---

Anti-Drug Awareness

I congratulate the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) on securing this informative and important debate on anti-drug awareness. I also congratulate him on the publication, ““Early Intervention: Good Parents, Great Kids, Better Citizens””, which he co-authored with my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith) and which makes some provocative points about the direction of policy. It has certainly provided me with interesting bed-time reading and some thoughts and ideas on the emphasis that might, and should, be made, and on where things are going wrong regarding the direction of policy from the centre. We must look at the importance of local initiatives, and how the arrangement between the two could be more effectively structured. I shall deal with that in further detail. I congratulate the Minister on his promotion to the new challenges of policing and security. In all my dealings with him, he has always been prepared to listen to, if not agree with, the points that I have made to him. I have always found the way in which he has conducted ministerial business fair-minded and honourable. I wish him well, as I suspect that those qualities will be well tested in his new role and function. The emphasis of today's debate is very much on prevention and the need to address intergenerational issues, which are important, as is the stress on partnership working, however we define it. Much good work is taking place in communities up and down the country. It is important to recognise and appreciate that, but the hon. Member for Nottingham, North made an important point about the need for informed choices and better assessment so that local communities and authorities that seek to commission services or assess their policies have a much better toolkit, framework and guide for assessing their existing approaches and approaches have proved successful elsewhere. We cannot prescribe some top-down solution. We cannot say, ““We prescribe from the centre that this will happen, and therefore it will work in your community.”” It is perhaps that emphasis that has been the mistake in recent years. We must recognise that the effectiveness of a solution in one community may not necessarily and automatically be replicated in other communities. There is a need for localisation. At the same time, we must recognise the things that are working and consider why and how they are working and the lessons and messages from them. This is a difficult area, and the cost is great, not just to the individual but to society. The illicit drug market is estimated at between £4 billion and £6.6 billion. The use of class A drugs alone generates an estimated £15 billion in economic and social costs, which is why the emphasis of today's debate on prevention is important. However, one cannot look at it in isolation. The emphasis should not be just on prevention but on enforcement and rehabilitation as well. The question is the balance to be struck between each of those strands. I have some sympathy with what the hon. Member for Nottingham, North said about reorienting things towards earlier intervention to try to break some of the challenging problems perpetuated from one generation to the next, and about supporting parents in their role. Parents are key if we are to address the issues that we have debated and discussed today. We must support them properly and give them the information that they need, but, equally, there must be a focus on rehabilitation. It is unacceptable that, on the latest figures, the Government's drug treatment programmes result in only 3 per cent. of people leaving those treatment programmes drug-free. Drug users who seek treatment and services say that they want to be drug-free: they want to be able to abstain and to get support, which is why the emphasis of policy must move in that direction and not simply be badged as harm reduction, which in many ways merely means holding people in addiction by switching them from an illegal substance to a legal one to modify or control their behaviour. It simply cannot be right to hold people in addiction by, for example, keeping them on methadone. The cost of such prescriptions is rising every year. Early intervention is important, because the age at which young children now use alcohol and illicit drugs is shocking. It is getting lower and lower, and that is one of the most disturbing trends that we see. Seventeen per cent. of schoolchildren aged between 11 and 15 have used an illegal drug in the past year. We are seeing an increase in prescriptions for anti-psychotic drugs among teenagers, and class A drug use has not really budged at all in the 16-to-24 age group. Another important issue is binge drinking and alcohol. The hon. Member for Nottingham, North, my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green, and the Centre for Social Justice highlighted the effects of binge drinking among 10 and 11-year-olds, who admit going out and getting drunk on a regular basis. Younger and younger children are doing so, which is why messaging is so important. I heard what the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) said about the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, but we cannot simply delegate responsibility to the ACMD. There is a wider perspective on all this, which is why it was right to seek the reclassification of cannabis. I hope that the Minister will update us on what progress has been made on implementation. I disagree with the potential reclassification of ecstasy, which would downgrade it, because that would send out strong messages suggesting that it is somehow a more acceptable drug, whatever evidence the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs may bring to bear on that issue. I draw the Minister's attention to FRANK, which is a key part of the Government's 10-year prevention strategy, which was launched in 2003. FRANK provides information, advice and guidance to young people in relation to drugs. However, I question some of the approaches that are being taken. For example, the FRANK website says some things about the effects of cannabis, but there is no mention of psychotic episodes, paranoia and all those mental health issues that are attached to cannabis. The information that is provided therefore needs to be clearer and much more robust. Prevention has to be the watchword in all of this. I appreciate that early intervention goes much further than prevention, but prevention must still be at the forefront in the approaches taken on information and education. We bandy around the words, ““harm reduction””, but I am entirely unconvinced that people understand what that term means. Prevention is a much more understandable concept in respect of what we are trying to achieve in all this and it is a better form of road-marking to signpost the direction of preventive policy on drugs. Will the Minister spell out how he sees FRANK's development as a resource? He will be aware that the budget for FRANK has been cut by about one third in the current financial year and is due to be reduced by a further £1 million in the next financial year. The Government say that they are committed to the initiative, but how is that commitment represented when funding has been being significantly reduced in the current year and in the year ahead? I am pleased that the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) is in the Chamber, because I paid an interesting visit to the Bolton drug treatment service in his constituency. I was interested to hear about the approach adopted by that service, particularly its use of outcome-based measures: in other words, looking at the results of things, rather than simply measuring inputs and box ticking, which, sadly, has been the approach taken by many services, not just those dealing with drugs, but other public services around the country. One of the things that struck me—the people working there were rightly proud of it—was that information on cocaine use was being putting across to provide better signposts to treatment for people addicted to it. I am sure that the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East is aware of the problems locally in respect of mixing cocaine and alcohol, and knows about some of the tragic deaths resulting from polyaddiction—the mixture of those two substances together—and what that has meant for so many people. He will also be aware of the question of how to get people into treatment. The Bolton drug treatment service has effectively set up its own website, because those involved thought that the information was not out there on the effects of cocaine and what might happen if cocaine is combined with alcohol. I congratulate those involved on that initiative.