Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government, further to the Advisory Council
on the Misuse of Drugs report Nitrous oxide: updated harms
assessment, published on 6 March, what steps they are taking to
prevent the sale of large canisters of nitrous oxide to the
public.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, it is an offence under the Psychoactive Substances Act
2016 to supply or offer to supply oxide canisters of any size,
knowingly or recklessly, for its psychoactive effect. I would
expect police to use all available powers to crack down swiftly
on illegal sellers. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs
identified concerning anecdotal evidence of an increased
prevalence of large canisters since 2015. We are now carefully
considering its recommendations and will respond shortly.
(Lab)
My Lords, I must confess I am somewhat disappointed by the
response from the Minister. I have here the type of canister that
is the challenge that we face. I do not know if you have noticed,
but these canisters now litter the countryside everywhere. This
one is empty—I did not indulge—but they are a serious problem.
They are meant for industrial use, but are also a serious health
hazard. There is no limit to the amount that can be ingested with
them, unlike the small silver ones, known as whippits, that you
see around; they are really meant for inflating party balloons
but are also used to get a high. You can buy the large canisters
on Amazon, no questions asked. Will the Minister take urgent
action to ensure that these canisters are sold to licensed
traders only, and take steps to discuss with Amazon the question
of putting a deposit on the canisters so that they are returned?
I would like the opportunity to meet him to discuss what further
action could be taken.
(Con)
The noble Lord is right that the availability of larger tanks—I
thank him for his example of one—is believed to have led to an
increase in the amount and frequency of nitrous oxide use. In
November 2018, the Government published a review of the
Psychoactive Substances Act, which provided insights into the way
the Act has affected the sale and use of potentially harmful new
psychoactive substances. The review concluded that the open sale
of new substances had largely been eliminated. After the 2016 Act
came into force, 332 retailers across the United Kingdom were
identified as having either closed down or stopped selling.
However, I take his points on board; I am happy to meet him and
will certainly take this back to the department. I should say
that the report was published only on 6 March.
(CB)
My Lords, the review to which the Minister has just referred went
on to say that academic and Europol evidence identified the UK as
one of the leading dark-web sources of these illegal substances.
What have the Government done since that review to address this
and close down these too-easy-to-access sources of highly
dangerous substances?
(Con)
I take the noble Baroness’s point. As I say, the recommendations
from the report are still under consideration. As I have just
outlined, considerable work has been done on the retail of these
canisters, but I will come back when I have more to tell her,
based on the review of the report.
(Con)
My Lords, the advisory council is obviously vital; developments
in this area are very speedy, so it enables the law and
government decision-making to keep pace. However, the speed of
development is glacial compared to the speed of change on the
internet, and it is not just substances that we ingest that cause
harm but images. Could my noble friend the Minister please take
the opportunity to turn to his noble friend next to him from the
DCMS, to advise him that somewhere in the Online Safety Bill we
need clauses to future-proof so that, as things develop on the
internet, the Government have the information quickly to hand so
that we can put legislation or decisions in place to stop that
harm?
(Con)
My noble friend Lady Berridge is right; obviously we need to
future-proof legislation—and I note that my noble friend next to
me was nodding sagely during her question.
(LD)
My Lords, the advisory committee may not have given the advice
that the Government were seeking in this matter, but I hope that
the Government will look very seriously at the second issue which
the advisory committee reported on, which was education. Given
that there are now many medical professionals, both clinical and
in research, who place the risks of nitrous oxide on a par with
or greater than alcohol abuse, what steps do the Government
propose to take to inform the public—particularly young people
—of the consequences of nitrous oxide abuse, using their
experience of dealing with alcohol abuse?
(Con)
The noble Lord raises a good point. A free drugs advice service
from the Government, FRANK, contains information on nitrous oxide
and the harm associated with taking it, such as dizziness,
vitamin B12 deficiency, and nerve damage that can result from
heavy long-term use. FRANK receives over half a million visits a
month, with high levels of awareness and trust. User research
commissioned by Public Health England has shown that 83% of 18 to
24 year-old adults are aware of this site, and that 85% of its
users trust the site to provide reliable information about
drugs.
(Con)
My Lords, further to the question from my noble friend Lady
Berridge, I say that it is a question not just of the ready
availability of these online vendors who are working very hard to
sell nitrous oxide, but of campaigns by social media which are
backing that up. Does the Minister agree that there is now an
argument for moving control from the Psychotic Substances Act
2016 to the Misuse of Drugs Act?
(Con)
My noble friend makes a very good point but the advisory council
did not actually recommend that. It said that nitrous oxide
should be kept subject to the provisions in the Psychoactive
Substances Act 2016. However, as I said earlier, we are
considering all the recommendations of the report, and the Home
Secretary has a duty to consider advice on whether to pursue
control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
(Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that nitrous oxide is a
gateway drug and may well lead to young people in particular
moving on to other drugs which are even more harmful? Does he
also accept that the courts and the police force find it
difficult to deal with the multitude of available drugs, which
are constantly changing, so there needs to be huge vigilance to
try to understand the range of drugs available to our young
people?
(Con)
I do not have any personal knowledge of whether it is a gateway
drug, but the evidence that I have seen certainly suggests that
to be the case; I believe it is the third most common drug in
England and Wales after cannabis and cocaine, so I suspect that
the noble Lord is right. As regards vigilance, I agree; obviously
we have a long-term drugs strategy to take the challenge of drug
misuse very seriously. It is a 10-year strategy, significant
funds have been dedicated towards it, and it includes investing
significant amounts of money in an ambitious programme of drug
treatment and recovery.
(Lab)
My Lords, can the Minister explain the legality of selling
nitrous oxide in these large canisters? Are they illegal and, if
so, has anybody been convicted of selling them? If they are not,
is the Minister saying, “It is all right. We will welcome it for
the moment and have a policy later”?
(Con)
I certainly do not think I have said that, my Lords. There are
legitimate uses for nitrous oxide, and we should bear that in
mind. It is used in medicine, dentistry and—this may surprise
noble Lords—as a propellant for whipped cream canisters. Those
who supply nitrous oxide, knowingly or recklessly, where it will
be used for its psychoactive effect commit an offence under the
Psychoactive Substances Act 2016, regardless of the age of the
buyer. That can include a maximum sentence of seven years’
imprisonment, and people are convicted under the Psychoactive
Substances Act. There is no complacency here.
