§ Mr. Cohenasked the Secretary of State for Defence how many cases of alleged misuse of drugs have been investigated in (i) the Army, (ii) the Royal Navy and (iii) the Royal Air Force in each year since 1979 and in the current year to date; in how many cases in each year in each category any action has been taken against alleged offenders; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. FreemanAll three services pursue a vigorous and comprehensive programme of education and prevention in relation to drug abuse, supported by appropriate investigative, disciplinary, and administrative procedures where such measures fail. The message conveyed is that drug abuse cannot be tolerated in the Armed Forces and that prohibition will be vigorously enforced. The statistical information requested is as follows:
496W
Royal Navy/Royal Marines Investigations by Special Number of people Investigated Individuals Convicted Investigations Squad 1979 32 65 50 1980 36 140 100 1981 54 116 100 1982 34 81 36 1983 29 74 61 1984 58 114 61 1985 49 104 *52 1986† 10 19 6 * (includes 2 RM). † To date.
Army Cases Investigated by Royal Military Police Positive Investigations Individuals Convicted 1979 — — 38 1980 — — 39 1981 173 113 70 1982 147 102 69 1983 172 83 114 1984 208 133 149 1985 249 140 125 1986 †134 28 *31 * (Until end March). † (Until 9 July).
Royal Air Force Cases Investigated Individuals Convicted 1979 25 18 1980 33 14 1981 52 32 1982 33 17 1983 40 15 1984 97 143 1985 96 77 1986 63 *8 * until end June Notes:
1. The Royal Navy's figures are not directly comparable to those of the other two Services because:
- a. they do not include convictions in civilian courts for which records are not readily available and
- b. the Royal Navy's policy is to try almost all drug cases whilst the other two Services have tended to deal with very minor cases administratively.
2. The RAF figure for 1984 reflects the fact that from the beginning of that year all minor offences have been subject to formal disciplinary action rather than being dealt with administratively as previously.
3. All Royal Navy and RAF figures from 1984 include convictions for monor drug-related offences charged respectively under Section 39 of the Naval Discipline Act or Section 69 of the Air Force Act. The Army does not produce a breakdown of offences charged under Section 69 of the Army Act which is used for a wide variety of misdemeanours and no Section 69 offences are therefore included in the Army's figures.
4. Each ease investigated can involve more than one individual
5. It is not known whether any Royal marines were convicted under the Army Act in 1979; figures for subsequent years include such convictions (three in 1983 and two in 1985).
6. Reliable statistics are not available in respect of investigations in the Army in 1979 and 1980. Positive investigations in the Army relate to cases which, following initial investigation, indicated there was a case to be answered.
7. Figures are not availble for the Royal Air Force in respect of the number of investigations which were acted upon.
8. The figure for individuals convicted in 1984 for the RN/RM differs from that previouly quoted in reply to a question from Lord Boston of Faversham on 14 October 1983 (Vol. 467 col. 464/6). The figure of 44 given on that occasion did not cover the whole calendar year period.