Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 21 Jul 2016

Vol. 919 No. 2

Misuse of Drugs (Amendment) Bill 2016 [Seanad]: Report Stage

Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are related and will be discussed together.

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, after line 28, to insert the following:

“Amendment of section 3 of Principal Act

3. Section 3 of the Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following subsection:

“(2A) That possession of the substances listed in Part 1 and Part 2 of the Schedule not be subject to prosecution for amounts equating to personal use.”.”.

This Bill is designed to criminalise the illegal sale and possession of certain prevalent prescription medicines. We would argue that criminalising those with addictions is simply meting out a further punishment on people who are already victims of the regressive laws surrounding prohibition. As Senator Lynn Ruane pointed out, as happened in Canada, this type of legislation will just move people on to new drugs and new ways of consuming them and when they are outlawed, they will move on to newer ones and so on, sometimes with devastating effect, even more on safe practices and drugs being used in this cycle of misery and punishment.

When we debated the Bill a few weeks ago, I spoke at length about the system in place in Switzerland for more than 20 years. They have injection centres for heroin addicts and the state provides clean, safe prescription heroin to those who need it. The Swiss programme has been a fantastic success. It has saved countless lives and undermined and effectively destroyed the power of the drug dealers.

The United States has chaos at the heart of its drugs war and has behind bars a higher proportion of its population than any country on the planet. Clearly, it is not working.

In Switzerland, the gangs have no power over the addict they addicted because the state is caring for them. The average patient uses the programme for three years, after which 85% have stopped using every day. Crimes committed by those on heroin have plummeted, there are 55% fewer car thefts, and 80% fewer muggings and burglaries. That drop happened almost immediately after the programme started. HIV infections from heroin use have almost entirely disappeared.

The Swiss started caring for addicts over 20 years ago by abandoning the American style of a zero tolerance approach and made heroin safe by taking it out of the hands of the criminals. The benefits of the system are crystal clear and the public have overwhelmingly defended the law from conservatives in two national referendums.

Last year, the members of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality travelled to Portugal to see first hand how the Portuguese decriminalisation system is working and to talk to those involved. In terms of the information the delegation brought back, they were told that 15 years ago, before they started, what was most feared was that this approach would cause drug consumption to increase, the authorities to be more tolerant towards drugs trafficking, allowing it to also increase, that Portugal could become the destiny for drug consumers from throughout Europe but especially from Spain and that the number of crimes directly related to drug addiction would rise, but that did not happen. Fifteen years have passed and drug consumption has not increased. The authorities kept at least the same level of intolerance towards drug trafficking, both internal and international. Portugal did not become a destination for drug consumers and the number of crimes directly related to drug addiction has decreased. At the same time, drug consumers are no longer looked upon or treated as criminals by the authorities but also by society, including their own families. They have become less dependent on traffickers and police discretion, being especially true when it comes to people with fewer resources. There was an end to thousands of criminal cases for drug consumption that cost time and money with absolutely no gain because if it is easier to know who is buying drugs, it is easier to know who is selling them.

Why are we passing regressive laws today when nowhere has prohibition been seen to work? Why are we so intent on punishing those who need our care? Nothing but misery and waste will result from criminalising in this manner.

Given that we are unlikely to get what we sought when we discussed the Bill a few weeks ago, namely, all prohibition lifted around these drugs, our amendment seeks to challenge the notion of prosecutions for small amounts of drugs for personal use. It is irrational to prosecute people for carrying something that is of a quantity that can only be for personal use. If the Minister intends to continue with her draconian prohibition laws around drugs, she should at least use some commonsense and stop wasting State money on arresting people who are not carrying enough to sell but only enough for their own consumption. It costs €1,700 a week to put someone in prison here. The number of people in prisons for drugs-related offences is ludicrous. It is about time we copped on to ourselves in that regard.

Another amendment of ours was ruled out of order because it could cost the State some money. My amendment No. 1 will save the State money and it would be a very good idea for the Minister to accept it.

In supporting the amendment I want to reiterate the points that have been made and say, as I did when the Bill first came before the Dáil, that it is very difficult to understand how a Bill shaped by An Garda Síochána, which is responsible for the area of justice, comes to the Department of Health. If the Department of Health is proposing a measure the Garda believe will help it in the war on crime or stop gangland killings, it should come through the Department of Justice and Equality, but this Bill is coming through the Department of Health.

When we consider the holistic approach to drugs in this society, as stated by Deputy Wallace, we are way behind the times when we compare ourselves not just to modern countries like Switzerland and Portugal but also to some of the Third World countries like Uruguay and Paraguay, which have moved to legalise and curtail the amount distributed to each individual who requires it. I will move a Bill later to legalise cannabis for medicinal purposes but this amendment acknowledges that the personal use of drugs is rampant, particularly in impoverished parts of our inner cities. It reflects not just the availability of these drugs but, importantly, the alienation and detachment felt by many people who have no stake in society and who have been brought up to believe they are worthless. They failed in education and in employment, so why not fail at everything else? They are on a housing list but they will never get a home. When they seek to use the services that are put into communities for projects that will help their addiction and help them live better lives with their families, they find that the funding for those projects has been cut. The message those people get all the time is that they are pretty much worthless, and the pain and historical baggage they have in their lives is often inured by taking drugs, many of which until now have been illegal. We are now introducing a Bill to make it illegal to carry drugs that are available on prescription. This Bill will make the problem implode rather than address it because it is being approached from a criminal rather than a health point of view.

As has been said, if we had our way we would be costing the State money. We would say that, at the very least, the Government should reverse all the nasty cuts the previous Government imposed on the drugs projects, the family projects and the youth projects throughout the inner city. At the very least it should provide a decent number of detoxification beds and facilities for people who have issues with addiction. If the Minister will not do that, she should stop criminalising those who have a health problem and no way out of that other than through the use of drugs, which takes their minds off the horrible lives they live.

The amendment is important because it provides that those who carry prescription drugs for personal use are not criminalised. If they are not criminalised, then resources are freed because the courts and prisons will not be so choked up, as well as Garda time. It is quite a positive amendment in that regard. I would throw the whole Bill out if I had my way, but clearly this is what we have to live with. I will urge people to support this amendment later.

I stand here today on behalf of my colleague, Deputy Jonathan O'Brien who, unfortunately, is unable to attend the House. We support both amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 2.

The treatment of addicts and users is first and foremost a health issue and not a criminal justice issue. I have articulated this on many occasions. Our focus in regard to the criminal justice system and drug misuse must be concentrated on suppliers and dealers. That is the area that needs to be addressed. I sincerely hope that we will proceed with the pilot injection centres, but it is a simple point of fact that if we are to proceed successfully then we must adopt this approach in law. To give credit where it is due, injection centres were championed by the last Minister of State with responsibility for drugs, the former Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, in the previous Dáil. I commend him on his openness and innovation and his correct stance on this matter.

I commend the second amendment in the name of my colleague, Sinn Féin's justice spokesperson, Deputy Jonathan O'Brien. I will be moving amendment No. 2, which is an addendum to page 3 of the Bill. It proposes to amend section 4 of the principal Act by inserting a new subsection (4) stating: "It shall be lawful for any person, or a person of a class or description specified in regulations under this section, to have in his or her possession a reasonable amount of a controlled drug specified therein, provided that it is for personal use." This is a very reasonable position, as is the first amendment which is being tabled in the names of colleagues, two of whom have already spoken regarding their amendment. The amendments largely reflect a similar position.

With regard to the purpose behind the legislation now under our address, I refer back to the last occasion on which such amending legislation was presented, in March 2015. I stated then and I reiterate now that we are on a hiding to nowhere if we address this particular matter in this way. We are endeavouring to catch up with the addition of different substances in the hope that we will get to the point at which the legislation is on a par with the criminal chemists. We are never going to be able to catch up with the criminal chemists. They will always be that one step - and many more steps - ahead of the system.

I do not want to be a party to criminalising unfortunate people who find themselves caught up in dependency and what is called substance abuse. I have seen the tragedies in my own community, with the loss of two young lives in my home town. With regard to dependency on synthetic cannabinoids such as "clockwork orange" and all the other little packs I have seen strewn on the paths of my home town as if they were cigarette butts, it is a frightening situation. As I have said on previous occasions, two deaths is two too many. We also face the prospect of further lives being lost, such is the grip that this cohort of drugs is taking in my community. It is a very serious problem indeed, which needs more than just a criminal justice response. That applies to those who are the suppliers and dealers. However, people who are using on a daily basis and, because they are extremely addictive, become dependent upon these drugs, need a very different response from us, from society and from the State.

There may be some merit in taking a look at the most recent British legislation regarding how they address this matter. I have not had the opportunity to properly evaluate it, as it is only relatively recent in terms of its enactment. I believe the focus should not be on trying to catch up with the criminal chemists. We should be looking at addressing the impact or effect of the substances. It should not be the Garda or the law enforcement agencies, be they on this island or on the neighbouring island, who must always try to establish what in heaven's name is involved in these substances at any given time. We should be focusing wholly and solely on the suppliers and the dealers and, if we are lucky internationally, with the criminal chemists and those who are making huge profits from this most unacceptable business.

For those in my own community who I know are users and are dependent, I hope I am representing their voices. On their behalf and to offer some hope of a change of course by these Houses at some point in the not too distant future, I will be supporting both amendments as tabled. I will also be supporting the final passage of the legislation.

Fianna Fáil supports the Bill, and while I respect Deputy Wallace's arguments, I believe we do need to examine broader drug reform and what has worked elsewhere. Making a specific legislative amendment will not change the problem and will not improve the lives of many users. We have seen the impact of these drugs throughout our country. In fairness to the Garda and to others who have called for this legislation, I believe it is more of an interim measure to actually tackle the dealers and, necessarily, the users. It applies to dealers who are carrying very small amounts of a drug. They abuse users by carrying such small quantities and selling the drug on. Under the current legal situation the Garda is powerless to tackle dealers.

That is what the Minister of State is trying to do here. We need to examine the Stanton report and see what has worked well in other countries. The UK Public Health Agency recently issued a report on reform and how to deal with this as a health matter. I spoke at the Oireachtas Committee on Health about prevention and education. Many young people who take various gateway drugs and increase their consumption over years equate cannabis with tobacco although it has a worse health outcome. Prevention, education and a more holistic approach are important. As part of the next national drugs strategy we need to focus on those pillars and not punish end users.

We also need to focus on treatment. If this is to be addressed as a health matter, it has to be properly addressed as such. Given the crisis in the health service and the way it deals with many problems, I have no confidence that it can manage many of the users who are vulnerable and need that intervention. We also need to help those who are in prison by offering them the opportunity to be rehabilitated. I have read widely in this area and the problem of abuse of prescription medicines will not be solved by regulation alone. It is a fair interim measure that will address a lacuna in our legislation. The Garda has tried to deal with this by punishing dealers. I would not like to see any vulnerable user punished under this legislation. In the current situation, hundreds of users have wide access to these drugs on the basis that the Garda can do nothing to intervene with the dealers. It was reported in some newspapers and gardaí have stated that the dealers asked for the drugs back because the legal situation was so uncertain.

This is a necessary measure. It is not the only measure. We do need to consider this from a legal perspective and also address it as a health matter but that cannot be done with a simplistic amendment that will not help many of the users who cannot access treatment, or future users who do not receive the education in schools. It does not exist in the social and personal health education and other modules in our schools. It is important to focus on that as part of the next national drugs strategy and consider this as a broader problem. I thank the Minister of State and the other speakers. I respect their sentiments and their arguments but it is not appropriate to accept the amendment.

We have to consider this amendment in the context of the discussions and the very thorough work done by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice and Equality last year on the drugs issue. It is never acceptable to say this is only now and we will come back and look at the bigger picture and change our approach in the future. Everybody has improved their understanding of this issue dramatically. The committee strongly recommended the introduction of a harm reduction and rehabilitative approach and said the possession of small amounts of illegal drugs should be dealt with by a civil and administrative approach rather than a criminal justice one. That was a cross-party view based on substantial work undertaken by the members of the committee, many of whom made a personal journey in their understanding of this issue. Why have committees if the Minister then recommends what is in essence the opposite of what the committee said?

Our amendment is completely in keeping with the committee’s analysis. If we are saying it is a health issue and needs to be dealt with in that way we must view it as such because of the dislocating impact on those who become the victims of a criminal justice approach. There are people in prison who have desperately sought to have treatment made available to them but the resources are not there to access that. I appreciate Deputy Chambers’ point that it is only the dealers but we are dealing with Garda discretion against the backdrop of many problems inside An Garda Síochána. The Garda already has powers of arrest for possession of other unlawful substances and it is not just the dealers who are targeted in this situation. It would not necessarily be the case under this legislation, although I understand the very specific circumstances in the inner city areas that have led the Government to introduce this Bill. I know many in the communities support it but it is a knee-jerk response, probably for the best of intentions. Unfortunately, when we do this it can have the most far-reaching unintended consequences and therefore our amendment is tabled to cut across that, and to ensure it would not happen and that people we do not want to victimise would not be victimised. I hope the Minister will accept the amendment in the spirit in which it is put forward.

I thank all the Deputies who have spoken on the amendment. The proposed amendments, if accepted, would mean that a person in possession of certain controlled drugs could not be prosecuted under the misuse of drugs legislation where the amount could be thought to be for personal use.

I fully understand and appreciate the intent behind the proposed amendment. However, overnight, it would become effectively legal to possess NBOMes, legal highs or any of the other drugs which were re-controlled by emergency legislation last year. In effect, it would mean that Ireland would be open for business for persons from Ireland and abroad wishing to buy and use drugs for personal use. We can all remember the national and international headlines from last year such as Ireland accidentally legalises drugs. We do not want to go back to that.

I have said many times that I also do not want to criminalise addicts. I have met many of them and have dealt with them all my life through my community work. As I have also said, however, the development of any policy to provide an alternative to criminalisation has to be carefully thought through. We have heard many speak during the debate about the Portuguese model. In Portugal, it is an offence to possess a small quantity of drugs for personal use. It is not a criminal offence, but it is nevertheless still an offence. There are other forms of sanctions which can be applied, as well as referral to addiction programmes.

This amendment removes the offence of possession and replaces it with nothing. It becomes a free for all. This amendment would mean that no matter how many times a person is apprehended with a quantity of drugs for personal use, that person cannot be prosecuted. What does for “personal use” mean? Is it for personal use today, for a week or a month? A person could possess a significant quantity of a substance, but argue that this is for his or her sole use. I cannot, therefore, accept this amendment. Legislation has to be carefully crafted to ensure that no unintended and undesirable consequences occur.

A change to our legislation on such an important matter requires careful consideration. I believe that a decriminalisation model in Ireland must be one that suits the Irish context and is evidence-based. I also believe that this kind of approach will only work if it is accompanied by timely treatment and harm reduction services, backed up by wrap-around supports which foster recovery.

An examination of the approach to drugs policy and practice in other jurisdictions will help to identify any additional evidence-based approaches which might be considered in an Irish context. The development of the national drugs strategy is the vehicle for doing this. I encourage every Deputy who has contributed to this debate in this House and in the Seanad to contribute to the consultation process which I will launch in September.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share