Dangerous Drugs — 12 Sep 2023 at 18:28

That the draft Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) Order 2023, which was laid before this House on 5 September, be approved.
“The Scottish government has and will continue to promote a public health approach, rather than continuing the failed war on drugs. It is our view that banning nitrous oxide will further criminalise people for their drug use, serving only to heap additional harms on vulnerable individuals, our young people and communities while doing little to improve the health of these individuals.”
“Total costs across all monetised set up and ongoing costs are estimated to be between £19.6 to £178.1 million…with a central estimate of £67.9 million…over the 10-year appraisal period.”
“There is limited evidence available to estimate how nitrous oxide misuse may change following the intervention.”
“We recommend that the UK Government reform the 1971 Act and 2001 Regulations in a way that promotes a greater role for public health in our response to drugs, whilst maintaining our law enforcement to tackling the illicit production and supply of controlled drugs.”
“Based on this harms assessment, the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 remains the appropriate drug legislation to tackle supply of nitrous oxide for non-legitimate use. There is, however, a need for enforcement of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 to be supported by additional interventions designed to reduce health and social harms. Based on this harms assessment, nitrous oxide should not be subjected to control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 for the following reasons”.
“Level of health and social harms”,
“current evidence suggests that the health and social harms are not commensurate with control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.”
“Proportionality of sanctions: the offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 would be disproportionate for the level of harm associated with nitrous oxide and could have significant unintended consequences.”
“Impact on legitimate uses: control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 could produce significant burdens for legitimate medical, industrial, commercial, and academic uses. The current scale and number of legitimate uses that stand to be affected is unknown but is estimated to be large.”
“investigation costs to the Police have not been estimated.”
“It is estimated that between 8 and 63…additional prison places will need to be built.”
“criminal groups will fuel violence and anti-social behaviour, not reduce it.”

Debate in Parliament |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alba0 20100.0%
Con269 (+2 tell) 2075.8%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 1020.0%
Lab131 3066.7%
LDem0 000.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 1050.0%
SNP0 22 (+2 tell)053.3%
Total:400 35069.4%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Adam HollowayGraveshamCon (front bench)no
Daniel PoulterCentral Suffolk and North IpswichCon (front bench)no
Bell Ribeiro-AddyStreathamLab (minister)no
Zarah SultanaCoventry SouthLabno
Nadia WhittomeNottingham EastLab (minister)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive