Few could argue with the conclusion of yesterday's report from the Royal Society for the Arts on illegal drugs: current policy is broke and needs to be fixed. There could be hardly a more startling illustration than the figures obtained by The Herald on the number of children in Scotland being referred to the children's panel for the possession of drugs: 1000 a year. A further 1500 are referred because they have a problem with drugs or alcohol. We can be sure that the true number of under-18s using illegal drugs is many times higher. A recent report indicated that children as young as 10 have been charged with supplying hard drugs.

Few could argue with the conclusion of yesterday's report from the Royal Society for the Arts on illegal drugs: current policy is broke and needs to be fixed. There could be hardly a more startling illustration than the figures obtained by The Herald on the number of children in Scotland being referred to the children's panel for the possession of drugs: 1000 a year. A further 1500 are referred because they have a problem with drugs or alcohol. We can be sure that the true number of under-18s using illegal drugs is many times higher. A recent report indicated that children as young as 10 have been charged with supplying hard drugs.

Against this backdrop, the approach taken in the RSA commission's report looks dangerously complacent. It suggests that current policy is "driven by moral panic", and that illegal drugs, which may be less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, have been "demonised". The central recommendation is that drugs policy should focus on harm reduction rather than the level of crime. Some may seek to dismiss this report as the work of a few laidback academics, not averse to the odd spliff after a hard day's work in their ivory towers. Far from it. It is the product of a serious two-year investigation by a panel that included some of the foremost authorities in the field. Nevertheless, we disagree fundamentally with the conclusion.

The most extraordinary claim is that the "great majority" of drug users do not harm themselves or others. Anyone who has been robbed by an addict desperate for their next fix will disagree, and, because it is estimated heroin addicts need to steal £45,000 of goods a year to fund a £15,000 habit, there are lots of them. Then there is the impact on children. Around 50,000 children in Scotland are growing up with a drug-addicted parent. Add in the wider family and the number rises to 150,000. As this is thought to make a child at least six times as likely to develop a drug habit, many of those coming to the attention of the panel must come from this background.

Though the report does not call specifically for decriminalisation, that is where its conclusions lead. It is not to downplay the harm caused by alcohol to say that decriminalising illegal drugs can only make a bad situation worse. After all, major factors in rising levels of alcohol abuse are its price and availability.

Removing the consumption of illegal drugs from the criminal justice system would have the same effect. The emphasis on harm reduction is also misplaced. It is a policy that manifestly has failed, leaving many thousands stranded on methadone programmes, many of them still stealing to top up their prescribed drugs. Addicts need recovery programmes that lead to drug-free lives, but the best way for children to grow up drug-free is for them not to meddle with drugs in the first place. That is why prevention must be our first priority.