Proceeding contribution from James Brokenshire (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 9 September 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Controls on Legal Highs.
Controls on Legal Highs
We have had a good, wide-ranging debate about legal highs. Various hon. Members highlighted the fact that even using that terminology brings about a misconception. To take the last point from the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Tynemouth (Mr Campbell), about why people take drugs, including legal highs, when they know the risks, I think that that is part of the problem—they do not know the risks. The fact that something is branded as a legal high implies that it is safe. Therein lies part of the challenge in relation to these newly emerging psychoactive substances—I agree that that does not trip off the tongue, either—that highlights the important need to ensure that the legislation is there as a mechanism for telegraphing clear messages about enforcement of the law and about safety. I noted the hon. Gentleman's comments about mixed messages. I say to him very gently that his Government sent out very mixed messages about cannabis, so perhaps he is not in the strongest of positions from which to be pointing fingers about communicating messages.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 515 c167WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Drugs Misuse Mephedrone
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 22:45:21 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_663699
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_663699
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_663699