Draft Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2014
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
† Bacon, Mr Richard (South Norfolk) (Con)
† Doran, Mr Frank (Aberdeen North) (Lab)
† Featherstone, Lynne (Minister for Crime Prevention)
† Freer, Mike (Finchley and Golders Green) (Con)
† Gillan, Mrs Cheryl (Chesham and Amersham) (Con)
† Healey, John (Wentworth and Dearne) (Lab)
† Hinds, Damian (East Hampshire) (Con)
† Johnson, Diana (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)
Kaufman, Sir Gerald (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)
† Lloyd, Stephen (Eastbourne) (LD)
† Prisk, Mr Mark (Hertford and Stortford) (Con)
Shannon, Jim (Strangford) (DUP)
† Sharma, Mr Virendra (Ealing, Southall) (Lab)
† Simpson, Mr Keith (Broadland) (Con)
† Whittaker, Craig (Calder Valley) (Con)
† Wilson, Phil (Sedgefield) (Lab)
Anna Dickson, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
First Delegated Legislation Committee
Monday 1 December 2014
[Mr James Gray in the Chair]
Draft Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2014
4.30 pm
The Minister for Crime Prevention (Lynne Featherstone): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2014.
What a pleasure it is to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Gray. The draft order was laid before Parliament on 7 November as part of the continuing efforts to tackle the trade in so-called “legal highs”—a particularly unhelpful term. The Committee will be aware that on 30 October the Government published their response to the expert-led review of new psychoactive substances. We have set out an enhanced package of measures that includes looking at the feasibility of new legislation in what is a challenging legal area. The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 will remain the cornerstone of our legislative actions to curtail the availability of new drugs where we have expert advice on their harms. The draft order is one part of the actions that we continue to pursue with full vigour.
I thank the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs for its continued support for reviewing the evidence base on new psychoactive substances with the potential to cause harm that are sold as legal highs. The ACMD’s considerations and advice continue to inform the Government’s response to these drugs. The Committee will wish to note that the legislative measures we are proposing in the order are entirely in line with the ACMD’s advice.
If passed, the order will specify for control the synthetic opioid AH-7921 and a number of LSD-related compounds commonly referred to as ALD-52, AL-LAD, ETH-LAD, PRO-LAD and LSZ. The order will also extend the definition used to control the family of tryptamines in order to capture compounds such as alpha-methyltryptamine, as well as 5-MeO-DALT, for control under the 1971 Act. The Government have received advice from the ACMD that the drugs to be controlled are being misused or are likely to be misused. In the ACMD’s view, their misuse is having, or is capable of having, sufficiently harmful effects to warrant legislative action under the 1971 Act.
Legislative action is necessary as a result of the real and potential harms identified by the ACMD. The action will send out a strong message to those who are considering experimenting with these drugs, and help us to target our public health messaging in order to protect the public. It will also allow enforcement partners to prioritise resources accordingly to tackle the sale and supply of these drugs, sending out a strong message to those who trade in these harmful drugs, including high street “head shops.”
Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): I support the draft order. The Minister may know that for some time I have been concerned by DNP, a drug taken by people worried about their body image that sadly caused the death of a constituent of mine and several other young people. While the Department was considering the advice on the substances covered by the draft order, did the Minister look at DNP at any stage?
Lynne Featherstone: I am very sorry to hear about my right hon. Friend’s constituent. That is why the work done by the ACMD in providing advice on the continual succession of new so-called “legal highs” is so important. I understand that my predecessor wrote to my right hon. Friend to set out a range of actions taken by the Government—including the involvement of the Food Standards Agency—and as we develop in scope the range of substances to be caught under the plans for the new offence, we will bear DNP and similar drugs in mind.
Mrs Gillan: I thank the Minister for her answer. I am aware of the issues, problems and complexity of the matter because of the involvement of the Food Standards Agency, but at the Dispatch Box the other day she kindly left me with the impression that she would look again at the classification—
The Chair: Order. I know that the matter is dear to the right hon. Lady’s heart, but it is beyond the scope of this SI. We can discuss only the drugs that are included in the SI, not those that we might wish were included. The Minister must restrict herself to the SI itself.
Lynne Featherstone: Thank you, Mr Gray.
The Government and the ACMD continue to monitor, through UK and EU drugs early warning systems, emerging substances marketed as legal alternatives to controlled drugs. That work has informed the ACMD’s deliberations and, as appropriate, its current advice to update our drug laws in relation to the new psychoactive compounds being controlled.
AH-7921 is a potent synthetic analgesic developed more than 40 years ago by the Allen & Hanburys pharmaceutical company in the United Kingdom. The ACMD reports:
“The compound was not developed further, presumably because animal studies revealed a high addictive potential.”
AH-7921 has recently become available as a new psychoactive substance. It was first detected in Europe in July 2012. Since then, a number of drug-related deaths have been reported in Europe, including three related deaths reported by the national programme on substance abuse deaths in the United Kingdom in 2013. AH-7921 is reported as being highly addictive, with a potency similar to morphine. Harms from the misuse of this drug are reported to include difficulty in breathing, severe pain, and death.
John Healey (Wentworth and Dearne) (Lab): Rather light-heartedly, on the way in before the Committee started, I asked the Minister whether she had checked the chemical formulae in the statutory instrument. Of course, the previous statutory instrument was withdrawn because of errors in those formulae. Can she guarantee—she
has not yet—that they are right this time? And can she give us the street name for AH-7921 and the other drugs listed, so that we and any members of the public who might be following our proceedings can understand in more familiar terms what we are talking about?Lynne Featherstone: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I can give him the assurance he seeks: the chemical formulae are correct on this occasion. I will be more than happy to give him the street names in due course; I do not know them off the top of my head.
The LSD-related compounds are potent hallucinogens that currently evade UK controls on this family of drugs. These compounds are reported as being offered for sale on the specialist websites devoted to hallucinogens as new psychoactive substances. The harms associated with the misuse of such compounds are reported to include euphoria, hallucinations, rapid heartbeat, and depression. The compounds are also known to cause acute mental health disturbances.
The tryptamines are hallucinogens, a large number of which are already controlled via a generic or group definition under the 1971 Act as class A drugs. The ACMD reports that in recent years there has been significant interest in hallucinogens of this type. A number of these substances, which fall outside the current group definition, are being offered for sale as new psychoactive substances. Two in particular, commonly referred to as AMT and 5-MeO-DALT, have been routinely encountered through the Home Office forensic early warning system.
AMT was linked to the tragic deaths of Adam Hunt and Christopher Scott last year. The physical effects of the tryptamines are reported as visual illusion, hallucination and euphoria, among others. The ACMD also reports a small number of confirmed post-mortem toxicology reports, rising from one in 2009 to four in 2013, with AMT being the drug most frequently linked to reported tryptamine deaths. For all those reasons, the Government accepted the ACMD’s advice to extend current controls to these compounds, as class A drugs under the 1971 Act.
It is intended to make two further related statutory instruments, which will be subject to the negative resolution procedure. The Misuse of Drugs (Designation) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2014 will amend the Misuse of Drugs (Designation) Order 2001 to place the compounds being controlled in part 1 of the order as compounds to which section 7(4) of the 1971 Act applies. These compounds have no known legitimate uses outside of research. Their availability for use in research will be enabled under a Home Office licence. The Misuse of Drugs (Amendment No. 3) Regulations 2014 will amend the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 to place the compounds being controlled by this order in schedule 1 to the 2001 regulations, as they have no known or recognised medicinal uses. Those instruments will be laid to come into force at the same time as the order, if they proceed as proposed. The Government will publicise the approved law changes through a Home Office circular.
4.40 pm
Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serve under you today, Mr Gray. I thank the Minister for introducing the order and for so
competently pronouncing the names of all the different compounds. I also welcome her back to the Home Office, where she started her ministerial career in 2010 when the coalition was formed—it is good to see her back in her place.The Opposition fully support the Government in proposing the order. I have only a few questions. First, I am slightly concerned about the length of time it takes to bring orders that deal with such drugs before the House. I note that the letter containing the advisory council’s recommendations to the Government on AH-7921 is dated 10 June 2014. Attached to that was information and a reference to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction from earlier in 2014. I note that the impact assessment, which was signed by the Minister’s predecessor, was also dated 10 June 2014. There were clear recommendations, and work was being carried out in the Home Office to bring this order before the House back in June. It is now December. Will the Minister explain the reason for this delay? Obviously we want such matters to be dealt with in a timely way.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth and Dearne asked about mistakes in the statutory instrument that was to have been considered in November. Will the Minister comment on those?
On the LSD compounds that the Minister referred to, I want to ask about time scales. Point six on page 3 of the impact assessment says:
“Two in particular…AMT…and 5-MeO DALT have been routinely encountered through the Home Office’s Forensic Early Warning System.”
Will she explain when those substances came to light, so we can get a feel for how long it takes to deal with such substances?
The impact assessment also refers to 10 deaths in Europe. Will the Minister tell us in what period those 10 deaths took place, and why it seems to have taken us quite a long time to deal with these substances in this country?
I was rather taken aback by the “objectives” section on page 4 of the impact assessment. Reference is made to the new psychoactive substance action plan, which was published on 17 May 2012, which, it says,
“combines legislative measures alongside public health, prevention and international policy approaches to tackle new psychoactive substances.”
However, as the Minister said, since that date the Home Office has published a review into NPS. Why does the impact assessment not mention that work and the Government’s plans to develop the ways they tackle “legal highs”?
On page 7 of the impact assessment, under “enforcement”, reference is made to seizures by the police and the UK Border Force. Does the Minister have a view on this issue? According to the latest figures, the number of seizures has gone down over the last few years. Does she think anything else needs to be done to ensure that the figures start to go up, which is of course what we all want?
Paragraph 9 of the explanatory memorandum deals with guidance and getting information out to the public, an issue I know the Minister takes very seriously. Does she feel the time has come to do more than just refer to the FRANK website, which I know the Department puts a great deal of store by as a way of communicating
with young people in particular? However, can more be done to explain the real problems with “legal highs” and new psychoactive substances?The Home Office produced a report on 30 October on its new approach to dealing with “legal highs”. What legislative steps might be taken before the end of this Parliament to tackle the proliferation of “head shops” and sales of such substances on the internet?
4.46 pm
Lynne Featherstone: I thank the hon. Lady and other members of the Committee for the points that were raised. I am very pleased to have her support in this endeavour, and thank her for her kind words about my return to the Home Office. I hope that all members of the Committee agree that the order should be approved, on the basis of the latest available evidence and the ACMD’s advice. Such approval will ensure that our drug laws continue to remain effective and assist law enforcement in restricting the availability of compounds that have no legitimate use outside of research. Law enforcement partners will be empowered to target unscrupulous suppliers who push these compounds on to the so-called “legal highs” market, despite the potentially serious harm they can cause.
I wish to commend the ACMD for its continuous work and support for our work priorities, including on new psychoactive substances. The constantly evolving market for these compounds continues to require, more than ever, careful prioritisation of our resources. It also underscores the need for closer working with a broad network of partners, in the UK and abroad, to inform and preserve the integrity of our laws and protect the public.
Of course, our response does not simply rely on legislation and law enforcement to reduce the threat posed by these compounds. Action to reduce demand through early intervention and targeted public health messaging are essential to reducing the demand for these drugs, and especially to protecting young people from their potential harms. Our public health messaging on the risks associated with these compounds, which are often untested for human consumption, remains consistent and clear, particularly in the light of the recent emergence of synthetic opioids: anyone using these drugs is taking a risk with their lives.
The Home Office continues to run communications campaigns to reduce the demand for so-called “'legal highs” during the summer music festival season, freshers’ week and holidays. I think that goes some way to answering the hon. Lady’s questions. This year’s activities had a potential reach to 74% of 15 to 18-year-olds in England. We saw a 110% increase in traffic to the “legal highs” page on the FRANK website—I should point out to the hon. Lady that that is not our only avenue of contact—compared with the previous period. Some 34% of those responding to a survey hosted on the FRANK website said that they are less likely to take “legal highs” in future, having seen that material.
The Government have provided guidance to schools and will ensure that the drug education curriculum covers new psychoactive substances. We have a range of evidence-based approaches to educating young people and targeting specific user groups about the risks associated with new psychoactive substances.
Diana Johnson: I wonder whether the Minister might use her good offices to persuade her colleagues in the Department for Education to take into account that, according to Monitor’s survey of drugs education in schools, there is about one hour per year of such education. I know she will share my commitment to making PSHE compulsory in schools, so that there is a good standard of such education in all schools.
The Chair: Within the terms of the statutory instrument, Minister.
Lynne Featherstone: Indeed, Mr Gray. It was very wicked of the hon. Lady to indicate my party’s position on PSHE, but that is the case. Nevertheless, our strong advice to all schools is to include such lessons in PSHE. How else will young people learn about such issues?
Public Health England will continue to update FRANK messaging targeted at young people to reflect new forensic, toxicology and social science evidence. That will include messaging on risks and trends, as well as the latest advice from the ACMD on harms, including on the drugs subject to the order.
Evidence-based clinical guidelines, covering assessment and treatment needs of users, have also been developed through Project Neptune to support partners in the treatment sector. An increasing number of specialised clinics have also been integrated into existing specialist drug services. A new PHE toolkit will further support local authorities in responding to this issue in our communities through prevention and treatment work. The Home Office will also disseminate its resource pack on new psychoactive substances to professionals, including youth and social workers, teachers and probation services working with young people and others, to extend the impact of the messages from our targeted communications campaigns.
Our response to this emerging threat is wide-ranging and extensive. Other actions include training front-line NHS staff to deal with users of new psychoactive substances. PHE will also examine the feasibility of piloting a national system for a new network of clinicians to share intelligence on compounds, adverse reactions and harms, and with outreach workers to report encounters with these compounds.
Last week, in light of emerging evidence on harms received from the ACMD, I decided to introduce legislation to bring two new psychoactive substances, including another synthetic opioid that is causing concern, under control without delay. That order will be brought before the House in due course.
Mrs Gillan: I reiterate that the Minister is doing the right thing. Can she at some stage address the question whether these substances are subject to similar bans in other European countries? I know, for example, that they are illegal in Germany. Before she finishes, will she let us know the situation in the rest of the European Union, because these substances travel across borders these days?
Lynne Featherstone: They do, and they travel quickly. I will return to that point in a minute. We know that more needs to be done to tackle the emergence of new psychoactive substances, which seem as though they are
on a continual train. That is why my right hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) led a review by an expert panel into the UK’s response to such substances—a point raised by the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North.The Committee will be aware of the outcomes of that review and the actions announced by the Government in response to the panel’s recommendations. The expert panel recognised that the flexibility of our current approach, which has the Misuse of Drugs Act at its heart, has real strengths that we should not dismiss but build upon. We are already consulting the ACMD on a new legislative approach to control all synthetic cannabinoids once and for all, and the doubling of the maximum duration of temporary class drug orders from 12 to 24 months, which the hon. Lady has pushed for.
The Government will continue to deliver our balanced and evidenced-based drug strategy. We will continue to highlight that drug misuse is harmful, prevent drug use in the first place and intervene early with those who develop problems. We will also continue to support individuals to recover from dependence through timely and effective treatment and local services, which encompass housing, employment and appropriate support to maintain stable family life and a life free from crime.
On the question of further information to educate young people, we have covered FRANK, but PHE continues to update the scheme to reflect all the new information, and there is the toolkit to which I have already referred. Drug seizures, which the hon. Lady asked about, are down under this Government. There were 193,999 drug seizures in England and Wales in 2013-14, a 3% decrease on the previous year. Seizure statistics are just one part of a complex picture in our fight against drugs. Our overall approach is having a positive effect. There is a long-term downward trend in drug use. This year, we have seen an increase in the number of large seizures of illicit drugs at UK borders, and the police are making good progress in seizing significant quantities of drugs off the streets. However, drugs seizure statistics will be heavily influenced by local policing activities established in response to local priorities. That may result in changes in the type of enforcement activity undertaken in any police area.
The statutory instrument was withdrawn as a result of a mistake in the chemical names of the LSD-related materials. Withdrawal was necessary to ensure that our drug laws could be enforced—it would obviously not be helpful if we used the wrong name—but re-laying the order has not delayed the implementation time lines at all.
The hon. Lady asked why it takes so long to introduce legislation on these drugs. The control of new psychoactive substances under the 1971 Act is informed by the ACMD, which assesses evidence gathered on the harms of these drugs; that evidence can be limited. We have acted expeditiously on receipt of advice. The process requires time, but it is essential so that drug control is effective. That is why we asked the ACMD to review the generic definitions used in the 1971 Act to update our legislation and the controlled groups of drugs, including new psychoactive substances. I do not have to hand the
necessary information on the particular drugs referred to by the hon. Lady, but I am more than happy to write to her if things took longer than expected. Hopefully that was not the case, because the hon. Lady is right that we must act as expeditiously as we can.We have already gone ahead on the recommendations made by the panel that do not require legislation. They are being taken forward immediately and the Government have set out a clear timetable for delivery.
On the PHE toolkit, in the financial year 2015-16, PHE is also going to pilot a new adverse event reporting system, which is a bit like the MHRA yellow card system for medicine. The PHE’s “Rise Above” programme will help to build up young people’s resilience to risky behaviours. We are moving ahead in looking at, and hopefully bringing into legislation, a general ban on new psychoactive drugs in due course.
On the impact assessment objectives and the 2010 action plan, the impact assessment was published prior to the Government response, so it is not appropriate to include references to our new commitments from a previous review.
I am sorry to disappoint the right hon. Member for Wentworth and Dearne, but as far as we know there are no obvious street names for substances such as AH-7921—none have been identified by ACMD or the Home Office. There are any number of street names for new psychoactive substances; some are generic, some are specific to some substances, such as mephedrone, which is known as MCAT and meow meow.
John Healey: Can the Minister tell the Committee how on earth the public health awareness campaigns that she mentioned are alerting young people to the dangers and prohibition of certain substances if the Department is unable to use the terminology that young people are using?
Lynne Featherstone: I am sure that, wherever possible, we do use terminology that is recognisable to young people who are visiting websites or encountering new psychoactive substances on the street. However, on the new substances that will be controlled by the order, the information I have is that we do not have street names for them at this moment in time. I am sure my officials will tell me in due course whether or not they exist.
I was asked about the European perspective. AH-7921 is currently being advertised for sale as a “legal high”. It was first detected in Europe in July 2012, and a number of related fatalities have been reported to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
I hope the Committee will support the order, and the Government’s wider response to new psychoactive substances as part of the work we continue to undertake to ensure that we protect the public as much as possible from drug harms. I commend the order to the Committee.