BRIEFING FOR UK MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

DANCONA REPORT: HARMONISATION OF MEMBER STATES DRUGS LEGISLATION

Submitted by the Home Office

7 January 1998

I. Background

In November 1996, 61 Members of the European Parliament signed a proposal for a recommendation on the harmonisation of the Member States laws on drugs. The proposal focused on two key recommendations: the decriminalisation of cannabis and the supply of heroin under prescription for the treatment of drug addicts. The proposal was referred to the Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs for consideration on 3 December 1996, which decided to draw up a report. The Committee recently adopted Ms dAnconas resulting report which was tabled on 10 November 1997. The report also makes references to the Joint Action (proposed by France) on the approximation of the laws and practices of EU Member States to combat drug addiction and to prevent and combat drug trafficking, which was adopted by the Dublin European Council in December 1996. As the report recognises, this Joint Action does not claim to bring about a thorough-going harmonisation of policy and legislation in this area; it does, however, place a commitm

ent on Member States to take steps to cooperate more effectively in combatting drug trafficking.

II. Purpose and effect

The dAncona report claims that there is a divergence and difference of emphasis in Member States drugs policies, whilst recognising that in practice there are many similarities in the range of measures adopted by Member States to tackle the drugs problem. It calls for harmonisation of legislation and practice, but makes no attempt to assess what benefits, if any, would result from harmonisation of Member States drugs laws into a single EU approach.

Whilst conceding that full harmonisation, in present circumstances, is not an achievable objective, the report suggests that more should be done to improve practical co-operation in tackling drugs at all levels of the EU, with the focus on prevention and demand and harm reduction activity, and in particular that more power be devolved to local and regional authorities to pursue their own drugs policies (which appears somewhat inconsistent with the overall harmonisation aim). The main thrust of the reports recommendations is very much towards liberalisation and greater tolerance of the use of illicit drugs. It urges the Council to call, at the UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs (June 1998), for the UN Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988 to be reviewed, with the aim of decriminalising the consumption of illicit drugs and enabling the trade in cannabis and its derivatives to be regulated. The report also seeks to encourage the use of treatment programmes under which methadone and heroin are supplied to

drug addicts on medical prescription (subject to necessary checks).III. UK interests

Decriminalisation

There is much in the Committees report that the UK Government would support - the emphasis on improving practical co-operation, the importance of prevention and demand and harm reduction activity, the value of having flexibility and a range of responses to the drugs problem, the benefits of involving local communities in drugs initiatives, etc. But the UK Government has made clear that it has no intention of legalising or decriminalising any currently controlled drug. It could not therefore support that liberalising objective, which may be seen as underlying the Committees report.

Harmonisation

A study undertaken by the Council (during the Irish Presidency) concluded that Member States drugs legislation was already convergent to a great extent, being broadly in line with the UN Drugs Conventions, and that further harmonisation of legislation was unnecessary, except perhaps in certain specific areas (such as synthetic drugs). Of greater importance is the effective and consistent enforcement by Member States of existing legislation, together with enhanced co-operation between Member States against drugs. The UK would only support proposals for further harmonisation where there was clear and evident added value in such action at EU level.

Prescription of methadone and heroin in treatment of drug addicts

The UK Government aims to provide a comprehensive range and choice of local treatment services to help all drug misuses, including heroin addicts, to give up drugs and maintain abstinence. Doctors have traditionally had a general authority under the misuse of drugs legislation to prescribe controlled drugs. The most common substitute drug used in the treatment of opiate dependence is oral methadone. This can be prescribed (for a range of treatments) by all registered general practitioners. Prescribing has expanded in recent years and is used not only for detoxification, but for stabilisation and longer-term therapies.

In the UK diamorphine (clinical heroin) is prescribed in a small number of cases for the treatment of addiction, by doctors who hold a special licence. It is not a widely followed practice and medical bodies are currently reviewing guidelines on drug treatment.

Independent assessment of Member States policy measures

This would seem an unnecessary and duplicatory measure, given the long-standing role and function of the International Narcotics Control Board in analysing the drug control situation worldwide and advising Governments on gaps and weaknesses in national control and compliance with UN Conventions.

IV. Impact on UK law

None directly from this report. But if calls on the UN General Assembly Special Session to reform the UN Drugs Conventions were to make progress, this could, of course, haveimplications for UK drugs legislation.

V. Timetable

The Committees report and proposal for an EP recommendation to Council has been tabled for consideration during the Plenary Session on 15 January.

The next annual report on the implementation of the Joint Action on the approximation of laws and practices will be made to the Vienna European Council on 11/12 December 1998. The UK Presidency will be taking forward consideration of suggestions made by the Member States as to additional ways in which the Joint Action could be implemented.

VI. Contact point for further information

Mr Stephen Pike

Action Against Drugs Unit

Home Office

50 Queen Annes Gate

London SWIH 9AT

tel: 0171 273 2324

fax: 0171 273 2671/4102