The principal Act, the Misuse of Drugs Act, was first presented to the Dáil in 1973 and came into operation in 1979. As the Minister has pointed out the main work on that legislation was done by an all-party committee in 1976. After a lot of hard work by all sides in the House the legislation was agreed by the parties. It is in the spirit of that all-party approach that I would like to discuss the Misuse of Drugs Bill before us today.
The Misuse of Drugs Act is very important legislation which deals with a situation which is difficult and complex. The principal Act was new and it is appropriate that after five years in operation we should review it to see how it can be improved. While most of the amendments proposed by the Minister give more power to the Garda and increase the penalties for offences it is important to balance between giving the necessary power to the authorities to implement the legislation to recognise the special problems and the needs of the addict. Many addicts are young people without any evil intent and they unwittingly get hooked on drugs without knowing the harmful consequences of their action. They often require medical care and attention rather than punishment.
There is no doubt that there has been a serious increase in substance abuse in the country over the last ten years, particularly over the last five years. It is important at the outset when we are speaking about substance abuse and drug abuse to recognise that far and away the greatest problems in the country are still created by the amount of alcohol consumed and the amount of tobacco smoked. While the abuse of drugs is a very serious problem, particularly in this city, we should not lose sight of the need to see what we can do to ensure that the people do not damage their health or other people's health through the abuse of other substances. It is important to recognise that the abuse of alcohol and the abuse of tobacco are two substance abuses which are causing serious problems.
In the sixties there was practically no drug addiction not alone in Ireland but throughout Europe. The few addicts we had became addicted to drugs abroad. It is interesting to note that in 1966 only one person was charged with drug offence. By 1979 that had risen to 594 people and by 1982 to more than 1,500 people. It is an increasing problem and the particular substances used vary from country to country. We seem to be the only country who use dicanol, an opium derivative, on any large scale. We have got a problem now with the abuse of heroin which is of crisis proportions, particularly in Dublin. The heroin problem started to escalate very rapidly in 1980 following the Iranian revolution.
Section 2 includes a new definition of cannabis. It is important that it should be redefined because the cannabis cultivated in Ireland does not have the flowering referred to in the Principal Act. Cannabis is still the most widely abused drug. Throughout the world 560,000 tons were seized in 1982. Here there were 107 seizures in 1977 and 430 in 1981. While heroin creates the most serious problem, we must not lose sight of the fact that the amount of cannabis being used is increasing as well. A debate has been going on for years on whether or not the use of cannabis is harmful. At this stage there is sufficient evidence to show that its use is not harmless in its own right and that it leads to the abuse of harder drugs.
The problem of heroin use has reached almost crisis proportions in this city. Since 1980 there has been an almost vertical rise in the graph. It is estimated that there are 1,500 addicts in this city. A recent study carried out by the Medico-Social Research Board showed that in one area of the city 10 per cent of young people between the ages of 16 and 24 years were using heroin. That is a frightening figure. Many of these young people have a poor educational record. Some of them use other drugs and the older ones are unemployed. These are all factors which we have to take into account.
In 1977 there was one seizure of heroin here and in 1981 there were 117. That is an indication of good detection work by the Garda and also of the increased use of that substance in the city. Particularly worrying about the use of heroin is the amount of associated crimes. Perhaps that is why in the public mind heroin addiction seems to supersede all other forms of substance abuse and addiction. Heroin addicts spend up to £100 per day to get their supply on the black market. Many of them are involved in crime to get money to keep themselves supplied with the substance to which they are addicted. The side effects of heroin also cause people to become involved in very serious crime.
The Jervis Street national drugs advisory and treatment centre see 80 new patients per month. There is a time lag of approximately four years between when a person starts to take heroin and his or her appearance at the Jervis Street clinic. This is a particularly difficult problem and shows no sign of abating.
The Minister told us in the past that glue sniffing will be dealt with in the Children Bill. We might ask how effective legislation to deal with glue sniffing will be because it is indulged in mainly by very young people. It is a particularly serious problem because a number of sudden deaths have occurred in the case of teenagers as a result of sniffing glue. They can die while sniffing it. It is particularly serious from that point of view. A question arises as to how this problem should be dealt with, and whether legislating for these young people is the correct way to deal with it, or whether some other way might be found. In this area the ideal answer is education on the danger of the misuse of any substance.
In this Bill the Minister intends to change the procedure for investigating allegations of irresponsible prescribing against members of the medical, dental and veterinary professions. Under the present legislation the Minister refers the case to the registration authority who set up a committee of inquiry to investigate the allegations. The Minister now intends to by-pass the registration authority and set up his own committee of inquiry without reference to the registration authority, except to notify them of his decision following the investigation. In other words, under the present legislation, if a doctor were accused of over-prescribing, the Minister would refer the case to the Medical Registration Council who, in turn, would set up a committee of inquiry who would report back to the Minister. The Minister would then write to the doctor pointing out the result of the committee's inquiry and the doctor would be at liberty to appeal to the Minister against the decision if he was not satisfied with it. The Minister would then write again to the Medical Registration Council who would set up an advisory committee, who would again write back to the Minister. The Minister could then give a direction or refer the case back to the original committee of inquiry.
I accept that that is cumbersome and time-consuming. If somebody is over-prescribing drugs it is important that the case should be investigated quickly and a decision made. I accept the need to expedite investigations into irresponsible prescribing. Having said that, I have certain reservations about the section. The registration authority should be involved in the investigation in some way. Under the proposed legislation the Minister will set up a committee of inquiry and make his decision on the basis of their report, and notify his decision to the registration authority.
One of the problems is that in the Bill there is no indication of who will make up the committee of inquiry and what the structure of the committee will be. It is important to recognise that the right to prescribe controlled drugs is part of the profession in which practitioners earn their livelihood, doctors, veterinary surgeons and dentists. The composition of the committee of inquiry should be written into the legislation so that we can ensure that justice will be done.
We on this side of the House hold no brief for practitioners who over-prescribe controlled drugs. We are as anxious as the Minister to have this practice brought to a halt. It is important to recognise that only a small percentage of practitioners, mainly doctors, have been involved to any serious extent in the over-prescription of these drugs. We have to find a balance between the right of an individual to practise his profession and the responsibility of the Minister to protect the public from over-prescription. I ask the Minister to meet representatives of the medical, dental and veterinary professions to discuss the section with them in order to find a more acceptable way of dealing with the problem rather than having the Minister bypass the registration authority completely. There are time limits with regard to setting up the inquiry and when the Minister gets a reply from the respondent, but there is no time limit on when the Minister will take a decision. There should be a time limit on the Minister when he receives the report of the committee.
Section 6 deals with penalties, mainly penalties for increasing the fines for various offences under certain sections of the original Act. Subsection (3) states that a person found guilty of an offence under section 15 shall be liable on conviction on indictment to a fine of such amount as the court considers appropriate or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for life, whereas the 1977 Act sets out a fine of £3,000 or a sentence not exceeding 14 years. It appears to me that instead of making the penalty more severe for those guilty of unlawful supply we are providing for a lesser penalty in this section. At the moment the average life sentence is between eight and ten years and existing legislation provides for a maximum of 14 years. Nowadays a life sentence is always less than 14 years and, therefore, I ask the Minister to provide for a maximum of 14 years in this section.
The pusher, the person who sells drugs for his own gain, is guilty of the most serious offence. We have to distinguish between the pusher who is an addict — often he sells drugs to get money for his own supply — and the person pushing drugs for commercial gain and who is not involved in taking drugs himself. We can have absolutely no sympathy for the latter. We must have regard to the condition of the health of any person who suffers from drug addiction and to their need for treatment but for the person who, for commercial gain, sells these drugs with such devastating consequences for the community we can have no sympathy. If we provide for life imprisonment instead of the 14 years as set out in the Act, we will favour that type of criminal. We will look at the section on Committee Stage.
Section 19 of the original Act refers to:
... a person who is the occupier or is in control or is concerned in the management of any land, vehicle or vessel and who knowingly permits or suffers any of the following to take place on the land, vehicle or vessel....
The Act mentions various activities such as the cultivation and preparation of opium and cannabis. Subsection (2) states that in respect of any person who is in management of such vehicle or vessel it will be presumed by the court that they had knowledge of such activity unless they prove otherwise. I suggest that the words "licensed premises" be added there because it appears there are licensed premises where young people particularly get drugs. In the context of prevention of misuse of drugs every outlet must be looked at and the necessary legislation introduced.
In 1982 the number of persons charged for possession of cannabis was almost 1,000, for heroin it was 208 and for synthetic narcotics such as dicanol, which appears to be a particular problem in Ireland, it was 76. For forged prescriptions the number of offences was 19 and the number of persons charged for the importation of drugs was 18. In respect of the cultivation of cannabis plants 52 people were charged.
Section 11 of the Bill provides for the courts to dispense with their obligation under the present law to obtain a report from a medical doctor or an appropriate authority in respect of a person in possession of drugs. I accept what the Minister said that where a person is not medically ill or is not involved in addiction it should not be necessary to await a medical report, but where such a report is required perhaps the Minister might look at the current situation. I understand that the person who carries out this examination does not always have expert knowledge of the patient or of the misuse of drugs.
A matter that has not been dealt with by this Government — it is not necessarily the responsibility of the Minister for Health — is the whole matter of the involvement of officers of the customs and excise in prohibiting the importation of drugs. There are about 700 members of the customs and excise who are placed in strategic positions at airports, seaports and along the land frontier. Most of the drugs that are misused come in either through the airports or seaports or along the land frontier. Very few of the drugs abused are produced at home, apart from cannabis which is grown here now. Others, particularly heroin, must come from abroad.
It is difficult to understand why something has not been done to ensure that customs officers have the authority and training to help combat this very serious situation. It is very surprising that there is no ministerial representative from the Department of Finance on the special task force having regard to the seriousness of the problem and the fact that customs officers are in a position to seize drugs at the point of entry. Ideally, if we could seize drugs at the point of import, it would considerably lessen the problem and perhaps abolish the more serious aspects. If we could even seize a percentage of what is coming in it would lessen the work of the Garda Drug Squad and would mean that less damage would be done to individuals and communities. There is no reason why a special drugs squad could not be established amongst customs officers. At least they should get proper and adequate training to deal with this problem, such as detection equipment, sniffer dogs and anything else necessary to ensure that they play a meaningful role in helping to combat the misuse of drugs.
The whole question of misuse of drugs highlights the old saying that prevention is better than cure. Prevention is also better than punishment and any anti-drugs strategy must control supply and demand. Sections 8, 9 and 10 up-date the production and processing of drugs. These sections relate to bringing in new drugs under the Bill and increased powers to the Garda in terms of search warrants and arrest, which are very welcome.
The control of supply depends on the production and processing of the traffic in drugs and I should like to see customs officers taking a more active interest. There should be a unit amongst customs officers which could help to ensure that as much of this illegal trafficking as possible would be stopped at the point of entry.
Supplies also come from illegal prescriptions and I know the Minister intends to tighten up the law in that regard in section 3. The penalties for forging illegal prescriptions are increased and it must be looked at carefully to ensure that there is proper supervision of prescription pads so that the number of forgeries will be reduced to a minimum. It is surprising to hear of some of the forgeries which got through the dispensing agent. Chemists' premises, dispensaries and hospital pharmacies must have maximum security to prevent people breaking and entering.
Prevention is the ideal answer to the misuse of drugs. If people get involved, treatment and rehabilitation should be readily available to get them back into the community as quickly as possible. Prevention depends on education and the main treatment facilities are available at the National Drug Advisory Treatment Centre which is doing excellent work. Hospital facilities at Jervis Street are to be moved to Beaumont and, while it is not intended that the drug advisory unit will go there, nevertheless they do not have any indication at this stage as to where they will be located. It has been recommended that they should be in a centre city location and that would be ideal because the centre city is convenient and people can be moved there quickly. A unit of that nature should be attractive and the present centre city premises is too small for the work which is being done. It is important that there is a quick decision as to where the centre will be located and that work will commence immediately on creating a proper purpose built unit, which is necessary for this work.
The laboratory which is available is grossly over-loaded, which is causing a serious problem because, if you do not have full laboratory facilities, it is very difficult to monitor patients' progress with regard to measuring the level of the drug in the system either through blood or urine samples. They need intensive treatment and I ask the Minister to look at the whole question of the centre city premises and say when a decision will be made on it. It is envisaged that there will be bed accommodation in Beaumont and Saint James's Hospital to cater for the north and south city but it is the day care centre which is important. These people, who are a danger to themselves and others, have nowhere to go unless they are compulsorily detained in prison. There are no alternative rehabilitation units, apart from Coolmine, Rutland and Usher's Island day centre.
With regard to rehabilitation, there are voluntary agencies such as Coolmine, Usher's Island day centre and the Anna Liffey centre, which are worthy of support. It is encouraging to see that some public companies are giving financial support to these bodies which are doing such excellent work. I would ask the Minister to ensure that they have the necessary finance from his Department to enable them to carry out their work. In Coolmine in 1981 the number of drug abusers contacted was 246 and there were 68 in residence, 85 per cent of whom were from the Dublin area and were abusing morphine or morphine derivatives. The average age was 21 years.
The main area of prevention lies in the field of education and it is quite alarming to read some of the studies which have been carried out, for example, the study carried out by the Medico-Social Research Council and the department of community medicine in Trinity College, and reported in 1982. They carried out a survey of 5,178 post-primary students and discovered that 20 per cent of them had been offered drugs. Of those under 16 years of age, 25 per cent had friends who used drugs; of those over 16 years of age, 44 per cent had friends who used drugs. Forty per cent of the students under 16 and 15 per cent of those over 16 were unable to name a soft drug and 30 per cent of the total were unable to name a hard drug. This is an indication of the lack of knowledge of the people attending three post-primary schools in the one area. It is important that there should be a proper level of advice and encouragement available to parents, teachers and the public in general. People should be informed of the over-use of substances such as alcohol, cigarettes, the drugs covered by this Bill and medicines generally. It is important that the Government should have a comprehensive policy in relation to preventing abuse of these substances, not just a policy in regard to penalties and giving the Garda more powers. Healthy alternatives should be promoted and people should be encouraged to consider their responsibility for their own health and to adopt a healthy lifestyle. Leisure activities should be available and I would ask the Government to look at the provision of proper recreation and leisure facilities, not only for people who are liable to over-use these substances but for the many who have leisure time, particularly the unemployed.
Health education should be an integrated part of the schools' curriculum, including the whole problem of drugs and drug abuse. The plan for education published by the Department stated that they would encourage health education but the time has come when the Government should look seriously at the whole question of health education, not only in relation to drugs but in relation to the promotion of good health, sex education and the various areas of life which are important.
The Health Education Bureau believe that the most important and hopeful intervention measure in controlling drug abuse is client orientated community health education and school education. I would compliment the HEB on their work in the field of community health education and their efforts to co-ordinate the approach by doctors, chemists, counsellors, juvenile liaison officers, social workers and others. It is of relevance to recognise that in 1982 when Deputy Woods was Minister for Health he allocated an extra £250,000 to the Health Education Bureau, which has not been repeated, for the specific purpose of education in the area of drug abuse.
There are many recommendations in the report of the Ministerial task force on which we would like to see more progress. The Criminal Justice Bill is going through the House at present and we have also dealt with the customs and immigration controls. While additional ban-ghardaí have been assigned to the drugs units in Dublin, Cork and Limerick it is important to ensure that the drugs squad is kept up to the necessary strength to cope with this very serious problem.
In reply to a question by me today regarding progress on the report of the task force the Minister stated:
The recommendation relating to the appointment of one judge of the Circuit Court and one district justice who would have special responsibility for all cases involving drug offences in the Dublin area is being pursued with the appropriate authorities — so also is the recommendation relating to the appointment of one solicitor in the Chief State Solicitor's Office who would specialise in drug offence case work.... The Minister for Education has asked the new Curriculum and Examinations Board to examine the introduction of health education in schools — at both primary and post-primary levels. It is also planned to develop the programmes of training in drugs education....
We should be getting more action rather than matters being pursued or examined. The situation is serious and we should have the necessary facilities to deal with it. It is not all the responsibility of the Minister for Health but it is important that the Government be seen to be taking the necessary action.
We are not opposing this Bill but we will have some amendments on Committee Stage. Because I feel there should be an all-party approach, I should prefer the Minister to consider some of the points I have raised and perhaps it would be possible to get agreement on them.