Psychoactive Substances Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office

Psychoactive Substances

Lord Walney Excerpts
Monday 11th November 2013

(10 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Norman Baker Portrait Norman Baker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that information. Of course, his knowledge of European matters is second to none in this House—[Interruption.] I did not say whether or not I approved of it.

The proposed regulation has features that might be appropriate if harmonisation of a legitimate internal market was genuinely required, but when applied to the control of these substances by member states, the proposal greatly exceeds any action required at EU level and thus does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity. For those few psychoactive substances that have legitimate uses, which amount to fewer than 2% of the more than 300 substances identified by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction since 2005, our framework is already flexible enough to place controls on those substances to restrict recreational use without hindering genuine use in industry.

Lord Walney Portrait John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

Does the Minister believe that the European Commission’s impact assessment is mistaken? It states that member states would be able to apply national measures before the introduction of any EU-level measures and go further than what is foreseen by EU measures. It suggests that the UK would not be fettered. He clearly disagrees. Why?

Norman Baker Portrait Norman Baker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I do not think that is correct. Certainly, with regard to those substances classified as severe, with the top rank of measures, we would not be able to countermand the EU description applied to the substance unless the European Commission agreed to do so on application from the member state, so I do not think that is correct.