HL Deb 15 November 2001 vol 628 cc747-8

7.57 p.m.

Lord Rooker rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 24th October be approved [7th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in my view, the provisions of this order are compatible with convention rights. The purpose of the order is to bring 36 previously uncontrolled ecstasy-type substances under the controls of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. As required by that Act, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has considered the misuse potential of these drugs and recommended that they be brought under the Act's controls.

The Government's aim is to prevent these ecstasy analogues being launched onto the illicit drugs market. The order will prohibit the production and supply of the substances on the illicit drugs market and provide the enforcement agencies with the powers they need to stem the trade in these drugs. Thirty-five of the substances have no recognised therapeutic uses. The 36th substance—α-methylphenethylhydroxylmine (henceforth referred to as "α-m")—is used medicinally but is not manufactured as a medicine in the UK.

The order proposes that 35 of the substances be added to the list of controlled drugs specified in Class A of Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act. The 36th substance, a-m, will be added to the list of controlled drugs specified in Class B. In accordance with usual practice, we have consulted the organisations which represent the enforcement agencies, the medical professions and the pharmaceutical industry about the changes. None has raised any objections to the proposals.

If the order is approved we aim to bring it, together with the relevant amended regulations, into force on 1st February 2002. I commend the changes proposed in the order. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 24th October be approved [7th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Rooker.)

Lord Phillips of Sudbury

My Lords, we on these Benches entirely support the order. All must cherish this particular order: it is stuff with which to paper one's lavatory at home. However, we accept that it is very important. For the consideration of the Government, the only point I raise, which was debated in the other place, is that one of the drugs on the list was accidentally omitted on the previous occasion. I also understand that these are all artificial drugs. That is to say, they are compounds.

The world of drugs moves at a tremendous rate. New types of ecstasy-related drugs are created all the time. One wonders whether there is a procedure to bring these newly created drugs back to the House more swiftly than has taken place in this case. The drug was left off three years ago. I raise the question in a spirit of constructiveness. Other than that, we support the Motion.

Lord Rooker

My Lords, in answer to the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, these are alternative drugs to ecstasy which are designed to evade the drug controls. They are designer drugs.

The noble Lord's point about legislation is extremely valid. It will always lag behind the illicit traders. I shall ask for consideration to be given to his suggestion in order to avoid Ministers, or anyone, in future having to read out some of the drug names.

On Question, Motion agreed to.