I join the congratulations to the hon. Member for Jarrow (Kate Osborne) on securing the debate. I follow an extremely …
Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
e-Petitions are administered by Parliament and allow members of the public to express support for a particular issue.
If an e-petition reaches 10,000 signatures the Government will issue a written response.
If an e-petition reaches 100,000 signatures the petition becomes eligible for a Parliamentary debate (usually Monday 4.30pm in Westminster Hall).
Make LGBT conversion therapy illegal in the UK
Gov Responded - 21 May 2020 Debated on - 8 Mar 2021 View Crispin Blunt's petition debate contributionsI would like the Government to:
• make running conversion therapy in the UK a criminal offence
• forcing people to attend said conversion therapies a criminal offence
• sending people abroad in order to try to convert them a criminal offence
• protect individuals from conversion therapy
These initiatives were driven by Crispin Blunt, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.
MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.
Crispin Blunt has not been granted any Adjournment Debates
Crispin Blunt has not introduced any legislation before Parliament
Marriage (Authorised Belief Organisations) Bill 2019-21 - Private Members' Bill (Presentation Bill)
Sponsor - Rehman Chishti (CON)
Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019 - Private Members' Bill (Ballot Bill)
Sponsor - Geoffrey Robinson (LAB)
The Nationality and Borders Bill, which is part of our New Plan for Immigration, seeks to build a fair, but firm asylum and illegal migration system.
On 16 September, we published an Equality Impact Assessment for the policies being taken forward through the Bill. This includes an assessment on potential impacts on people who are LGBTQ+.
I refer the hon. Member to my answer to Question 143679 on 29 January.
The Government continues to conduct research into conversion therapy and will publish this in due course. The Government will introduce steps to end conversion therapy after the research has concluded and we have considered its findings.
I know that the restrictions on singing are frustrating to large numbers of amateur choirs and performance groups across the country and that many people have made sacrifices in order to drive down infections and protect the NHS over the last year. I can assure you that everyone across Government wants to ease these restrictions as soon as possible.
However, it is important that we take a cautious approach in easing restrictions. We have followed the views of public health experts on singing. We are aware, through the NERVTAG and PERFORM studies that singing can increase the risk of COVID-19 transmission through the spread of aerosol droplets.this was backed up by a consensus statement from SAGE, resulting in the suggested principles of safer singing being published.
We will continue to keep guidance and restrictions under review, in line with the changing situation. Further detail on step 4 will be set out as soon as possible.
The majority of parents are offered a place at a school of their choice. In 2021, 98% of parents received an offer from one of their top three choices of primary school, while 93.4% received offers from one of their top three choices of secondary school.
The Department has not made an estimate of the number of pupils with no reasonable choice other than to attend a faith school due to a lack of secular provision in their area, or an estimate of the number of pupils unable to access their nearest school because of religiously selective admissions.
Local authorities have a duty to provide sufficient school places in their area. Faith schools have played an important role in our education system for many years. Faith schools are popular with parents and are more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as Good or Outstanding.
Faith schools are allowed to give priority to children of their faith where they are oversubscribed. Of those that do, some choose to allocate only a certain percentage of their places with reference to faith, while others do not have faith admissions criteria at all.
The majority of parents are offered a place at a school of their choice. In 2021, 98% of parents received an offer from one of their top three choices of primary school, while 93.4% received offers from one of their top three choices of secondary school.
The Department has not made an estimate of the number of pupils with no reasonable choice other than to attend a faith school due to a lack of secular provision in their area, or an estimate of the number of pupils unable to access their nearest school because of religiously selective admissions.
Local authorities have a duty to provide sufficient school places in their area. Faith schools have played an important role in our education system for many years. Faith schools are popular with parents and are more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as Good or Outstanding.
Faith schools are allowed to give priority to children of their faith where they are oversubscribed. Of those that do, some choose to allocate only a certain percentage of their places with reference to faith, while others do not have faith admissions criteria at all.
Non-faith or community-ethos schools have different characteristics, particularly in relation to governance, compared to schools with a religious designation. Their secular character and ethos are protected regardless of which type of multi-academy trust they join.
The academy trust’s charitable object is to recognise and support a school’s individual ethos. This places an obligation on the trust and its board to ensure that a non-faith or community school’s character is safeguarded in a mixed multi-academy trust.
The supplemental funding agreement, a contract between my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Education, and academy trusts, has recently been updated to include clauses to protect the local governance arrangements of a non-faith or community school joining a mixed multi-academy trust.
The Department is giving due consideration to the implementation of the statutory relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) curriculum in the context of COVID-19. There is no intention to change the regulatory requirements for the implementation of RSHE.
The Department continues to work with key stakeholders and subject experts to develop a comprehensive programme of support for schools which includes a digital service to be delivered through GOV.UK.
Working on LGBT rights is essential to meet DFID’s vision of a world where no one is left behind. This is central to the Global Goals and a secure and prosperous world. Organisations implementing LGBT initiatives are facing significant challenges as a result of COVID-19. DFID supports many programmes on access to services for all, including vulnerable and persecuted minorities, promotion and protection of rights and tackling stigma and discrimination. These programmes include initiatives on LGBT inclusion. DFID is in discussion with partners to find flexible solutions to ensure they can use the resources allocated to implement these programmes effectively.
The UK Government works to ensure that all aid reaches the most vulnerable including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Vulnerable populations will experience COVID 19 outbreaks differently. COVID 19 is likely to reinforce their marginalised position in society, their experience of discrimination, violence and stigma, and further limit their access to essential support and services. For this reason, on 9 April, further guidance was circulated across DFID highlighting that inclusion must be central to our response to COVID 19 and the specific contexts and needs of vulnerable people such as LGBT people should be taken into account when developing practical programmes to tackle COVID 19.
Decisions on Red, Amber or Green List assignment and associated border measures are taken by Ministers, who take into account the JBC risk assessments, alongside wider public health factors.
Key factors in the JBC risk assessment of each country include:
A summary of the JBC methodology is published on gov.uk, alongside key data that supports Ministers' decisions.
From 19 July, arrivals who have been fully vaccinated through the UK vaccination programme (plus 14 days) will not have to self-isolate or take a day 8 test when travelling to England from amber list countries. There are no changes to the green or red list, or for those arriving from countries on these lists.
The Money and Pensions Service publishes data on pension wise appointments across 2019-2020 here:
The Money and Pensions Service publishes data on pension wise appointments across 2019-2020 here:
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are not made with natural rubber latex. However the presence or traces of natural rubber latex in the product as delivered to the end-user cannot be excluded completely due to the potential to come into contact with latex during transportation or handling processes. We are currently reviewing all aspects of PCR testing in light of this potential risk.
In line with the Withdrawal Agreement, the United Kingdom ceased to be a member of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addition (EMCDDA) on 31 January 2020. As the UK is no longer a member of EMCDDA, it does not take part in the annual reporting process.
The UK continues to have strong domestic drugs monitoring and surveillance systems, augmented through our sharing of information and expertise with international partners, including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the World Health Organization.
No recent assessment has been made.
The Government is committed to supporting the most vulnerable at risk from alcohol misuse, including through establishing alcohol care teams in hospitals and supporting children of alcohol dependent parents. We will be publishing a new Tobacco Control Plan later this year setting out plans for England to become a smoke-free country by 2030.
No equalities impact assessment was undertaken by the Department or NHS England and NHS Improvement.
NHS England and NHS Improvement took immediate action following the High Court Ruling on 1 December. Their amendment to the service specification for gender identity services for children and young people was published on the day of the judgement in order to protect patients and clinicians given the significant safeguarding, clinical and legal issues raised. The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust will be conducting a clinical risk assessment of every young person who is immediately affected by the decision.
The Gender Identity Development Service will ensure that appropriate psychosocial support and psychological therapies are available to patients who are removed from puberty blockers, as well as to their families and carers.
No equalities impact assessment was undertaken by the Department or NHS England and NHS Improvement.
NHS England and NHS Improvement took immediate action following the High Court Ruling on 1 December. Their amendment to the service specification for gender identity services for children and young people was published on the day of the judgement in order to protect patients and clinicians given the significant safeguarding, clinical and legal issues raised. The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust will be conducting a clinical risk assessment of every young person who is immediately affected by the decision.
The Government has made no recent assessment of the potential merits of rescheduling psilocybin, which remains a Schedule 1 substance under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 (the 2001 Regulations).
Ministers continue to take a close interest in any new evidence relating to controlled drugs and they would seek expert advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs before making any amendments to the 2001 Regulations.
The current restrictions on social contact include an exemption for gathering to attend a funeral. Such a gathering can include no more than 30 people and must be held at a COVID-19 secure venue, not a private dwelling.
A ‘commemorative event following a person’s death’ may be held following the funeral including a wake, stone setting or scattering of ashes. Commemorative events are limited to 15 people and also must be held at a COVID-19 secure venue and not a private dwelling.
We recognise how important it is to be able to attend the funeral of a loved one. That is why there is an exemption so that up to 30 people can attend a funeral.
Pre-funeral and post-funeral ceremonies may be held for up to 15 people in line with the guidance on staying alert and safe (social distancing). However, families may consider deferring a celebration or memorial service, until further social restrictions are lifted and at a time when attendance can take place safely.
Guidance can be found at the following link:
In 2018 a new service specification was developed for gender identity clinics, this new specification concluded that access to specialist interventions by trained healthcare professionals was needed within primary care and other local health settings.
Three new clinics were announced earlier this year. The new services will provide the range of services available from an established gender dysphoria clinic. The clinics are based in London, Manchester, and Cheshire and Merseyside. The first of these services began in July 2020 in London. These services will be evaluated as pilots over a period of up to three years to determine how they could be expanded nationally.
These services were referenced by the Minister for Women and Equalities in her response of 24 September.
Proposals for the Innovative Medicines Fund (IMF) are in development and will take full account of stakeholder views to ensure best use of the Fund. The budget for the fund will be confirmed in due course.
Alongside the IMF, we will continue to support the Early Access to Medicines Scheme, which is a key part of the Government’s commitment to accelerating patient access to innovative, life-changing treatments.
The National Institute for Health Research welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health; it is not usual practice to ring-fence funds for particular topics or conditions. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality.
There are no plans to update the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Constitution and Functions) and the Health and Social Care Information Centre (Functions) Regulations 2013.
Between April 2019 to March 2020, the expenditure for the Cancer Drugs Fund was £317 million.
For the year 2020/21, data is only available for Q1 (April to June), during which period expenditure was £82 million.
Public Health England (PHE) has conducted a rapid review to better understand how different factors such as ethnicity, deprivation, age, gender and obesity can impact on how people are affected by COVID-19. The review’s findings, published on 2 June 2020, are available at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-review-of-disparities-in-risks-and-outcomes
PHE publishes a weekly epidemiological surveillance report with information about cases and deaths by sex, age, ethnicity and other characteristics. This report is available at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for the review of the methods it uses in the development of its technology appraisal and highly specialised technology recommendations in England. NICE has advised that additional factors and modifiers that may affect NICE’s decisions, including factors relevant to orphan medicines and medicines that substantially improve health and/or life expectancy, are being considered within its methods review. This review will give consideration to approaches in other health technology assessment bodies, including the devolved administrations.
There are no current plans to establish a further National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assessment programme for orphan medicines. Where companies are willing to price their drugs fairly in a way that reflects the benefits they bring to patients, NICE has been able to recommend a number of orphan medicines for routine NHS funding through its technology appraisal programme. NICE is reviewing its methods for the development of technology appraisal and highly specialised technology recommendations, including the methods for the assessment of medicines licensed for rare diseases. The creation of an Innovative Medicines Fund will also build on the success of the Cancer Drugs Fund and support access to the most advanced medicines for patients with rare diseases.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has now initiated the review of its technology appraisal and highly specialised technologies methods in line with the commitment made in the 2019 Voluntary Scheme for Branded Medicines Pricing and Access. Further information about the process and timescale for the review is available on the NICE website at the following link:
Detailed proposals for the new Innovative Medicines Fund are in development and will be consulted on in due course. The Fund will build on the success of the reformed Cancer Drugs Fund so that doctors can use the most advanced, life-saving treatments for conditions such as autoimmune disease or cancer, or for children with other rare diseases.
The Department is working directly with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, Health Research Authority, NHS England and NHS Improvement, the National Institute for Health Research and other partners across the health and life sciences sectors to ensure that the United Kingdom remains an attractive place to conduct clinical trials and supply human medicines.
The Medicines and Medical Devices Bill provides the UK the means to remain a world-leading regulator and an important market for medicines and medical devices and supports the delivery of the Life Sciences Industrial Strategy to make the UK a leading global hub for life sciences. The Bill makes clear the importance of ensuring the UK is an attractive place to bring new products to market and conduct clinical trials, specifying that before making any regulations under the Bill, the Secretary of State must consider this point.
We are determined to maintain the UK’s position as one of the best locations globally to run clinical trials.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is reviewing its methods for the development of technology appraisal and highly specialised technology recommendations in line with the commitment in the 2019 voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing and access. The scheme also states the Government’s expectations for the review as follows: ‘“The Department expects that any future changes to NICE methods and processes would respond to the new types of innovation coming to the market, be consistent with improving the health gain achieved by spending on new innovative medicines, and support faster adoption of the most clinically and cost effective medicines.”’
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is reviewing its methods for the development of technology appraisal and highly specialised technology recommendations in line with the commitment in the 2019 voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing and access. The scheme also states the Government’s expectations for the review as follows: ‘“The Department expects that any future changes to NICE methods and processes would respond to the new types of innovation coming to the market, be consistent with improving the health gain achieved by spending on new innovative medicines, and support faster adoption of the most clinically and cost effective medicines.”’
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has recommended 11 topics for access via a Managed Access Agreement (MAA) in 2019/20 to date. In 2018/19, 12 topics were recommended via an MAA.
These topics are listed in the following table.
NICE ref | Drug | Indication | Managed access start date |
| |
2018/19 |
| ||||
TA522 | Pembrolizumab | locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer where cisplatin is unsuitable | 27 April 2018 |
| |
TA529 | Crizotinib | ROS1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer | 31 May 2018 |
| |
TA528 | Niraparib | platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer after second response to chemotherapy | 1 June 2018 |
| |
TA540 | Pembrolizumab | Relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma | 25 July 2018 |
| |
TA554 | Tisagenlecleucel | relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia | 16 November 2018 |
| |
TA553 | Pembrolizumab | adjuvant treatment of resected melanoma with high risk of recurrence | 19 November 2018 |
| |
TA557 | Pembrolizumab (with pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy) | untreated metastatic non-squamous NSCLC | 21 November 2018 |
| |
TA558 | Nivolumab | adjuvant treatment of resected stage III and IV melanoma | 30 November 2018 |
| |
TA559 | Axicabtagene ciloleucel | diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma after 2 or more systemic therapies | 7 December 2018 |
| |
TA567 | Tisagenlecleucel | relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after 2 or more systemic therapies | 1 February 2019 |
| |
TA573 | Daratumumab with bortezomib | Multiple myeloma | 12 March 2019 |
| |
TA578 | Durvalumab | NSCLC | 28 March 2019 |
| |
2019/2020 |
| ||||
TA579 | Abemaciclib with fulvestrant | HER2-negative breast cancer after endocrine therapy | 2 April 2019 | ||
TA581 | Nivolumab with ipilimumab | untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma | 5 April 2019 | ||
TA592 | Cemiplimab | cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma | 2 July 2019 | ||
TA588 | Nusinersen | Spinal Muscular Atrophy | 3 July 2019 | ||
TA593 | Ribociclib | in combination with fulvestrant for treating advanced hormone-receptor positive, HER2-negative breast cancer | 17 July 2019 | ||
TA598 | Olaparib | maintenance treatment of newly diagnosed BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian, fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer, after response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy | 26 July 2019 | ||
TA600 | Pembrolizumab with carboplatin and paclitaxel | Metastatic squamous NSCLC | 8 August 2019 | ||
TA611 | Rucaparib | maintenance treatment of relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian, fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer | 11 October 2019 | ||
TA619 | Palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant | advanced, HR+ HER2- breast cancer after endocrine therapy | 28 November 2019 | ||
TA620 | Olaparib | maintenance treatment of BRCA-mutated platinum sensitive relapsed ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer, after response to platinum-based chemotherapy | 29 November 2019 | ||
HST12 | Cerliponase alfa | neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis type 2 | 5 November 2019 | ||
NHS England and NHS Improvement has advised that the Commercial Framework for new medicines remains in draft at this time with publication expected in spring 2020. The Commercial Framework is designed to complement the processes and methods of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s technology appraisal programme which provides direction on when managed access agreements may be appropriate. The framework will promote the opportunities that currently exist and clarify NHS England and NHS Improvement’s involvement within the existing arrangements rather than advising on new opportunities for managed access agreements.
The Government established the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) to ensure access for National Health Service patients in England to effective cancer drugs that would not otherwise have been available to them. New arrangements for the assessment and adoption of new cancer drugs were introduced in 2016 to help improve patient access to new cancer drugs and the CDF is now linked to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal programme.
Under the new arrangements, NICE now appraises all new cancer drugs, and NICE is able to recommend a drug for use through the CDF where there is too much uncertainty to be able to recommend routine use. All cancer drugs recommended by NICE are eligible for funding through the CDF from the point of NICE’s draft guidance.
Since it was reformed in July 2016, the CDF has had a fixed budget of £340 million. This will remain the same for 2020-21.
Detailed proposals for the new Innovative Medicines Fund are in development and will be consulted on in due course. The Fund will build on the success of the reformed Cancer Drugs Fund so that doctors can use the most advanced, life-saving treatments for conditions such as autoimmune disease or cancer, or for children with other rare diseases.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has advised that it is considering the most appropriate way to publish the relevant information supporting the methods review work. Details will be released in due course.
The Government established the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) to ensure access for National Health Service patients in England to effective cancer drugs that would not otherwise have been available to them. New arrangements for the assessment and adoption of new cancer drugs were introduced in 2016 to help improve patient access to new cancer drugs and the CDF is now linked to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal programme.
Under the new arrangements, NICE now appraises all new cancer drugs, and NICE is able to recommend a drug for use through the CDF where there is too much uncertainty to be able to recommend routine use. All cancer drugs recommended by NICE are eligible for funding through the CDF from the point of NICE’s draft guidance.
Since it was reformed in July 2016, the CDF has had a fixed budget of £340 million. This will remain the same for 2020-21.
Public Health England (PHE) is conducting surveillance activities to monitor the effectiveness of the National Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination Programme. The current HPV vaccine protects against two high-risk HPV types, HPV16 and HPV18 which cause around 80% of cervical cancers in the United Kingdom and two low-risk HPV types, HPV6 and HPV11 which cause most genital warts.
Surveillance conducted among young sexually active women in England has compared changes in the number of women who have a HPV infection over time since the introduction of the HPV vaccination.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is the primary screening test used in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme. This can be reviewed at the following links:
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/human-papilloma-virus-hpv/
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/cervical-screening-programme-overview
While there are many different types of HPV, the screening programme in England uses tests to detect for HPV 16, 18 and several other high-risk HPV types. HPV 16 and 18 are the two most common high-risk strains of HPV that are found in 99.8% of cervical cancer cases. This can be viewed at the following link:
The results from a HPV screen test will indicate to the individual whether they are HPV positive or negative and the next steps.
HPV infection is very common and most abnormalities that develop as a result will clear themselves without intervention or treatment.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is the primary screening test used in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme. This can be reviewed at the following links:
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/human-papilloma-virus-hpv/
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/cervical-screening-programme-overview
While there are many different types of HPV, the screening programme in England uses tests to detect for HPV 16, 18 and several other high-risk HPV types. HPV 16 and 18 are the two most common high-risk strains of HPV that are found in 99.8% of cervical cancer cases. This can be viewed at the following link:
The results from a HPV screen test will indicate to the individual whether they are HPV positive or negative and the next steps.
HPV infection is very common and most abnormalities that develop as a result will clear themselves without intervention or treatment.
Unlicensed cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPM) may only be imported to meet the special clinical need of individual patients. It is not currently possible to import bulk quantities of these products. This restriction forms part of the checks and balances that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs asked the Government to put in place when rescheduling CBPMs to minimise the risk of misuse and diversion.
The Medicines and Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency has received 242 notifications for the importation of unlicensed CBPMs from specialist importers in the past 12 months.
Unlicensed medicines, including CBPMs are not assessed by the MHRA for quality, safety and efficacy, but must be notified to the MHRA prior to import and meet basic production standards.
Importers registered with the MHRA can import active pharmaceutical ingredients where intended for the production of a medicinal product for use in humans.
Unlicensed cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPM) may only be imported to meet the special clinical need of individual patients. It is not currently possible to import bulk quantities of these products. This restriction forms part of the checks and balances that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs asked the Government to put in place when rescheduling CBPMs to minimise the risk of misuse and diversion.
The Medicines and Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency has received 242 notifications for the importation of unlicensed CBPMs from specialist importers in the past 12 months.
Unlicensed medicines, including CBPMs are not assessed by the MHRA for quality, safety and efficacy, but must be notified to the MHRA prior to import and meet basic production standards.
Importers registered with the MHRA can import active pharmaceutical ingredients where intended for the production of a medicinal product for use in humans.
Unlicensed cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPM) may only be imported to meet the special clinical need of individual patients. It is not currently possible to import bulk quantities of these products. This restriction forms part of the checks and balances that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs asked the Government to put in place when rescheduling CBPMs to minimise the risk of misuse and diversion.
The Medicines and Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency has received 242 notifications for the importation of unlicensed CBPMs from specialist importers in the past 12 months.
Unlicensed medicines, including CBPMs are not assessed by the MHRA for quality, safety and efficacy, but must be notified to the MHRA prior to import and meet basic production standards.
Importers registered with the MHRA can import active pharmaceutical ingredients where intended for the production of a medicinal product for use in humans.
Unlicensed cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPM) may only be imported to meet the special clinical need of individual patients. It is not currently possible to import bulk quantities of these products. This restriction forms part of the checks and balances that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs asked the Government to put in place when rescheduling CBPMs to minimise the risk of misuse and diversion.
The Medicines and Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency has received 242 notifications for the importation of unlicensed CBPMs from specialist importers in the past 12 months.
Unlicensed medicines, including CBPMs are not assessed by the MHRA for quality, safety and efficacy, but must be notified to the MHRA prior to import and meet basic production standards.
Importers registered with the MHRA can import active pharmaceutical ingredients where intended for the production of a medicinal product for use in humans.
The UK government is committed to the promotion and protection of the rights of LGBT+ people. Our overseas missions prioritise engagement with local human rights defenders and we have consistently committed funding to targeted international LGBT+ rights programmes. In 2020/21 the UK committed £5.47 million to targeted international LGBT+ rights programmes. For more information on some of our programmes, see the FCDO's 2020 Annual Human Rights Report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/999607/Human_Rights_and_Democracy_the_2020_Foreign__Commonwealth___Development_Office_report.pdf
The UK's approach to making public statements in cases of attacks on LGBT+ defenders is always informed by advice from civil society groups on the ground. Our first principle is always that we should "do no harm" and we seek advice from local LGBT+ Civil Society Organisations to ensure that our interventions are of genuine benefit to LGBT+ communities. Some interventions are therefore not public but are made privately.
The UK is committed to promoting and protecting the rights of LGBT+ people. We are fundamentally opposed to all forms of discrimination and work to uphold the rights and freedoms of LGBT+ people in all circumstances.
The UK remains concerned about reports of human rights abuses in the Philippines, including as part of the "war on drugs", and the treatment of some human and land rights defenders and journalists. We note with concern reports of the killings of LGBT+ activists. I regularly raise human rights with the Philippines Government and last discussed this issue with Philippine Foreign Minister Locsin on the 23 March. The British Embassy in Manila continues to support the LGBT+ community in the Philippines through events and advocacy.
The UK recognises that LGBTI civil society organisations(CSOs) and Human Rights Defenders play an essential role in promoting and protecting LGBTI human rights. Our overseas missions prioritise engagement with local human rights defenders and fund programme work through local CSOs, and these feature in their human rights strategies.. In 2020/21 the UK committed about £5.5 million to targeted international LGBT+ rights programmes. Providing funding for LGBTI rights programme work remains a UK government priority
The UK recognises that LGBTI civil society organisations(CSOs) and Human Rights Defenders play an essential role in promoting and protecting LGBTI human rights. Our overseas missions prioritise engagement with local human rights defenders and fund programme work through local CSOs, and these feature in their human rights strategies.. In 2020/21 the UK committed about £5.5 million to targeted international LGBT+ rights programmes. Providing funding for LGBTI rights programme work remains a UK government priority
As co-chair of the Equal Rights Coalition (ERC) in partnership with Argentina, we are leading the ERC's work, in co-operation with civil society, to address violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals, and the ongoing criminalisation of same sex conduct in 70 countries. We have started work on a new ERC Strategy to guide and re-energise the work of the ERC, and are currently working on an ERC statement that calls on all governments to limit the repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic on people identified based on real or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or sex characteristics. Likewise as Commonwealth Chair-in-Office, the UK continues to raise the importance of countering discrimination within the Commonwealth, including on grounds of gender identity or sexual orientation. In both of these roles working through international organisations, we regularly raise concerns about countries that do not comply with their human rights obligations and promote non-discrimination against LGBT people, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.
On 9 April, the UK participated in the UN Human Rights Council's first ever virtual conversation with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Discussion focused on the human rights implications of the COVID-19 crisis which included concerns about increased risks on vulnerable groups. In his statement to the Council, our Ambassador to the UN in Geneva stressed the importance to ensure that parliaments, media and civil society all play their role to scrutinise the actions of governments and international agencies, and that we do not lose sight of the international human rights frameworks. The British Government remains committed to upholding the rights and freedoms of LGBT people in all circumstances.
As co-chair of the Equal Rights Coalition (ERC) in partnership with Argentina, we are leading the ERC's work, in co-operation with civil society, to address violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals, and the ongoing criminalisation of same sex conduct in 70 countries. We have started work on a new ERC Strategy to guide and re-energise the work of the ERC, and are currently working on an ERC statement that calls on all governments to limit the repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic on people identified based on real or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or sex characteristics. Likewise as Commonwealth Chair-in-Office, the UK continues to raise the importance of countering discrimination within the Commonwealth, including on grounds of gender identity or sexual orientation. In both of these roles working through international organisations, we regularly raise concerns about countries that do not comply with their human rights obligations and promote non-discrimination against LGBT people, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.
On 9 April, the UK participated in the UN Human Rights Council's first ever virtual conversation with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Discussion focused on the human rights implications of the COVID-19 crisis which included concerns about increased risks on vulnerable groups. In his statement to the Council, our Ambassador to the UN in Geneva stressed the importance to ensure that parliaments, media and civil society all play their role to scrutinise the actions of governments and international agencies, and that we do not lose sight of the international human rights frameworks. The British Government remains committed to upholding the rights and freedoms of LGBT people in all circumstances.
The British Government is fundamentally opposed to all forms of discrimination and works to uphold the rights and freedoms of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) people in all circumstances, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. Funding for LGBT projects comes from a variety of sources. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office will consider future funding cycles for FCO funded programmes as part of its preparation for the Spending Review.
We are concerned about the continued detention of women's rights activists in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia remains a Foreign and Commonwealth Office human rights priority country, particularly because of the use of the death penalty and restrictions on women's rights, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion or belief. We will continue to call for political detainees, including women's rights defenders, to be given adequate legal representation. We have pressed for due process and raised concerns over the use of solitary confinement and the use of torture. The UK attends trials of international importance in all countries where permitted. The UK, along with other embassies in Saudi Arabia, has requested and been denied access to each and every trial we have been aware of since October 2018, with the exception of the trials for those involved in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. We regularly raise human rights issues with Saudi Arabia, most recently by the Foreign Secretary during his visit earlier this month.
In February 2019, the then Home Secretary commissioned the ACMD to conduct a longer-term review of Cannabis-Based Products for Medicinal use (CBPM). The ACMD published their report on 27 November 2020 on gov.uk. In it they recommended:
“that the scheduling of CBPMs under Schedule 2 of the MDR remains appropriate and that no further legislative amendments to the MDR regarding CBPMs are required at this point in time.”
Unlike Sativex, most CBPM do not have a marketing authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). As such, in the absence of the reassurance that a CBPM has gone through the safety, quality and efficacy process established by the MHRA, it is right that it is in Schedule 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. However, should a cannabis-based medicine receive a marketing authorisation from the MHRA, the Government will commission the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) to reconsider the scheduling of the product under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. This was the case for Sativex following its marketing authorisation.
The NCA reports that data derived from Operation VENETIC has, to date, led to over 2,300 people being arrested, over 1000 charged and 162 individuals convicted of a range of serious offences. These include well publicised cases of individuals involved in drug trafficking, like Thomas Maher, described by the judge at his trial as “an extremely important cog in the wheel of a sophisticated network”. A large number of cases linked to Operation VENETIC are progressing through the criminal justice system and it would be inappropriate to comment further on these at this time. The NCA regularly publishes the outcomes of investigations via press notices on its website.
Needle and syringe programmes and other programmes and services that engage drug users do not involve the organiser condoning and facilitating consumption of controlled drugs on the premises, nor do they create spaces where police enforcement of the law in relation to drug possession and supply is compromised.
Drug Consumption Rooms would not be lawful in the UK due to the offences which would be committed in the course of running such a facility.
Needle and syringe programmes and other programmes and services that engage drug users do not involve the organiser condoning and facilitating consumption of controlled drugs on the premises, nor do they create spaces where police enforcement of the law in relation to drug possession and supply is compromised.
Drug Consumption Rooms would not be lawful in the UK due to the offences which would be committed in the course of running such a facility.
Injectable opiate treatment programmes compliant with legislation and clinical guidance are supported by the Home Office and Public Health England and are in scope for Project ADDER funding. The Home Office and Public Health England have worked closely with delivery partners in each of the pilot Project ADDER areas to develop a delivery plan based on local need to provide a whole-system response to drugs misuse and drug-related harms locally.
We have no plans to control alcohol or tobacco under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and no plans to commission advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) on this matter. Parliament considered arguments about their inclusion at the time of the Bill’s passage, including the reasons for the distinction between them and controlled drugs. Alcohol is regulated under the Licensing Act 2003 in England and Wales and tobacco is regulated under The Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016.
The Government considers advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) before making any classification or scheduling decisions under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. ACMD advice is not binding and decisions are ultimately for Ministers. The decision to control cannabis as a Class B drug was taken under a previous government. However, this Government remains of the view that cannabis is a harmful drug for which the current controls are proportionate.
The Government does not impose legal penalties on possession of drugs unless they have been shown to cause harm or to have the potential to cause harm. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) regularly provides advice on substances and their appropriate control status, and these are published on the gov.uk website. Drugs which have been controlled under the 1971 Act for a considerable period of time may not have been subject to recent analysis of their harms by the ACMD. The Government introduces new controls over drugs only after considering advice from the ACMD.
The Government does not impose legal penalties on possession of drugs unless they have been shown to cause harm or to have the potential to cause harm. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) regularly provides advice on substances and their appropriate control status, and these are published on the gov.uk website. Drugs which have been controlled under the 1971 Act for a considerable period of time may not have been subject to recent analysis of their harms by the ACMD. The Government introduces new controls over drugs only after considering advice from the ACMD.
We continue to collect and monitor a range of data on the use and harms of New Psychoactive Substances (NPS), including:
These allow us to monitor trends and any changes in the use of, and harms from, NPS.
Alongside this data, our engagement with partners inside and outside government (including policing, charities, treatment providers and the devolved administrations) also provides an opportunity to gather and share any soft intelligence related to the use and harms of NPS.
All major investments and proposals for funding go through economic appraisal which is conducted in line with Green Book guidance. This is guidance issued by HM Treasury on how to appraise policies, programmes and projects, as well as the design and use of monitoring and evaluation throughout implementation. For major Home Office investments these appraisals are reviewed by the Finance and Investment Committee (FIC) which involves sign off by the Home Office Chief Analyst/HOAI Director. Where relevant evaluations already exist these are used, as well as existing management information, to form the basis of economic appraisal for new investments.
Programmes being delivered as part of the Government’s whole-system response to tackling drug misuse, including investment to disrupt drug supply and county lines, drug treatment and Project ADDER (Addiction, Disruption, Diversion, Enforcement and Recovery) have been subject to this approach. We will continue to monitor and evaluate our drug misuse programmes across Government to learn what is most effective and inform future spending decisions.
As the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is independent from Government, its responses to correspondence are a matter for the ACMD.
The Government has no plans to commission a comprehensive review of the relative harms of controlled drugs. The Government takes expert advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) on classification of substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and scheduling under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001.
The Government commissions the ACMD to consider classification and scheduling of substances if, for example, new evidence about harms or legitimate uses emerges or there are issues of public concern. With regard to the scheduling of controlled drugs, the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 exempts specified activities from the scope of the offences, for example, where controlled drugs are produced and supplied by healthcare professionals for medicinal purposes. The Home Secretary places controlled drugs in the appropriate schedule following consideration of advice from the ACMD. There is an established process for the development of medicines, overseen by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which enables medicines containing controlled drugs to be developed, evaluated in clinical trials and licensed based on an assessment of their quality, safety and efficacy before being made available to patients in the UK. When a medicine containing controlled drugs is made available following an MHRA assessment, it may be scheduled or re-scheduled under the 2001 Regulations as appropriate, following consideration of advice provided by the ACMD.
The Home Office Accounting Officer has a personal responsibility to ensure that the Department’s budgets are used in a way that represents value for money for the taxpayer. A number of other departments deliver programmes to address drug misuse and their accounting officers have the same responsibility.
We have no current plans to deprioritise any aspects of our approach to tackling drug misuse, but we will continue to monitor and evaluate our drug misuse programmes across Government to learn what is most effective and inform future spending decisions.
The County Lines Programme and Project ADDER is monitored at a number of levels including by the Combating Drug Misuse Delivery Board.
The Home Office has established the County Lines Task and Finish Group to oversee delivery of the County Lines programme. The Group meets regularly to drive forward progress, monitor the impact of the funding we are providing to tackle county lines and identify challenges. Through the Task and Finish Group we worked closely with delivery partners to develop a monitoring framework for the programme including reports on the numbers of lines closed. Since it was launched, in November 2019, our County Lines Programme has already seen more than 780 lines closed, over 5,100 arrests, £2.9 million in cash and significant quantities of drugs seized, and more than 1,200 vulnerable people safeguarded
For Project ADDER (Addiction, Disruption, Diversion, Enforcement, Recovery), the Home Office in partnership with Public Health England worked closely with delivery partners in each of the pilot areas and colleagues from across Government to develop a theory of change and monitoring and evaluation framework for the programme. This includes a variety of key performance metrics relating to enforcement, diversion into treatment, as well as treatment and recovery outputs. These metrics are being collected by areas using local data systems and are being monitored on a monthly basis through programme governance board to assess overall effectiveness of the programme
The Government works closely with the ACMD and continues to look at a range of evidence in developing its strategic approach to tackling drug misuse and identifying outcomes to monitor progress. However, given the nature of the programmes, the ACMD were not involved in the development of the county lines programme and Project ADDER outcomes framework.
Operation VENETIC is an ongoing operation yielding tangible results on a weekly basis. As law enforcement continue to act on the significant volume of intelligence received from Operation VENETIC, we are not currently evaluating its impact. We will keep this under review. The National Crime Agency has led a number of investigations under Operation VENETIC and publishes regular press notices on the outcomes of these investigations. A wider overview of Operation VENETIC can also be found in the NCA’s 2021 National Strategic Assessment.
The Crime and Justice Task Force was established in January 2020. It is a long-established precedent that information about the discussions that have taken place in Cabinet and its Committees, and how often they have met, is not normally shared publicly.
Drug Consumption Rooms are not legal in the UK. A range of crimes would be committed in the course of running such a facility, by both service users and staff, such as possession of a controlled drug, being concerned in the supply of a controlled drug, knowingly permitting the supply of a controlled drug on a premises or encouraging or assisting these and other offences.
The Government is aware of the differing views on Drug Consumption Rooms and that they are subject to much debate. We will give due consideration to any new evidence on the harms and benefits of Drug Consumption Rooms including the extent to which they condone or encourage drug use or otherwise.
We continue to support a range of evidence-based approaches to reduce the health-related harms of drug misuse, such as maintaining the availability of needle and syringe programmes to prevent blood borne infections and widening the availability of naloxone to prevent overdose deaths. Heroin assisted treatment is also an option open to local areas under the existing legal framework subject to obtaining the relevant licences from the Home Office.
The Government is focused on improving the quality of, and access to, drug treatment services to support individuals to recover and turn their lives around. That is why, on 20 January the Government announced £148 million of new investment to cut crime and protect people from the scourge of illegal drugs. This package includes £80 million for drug treatment services across England, which represents the largest increase in drug treatment funding for 15 years.
Op VENETIC had a major impact on Organised Crime Groups involved in drugs trafficking, firearms trafficking, serious violence and money laundering. Many suspects that would otherwise have evaded justice due to their use of this criminally dedicated secure communication system are now facing prosecution for serious offences and face losing the financial benefits of organised crime due to proceeds of crime investigations.
The operation has also made a significant contribution to the knowledge and understanding of Serious Organised Crime in the UK, how it operates and its vulnerabilities, which is assisting law enforcement operations going forwards.
Whilst it is not possible to define an overall cost for this complex, large scale multi agency operation, over £56 million in criminal cash has so far been seized as a result of this operation.
This Government is taking a whole-system response to tackling drug misuse. That is why we have committed £148m this year to cut drug-related crime and support people into recovery, this includes £40m for disrupting drug supply and county lines, £80m for drug treatment and a further £28m for Project ADDER (Addiction, Disruption, Diversion, Enforcement and Recovery).
We have robust arrangements in place to oversee delivery of this work including outcomes framework which is monitored through a cross government Drugs Misuse Delivery Board.
In addition, on enforcement specifically, we have robust governance and monitoring/evaluation frameworks in place to monitor the impact of our county lines programme and Project ADDER through monthly Task and Finish Group meetings and Programme Delivery Board.
We will continue to monitor and evaluate our drugs misuse programmes to learn what is most effective in combatting drug misuse and will continue to work together across Government Departments on this.
The membership of the Crime and Justice Task Force is available at Gov.uk. Other Cabinet Ministers will be invited to attend according to the agenda.
The Government has not commissioned or published any recent analysis of the harms of psilocybin. Psilocybin, as an “ester of psilocin”, is controlled as a Class A drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (the 1971 Act) and is placed in Schedule 1 to the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. Psilocin is also subject to the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, to which the United Kingdom is signatory.
A number of drugs which have been controlled under the 1971 Act for a considerable period of time have not been subject to analysis or recent analysis of harm. However, there is not an exhaustive list of such drugs. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs regularly provides advice on substances, and these are published on the gov.uk website. Recent assessments and reviews include: gamma-hydroxybutyric acid and related substances; fentanyls; novel benzodiazepines; Sunosi; synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists; and cannabis-based products for medicinal use.
The Government has no plans to change the law on drug consumption rooms. While the UK Government continues to support a range of evidence-based approaches to reduce the health-related harms of drug misuse, we must not do anything that encourages the consumption of drugs. Our policy on drugs is clear – we must prevent drug use in our communities and support people through treatment and recovery. In order to ensure we do all we can to tackle the harms drug misuse causes, Dame Carol Black is leading an independent review, part two of which focuses on treatment and recovery support for people substance misuse problems.
UK law enforcement continue to act on the significant volume of intelligence Operation VENETIC generated, with the National Crime Agency (NCA) acting as the lead organisation in the UK on this.
The Home Office has not made an assessment of the effects of Operation VENETIC on the illegal drugs market. The NCA has led a number of investigations under Operation VENETIC and publish regular press notices on the outcomes of these investigations. The NCA’s 2021 National Strategic Assessment includes further information about the outcomes of activity following Operation VENETIC file (nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk)
No evaluation framework has been developed to assess the 2017 Drug Strategy. However, a number of initiatives that have been implemented under the 2017 Drug Strategy have been subject to assessment or evaluation, including;
On the question of punishment for people who break the law, including buying illicit drugs, the Government is unashamedly clear that drug use is unacceptable and users must face the consequences. Prison is one possible punishment, however the police have a range of powers at their disposal to deal with drug-related offences in a way that is proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and the public interest. They also have discretion to engage a first-time young offender with local services to assess their needs including the risk of harm. How police choose to pursue investigations is an operational decision for chief constables, but we are clear that we expect them to enforce the law.
Addressing drugs and drug harms is not something that law enforcement alone can do and we must ensure that we intervene early and effectively to reduce the demand for drugs. We therefore take a balanced approach which brings together police, health, community and global partners to tackle the illicit drug trade, protect the most vulnerable and help those with a drug dependency to recover and turn their lives around.
Violence and exploitation is an inherent part of the business model of organised criminal gangs who supply drugs, and it is important that we continue to address this threat. Law enforcement partners are therefore cracking down on criminals who supply drugs, causing misery to families and communities. Violence Reduction Units and police forces work with local partners to understand and tackle the drivers of violence in their area. This year we have provided VRUs with £35.5m to continue this work, alongside an additional £30m of ‘Grip’ funding to the police force areas most affected by violent crime.
We know there is more to do to tackle drugs and the harms they cause, which is why the Home Office commissioned a major independent review, led by Dame Carol Black, to examine these issues. Part one of the Review was published in February 2020 and provided a detailed analysis of drug supply and demand. In July last year, DHSC announced the second part of the review led by Dame Carol to look at prevention, treatment and recovery which will be published later this year.
The Government continues to go further than the Drug Strategy 2017. In January, the Government announced a £148 million new investment to cut crime and protect people from the scourge of illegal drugs including;
Together the funding represents a comprehensive drive by the Government to build back safer from the pandemic by helping people break free from the scourge of drug use and cutting drug-fuelled crime and violence.
No evaluation framework has been developed to assess the 2017 Drug Strategy. However, a number of initiatives that have been implemented under the 2017 Drug Strategy have been subject to assessment or evaluation, including;
On the question of punishment for people who break the law, including buying illicit drugs, the Government is unashamedly clear that drug use is unacceptable and users must face the consequences. Prison is one possible punishment, however the police have a range of powers at their disposal to deal with drug-related offences in a way that is proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and the public interest. They also have discretion to engage a first-time young offender with local services to assess their needs including the risk of harm. How police choose to pursue investigations is an operational decision for chief constables, but we are clear that we expect them to enforce the law.
Addressing drugs and drug harms is not something that law enforcement alone can do and we must ensure that we intervene early and effectively to reduce the demand for drugs. We therefore take a balanced approach which brings together police, health, community and global partners to tackle the illicit drug trade, protect the most vulnerable and help those with a drug dependency to recover and turn their lives around.
Violence and exploitation is an inherent part of the business model of organised criminal gangs who supply drugs, and it is important that we continue to address this threat. Law enforcement partners are therefore cracking down on criminals who supply drugs, causing misery to families and communities. Violence Reduction Units and police forces work with local partners to understand and tackle the drivers of violence in their area. This year we have provided VRUs with £35.5m to continue this work, alongside an additional £30m of ‘Grip’ funding to the police force areas most affected by violent crime.
We know there is more to do to tackle drugs and the harms they cause, which is why the Home Office commissioned a major independent review, led by Dame Carol Black, to examine these issues. Part one of the Review was published in February 2020 and provided a detailed analysis of drug supply and demand. In July last year, DHSC announced the second part of the review led by Dame Carol to look at prevention, treatment and recovery which will be published later this year.
The Government continues to go further than the Drug Strategy 2017. In January, the Government announced a £148 million new investment to cut crime and protect people from the scourge of illegal drugs including;
Together the funding represents a comprehensive drive by the Government to build back safer from the pandemic by helping people break free from the scourge of drug use and cutting drug-fuelled crime and violence.
No evaluation framework has been developed to assess the 2017 Drug Strategy. However, a number of initiatives that have been implemented under the 2017 Drug Strategy have been subject to assessment or evaluation, including;
On the question of punishment for people who break the law, including buying illicit drugs, the Government is unashamedly clear that drug use is unacceptable and users must face the consequences. Prison is one possible punishment, however the police have a range of powers at their disposal to deal with drug-related offences in a way that is proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and the public interest. They also have discretion to engage a first-time young offender with local services to assess their needs including the risk of harm. How police choose to pursue investigations is an operational decision for chief constables, but we are clear that we expect them to enforce the law.
Addressing drugs and drug harms is not something that law enforcement alone can do and we must ensure that we intervene early and effectively to reduce the demand for drugs. We therefore take a balanced approach which brings together police, health, community and global partners to tackle the illicit drug trade, protect the most vulnerable and help those with a drug dependency to recover and turn their lives around.
Violence and exploitation is an inherent part of the business model of organised criminal gangs who supply drugs, and it is important that we continue to address this threat. Law enforcement partners are therefore cracking down on criminals who supply drugs, causing misery to families and communities. Violence Reduction Units and police forces work with local partners to understand and tackle the drivers of violence in their area. This year we have provided VRUs with £35.5m to continue this work, alongside an additional £30m of ‘Grip’ funding to the police force areas most affected by violent crime.
We know there is more to do to tackle drugs and the harms they cause, which is why the Home Office commissioned a major independent review, led by Dame Carol Black, to examine these issues. Part one of the Review was published in February 2020 and provided a detailed analysis of drug supply and demand. In July last year, DHSC announced the second part of the review led by Dame Carol to look at prevention, treatment and recovery which will be published later this year.
The Government continues to go further than the Drug Strategy 2017. In January, the Government announced a £148 million new investment to cut crime and protect people from the scourge of illegal drugs including;
Together the funding represents a comprehensive drive by the Government to build back safer from the pandemic by helping people break free from the scourge of drug use and cutting drug-fuelled crime and violence.
The Government has not commissioned or published any recent analysis of the harms of psilocybin. Psilocybin, as an “ester of psilocin”, is controlled as a Class A drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and is placed in Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. Psilocin is also subject to the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, to which the United Kingdom is signatory.
We have no plans to move responsibility for drugs from the Home Office to the Department of Health and Social Care. Both departments have an important role to play in tackling the current issues around drug misuse.
This Government takes a balanced approach which brings together policing, health, community and global partners to tackle the illicit drug trade, protect the most vulnerable and help those with a drug dependency to recover and turn their lives around.
We have recently announced a £148million package aimed at dismantling the organised criminal gangs who encourage this terrible trade, helping those in drug treatment and recovery to stop drug-related crime, and dealing with the significant health-related harms drugs pose.
We know there is more to do which is why the Government commissioned a major independent review, led by Dame Carol Black, to inform the Government’s thinking on what more can be done to tackle the harm that drugs cause. Part One of Dame Carol Black’s review of drugs was published on 27 February 2020 at the Government’s UK Drugs Summit in Glasgow. It provides a detailed analysis of the challenges posed by drug supply and demand, including the ways in which drugs fuel serious violence. It is available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-drugs-phase-one-report.
Part Two of Dame Carol Black’s Review of Drugs was announced at the Drugs Summit and is focusing on prevention, treatment services and recovery. The final report will be made available to Ministers later this year. The Review findings will feed into wider Government work to tackle the serious harms caused by substance misuse.
The Government has not commissioned or published any recent analysis of the harms of psilocybin. Psilocybin, as an “ester of psilocin”, is controlled as a Class A drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and is placed in Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. Psilocin is also subject to the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, to which the United Kingdom is signatory.
We have no plans to move responsibility for drugs from the Home Office to the Department of Health and Social Care. Both departments have an important role to play in tackling the current issues around drug misuse.
This Government takes a balanced approach which brings together policing, health, community and global partners to tackle the illicit drug trade, protect the most vulnerable and help those with a drug dependency to recover and turn their lives around.
We have recently announced a £148million package aimed at dismantling the organised criminal gangs who encourage this terrible trade, helping those in drug treatment and recovery to stop drug-related crime, and dealing with the significant health-related harms drugs pose.
We know there is more to do which is why the Government commissioned a major independent review, led by Dame Carol Black, to inform the Government’s thinking on what more can be done to tackle the harm that drugs cause. Part One of Dame Carol Black’s review of drugs was published on 27 February 2020 at the Government’s UK Drugs Summit in Glasgow. It provides a detailed analysis of the challenges posed by drug supply and demand, including the ways in which drugs fuel serious violence. It is available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-drugs-phase-one-report.
Part Two of Dame Carol Black’s Review of Drugs was announced at the Drugs Summit and is focusing on prevention, treatment services and recovery. The final report will be made available to Ministers later this year. The Review findings will feed into wider Government work to tackle the serious harms caused by substance misuse.
As set out in the Government’s response to the ACMD’s report on custody-to-community transitions, published in October 2019, the Prisons Minister at the Ministry of Justice has overarching responsibility for this issue, working in partnership with the relevant departments, agencies and devolved administrations to respond to recommendations where appropriate.
The Crime and Justice Taskforce (CJTF), chaired by the Prime Minister, has responsibility for oversight of matters including both drugs and prisons. The Drug Strategy Board has been superseded by the CJTF.
In January, the Government announced £80 million additional funding for drug treatment services in England, including a focus on increasing the number of treatment places for prison leavers, and £70 million investment in accommodation and wider support for prison leavers, including for those with substance misuse problems. In addition, part two of Dame Carol Black’s independent review of drugs focused on prevention, treatment and recovery and this included an examination of the criminal justice response to people with drug misuse problems. Part two of the review will be published shortly.
The Department has made no assessment of limits of detection in relation to testing for the presence of controlled cannabinoids in CBD products. The Home Office approach is one of caution, that is, that a CBD product is likely to be controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 (‘the 2001 Regulations’) if it contains any controlled cannabinoids.
The term ‘administration’ in the exempt product definition is not defined by the 2001 Regulations. The Human Medicines Regulations 2012 provides the following as part of its definition:
““administer” means administer to a human being—
(a) orally, by injection, or by introduction into the body in any other way; or
(b) by external application (whether or not by direct application to the body)”
The interpretation of legislation is ultimately a matter for the courts to decide.
The Department has made no assessment of limits of detection in relation to testing for the presence of controlled cannabinoids in CBD products. The Home Office approach is one of caution, that is, that a CBD product is likely to be controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 (‘the 2001 Regulations’) if it contains any controlled cannabinoids.
The term ‘administration’ in the exempt product definition is not defined by the 2001 Regulations. The Human Medicines Regulations 2012 provides the following as part of its definition:
““administer” means administer to a human being—
(a) orally, by injection, or by introduction into the body in any other way; or
(b) by external application (whether or not by direct application to the body)”
The interpretation of legislation is ultimately a matter for the courts to decide.
The Home Office publishes data on the number of asylum applications received by the UK in the chapter ‘How many people do we grant asylum or protection to?’ in the quarterly ‘Immigration Statistics Quarterly Release’. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-release
Data on the number of asylum applications broken down by nationality are available in tables Asy_D01 of the ‘Asylum applications, initial decisions and resettlement datasets’.
Information on how to use the dataset can be found in the ‘Notes’ page of the workbook. The latest data relates to the year ending December 2019.
Additionally, the Home Office publishes a high-level overview of the data in the ‘summary tables’. The ‘contents’ sheet contains an overview of all available data on asylum and resettlement.
Information on future Home Office statistical release dates can be found in the ‘Research and statistics calendar’. https://www.gov.uk/search/research-and-statistics?keywords=immigration&content_store_document_type=upcoming_statistics&organisations%5B%5D=home-office&order=relevance
In 2019, the Drugs and Firearms Licensing unit issued to premises in Great Britain 362 domestic licences covering possession of schedule 1 drugs.
Controlled drug import licences are issued for individual consignments with reference to the drug substance(s) contained in the shipment. An import licence can cover up to four different types of drug substance or preparation. A total of 452 import licences for shipments containing cannabis or with a controlled cannabinoid content were issued in 2019.
In 2019, the Drugs and Firearms Licensing unit issued to premises in Great Britain (a) 33 low THC licences to cultivate low THC cannabis (b) 20 licences to cultivate high THC cannabis (c) 362 domestic licences covering possession of schedule 1.
Import licences are issued for individual drug substances as opposed to by schedule of drug. Thousands of drug substances could fall within schedule 1 control so it is not possible to provide a figure for the number of ‘schedule 1’ import licences granted.
The net amount spent on legal costs in relation to the Nuclear Test Veterans Group Litigation known as AB and Ors v Ministry of Defence is £786,939.48. The legal action reached the Supreme Court in November 2011 on the issue of limitation. The Supreme Court found in favour of the MOD in March 2012 when the legal costs in the Group Litigation were £4,786,939.48.
In line with the Court's decision to award MOD 90% of its costs of the limitation issue in the High Court and 100% of its costs in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, MOD recovered £4,000,000 in legal costs from the Claimants' After The Event Insurers giving the net costs figure of £786,939.48.
The Integrated Review will be published later in the year. Whilst I cannot pre-empt the contents of the review, I can give assurances that the well-being of the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces is of the utmost importance. Several active faith and belief networks, including humanism, have already been developed, and the Ministry of Defence pastoral support services will continue that important work.
Humanist wedding ceremonies can take place at this time with 15 people present, as well as for the legal solemnisation of the marriage.
We understand the unique significance that weddings hold in people’s lives but, by their nature they are events that bring families and friends together. For this reason, only up to 15 people can attend a wedding. We will keep this under review.
We have provided funding to assist local authorities to provide accommodation and support to vulnerable people who are at risk of, or who have been diagnosed with, coronavirus. This may include people identifying as LGBT+, as well as those who identify as having another protected characteristic.
£3.2 billion of additional funding was provided to local authorities to enable them to respond to Covid-19 pressures across the services they deliver. This is in addition to £3.2 million in targeted funding to ensure that we minimise the risk to those rough sleepers unable to self-isolate.
The Chancellor also announced a £750 million package of support for frontline charities across the UK. This will help charities to provide support to vulnerable people during the pandemic, including those whose beneficiaries have a protected characteristic.
Within the National Planning Policy Framework, and the National Design Guide, the importance of design quality and how it can be achieved was emphasised. Steps we have taken to ensure this is reflected in decision making include convening the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission, which published its final report and recommendations on 30 January and which we will respond to in due course. We have also committed to producing the National Model Design Code this year which will set detailed standards for key elements of successful design.
The Department welcomes the report and the research team provided evidence to the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission and that their findings have informed the 45 recommendations from the commission. The Government will respond to in due course.
Guidance on design issues is not within the remit of the Planning White Paper. The purpose of the White Paper will be to make the planning process clearer, more accessible and more certain for all users, including homeowners and small businesses. It will also address resourcing and performance in Planning Departments. Designing at higher densities and making effective use of land, and the creation of highways that take into account place-making, are covered by our National Planning Policy Framework. These are also referenced within our recently published National Design Guide and are intended to form part of the forthcoming National Model Design Code.
The Ministry of Justice has published information on immediate custodial sentences for specific offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, in England and Wales, up to December 2020, in the ‘Principal Offence Proceedings and Outcomes by Home Office Offence Code’ data tool, available here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987731/HO-code-tool-principal-offence-2020.xlsx
As the data tool above does not cover the full time series requested, please see the attached table with details of immediate custodial sentences given for offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 from 2005 to 2020. 2005 is the earliest year that the level of detail required is available within the Courts Proceedings Database.
The government responded to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs’ (ACMD) report on Custody to Community Transitions in October 2019. The MoJ is working closely with key departments across government to tackle the misuse of drugs. We are keen to align this work with any recommendations stemming from Part two of Dame Carol Black’s review, which is due for publication shortly. This forms part of cross departmental work on combatting drug misuse, including support for those moving from custody to the community. This includes many areas highlighted in the ACMD Custody to Community transitions report.
In January, the Department of Health and Social Care received £80m additional funding for drug treatment in 2021/22. The bulk of the funding (£55m circa) has been given to local authorities via a specific grant allocation to support delivery of services to reduce drug related deaths and target the offender cohort. This funding will be used to enhance drug treatment and the numbers of treatment places available, including for those leaving prison, to reduce drug-related crime. It will also tackle the rise in drug-related deaths via the provision of naloxone to prevent drug overdoses. The remainder will fund the treatment element of the ADDER Accelerator programme and an increase the number of inpatient detoxification placements available, for people with the most complex needs.
The Government announced in June 2019 that the Law Commission will conduct a fundamental review of the law on how and where people can legally marry in England and Wales. As part of that review, the Government invited the Law Commission to make recommendations about how marriage by humanist and other non-religious belief organisations could be incorporated into a revised or new scheme for all marriages that is simple, fair and consistent. The Government will decide on provision on the basis of the Law Commission's recommendations.
The Law Commission published a consultation paper on 3 September 2020 as part of its review and will welcome responses from all.
The Government announced in June 2019 that the Law Commission will conduct a fundamental review of the law on how and where people can legally marry in England and Wales. As part of that review, the Government invited the Law Commission to make recommendations about how marriage by humanist and other non-religious belief organisations could be incorporated into a revised or new scheme for all marriages that is simple, fair and consistent. The Government will decide on provision on the basis of the Law Commission's recommendations.
The Law Commission published a consultation paper on 3 September 2020 as part of its review and will welcome responses from all.
In respect of legal recognition of humanist weddings, the Government announced in June 2019 that the Law Commission will conduct a fundamental review of the law on how and where people can legally marry in England and Wales. As part of that review, the Government invited the Law Commission to make recommendations about how marriage by humanist and other non-religious belief organisations could be incorporated into a revised or new scheme for all marriages that is simple, fair and consistent. The Government will decide on provision on the basis of the Law Commission's recommendations.
The Law Commission has now published a consultation paper as part of its review and will welcome responses from all.