Hansard

I thank colleagues from all parts of the chamber for their contributions to the debate. Many members spoke eloquently, passionately and, indeed, poignantly—some because of their commitment to the issue since they entered the world of politics and others because of their experience in their previous occupations. Each added to the strong commitment that the Parliament must have to tackle the problems of drugs misuse.

I am grateful for the consensual nature of the debate, which was pointed out by Bill Aitken and Paul Martin. Paul Martin is correct; in seeking to create a consensus, we do not expect to have a supine Opposition. That would never be the case, and the adjective "supine" does not describe the members involved, but we are keen to try to work together towards common solutions.

We accept that the Opposition will disagree on some matters and it is appropriate that it should challenge us—that is the role of the Opposition—but we hope to make it clear that our door is open and that others can come and speak to us before something becomes an issue of political debate. If we can resolve the matter, all the better. If we cannot, we will require to disagree about it and vote on it in the chamber, but let us seek to work together first. I am grateful to the members throughout the chamber who have sought to make a commitment to do that.

The Government acknowledges that we do not face the problem of drug misuse alone. It is a problem that we must tackle together. We do not face the problem alone because it does not exist only in Scotland. Most western democracies have significant problems with drug taking. I recently returned from a weekend in the island of Ireland. It is well known that those of us on the SNP benches and in the Government greatly admire the success of the Celtic tiger and the Government of Ireland, but we should not forget that a significant drug problem exists not simply in Dublin but in rural Ireland too. Members from all sides made the point that drug misuse occurs not only in areas of urban deprivation but in rural areas. In Ireland, it occurs not simply in Tallaght but in the Gaeltacht.

The United States of America has the strongest economy in the world, but it still has significant problems with drug abuse. Even with all the resources of its drug enforcement agencies, its military and its police, it cannot stop drugs coming in. It is clear that there is a significant problem. Bill Wilson mentioned that there are even significant problems with drug taking in Switzerland, which everybody in the world recognises as a haven of great wealth and stable democracy. The problem affects us all and we have to try to reach a solution.

I welcome the change in terminology. The Westminster Government is to be given credit for moving away from the language and nomenclature of a war on terror, but we must do the same in relation to drugs. It is not a war on drugs, because that would be a war on our own communities and on individuals who are often more to be pitied than punished. Certainly many are to be punished, and I heartily endorse the credit that Paul Martin paid to Graeme Pearson. The Government will not seek to diminish the action that is taken against those who peddle drugs and those who are involved in serious and organised crime, with the attendant risk to those in law enforcement, but we have to accept that this is not a war; it is far deeper and more pernicious than that.

As many, such as Margaret Curran and Trish Godman, have said, it is also clear that beneath the statistics there are stories and tragedies. Paul Martin commented on that in relation to his area. For all the statistics, these are individuals. They may not be citizen of the year or the most pleasant people to spend time with, but they are somebody's son or daughter. Tragically, they are quite often somebody's mum or dad, and they are a death far too soon that we could do without. Something about common humanity means that we have to address that.

We have listened to many of the points Liberal Democrat members have made, and we will be happy to reflect on them, but I ask them, in the spirit of consensus, to consider withdrawing their amendment, which we do not feel able to accept. We accept the spirit in which it was lodged, and we hope that we can rally around that.

I will try to run through the various points that members have raised. If I do not manage to deal with them all, the error will be mine and I will be happy to meet privately or answer a letter.

Margaret Smith spoke about the expansion of residential places, which we clearly have to address. We have to provide support for those who recognise that they have reached such a juncture in their lives and make a cry for help. Some of that can be given as direction from the centre but, ultimately, it has to be delivered at grass roots level. We have to work with all bodies to ensure that those who work in the community are able to provide support. We are reviewing the matter, and on Monday coming the Minister for Community Safety and the Minister for Public Health will meet alcohol and drug action teams to work out how we can improve delivery, because this is an area in which we must deliver.

Margaret Smith and Bill Wilson mentioned heroin prescription. It is sometimes forgotten that practitioners may already prescribe heroin if they so wish, although they require a Home Office licence to do so. Three practitioners in Scotland have such a licence but are not currently using it. It is not a simple matter, as there are clear problems related to it and there is no real suggestion that it is necessarily better, but it must obviously be reflected on. As I said, heroin prescription currently exists, but we would delude ourselves if we thought that it was a panacea.

Margaret Smith mentioned drugs courts. They started as a pilot, and we have welcomed their success. They were a pilot until March 2006. At that juncture, it was agreed to fund the courts for a further three years, and we will continue to maintain them under operation. She also touched on a variety of other courts. I remind her that what operates in one jurisdiction does not necessarily operate in another because of several factors, including the number of sheriffs and the size of the court. What can be done in Glasgow is vastly different from what can be done in Tain or Dornoch, but we accept that drugs courts have worked and are an important factor to be considered.

Margaret Curran raised the idea of creating a drugs commission. We are determined to build on the national consensus, and we will consider a variety of views. We are conscious that, before we formed the Government, the Parliament had taken some steps and that Mr Pignatelli had been charged with investigating certain matters. We are considering a variety of mechanisms to take on board the genuine consensus and to work together—not simply in Parliament, because the issue involves all of civic Scotland.

I echo the point made by Margaret Curran and others that we sometimes forget and ignore the role of the voluntary sector in Scotland. Trish Godman and Duncan McNeil recognised the importance of kinship and those people who do a great deal of good collectively through organisations or individually through simply dealing with their families. We wish to engage with them as they are significant. We should not forget them.

This is a question not simply of spending more money, but of spending it wisely. We must also recognise that we address the problems in different ways. Some are dealt with through health, education and criminal justice; some are dealt with at central Government level; others are correctly dealt with at local government level. We are committed to providing the appropriate resources. Ring fencing will be difficult because of how such matters are laid out and how money is dispensed, but we are committed to ensuring that the appropriate resources are available to tackle not simply the health manifestations but the problems that we face in education.

Drugs in prison have also been mentioned. There is clearly a significant problem that we have to tackle.

We announced £4 million in additional funding last month to increase training opportunities for foster and kinship carers.

Duncan McNeil raised points about children, which I would be happy to discuss with my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, because some of the matters he raised fall outwith the sphere of criminal justice. However, we have to ensure a holistic and joined-up approach.

If I have not answered any particular points, members should feel free to come to me and I will address them in greater detail. I pay tribute to the consensus that prevails in the chamber and recognise that we have a job of work to do. We understand that if we work together, we are more likely to reach a solution. Matters are being addressed; we just have to work harder and work smarter.