Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

As the Chairman probably knows, I raised issues concerning this subject on the pre-legislative stage. Originally my understanding was that we did have a methadone-like element included but I was wrong. The purpose of the exercise has already been pointed out. This proposal is not aimed at reduction but at protecting the health of those who are already serious users of illegal drugs. It is merely to give some sort of control over the manner in which the drugs are used.

Deputy Seán Barrett made a valid point in that the question arises as to whether we can, on the one hand, be opposed to the use of illegal drugs while, on the other, allowing their use and supervising their consumption in an enclosed setting. There are regulations in this area, which the committee has already discussed.

I am not an expert in this area and do not know the likely outcome in the event of a constitutional challenge. I do not know what that would involve. It is in this regard that a challenge could arise. The purpose of the exercise, as I see it now, is not reduction but merely regulating the manner in which drugs are consumed and trying to ensure the worst-case scenario does not prevail, as happened in the past whereby injecting took place in all kinds of places, including in front of children and passers by. The methods of such injecting are such as to raise serious health issues, which in turn could become a legal responsibility of the State at some stage down the road if, for instance, it were seen to ignore what is happening in the public arena.

I would have no problem with the Minister of State including, if she desires it, a clause stipulating the legislation should be reviewed after a year or two to ascertain its effectiveness or otherwise but we need to realise what the purpose of the exercise is. There are two distinct issues that could well be in conflict. One is the administration of the law, as it stands, and the other seems to be in conflict with that. The purpose of the exercise, however, is not to have one confront the other; rather, it is to confront the issue of people injecting themselves in stairwells using unhygienic procedures and of their overdosing regularly. The contention under this legislation is that there would be advice to users that would in some way influence them to prevent overdosing. I hope that works.

I brought to the Chairman's attention earlier today another element that may be helpful in this matter. It would introduce a reduction measure that could be very beneficial. That will have to be done separately. I was asked to bring it to the attention of the committee. I will give the information to the Chairman and other members of the committee at a later stage.

The objective of the Bill is harm reduction. It cannot reduce the extent to which drugs are used by people. Without a doubt, the facilities would see supplies drawn from illegal sources. I raised that question previously. I raised it in the context of whether the Garda has a right to accost users of illegal drugs going to or from their injecting facilities.

I was concerned as to why the gardaí would not have the right to do so. That was where my misunderstanding was. We are informed that it is legally applicable. It does not matter whether something is in the programme for Government or not. The Government can never introduce legislation that it knows to be illegal or unconstitutional. It cannot be done. This is what I spoke about earlier this morning. We as politicians very often have great ideas that might not necessarily be applicable and certainly might not be legal in certain circumstances. That something is in the programme for Government does not make any difference. Legislation coming before the House at any particular time must be known not to be in conflict with the Constitution.