Proceeding contribution from Diana Johnson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 December 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate and Backbench debate on Drugs Policy.
Drugs Policy
We will want to look carefully at the pilots and exactly how such problems might be dealt with. There must be an imaginative way of dealing with that matter, but we need more detail. The strategy sets out in broad terms what the Government want to do, but the hon. Gentleman is right. There is also the question of prisons and the criminal justice system. Reference has been made to the proposals in the Green Paper published by the Secretary of State for Justice. It is worth pointing out again that resources and funding will be required. For the approaches that the majority of Members want to see put in place, the important question is where the money and resources will come from. We also need to deal with the social issues set out in the strategy, such as the reintegration of former drug addicts so that they can obtain housing and employment. Such matters sit uneasily with some of the proposals made by the coalition Government on housing, housing benefit and changes, and that may cause problems for people returning to work. Those matters, too, need to be considered. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Coventry North East said, clause 150 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill will remove the requirement for certain appointments to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs to have a scientific background. It will remove the requirement set out in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 to include those with wide and recent experience of medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, pharmacy, the pharmaceutical industry and chemistry, and those with experience of the social problems caused by drug abuse. That approach rather undermines the view of the Minister for Universities and Science, who wrote into the ministerial code the principles for respecting independent advice—including scientific advice, obviously and importantly. The Liberal Democrats seem to be in some difficulty on this question. The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) raised it in an intervention, and the hon. Member for Cambridge (Dr Huppert) has tabled EDM 1148. The problem is that the Liberal Democrat 2010 manifesto says that drugs policy should always be based on independent scientific advice, including making the ACMD independent of Government. There will be some discussion in the coalition about how to deal with that, as it seems that that pledge is in danger of bring broken. I look forward to hearing from the Minister, and particularly to his answer to the question posed by my right hon. Friend the Member for Coventry North East on evaluating the success of the drugs strategy, and at what point we can have a further debate to consider whether the strategy has worked.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 520 c368WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Drugs Misuse Policy Regulation Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 21:43:22 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695118
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695118
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695118