While some are keen to downplay the conflicts that exist across the drug-sector, I am more of the mind that blinding light must be shone on them. There is more going on here than a simple stand-off between advocates of ‘abstinence’ and proponents of ‘harm-reduction’.

There is deeper battle for influence over the direction of travel between those who’ve enjoyed unfettered access to the ears of government for years and those who have been side-lined. Government will always prefer solutions which can be quantified.

That’s why addiction teams are preferable to 12-step groups. Why methadone is more favourable than rehab. And why the same ‘advisors’ who have presided over decades of decline still have government ministers on speed-dial.

Words like ‘compassion’, ‘trauma’ and ‘love’ can often appear wishy-washy when contrasted with the cold, objective jargon of science. ‘Recovery’ can seem radical when compared with the comforting familiarity of endless medicalisation.

Nobody claims rehab is the magic bullet - all we want is rehab for the people it is likely to work for. Nobody claims abstinence is the only real sobriety - all we want is for that to be promoted as a possibility like opiate-replacement therapy.

A false dichotomy will be peddled by some that the choice going forward is between ‘evidence-based’ solutions or faux-spiritual ‘mutual aid’. But there's as much evidence for the healing power of social connection as there is for any wonder-drug or therapy – never forget that.