When Ian McIntyre first saw the four-storey office block in one of London's dodgy districts, he knew it would be a perfect location for a new drug treatment centre. Having spent months searching for a base, he saw the former doctors' surgery in Paddington, west London, as the answer to his prayers.
Tucked next to a former community health centre, and only two doors from an acupuncture clinic and Chinese herbal medicine shop, the Praed Street premises were easy to get to and offered discreet access for addicts.
All seemed to be going well for McIntyre, who is planning officer for one of Britain's biggest mental health trusts. Armed with £1m government funding, and with the promise of millions more to come, he went ahead and leased the building. He felt sure he would be helping some of the thousands of drug users in the area to beat their addiction.
That, however, was before local residents found out about McIntyre's application, in February last year, to change the use of the building. Facing anger and demonstrations, Westminster council threw out the proposals in June on the grounds that it would have a "detrimental impact" on local people and would lead to loss of a retail unit.
For drug users seeking help, this is unfortunately not an isolated example. The case is one of a series of failed attempts by Brent, Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster mental health trust (BKCW) to get proposals for community-based treatmentcentres past west London planners. Meanwhile, millions of pounds of government money earmarked for addiction treatment remains unallocated.
Drug treatment centres - specialist clinics which offer out-patient treatment, advice and counselling - are seen by the government as a vital weapon in tackling Britain's drug problem. But amid suspicions of "nimbyism", applications by BKCW to set up the centres have now been rejected by three separate councils: Westminster, Ealing, and Hammersmith and Fulham.
A crisis looms in the capital as drug workers struggling to set up the centres find themselves frustrated at every turn. They say the deadlock is threatening to undermine the government's £230m, 10-year strategy, Tackling Drugs Together. Published in 1998, the strategy has four aims: action to help young people resist drugs; help in overcoming drug problems; protection for communities from drugs; and action to stifle the availability of illegal drugs.
Under government targets, BKCW, along with other substance misuse services, must by 2008 double the number of people using treatment centres. It has been promised more than £3m government cash to achieve this aim - but it looks increasingly unlikely to be fulfilled.
Peter Carter, chief executive of BKCW, is astonished at the strength of resistance put up by local authorities. "It's very frustrating putting in a planning application and not getting anywhere," he says. "We keep hitting a brick wall. It just seems the planning committees don't want to know. They never say it is the drugs they are afraid of; they just reject the applications on other grounds.
"I understand the initial reaction of shopkeepers and residents who have fears of dirty needles. However, our experience is exactly the opposite. Most people who are drug addicts and have a serious problem are motivated to manage the problem. It might seem a contradiction, but most heroin addicts are decent people and regret the day they ever tried to take drugs."
An example of the vociferous opposition faced by the trust is the reaction of residents and some councillors when they learned of plans for the Paddington project. The site lies just a few hundred yards from St Mary's hospital, where a clinic is run from two Portakabins. By moving the clinic to Praed Street, drug and alcohol workers hoped to make it more accessible to young people. The proposals had the support of the police and social services.
"Almost as soon as we took out the lease, we had to re-market the property," recalls McIntyre. "There were such strong views against the proposed change of use. Words were being used like 'over my dead body'.
"We did our best to reassure people, but we realised we were fighting a losing battle. We could not afford for the building to stand empty while we went through a lengthy appeal process."
Guarantees were given that drug users would not congregate outside the building, which would be monitored by CCTV and would have controlled access. The trust promised also to vacate the premises after 12 months if its new use was shown to have had an adverse effect on local business.
This was not enough for local people. Pamela Batty, a Conservative councillor who sits on the planning committee, campaigned against the centre on grounds including the dangers of needles discarded by drug users. "Praed Street was not the right place for this," she recalls. "There is a tight-knit residential community nearby with a children's playground, and plans to build thousands more homes. What local people need is shops. There is no reason why this should not have stayed within the grounds of St Mary's hospital."
At present, BKCW has contact with almost 2,000 people addicted to heroin or crack. It estimates there are thousands more on the streets who are seeking treatment to control their addiction but are slipping into a life of crime to support their habit.
There is particular concern about young drug users. With this in mind, BKCW sought to convert a former photo lab in Ealing into a centre offering a specialist drugs and alcohol treatment service for those aged 16-21. The premises are close to bus routes and underground stations and the trust said the service would not create any extra traffic. However, the application was turned down on the basis that the street, which is lined with shops and houses, was the wrong area for the clinic.
A spokesman for Ealing council admits: "There is a certain element of nimbyism by residents. We hope suitable premises can be found elsewhere in the borough."
The decision was a disappointment, and was followed by a further blow. Just when BKCW wondered whether things could get any worse, it was forced to withdraw plans for a treatment centre in Fulham on the advice of Hammersmith and Fulham council. The clinic would have been next door to the social services department, less than 100 yards from a tube station. But residents and councillors objected that the plans would mean the loss of a local amenity and would generate too much traffic.
Carter is furious and warns that the councils' actions will have enormous consequences. "This is not just about blocking government targets; it affects everyone," he says. "People are storing problems for the future. By refusing to allow drug treatment centres at the bottom of their streets, residents are making crime more likely."
Although driven to despair, Carter refuses to give up. After a series of meetings, the trust is now trying to work with Hammersmith and Fulham to identify potential alternative sites. And it is planning to appeal against Ealing's decision - a lengthy process that could take up to six months, with no guarantee of success. "We will fight this," Carter declares. "In the meantime, our ability to follow the government's strategy is severely compromised. But we will not give up without a battle."
Treatment at braking point
Problems in winning approval for community treatment centres are so serious that the chief executive of the government's drug treatment agency is warning of "a major brake on the government's policy".
Paul Hayes, appointed to lead the agency when it was set up last year, has been monitoring the experience of the Brent, Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster trust. "I am very disappointed that the trust has come up against such difficulties," he says.
Hayes fears that what is happening in west London is happening elsewhere. He stresses the importance of establishing treatment centres away from hospitals, encouraging and enabling people to access services.
"We know there are better outcomes for people receiving treatment and it reduces crime rates," says Hayes. "If communities are inhibiting treatment centres, they are doing themselves a disservice."
.png?w=600)
