Same old same old

Professor Neil McKeganey, Scottish drugs prevention guru, writing in The Telegraph, wants to intensify the existing policy:

For the past 15 years, government has pursued a drug policy that has been more about reducing the harms associated with illegal drug use than about reducing the scale of the problem itself.
That is where we are going wrong.
Yes, policy must focus on treatments that enable addicts to become drug free, but also on hard-hitting prevention with robust enforcement.
Policing the problem means tackling street-level drug dealing directly. It must also mean tougher action against those who profit from the trade. We need to ensure that our police are protecting our communities. This will not be done through intermittent, high-profile campaigns, but sustained action.

Now I know nothing about drugs (other than the usual Al K and Nick O'). When I was a student, I didn't move in those kind of circles and, subsequently, I've never felt the need (nor had the opportunity).

But, do the phrases 'flogging a dead horse' and 'pissing into the wind' come to mind? Is more of the same really going to deliver? Did a police crackdown ever solve anything? Even a 'sustained' police crackdown, even if it were possible? How often over the years have you heard of special police task forces set up to deal with the drugs problem? Is more of them going to do the business? Let's face it, the present policy of prohibition, combined with modest support for addicts, has utterly failed.