|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
Westminster - Yesterdays debate on drug testing at work
Don Barnard Press Release
Thursday 15 Jan 2004 Legalise Cannabis Alliance, News Bulletin: 4/04: Westminster - Yesterdays debate on drug testing at work . DRUG TEST MP's !!!! Paul Flynn (Newport, West) (Lab) said: " ..We must consider realistically the position that we are in. We work in this workplace, in which prodigious quantities of drugs that impair our judgments and our 14 Jan 2004 : Column 273WH reactions can be used. We must examine the science, consider the matter realistically and, if any changes in the law are likely to occur, we must start by imposing any required restrictions in this building." Minutes of Westminster debate on drug testing at work [See Eds. notes] Press Office Legalise Cannabis Alliance PO Box 198, Norwich, NR3 3WB http://www.lca-uk.org donbarnard@lca-uk.org Tel: 07984 255015 Editors notes: Paul Flynn (Newport, West) (Lab): From debate on drug testing at work in Westminster hall yesterday. Read it all here: Paul Flynn (Newport, West) (Lab): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Laura Moffatt), who has been a distinguished vice-chairman of the all-party group on drugs misuse for many years and served it extremely well. The growing consensus in this debate is welcome. If we are going to impose on the country new rules about drug testing at work, we should start in this building and lead by example. There will be a programme tomorrow night on television showing a case in which a former Minister, in a celebrated occasion that is recorded in his diaries, was not drunk but was over-tired as a newt while addressing the House from the Treasury Bench. That was the late Alan Clark, who describes how he drank before addressing the House. We must introduce some reality, as my hon. Friend suggested, on the real threat of drugs, and how drivers are impaired on the road. The major cause of drivers' impairment is exhaustion. Next is impairment from medicinal drugs; then alcohol; then illegal drugs. I gained a number of impressions from attending every sitting of the all-party group on drugs misuse and chairing one or two of those sittings. One of those 14 Jan 2004 : Column 272WH impressions was that the drive towards more workplace testing comes not from those who seek improvements in safety but from commercefrom those who stand to make a great deal of money out of selling the testing kits. In other countries, testing has become a hugely profitable business, because the kits are very expensive. Let us not be deceived. We all share the objective of reducing the number of accidents caused by drug use, but the figures that we considered and the evidence that emerged when we cross-examined witnesses produced a strange situation. Amphetamines were mentioned. For a long time, amphetamines were used to train jet pilots, because they have the beneficial effect of increasing the concentration of those who are piloting planes or driving cars. However, they also have a bad effect: while increasing concentration on the task in hand, they increase concentration on everything elseall the peripheral matters and distractionsso they are detrimental to safety. As we know, alcohol has an effect of impairment similar to that of cannabis. However, studies carried out in Germany and Canada on whether there is a link between the use of those drugs and the likelihood of being involved in an accident show that there is not. The figures with which the all-party group was presented showed that there would be an increase from 3 to 18 per cent. in the number of people involved in road traffic accidents who had been taking drugs. However, in every case, that precisely mirrored the increase in the use of those drugs in society. There should have been a greater increase in accidents among drug takers than is shown in the figures, and there was not. Everyone would agree that people should be discouraged from driving while impaired by the influence of illegal drugs. However, the odd fact is that cannabis makes people more fearful. They become defensive and tend to drive in a way that is less aggressive. Two of the reports showed that, as a result, those who were taking cannabis were less likely to be involved in an accident. We will not extrapolate from that that people should use cannabis or any other drug under those circumstances. The only way to test for drugsthe point has been made clearly this morningis on the basis of impairment. However, that can give rise to other problemsI have personal experience of that. I remember being accused by a policeman of staggering when I got out of a car. I was examined, and had to explain that that is the way in which I normally walk. Many others would find it difficult, even in the best of circumstances, to perform the impairment tests. I am reminded of a story told by my father, who fought in the first world war. He told me that on the Somme they could not get strawberry jam, but could get alcohol and cigarettes in unlimited quantities. My father died of lung cancer at the age of 43, and another member of his family, who also served on the Somme, was an alcoholic for life. Governments have often used drugs in that waydrugs were used deliberately on both sides in the great war. The great war would probably have stopped at Christmas on the first anniversary if huge quantities of alcohol had not been used. We must consider realistically the position that we are in. We work in this workplace, in which prodigious quantities of drugs that impair our judgments and our 14 Jan 2004 : Column 273WH reactions can be used. We must examine the science, consider the matter realistically and, if any changes in the law are likely to occur, we must start by imposing any required restrictions in this building.
After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.
|
This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!