Deputy Skelly is in possession. I might remind the House that this Bill must be concluded by 11.30 a.m. and I shall be calling on the Minister to conclude at 11.15 a.m.
Misuse of Drugs Bill, 1984: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I shall be a few minutes only summing up what I had been saying yesterday.
Although the 1977 Misuse of Drugs Act provided the legal framework for a wide range of controls over the supply and distribution of certain dangerous and harmful drugs difficulties have arisen in recent years because of the scale of their misuse. It is necessary to update that legislation, and I accept that. This Bill's strength is in the area of detection and detention in cases of drugs abuse. It is really an attack on criminals. Hopefully it will be in aid of the Garda in the detection of the godfathers in this area of crime and also constitute an attack on drug pushers. But it will not help to any great extent in eliminating the problem obtaining with drugs and will not provide any extra facilities needed in the fight against their misuse. I would ask the Minister to pass this message on to the Minister for Finance and, because this does constitute a genuine emergency, to ask that the necessary funds be made available for the provision of facilities and back-up services, where needed, for the victims of drugs abuse. Such facilities are needed in all communities.
I do not know what help may be available from EEC resources in that respect. I do not have comparative statistics with other countries, as to how they are tackling this problem. Although we are in the midst of a recession it must be said that we have not got our priorities in order with regard to the prevention of drugs abuse. In recent years we have provided an extra 144 churches in the Dublin area, the churches being built first and ancillary facilities coming later but, in most cases, those facilities have not been provided at all. The relevant communities provided the moneys for the building of those churches but without any facilities being provided adjacent thereto. In my constituency recently a community centre was built in preference to a church — by the prisoners of Mountjoy — when the priest involved was quite happy, feeling that the priority was to have a community centre, with facilities for the people living in the area, especially the young, because of the large numbers of children between the ages of 11 and 16 who are the victims of drugs abuse and because there was no place available for their treatment. Because facilities are so lacking in our community, especially in the city of Dublin, that is an area in which tremendous inroads could be wrought. Perhaps somebody in the religious area would take note of that.
I was recently in another part of my constituency where the insistence was on the provision of a church first, this was about six years ago, although the community concerned had offered to build a complete community or village centre with facilities for everybody from the very young to the very old. That was rejected by the relevant church authorities in favour of the traditional method of providing first a church for the community. Today that community has its church but no other facilities whatsoever. Although a fairly well-off community it is impoverished and does have all of the other problems of this age, drugs, drink, vandalism and so on whereas, had such facilities been provided, they might have been avoided.
I realise this debate is limited, and I shall afford other Deputies an opportunity to speak.
Like most other speakers on all sides of the House, I welcome this Bill. It is obvious that drug abuse is directly related to its availability in the community. Until spring of 1981 there was hardly any drug abuse in this country, then there was an extremely sudden epidemic and this is thought to have been due to the Iranian revolution to some extent. At that time a large amount of heroin flooded the world market. It has been suggested that a certain Dublin family saw an opening in the market in Ireland and flooded this city with illicit drugs, but I believe this is an over-simplification of the situation. Ireland has a burgeoning young population. Let me say that drug abuse is a crime of the young. The young have a proportionately large amount of disposable income and Ireland was used as a conduit for drugs going to Britain. At that time security in regard to drugs was relatively lax as it was not perceived as a problem in this country. The incidence in Ireland is rising while in all other high abuse areas such as New York etc. it is dropping. It reached an all-time high in the US during the Vietnam war period, again at a time of high availability.
Do we realise how much the general attitude of the community influences the incidence of drug taking? In the US it was considered the "in thing" to smoke marijuana. Cocaine sniffing has now replaced this and a party is not considered to be a success if "coke" is not offered to all present. In Ireland alcohol is the drug of addiction which is socially accepted. A night or a party is good in Ireland if the amount of alcohol consumed is so much that no one can remember the next day. I noted the publication on Sunday of figures suggesting that Irish families spent more of their housekeeping budget on alcohol than families in nearly every other country of the world. One-eighth of all our spending was on alcohol. Of course, I realise that part of this was due to the high VAT and excise duties, but a fact even more interesting is that Irish people deny the amount of money they spend on alcohol. They underestimate the amount spent. Maybe this means that our attitude to the abuse of alcohol is changing and that a climate may yet develop where the abuse of any drug, be it tobacco, alcohol, soft or hard drugs, is considered reprehensible. Also I suggest that long-term barbiturates and tranquilliser abuse needs a good deal more research into it and education of the public. In this I commend the new self-help groups set up to help tranquilliser addicts, but let me give a word of warning and suggest that there is a need for medical control of tranquilliser withdrawal as with all other hard drugs.
The Medico-Social Research Board survey on drug abuse in Ireland in 1982-83 pointed out how very often drug abusers come from families in which drink is a problem, even though the abusers or addicts themselves are not into alcohol. They also pointed out that heavy cigarette smoking was the almost invariable rule in these families. The sad thing about this survey was that some of the children involved were aged 12 to 14, some of them only ten years of age. They were experimenting with heroin at an age when they could not know the problems and the only reason for their doing it was that it was so easy to get and they thought that everyone else was doing it.
The Minister has talked about irresponsible prescribing of controlled drugs and the investigation of this in accordance with the procedure set out in the 1977 Act. He says these procedures are cumbersome and time-consuming, and I agree with him. However, he must realise that time is required where the investigation may lead not only to the taking away of a person's livelihood but also to a permanent blot on the person's character. Why should sections 3 and 4 enable the Minister to set up the exact same committee of inquiry as is now being set up by the registration authority in order to prevent a practitioner from continuing to prescribe dangerous drugs? I agree that the Minister should have the authority to issue, where he considers it necessary, a temporary prohibition, but a more permanent prohibition should be left as heretofore, in the hands of the registration authority.
To put this whole matter in its proper perspective, in the five years of the life of the first council — prior to that our council was based in England with Irish representatives — a total of nine doctors were investigated for irresponsible prescribing. Of these, in the case of four the adjudgment was no case to answer; in other words, these four practitioners were cleared. One practitioner was declared incompetent, two were found guilty, one of whom went quietly and the other contested the case in the High Court but lost. One doctor was found to be unregistered, in other words not entitled to write prescriptions. As can be seen from this, despite the high profile publicity given to "rogue" doctors, this problem is indeed quite small. Nevertheless I agree, as a medical practitioner, that the whole process of rooting out the bad apple must be simplified and speeded up.
I would also advocate some bar to the irresponsible prescribing of tranquillisers and barbiturates. Although tranquillisers are not included under the DDA, they are nevertheless drugs of addiction and are extremely widely used with, in many cases, medical complicity. It has been suggested that, as in Britain, addicts should be registered and have small doses of drugs prescribed for them. Controlled studies there have suggested some benefits for patients. There are also obvious benefits for the community in that, theoretically at least, if the addict does not need large amounts of money to support his habit then the level of crime in the community must automatically drop. In the Dublin North-Central study both phases I and II confirmed repeatedly that the daily requirement of heroin for a full-blown abuser or addict in this town costs £100 to £200, and that was at 1982-83 prices. I shudder to think what it is today. However, in the sixties in Britain uncontrolled prescribing by private practitioners led to a severe spread of addiction. This was reduced when controls on heroin and cocaine were introduced, but subsequently methadone, diconal and ritalin were unduly liberally prescribed. The obvious way to prevent this occurring is to restrict prescribing of all DDA drugs for addicts to certain treatment clinics staffed by doctors with special licences to prescribe where no fee would be involved. In Britain it was found that addicts would sell out part of their prescribed drugs in order to pay the doctor or for additional drugs elsewhere. In view of that it would be necessary for prescriptions to be made out on a daily basis with unalterable date, otherwise addicts could sell part of their supply or they might use more than their allotted daily dose at one time, thereby leading to an increased tolerance level and a greater requirement. I am not necessarily advocating this method of addiction control but I feel it warrants consideration by the Minister.
Section 6 refers to mandatory prison sentencing of a drug addict on a third offence. This seems somewhat harsh, particularly if we accept that once addicted a person is now a patient and ill. As a result, are we not locking up people as a punishment for their illness? Perhaps mandatory rehabilitation would be more to the point. In any case, as Deputy Gregory said last night, drugs are definitely available in Mountjoy and other prisons. A study of drug addicts in Mountjoy was completed recently and the lack of rehabilitation facilites came out very strongly in this. Therefore I ask the Minister to reconsider this measure. I believe it is too harsh.
The most worrying aspect of the drug problem is the widespread availability of drugs. I welcome the proposals in sections 9 and 10 which seek to tackle this problem by giving wider powers of search to the Garda. Though I quibbled earlier, I agree with sections 3 and 4 which propose to streamline the investigation procedure in regard to rogue doctors. I disagree with parts of those sections but I will await the Committee Stage before commenting further.
I welcome also section 5 though the matter with which it seeks to deal is not a problem at the moment so far as I am aware. Perhaps there are available in Dublin magazines which advertise the sale of drugtaking equipment but this is not the situation in Waterford. In relation to health education, perhaps career guidance officers who are being used to teach life skills could be used to educate on drug addiction. I deplore the cutting back in the area of career guidance teachers but that is a matter for another Minister and another day.
There is proof that drug addiction and crime are related directly to unemployment, so perhaps if we could correct that problem there would be no need for Bills such as this.
In common with the other speakers in this debate I welcome the Bill as part of the broad programme of action aimed at tackling the drug problem. The welcome elements of the Bill include the closing of certain loopholes in definitions and allowing wider powers of search in situations of the importation of drugs or of the movement of drugs from one country to another or within the State. There have been too many cases of people going free because of loopholes in the law.
I welcome also the proposal to increase the power of the Minister in respect of intervening in cases of abuse of power by medical practitioners in prescribing drugs. The proposal to bypass the low investigative powers of the registration board is a good development because there have been many reports of serious abuse in this area. It is important that such reports be acted on quickly. This is all the more important in areas of high medical card usage where even in the use of ordinary medicines there is an element of over prescribing and perhaps a higher level of visitation to doctors. There is a special need to be careful in the medical card area for which the Government have responsibility, having provided the facility in the first place.
Another important proposal is the one relating to making it an offence to produce books or to bring into the country books that will encourage the use of drugs. Such publications are not commonly available here but we must take steps to prevent their becoming available.
I welcome also the proposals in respect of making it an offence to pass information or documents to another in order to enable him to acquire prescribed drugs. I have heard of two or three addicts in my constituency using the same medical card. It is important that such activity be made an offence for all involved.
I am glad the Minister proposes to increase the penalties having regard to the level of addiction. Obviously, the godfathers have little to risk as the law stands. Profit levels for them are very high while the highest level of sentencing is of the order of eight years. They might consider it worth while to risk eight years imprisonment for the sort of profit they could make in one year beforehand. If then they were sent to prison their families could live very well financially and other benefits could be retained by the criminals' associates. Increasing the penalties indicates the seriousness with which we are treating the problem and is a reflection of the attitude of our people to the abuse of drugs and related crimes.
However, I would call on the Minister as head of the Department who spearheaded the Government Task Force on drug abuse to assume an overall responsibility in the broad programme which is needed to ensure success. Those of us who listened to Deputy Gregory will have heard another side of the story but one which I am sure the Minister is familiar with. The Deputy's contribution was very impressive though in many respects very sad in putting before us the reality of the problem in his constituency. I do not have the direct knowledge in this area that Deputy Gregory has because the problem has not reached such an extent throughout Dublin but there are areas of high risk in my constituency and that is why I am asking the Minister to ensure that the Government maintain their commitment to keeping a watch on these high-risk areas and to taking the action outlined in the report.
I welcome also the further strengthening of the Garda Drug Squad and I am glad that ban ghardaí are to be deployed in this area, not only for reasons associated with the drug problem but also because of my belief in the potential of women in many other areas.
There is an urgent need for the development of treatment facilities, an area for which the Minister has direct responsibility. It is unacceptable that after 18 months in office the Government have failed to develop treatment services. Until we have delivered on that aspect, we cannot claim to have made any significant progress in respect of the commitment to deal with the problem.
Because of the seriousness of the drug problem there is a need for action on the lines of the action taken by a former Minister, Dr. Noel Browne, when he tackled the problem of TB which was one of the greatest scourges of previous decades. The drug problem needs to be tackled, contained and eliminated but that will only happen if it is tackled wholeheartedly, and this includes the provision of treatment facilities.
The commitment in respect of areas at risk and also the development of educational services in this whole area of drugs are two matters that should be tackled quickly. Generally the profile of the drug addict is one of a youngster who for one reason or another has failed. He or she is a drop-out and may have some background instability with perhaps their parents missing for one reason or another. There are certain areas in the city where there would be large numbers of such youngsters at risk. Parts of my constituency were identified as being at risk. There are indications in the task force report that teachers in those areas should give a great deal more time to life skills. I have come across examples in the past year of the fruitless attempts of schools in those high risk areas to receive any kind of sympathetic treatment from the Department of Education in relation to ratios, remedial teachers or guidance teachers. If we are serious the fine proposals in this report must be made a reality. Special efforts must be made in the educational sphere and in the youth work development field.
I am glad to note that a high level of funds was given by the Minister, Deputy Birmingham, to the north suburban areas. Ballymun and Finglas received £24,000 each. There is need for a co-ordinated effort to be made in these high risk areas to ensure they do not have to argue on the same basis as areas with a lot of resources for treatment under the general educational scheme. There must be progress or these areas will remain at risk. They have the potential to solve their problems.
The problem in Ballymun is containable within the estate. The people who work with the drug addicts in that area have identified a need for an alternative constructive environment free from drugs for example, the Coolmine Therapeutic Centre. They need the assistance of every Government Department to create such an environment. One youth worker will not do it. I ask the Minister to undertake that co-ordination of the efforts of all Departments and ensure they focus on the areas of high risk in particular.
I compliment the Minister for updating the 1977 Misuse of Drugs Act. It is important that all legislation be looked at after a certain length of time. It is timely that legislation should be brought in now to supplement that Act. However, we might be a year too late.
In the past few months we heard about the reported involvement of subversives in the Dublin scene. It is an indictment of politicians and the Government that we have not brought in legislation to complement the 1977 Act. Subversives will always find a way to infiltrate communities.
I support the Bill and the power it gives to the Garda. They are the ones who have to control the drug problem. The problem is not confined to large urban areas but is a national one. One has only to go to any large centre of population and one will find a drug problem of some kind. The Minister should consider the causes of the problem. One of the biggest factors is unemployment. Young people leave school at a very vulnerable age and have no prospects of employment. Some of them are aged 15 years. The drug pushers approach such people and have little trouble in pushing drugs on them.
In a recent survey 10 per cent of those surveyed between the ages of 15 and 24 years were abusing heroin in parts of Dublin. That is an indictment of the Government and all politicians. I compliment the Garda Drug Squad for the work they are doing in controlling this problem. With very little accommodation and funding they are doing a good job. When this Bill passes, the Minister should turn his attention to the problem of unemployment. That is the underlying cause of the drug problem. When we solve that problem we will be well on the way to reaching an ultimate solution of the drug problem.
I thank Deputies for their contributions to this debate. I am very pleased with the positive way in which Deputies have greeted the introduction of this Bill. All the law enforcement in the world, Garda drug squads, social workers, doctors, treatment centres or educationalists cannot cure the drug problem unless there is a personal responsibility on the part of the individual not to blow his mind with drugs. People who consciously decide to blow their minds and their lives and in the process destroy society make a personal decision. That must be stressed. We must stress the havoc and human disaster which can be visited on the life of a person who indulges excessively in drugs. I include in that drink, cigarettes and drugs in general.
I should like to respond to the main points made by the Deputies during our discussion. Deputy O'Hanlon is anxious that the registration authority concerned should be involved in the investigation procedures provided for in section 3 of the Bill. I should say that the Medical Council, the Dental Board and the Veterinary Council each approved of the procedures provided for in both section 3 and section 4 of the Bill. In fact, the Medical Council requested that they should not have the responsibility of investigating such cases, to avoid prejudice to any action they might wish to take under their own disciplinary powers as provided for in the Medical Practitioners Act. They will, however, as requested by themselves, be supplied with copies of the reports of the committees of inquiry for any further action they may wish to take under their own disciplinary powers. This might extend to the removal of a doctor from the register, as in the case of the first doctor to be banned from prescribing under the Misuse of Drugs Act procedures.
Deputy O'Hanlon also expressed some concern with the fact that there is no time limit on when the Minister must take a decision following receipt of the report of a Committee of Inquiry. The purpose of streamlining the investigation procedure was to enable the Minister of the day to reach a decision quickly. The Minister, having insituted inquiries, can hardly be expected to delay a decision and the imposition of a time limit on him is not appropriate.
Several Deputies suggested that a minimum sentence of 14 years for drug pushing should be provided instead of a sentence to life imprisonment provided in section 6. I would point out that minimum sentences are not usually provided for in legislation as it is an important general principle of the judicial system that the courts be allowed discretion to deal with individual cases in the light of their particular circumstances. I would like to make it quite clear that a life sentence is indeterminate and that any decision to release a life sentence prisoner is one made by the Minister for Justice. As the purpose of law enforcement must be primarily reform, not simply punishment, there must always be scope for reduction of sentence after a period of careful assessment and before the prisoner has become institutionalised. Provided there is good reason to believe that the person concerned is unlikely to be a menace to society, he will be released at the discretion of the Department of Justice. A minimum of 14 years would be regarded as amounting to abandonment of any hope for the prisoner's reform.
Deputy O'Hanlon suggested that licensed premises be included in the Bill. I will examine this although such inclusion is probably not legally necessary.
Deputy De Rossa expressed some reservations about section 11 of the Bill in which it is proposed to amend section 28 (1) (a) of the 1977 Act to remove the obligation on a court to refer persons convicted of serious offences for medical and other reports in all cases before passing sentence. The reason I propose to amend section 28 in this respect is that it is inappropriate to defer sentences on drug pushers who do not have a serious addiction problem while reports are being sought on their medical and social circumstances.
Deputy De Rossa expressed concern about the provision of section 6 which allows prosecution on indictment for simple possession of cannabis while at the same time retaining the present reduced penalties for posession for personal use. The Deputy is also concerned that we are proposing to introduce a prison sentence in the case of a third or subsequent offence. This provision is already contained in section 27 (1) (a) of the 1977 Act and we are not providing for anything new here. I think it is reasonable to let it stand.
The committees of inquiry will be representative of the practitioners' profession, appointed by the Minister of the day from nominations by the medical organisations and others chosen by the Minister. Deputy Cosgrave referred to the proposed new National Co-ordinating Committee on Drug Abuse which I hope will be set up in early September. Meanwhile the chairman of the task force is keeping progress under review.
I agree that it is of great importance that our customs officials should be working in an effective manner and that there be full co-operation with the Garda authorities both as regards exchange of intelligence and prompt action for apprehending the culprits.
The Task Force on Drug Abuse considered this problem of illicit importations and made several recommendations in the areas of legislation and equipment which are being considered by the Revenue Commissioners. The proposed new National Co-ordinating Committee on Drug Abuse will also ensure that whatever administrative action is necessary to deal with them will be implemented by the responsible Departments.
I now come to the implementation of the task force recommendations. I am "browned off" at the negative carping one hears in this House. When one is trying to implement the task force recommendations, all one gets is ignorance and abuse from some Deputies. I am glad to be able to report that significant progress has been made to date on most of the recommendations. On the law enforcement side the introduction of this Bill is implementing one of the recommendations. The Criminal Justice Bill made significant progress last week. Additional ban-ghardaí have been assigned to the drug units in Dublin, Cork and Limerick as recommended by the task force. A more rigorous checking system for applications for passports has also been introduced by the Department for Foreign Affairs. This is progress. Deputy Gregory and others come into this House but never mention the implemention of these recommendations. For example, 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 actively with the appropriate authorities.
In the area of education, a set of five video films has been developed by the Department of Education, in co-operation with the Health Education Bureau in second level schools, youth club settings and parent groups. I was surprised to hear Deputy Gregory refer to these videos in a disparaging manner. I would have thought those who suffered from illiteracy in his constituency could valuably use those films. The Minister for Education 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 programme of training in drugs education so that selected teachers would be able to attend longer courses and progress would be made towards the stated Government aim of having at least one teacher in every school who would be in a position to advise on aspects of the drug problem in "at risk" areas. Again I regret the dismissive attitude adopted by Deputy Gregory. I have made substantial sums of money available to Trinity College to provide a diploma course in addiction studies. This course commenced in January 1984 and provides specialised training for people such as social workers, teachers, guidance counsellors and garda in direct contact with drug abusers and their families.
On the youth and community development side, the task force have met the Health Education Bureau, Cospóir, the National Youth Council and the National Youth Policy Committee. In Ballymun there was a major meeting on 10 April 1984 convened by the city manager. That meeting was quite successful and considerable work is being done in that area.
The Medico-Social Research Board are currently carrying out four research projects on specific aspects of the drug problem among adolescents and progress is being made in this area. I have been involved with the position in St. James's Hospital and Jervis Street Hospital and I thank the boards of those hospitals for agreeing to implement the relevant recommendations.
I have made additional funds available this year to assist the Coolemine community. This was hardly referred to in the debate. It is suggested that there are no facilities in the Dublin area but in Coolmine there is provision for 18 year olds and over, who constitute the majority of abusers. I have visited Coolemine and 76 people are being helped there. A large amount of State resources is being spent in this community where outstanding work is being done. I suggest that Deputies go out there to see what is being done instead of talking off the top of their heads.
Deputy Gregory referred to five deaths over a recent weekend. He said five young people died within five days. I do not have that information. The Garda Drug Squad are aware of seven deaths in the past six months and Jervis Street Hospital say there were nine deaths. It is true that three of those deaths occurred over the weekend 8-9 June. The question of heroin abuse and deaths arising therefrom must be kept in perspective. To come into this House and try to twist the facts is not effective.
I have opposed the Provisional IRA getting involved in concerned parent groups. They have become involved, they are involved, and I urge parents in certain areas who are very concerned about drug abuse to beware of the extent to which the Provisional IRA move in because they will exploit the situation. There are a number of concerned parent groups who are aware of this situation.
Deputy Skelly referred to the size of the drug squad. All Garda recruits are given special training to deal with the drug problem. It is not just a question of the role of the drug squad; it is a question of the role of the Garda generally. In recent months Garda authorities have increased the number of seizures.
Deputy Gregory said nothing was being done in the inner city area. Does he know what goes on in the Talbot Centre or in Sherrard Street? Does he know they have a project leader and a group worker? Does he know what is being done in Donore Avenue and the amount of money being given to that and other centres? Does he know what is happening in the Cherry Orchard and Ballyfermot area where the health board have assigned a public health nurse to act as a tracer counsellor?
A senior professionally qualified counsellor in substance abuse has been appointed to provide a service in Dún Laoghaire-Ballybrack. In addition she is a qualified nurse. She provides clinics and is involved in counselling and outreach work. She is co-ordinating the efforts of voluntary groups in the area to ensure a co-ordinated balanced programme for the families of addicts and for community groups.
The board also pay a grant to the Rutland Centre which in recent years has extended its services for the treatment of alcohol abuse to include services for illicit drug abusers. The board are in the process of building a youth development centre in the grounds of the Central Mental Hospital, Dundrum. The centre will provide accommodation for 31 young disturbed males and females whose behaviour, including drug-related offences, has resulted in their having difficulties with the law.
In the youth work services area, the grant scheme for youth employment, operated by the Department of Labour, provides grants towards wages of young people employed on two projects in the Dublin area which are directly related to prevention of drug abuse.
A grant was recently given to a group "Teen Challenge" in Ballybrack to assist them in their work educating young people about drugs and drug prevention. A grant has also been allocated to the Anna Liffey Project which provides support for ex-addicts through group work and counselling. In addition, grants are made to a number of youth and community organisations to help them staff drop-in centres and expand youth services in built-up areas where drugs might be a problem.
The death of Niall Rush was raised by one Deputy and I should like to make a personal statement on it. I have been examining clincial trials since 3 December 1983 and there was an article on it in the In Dublin magazine. I have been engaged in continual consultations in drawing up the difficult heads of a Bill to give statutory force to these matters, despite the abuse and the defamation heaped on me, particularly in the Sunday Press which eventually had the good grace to withdraw the allegations. I have been working in an area where nothing had been done by the previous administration. This work will be given full statutory force in the near future. I thank Deputy De Rossa for his concern in recent months and I can assure him that his observations have been taken into account.
Question put and agreed to.
Next Stage?
On Tuesday next, 3 July 1984, with the agreement of the Whips.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 3 July 1984.