---

11 Nov 2003 : Column 231W—continued

Association of Chief Constables

Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he last met the Association of Chief Constables to discuss crime reduction strategies. [136424]

Ms Blears: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I have frequent bilaterals with the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers and the discussions cover a very wide range of policing and crime reduction issues.

Botulinium Toxin

Mr. Etherington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many laboratory animals were used in potency testing of batches of botulinium toxin for human use in each year since 2000, indicating the end points used in the tests conducted; and if he will make a statement on the steps the Government are taking (a) to reduce the number of animals used in each batch test and (b) to ensure the most humane end points are used. [136515]

Caroline Flint: Information on the number of animals used for potency testing of botulinium toxin for human use is not recorded separately in the Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals which is published annually by the Home Office (copies of the latest publication, for the year 2002, are in the House Library—Command 5886). Figures for pharmaceutical safety/efficacy testing are included in Table 10 of the Statistics, which also includes data from testing other pharmaceutical and safety products. It is not possible from the format of the data to identify the number of animals used in testing a particular substance or product.

Procedures are ended in each case as soon as the scientific objective is achieved, which is usually when the onset of relevant clinical signs are observed. Animals are humanely killed to avoid any undue suffering.

Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 the Home Office can only license the use of animals when the scientific purpose cannot be achieved satisfactorily by any other reasonably practicable method not involving the use of animals. The Home Office has to be satisfied that the proposed procedure uses the minimum numbers of animals, of the lowest degree of neurophysiological sensitivity, and causes the least amount of pain, suffering, distress, or lasting harm and is the most likely to produce satisfactory results.

11 Nov 2003 : Column 232W

This reflects the principles of the 3Rs—the refinement of scientific procedures, reduction in the number of animals used and their replacement wherever possible.

Special conditions are tailored to each project licence in order to control or minimise pain or suffering. Animals in scientific procedures are carefully monitored by licensees, named animal care and welfare officers and animal care staff to ensure that agreed humane endpoints are implemented. In addition a named veterinary surgeon must always be available for advice.

Schedule 1 of the Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 sets out the appropriate methods of humane killing of animals used in scientific procedures.

The potency testing of botulinium toxin licensed under the 1986 Act is solely for pharmaceutical purposes, in relation to use of the substance as a prescription only medicine.

Dr. Iddon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government is taking to encourage the (a) development, (b) validation and (c) use of replacement alternatives for the in vivo potency testing in the United Kingdom of batches of botulinium toxin for use for (i) clinical and (ii) cosmetic purposes. [135480]

Caroline Flint: The animal testing of botulinium toxin, licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, is required and conducted solely in relation to its use for clinical purposes as a prescription only medicine. The Home Office does not license animal testing of this substance for use in cosmetic treatments.

Under the 1986 Act the Home Office can only license the use of animals for scientific purposes where there is no non-animal alternative, and then only when both the number of animals and their suffering is minimised. This reflects the principles of the 3Rs—the refinement of scientific procedures, reduction in the number of animals used and their replacement wherever possible.

No alternative to using animals has regrettably yet been developed to test the safety and efficacy of botulinium toxin for therapeutic medical purposes. Refinement of the test has, however, been the subject of useful research undertaken some years ago under a Home Office grant administered by the Animal Procedures Committee (as recorded in that Committee's published report for 1992—Command 2301).

The Government fully supports and encourages the general development and promotion of the 3Rs in a number of ways. It is involved in the validation of alternatives at the ED level, and seeks to take forward related matters through the Inter-Departmental Group on the 3Rs. It is estimated that the total spent by the UK Government and its funding agencies, on research into and development of alternatives, is between £2 and £10 million each year.

However, most work on the search for and development of alternatives to using animals in scientific procedures is neither done by Government nor with Government money—it is conducted and funded by the research community itself, which spends many millions of pounds on it each year. We must continue to

11 Nov 2003 : Column 233W

look mainly to the scientist community itself to come up with viable alternatives in specific areas such as the type of regulatory toxin testing subject of this Question.

Dr. Iddon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what regulatory requirements govern the use of botulinium toxin for cosmetic purposes; and if he will make a statement. [135481]

Caroline Flint: Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 the Home Office regulates the testing on live animals of botulinium toxin for clinical purposes as a prescription-only medicine. The Home Office does not license the use of animals for the testing of cosmetic treatments or products.

The use of botulinium toxin for cosmetic treatments, for which it is not licensed or tested, is not a matter over which the Home Office has any control. Regulation of the different uses made of botulinium toxin is a matter for the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which is an Executive Agency of the Department of Health, to whom further inquiries on this aspect should be addressed.

Burial Grounds

Dr. Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research into the potential need for the re-use of burial grounds has been commissioned by the Government since 1997; what the cost of that research has been; and where and when it has been published. [131162]

Paul Goggins: We have not commissioned specific research into the need to re-use old graves. In accordance with the commitment in our response to the recommendations of the Environment Select Committee's eighth report on cemeteries, we will shortly be publishing a consultation document on the reform of burial legislation generally, including the case for the re-use of old graves.

Cannabis

Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the research into how the users of higher class drugs start drug taking; and what the role (a) other drugs and (b) cannabis have had as gateways. [136267]

Caroline Flint: There is no available research evidence that examines specifically how Class A drugs users start using drugs and distinguishes this group from other drug users.

There have been no recent UK studies that have looked specifically at cannabis as a gateway drug. However, some analysis has been undertaken which examines wider progression from one group of drugs to another. This analysis used the 1998–99 Youth Lifestyles Survey, which questioned 3,700 young people aged between12–30 years.

The analysis examined progression from a group of drugs including cannabis, LSD, amphetamines, amyl nitrate and magic mushrooms to a group of highly dangerous drugs, including heroin, crack and methadone. When social and psychological factors, such as disturbed family background and disadvantaged

11 Nov 2003 : Column 234W

location were taken into account, little evidence was found for a gateway effect caused by use of the first group of drugs.

This analysis can be found in Home Office Research Study 253 entitled: 'The Road to Ruin? Sequences of Initiation into Drug Use and Offending by Young People in Britain'. Copies of this report can be found in the Library.

Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage cannabis users represented of total drug users in the UK in each year since 1997. [136268]

Caroline Flint: The table shows the percentage of total drug users in the last year that have used cannabis. This table also shows the percentage of total drug users in the last year that have used cannabis only. These figures are taken from the British Crime Survey, undertaken in 1998, 2000 and 2001–02.

Cannabis use by drug users in the last year

	Percentage
	Any cannabis use	Cannabis use only
1998	87	53
2000	89	55
2001–02	89	59

---