Fiona O'Malley (Progressive Democrats)

I do not want this debate to be framed as calling for the legalisation of drugs because that is not what I am doing. However, I am seeking a debate on the solutions because if we continue to do more of the same, we will not make progress. We should not close the door on positive elements of previous strategies or enlightened policies implemented in other countries. The law enforcement officers interviewed on "Prime Time" held the opinion that a blanket prohibition is not necessarily the correct way to proceed. I want to widen this debate so we can critically analyse the issues.

One academic called for a cost-benefit analysis of prohibition. That would be useful because we need to consider the real cost of drugs, including alcohol, to society.

The national drugs strategy comprises four pillars. The Opposition amendment addresses the first pillar, treatment, and the Minister of State is very familiar with the treatment services needed and how best to target resources. The previous drugs strategy helped to build the infrastructure for treatment. Money was available for discussions on what needed to happen and to establish systems. We have made significant progress but the next phase must include an audit of treatments to determine whether the resources invested are directly benefitting patients through streamlined services. We need to build a strong conduit that reaches the end user. Treatment should become a major element of the national drugs strategy.

The second pillar of the strategy is availability. The Garda has had major success in seizing drugs but only 10% of total imports are detected despite the investment of huge sums of money and resources. We need to examine how we can improve on that.

The Criminal Assets Bureau, empowered by various items of legislation, has done a tremendous job of pursuing major drug barons. The CAB is another of the successes of the existing strategy. Further successes of this nature are required. The work of the CAB proves that when we are determined to take action, make changes and tackle crime head on, we are well able to do so. This gives me great encouragement regarding the political will to act, which is vital. I have no doubt that during his term of office the Minister of State will see to it that practical steps are taken, in the context of the national drugs strategy, to deliver better resources for patients, in the first instance. Such resources must also be delivered in respect of tackling the cancer that is the major criminal element involved in the supply and distribution of illegal drugs.

In a sense, harm reduction lies at the heart of the prohibition argument. We do not want people to abuse drugs but they always will. It is human nature. We must, therefore, reach out to them in the best way possible. Harm reduction strategies have been extremely useful in allowing people who are isolated to lead as normal a life as possible. I would like harm reduction initiatives to form one of the major pillars in the new drugs strategy.

I look forward to the remainder of the debate and I hope it will continue in the spirit to which I referred earlier. We must seek solutions and encourage inclusivity. I look forward to the contributions of Members and the Minister of State.