a more sane and rational drug policy by the government do not use the term ‘legalise all drugs’.

Such a term is emotive and suggests that campaigners want a free-for-all where drugs are available to teenagers; for sale in supermarkets; and users can use drugs in public spaces.

Instead, campaigners call for the ‘legal regulation of all drugs by the state’, similar to alcohol and tobacco.

Lavinia is correct to point out the dangers of underage use of cannabis, where heavy regular use can trigger psychosis. In Colorado, the first US state to legally regulate cannabis, underage use has declined dramatically.

The only increase in use is amongst pensioners who smoked cannabis during the ‘flower-power’ era of the late 1960s. The $1billion a year that Colorado state receives from taxes on cannabis is used to pay for social programmes and education in schools about the dangers of drugs.

Lavinia is also correct to point out that in the current situation, where all drugs are illegal, cannabis is a ‘gateway’ drug where petty dealers try to sell other drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and ecstasy.

The legal regulation of all drugs by the state would stop cannabis from being used as a gateway drug. It would also allow labelling and quality control, similar to alcohol and tobacco.

Cannabis should be made available from independent shops licensed by Fenland District Council.

Cocaine and ecstasy should be made available from pharmacies, again licensed by Fenland District Council.

Heroin should be made available to registered heroin addicts via GP-led clinics as happens in Switzerland.

A more sane and rational drug policy would be to ‘legally regulate all drugs.’

John Smithee

Wisbech