Charlotte Nichols
MP for Warrington North · Labour · United Kingdom
“Does the Minister accept that although people co-infected with HIV and hepatitis C represent only around 7% of those on infected blood support schemes, they make up roughly 14% of those receiving special category support, because of the disproportionate harm caused by early hepatitis C treatments?”
“I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman’s points, and those of the victims whose voices he is bringing to the fore. Does he agree that both the proposals by the Government and the amendment to the Victims and Courts Bill that was agreed to in the other place, which says that victims will have the right to access a transcript of the jud…”
“In the spirit of cross-party consensus, I commend both the hon. Member on securing this debate and the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) on her campaigning work in this area.”
“The violence against women and girls sector has not had the opportunity to come together to discuss it, and the Government’s framing and narrative has been to pit survivors and defendants against each other in a way that I think is deeply damaging.”
“I thought long and hard about speaking today. I will allow right hon. and hon. Members from the legal profession to make the legal arguments better than I can, and will allow Members who rightly have procedural or rights-based concerns for defendants, which I share, to raise them. I trust that those points will be satisfactorily covered.”
“Shamefully, the tariffs have not been uprated in line with inflation since 2012 and have no eligibility for non-contact sexual offences, which can cause significant and lasting harm.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Charlotte Nichols, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“Does the Minister accept that although people co-infected with HIV and hepatitis C represent only around 7% of those on infected blood support schemes, they make up roughly 14% of those receiving special category support, because of the disproportionate harm caused by early hepatitis C treatments? Does he believe that today’s announcement properly recognises their suffering?”
“In the spirit of cross-party consensus, I commend both the hon. Member on securing this debate and the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) on her campaigning work in this area. Does he agree that for victims it is vital that they have agency within the court process as a complainant, and that following a court or tribunal case there is transparency for them, regardless of the verdict in their case, so that they can understand the decision and seek closure after the process has concluded?”
“I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman’s points, and those of the victims whose voices he is bringing to the fore. Does he agree that both the proposals by the Government and the amendment to the Victims and Courts Bill that was agreed to in the other place, which says that victims will have the right to access a transcript of the judge’s route to verdict, are inadequate? That is not a transcript of the full case and, as the hon. Gentleman said, it is important for victims of crime to be able to work through—with therapists or other support—the full details of what happened when they were not present in the courtroom, during what was, as he also rightly said, their case. Access to full transcripts would re-empower victims to get closure after the event.”
“It is wild to me that we are still arguing, after many years, about a person’s right to a free transcript of their own trial, particularly as the recent move to allow access to sentencing remarks does nothing to help with closure for those whose cases sadly do not end in a conviction.”
“The second thing to say is that the Bill does little for instances in which a rape victim actually comes to court. I still have almost as many nightmares about my experience on the witness stand as I do about my rape. The defence barrister, who had previously faced investigation after a witness took her own life following cross- examination in a different rape case, does not seem to have learnt much from that experience, and went for me in a way that undermined all the progress I had made in therapy and led me to blame myself for the eventual acquittal. We need far greater safeguards for those giving evidence. Actually, we need a reframing of the fact that legally you are a “witness” at your own trial.”
“It is worth saying that the Bar Council believes that even that 1% to 2% reduction is wishful thinking, so we risk offering false hope to rape victims, rather than real change. We know that juries are more diverse than the judiciary, and an unintended consequence of these changes could be that women from minoritised backgrounds are less likely to come forward, not more. Juries do not make perfect decisions, but neither do judges. An unintended consequence of measures that enabled pre-recorded evidence has been significant slippage in case handling, which is where the most significant procedural delays are. A clear re-prioritisation is needed here, alongside the expansion of recorders in cases involving rape and serious sexual offences.”
“This Bill is not that. The transition away from jury trials in certain cases might itself take up operational time, with changes to an already overstretched system entrenching issues and delays. The timeline for these changes to take effect is 2028-29. We know what works because it is already happening in a few key areas, including pioneering work in Liverpool and Preston Crown courts in the north-west. This is a bearing down on waiting lists that could be taking place in months, not years—proven, meaningful and significant reductions in waiting times for complainants and defendants, rather than speculative, unevidenced reductions that the Institute for Government says could be as little as 1% to 2%, and coming years down the track.”
“The violence against women and girls sector has not had the opportunity to come together to discuss it, and the Government’s framing and narrative has been to pit survivors and defendants against each other in a way that I think is deeply damaging. We have been told that if we have concerns about the Bill, it is because we have not been raped, or because we do not care enough for rape victims. The opposite is true in my case; it is because I have been raped that I am as passionate as I am about what it means for a justice system to be truly victim-focused. It is because I have endured every indignity that our broken criminal justice system could mete out that I care about what kind of reform will actually deliver justice for survivors and victims of crime more widely. In our manifesto, we promised specialist rape courts.”
“I care profoundly about rape victims facing intolerable delays for their day in court. I know only too well what that feels like, because, after being raped at an event that I attended in my capacity as a Member of Parliament, I waited 1,088 days to go to court. Every single one of those days was agony, made worse by having a role in public life that meant that the mental health consequences of my trauma were played out in public, with the event that led to my eventual sectioning for my own safety still being something that I receive regular social media abuse about from strangers to this day. But here is the kicker. In this debate, it feels as if experiences like mine have been weaponised and are being used for rhetorical misdirection in relation to what this Bill actually is.”
“I thought long and hard about speaking today. I will allow right hon. and hon. Members from the legal profession to make the legal arguments better than I can, and will allow Members who rightly have procedural or rights-based concerns for defendants, which I share, to raise them. I trust that those points will be satisfactorily covered. I want to focus my remarks on a particular perspective that I feel has been too often ventriloquised in this debate, and I hope that the House will be gentle with me as I do so. I have spoken before in this place about having post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of being the victim of a crime, but I have never specified the nature of that crime, and in doing so now I am aware that I am waiving my right to anonymity, and aware of the personal consequences that come along with that.”
“I have enormous respect for many of my Front-Bench colleagues, particularly my hon. Friends the Members for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) and for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), but from where I am sitting it feels that, despite their best efforts and the publication of our groundbreaking VAWG strategy, we could do so much for rape victims that does not involve the Lord Chancellor using them as a cudgel to drive through reforms that are not directly relevant to them. As a starting point, Rape Crisis England & Wales has called for five key demands in its “Living in Limbo” report. Do not say that this Bill helps deliver justice for rape victims until it actually, materially does.”
“Shamefully, the tariffs have not been uprated in line with inflation since 2012 and have no eligibility for non-contact sexual offences, which can cause significant and lasting harm. Finally, the VAWG sector has been under-invested in for such a significant period that the best things that we can do to drive down waiting times and improve the experience of victims require money, and the Treasury remains unwilling to adequately cough up. I welcome the announcement of independent legal advisers, but the £6 million that sits alongside this is woefully inadequate. I could not have made it all the way to trial without my independent sexual violence adviser, Jaz, whose support saved my life, but I had to wait seven months to be allocated one, given how under-resourced the system is. That is not good enough.”
“I thank my hon. Friend. The third thing to say is that, for me, closure began after a successful civil process following the acquittal. My rapist may not be considered to have met the criminal threshold for guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, and is out there on the streets as a free man while I live with the life sentence of what he did to me, but what has been established, at a civil standard of proof, is what happened. It found that I had been raped, and a compensation order was made that recognises me as the blameless victim of a violent crime. Despite the recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, we are still nowhere on civil remedy, including movement on the criminal injuries compensation scheme reform.”
“We mourn the lives cut short, the lives never lived, the children and grandchildren never born; the art, music and literature never written; the enormous loss to humanity itself of a tragedy at a scale we can barely fathom that reverberates through modern history and into our present. But as we mourn, we remember. As Jews, we can take forward our cultures, teachings and traditions to future generations, as we have always done, from the Exodus onwards, denying Hitler what the theologian Emil Fackenheim called “a posthumous victory”. Many Jewish communities around the world read and learn Torah from Czech scrolls from the desolated synagogues of Bohemia and Moravia, honouring the communities who were killed and keeping the flame of their memory alive.”
“Rabbi Shapira’s writing, however, survived to inspire future generations, buried in milk cannisters as part of the Oneg Shabbat underground archive, established in 1940 by Emanuel Ringelblum and a secret group of scholars and writers, to document the suffering, resistance and daily life of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, ensuring their story was not lost. They said: “It must all be recorded with not a single fact omitted. And when the time comes—as it surely will—let the world read and know what the murderers have done.” We mourn the 6 million Jews murdered in the Holocaust.”
“Rabbi Shapira did not live to see this victory, to sing in the future. He was murdered in Aktion Erntefest—Operation Harvest Festival—at Trawniki concentration camp on 3 November 1943. Jewish prisoners were separated from non-Jewish prisoners, and up to 43,000 Jews at the Majdanek, Poniatowa and Trawniki concentration camps were killed in two days—the single largest German massacre of Jews in the Holocaust. In all three camps, Jews were forced to strip naked and walk into dug trenches, where they were shot dead. Loud music was played to cover the sound of the gunfire.”
“With extraordinary faith and courage, and recognising the “bitter reality” that people were living through, he concludes: “we must use the judgments and suffering we endure properly, utilising them to worship God, to keep going day and night”. That this present tense speaks of the presence of God in their midst at a time of unimaginable privation, and is a source of strength for them to draw on, is profoundly moving as a contemporary reader. Later on in the parashah, Exodus 15:1, it reads: “And they spoke, to say, I will sing to God for his great victory”. Noting here the future tense, Rabbi Shapira says: “Already, when still in Egypt, they could see God’s salvation, and so they were able, in their minds, to ‘sing in the future’—‘to say’ implies that they succeeded in establishing this for future generations”.”
“This year, I came across a perspective that is both subtle in the closeness of the reading of it, and also completely striking in its depth. I have been reading “Esh Kodesh”, written by Rabbi Kalonymus Kalman Shapira, of blessed memory, the Rebbe of the Warsaw ghetto. Composed between 1939 and 1942, it is a truly astonishing body of work. Reflecting on Parashat Beshalach, he notes that in the text, Exodus 13:21 begins: “And God goes before them by day with a pillar of cloud to guide them along the way, and by night with a pillar of fire providing them with light to travel day and night”. This is the first place where the text uses the present tense.”
“In history, we recall what happened…so that it becomes part of us and who we are… We cannot bring the dead to life, but we can keep their memory alive.” This Shabbat, Jews around the world will be reading Parashat Beshalach. The Torah portion opens with the Pharoah pursuing the Israelites into the desert and the miracle of the splitting of the Red sea. It ends with victory over the Amalekites, the first enemy that the Israelites face upon escaping Egypt. There are so many biblical teachings through which we can approach the Shoah in Beshalach. In particular, we can approach it through grappling with the evil of Amalek and the Pharoah, and we can contemplate the act of remembrance through how we are commanded to commemorate these events.”
“The theme for Holocaust Memorial Day 2026 is “Bridging Generations”. That recognises that as the remaining survivors who can directly bear witness to the atrocities of the Holocaust pass away, living memory must become collective memory. As Jews, we know all about collective memory. The late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, of blessed memory, said: “One of the most important halachic responses to tragedy is the act of remembering, Yizkor. More than it has history, the Jewish people has memory. There is no word for history in the Tanach, and modern Hebrew had to borrow one, historiah. But the word zachor (remember), occurs no fewer than 169 times in the Hebrew Bible. The difference between them is this: history is someone else’s story; memory is my story.”
“We should remember the evils of the past to fight the evils of the present, taking strength from the everyday acts of resistance, large and small, and bringing their stories with us to secure for us all a safe and secure future. Eight decades on from the Holocaust, that is more important now than ever.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and share her thanks to the survivor she mentions, but I also send our thanks to that generation of survivors who were so determined to ensure that their stories were carried forward so that we can learn from them. Right hon. and hon. Members can visit the museum not far from here at Westminster synagogue, home of the Czech Memorial Scrolls Trust, to see the scrolls I referred to and artefacts from those communities. Remembrance of the Holocaust is, however, a society-wide effort that Jews cannot undertake alone. At a time of rising antisemitism globally, when Jews in Manchester and in Bondi Beach are killed just for being Jews, this same antisemitic poison is again taking root and must be confronted.”
“I want to add my voice to my hon. Friend’s comments about the Mothers of Srebrenica and Žepa Enclaves association. I had the real honour of meeting them myself around a decade ago, and their work is absolutely extraordinary. Will my hon. Friend join me in encouraging all Members of the House to take the opportunity to learn from them about what we can do to ensure that we do not carry into the future the hate that caused them to lose their husbands and sons?”
“While X as a platform, and indeed some parties in this place, seem content to profit from the proliferation of illegal sexually abusive content, this Government are meant to practise what we preach on online safety and violence against women and girls. The public, like me, are baffled by hearing tough words from a Government who continue to not just use but prioritise X for their communications. If non-consensual deepfake pornography and child sex abuse imagery is not the red line for the Government to take their communications elsewhere, I ask the Secretary of State, what is?”
“Although this announcement is a welcome step forward for the SMR programme and the community on Anglesey, after suffering many broken promises and false starts, it is abundantly clear that the UK will not meet our future clean energy needs without further gigawatt-scale plants alongside SMRs and AMRs. To that end, and with Wylfa having been widely considered one of the best sites, if not the best, in the UK for a full gigawatt-scale reactor, does the Minister grasp the urgency in setting out the road map for wider nuclear industry needs for future gigawatt sites beyond Sizewell C?”
“Warrington has one of the largest communities of Hongkongers in the country, many of whom I met this weekend when they reiterated their profound concern that the British national overseas 5+1 scheme was at risk as a result of the Government’s wider agenda on tackling issues in the asylum and immigration system. Will the Home Secretary give a clear commitment to Hongkongers that the UK is their home, that the British state will keep its promise to BNOs and Hongkonger refugees, and that the 5+1 scheme is safe?”
“Q6. I know that the thoughts of the whole House will be with everyone affected by the Huntingdon attack, and we should praise the actions of the train’s driver, Andrew Johnson, and the heroic guard, Samir Zitouni—in my mind, a worthy candidate for consideration for the George Cross—as we wish him well in his continued recovery. Andrew Johnson told “ITV News”:“I was only doing my job”.Will the Deputy Prime Minister take this opportunity from the Dispatch Box to recognise the importance of our railway crews, drivers and station staff and the vital role they play in keeping us all safe, from averting suicides on the rail network to dealing with antisocial behaviour and emergencies such as the one we have seen this week?”
“Eight months ago, a similar debate was held in Westminster Hall on the topic of preventing drug-related deaths, to which the Minister responded. Though it was a well-attended debate, during which Members from across the House called for the expansion of harm reduction and evidence-based measures, I am afraid to say that, since then, limited progress has been made in advancing drugs policy to limit the unspeakable further loss of life in our constituencies.”
“I extend my thanks to Mr Speaker for providing the opportunity to discuss the crucial matter of drug-related deaths. I declare an interest as the unremunerated chair of the Centre for Evidence Based Drug Policy, a think-tank in this policy space. The Office for National Statistics reported last month that deaths related to drug poisonings have increased for the 12th consecutive year, and have consequently reached an all-time high once again. The ONS reports that in 2024, there were 5,565 deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales, with just under half of those confirmed to involve an opiate. Continuity is therefore not a strategy; it is a guarantee of further avoidable loss. Every single one of those lives mattered, and every single one of those deaths was preventable.”
“I absolutely agree. There are huge regional disparities in drug deaths across the country, and a regional approach need to be taken to tackling them. While I appreciate that drugs policy and legislation do not fall under the Minister’s departmental remit, I am happy to see her here, as the drugs-related deaths crisis is primarily a public health issue, and must be treated as such if we are to avoid repeating the same mistakes of the last 50 years.”
“I completely agree about the role that rehab facilities can play in supporting people into recovery, and about the need for proper, consistent funding from the Government.”
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention; without it, it would not be an Adjournment debate. I completely agree. The deaths that I am talking about today are drug poisonings in England and Wales only, but if we look at drug deaths in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and at deaths related to alcohol and despair, we see that drug poisonings in England and Wales are a very small part of a huge issue in every part of our United Kingdom.”
“My overarching question today is: will the Government finally take an evidence-based stance on drugs policy to reduce the immense harm that the status quo causes in our constituencies? Will the Minister work across Government to bring forward necessary changes to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and deliver a fit-for-purpose, public-health-led approach to drugs across the UK, saving thousands of lives?”
“The number of drug deaths in Scotland is stark, and it underlines the fact that the issue affects every part of the UK. We know what we need to do to start addressing it. I welcome the recent Scottish Affairs Committee report, which I will mention later. I have said before that putting drugs within the Home Office’s ministerial purview is putting the issue in the wrong place, so I am very happy that a Health Minister is here to respond. The current approach is rooted in the belief that we can simply arrest and imprison our way out of this. Despite the death toll rising every year in the six years that I have been doing this job, the Home Office seems to show not just a lack of curiosity but hostility towards harm reduction measures.”
“The researchers found that drug-related deaths have been under-reported by 30%, and opioid-related deaths between 2011 and 2022 were found to be 55% higher than recorded, putting the estimated number of opioid-related deaths in that period north of 39,000.”
“I absolutely agree. Later, I will try to develop my argument for that kind of approach, which we could take here but do not. As a Parliament and as a society, we may have inadvertently come to accept the yearly statistics, and have perhaps not given them the necessary thought, but I stress that there are cost-effective solutions that could save the taxpayer money and save the lives of our constituents, while taking money out of the pockets of exploitative, organised criminal gangs. I am afraid to say that the problem may be far worse than is recognised. A recent report by King’s College London indicates that there has been a severe under-reporting of drug-related deaths over the past 15 years.”
“In the face of rising fatalities and a cost of living crisis, failing to scale treatment and harm-reduction measures is both morally indefensible and financially illiterate. If we want to realise that four-to-one return, we must provide long-term funding for organisations delivering services. Drug treatment services can only deliver if they are able to retain staff, train consistently and scale according to demand.”
“Take-home naloxone on release or discharge, same-day linkage to community treatment and a clear pathway for handover care are essential for people struggling with substance use disorders. As of December 2021, the Government estimated the annual cost of illegal drug use in England to be £20 billion. Around 48% of that was attributed to drug-related crime, while harms linked to drug-related deaths and homicide accounted for a further 33%. Notably, the majority of those costs are associated with the estimated 300,000 people who use opiates and crack cocaine in England. Dame Carol Black’s landmark 2021 review of UK drug policy found that for every for every £1 spent on treatment, £4 are saved through reduced demand on the health and justice systems.”
“However, further change is necessary and naloxone should be available rapidly and reliably in every community pharmacy in the UK, so that it can be quickly accessed in the event of an overdose. It is important to note that naloxone cannot be administered by the person overdosing and must instead be administered by someone else. That necessitates further education on the existence of naloxone, and how and when to use it, with people who may come into contact with people who use opioids, including frontline service workers, such as police officers and transport workers, and the loved ones of those struggling with addiction. The period immediately after release from prison or discharge from hospital is when risk peaks. Opt-out pathways for naloxone distribution should be the norm.”
“As I mentioned previously, and I will repeat again because it is important, near half of all drug-related deaths registered in 2024 were confirmed to involve an opioid. In addition, this year’s ONS report found that the number of deaths involving nitazenes—a group of highly potent synthetic opioids—almost quadrupled from the year before. This marks the beginning of a new stage in the drug-related deaths crisis. As we have seen across the Atlantic, once those synthetic opioids take hold, it becomes all the more difficult to limit their devastation. I welcome this Government’s changes to the human medicines regulation that further expanded access to naloxone, the lifesaving opioid antidote administered in the event of an overdose. Indeed, naloxone plays a vital role in the fight against drug-related deaths.”
“The National Audit Office reported that between 2014 and 2022 there was a 40% reduction in real-terms spending on adult drug and alcohol services, so I do not think it is a coincidence that the Office for National Statistics has reported a near doubling in drug-related deaths since 2014, and that the number of deaths only rises every year. It is clear that the problem has been made substantively worse by under-investment by the previous Government. We can all acknowledge that, but acknowledgment without reform is meaningless. Persisting with failed, punitive policies will only deepen a crisis that already ranks among Europe’s worst. Now is the time to show the difference a Labour Government can make by putting in place harm-reduction policies that will start to undo this extensive damage.”
“My right hon. Friend is exactly right. The clearest way to recovery is with companionship and support—there is no path to recovery without that—and I of course give credit to the organisation she mentioned that is doing such fantastic work in this space, as we were discussing earlier today. The implications of the under-reporting of drug-related deaths are that the problem is far worse than previously thought and the decision to cut funding to services under the previous Government was based on flawed figures.”
“Friend the Minister for Policing and Crime also maintains that supplying essential safer inhalation equipment would contravene current legislation, and that the Government are unable to support such a provision or to provide a legal pathway to address this. Encouraging drug users to change their method of consuming drugs from injecting to inhaling can be an important harm reduction step, yet while supplying clean hypodermic needles is exempt under section 9A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the Government continue to support a policy of criminalisation of potential providers and users of safer inhalation equipment.”
“I recognise and share the Minister’s concerns about supply but, with or without such centres, people will use the same drugs, either in alleyways and stairwells or in safe hygienic settings where sharps are disposed of, and where staff can intervene and build relationships that can be the foundation for recovery from addiction. The Scottish Affairs Committee recently published a report into problem drug use in Scotland and Glasgow’s safer drug consumption facility, and it is interesting to note the call for legislative action from the UK Government and Parliament and the fact that they seem to share my frustration with the Home Office’s ideological rather than evidence-based approach on safer drug consumption facilities. In written correspondence to me, my hon.”
“My hon. Friend is exactly right: Change Grow Live is a fantastic organisation. Multi-year funding schemes with clear outcome metrics, such as faster time for treatment, improved retention and improved naloxone coverage, will make a difference in bringing down the figures I have talked about. That is the path out of this crisis. I recently received a letter from my hon. Friend the Minister for Policing and Crime stating she could not support overdose prevention centres because of concerns about organised crime supplying the drugs there. Overdose prevention centres are a frontline, evidence-based intervention that save lives and public money, reducing ambulance call-outs and A&E attendances, cutting public injecting and needlestick injuries, and creating a bridge into treatment.”
“I absolutely agree and I took a note from that report: “However, it was clear from the Minister’s evidence that the Home Office will not make legislative changes, even if the evaluation finds that the facility has been effective in meeting its aims.” That is ideological, not evidence-based, which is why I believe the Home Office is fundamentally incapable of dealing with drug deaths and drug harm in our communities.”
“We must simply find the political expediency and courage to take bold action and do what is right. We cannot govern as the careful custodians of a failed Conservative settlement; we must replace it. This is a solvable problem, and it is clear what works. With clear guidance, consistent commissioning and the courage to back frontline services, we can save lives, support families and ease pressure on our NHS. We will not solve this problem overnight, but I hope to come back next year with the figures at least trending in the right direction. No amount of warm words or hand-wringing in this place will absolve us of our collective responsibility if we do not take the steps necessary to do that now. We promised the country change, and it is now time to see it.”
“In the light of that, I have tabled a number of questions recently on the effectiveness of the reclassification. I am genuinely concerned that no analysis of that move has been made, and the intention is clearly to ramp it up further. Other policy levers are available. In particular, an emphasis should be placed on tackling the mental health crisis among our young people, which can make the dissociative effects of ketamine an appealing proposition. Throughout this debate, I have sought to lay out the extent of the problem and to offer realistic, cost-effective and constructive measures that could save this country billions of pounds, not to mention thousands of lives. There are solutions to these issues, and the UK has both the expertise and the capacity to lead in this area.”
“While ketamine deaths are relatively low, with 60 deaths, the stats are again trending the wrong way, as is the prevalence of the drug in our communities. I refer Members to the rate of past-year ketamine use among 16 to 24-year-olds, which has doubled since the drug was reclassified from class C to class B in 2014. We need a fit-for-purpose national drug policy, not a platform for point scoring or performative “tough on crime” posturing while harms continue to mount. There is much talk at the moment about the reclassification of ketamine to a class A drug, as if that is some sort of panacea, despite the fact that deaths from heroin and cocaine—both class A substances—have been increasing year on year. It is as though the Home Office thinks that making something that is already illegal more illegal is somehow worthwhile.”
“The first substance is cocaine, with 1,279 deaths involving cocaine registered in 2024, which was 14.4% higher than in the previous year and 11 times higher than in 2011. That is perhaps not surprising, given that the UK is the largest consumer of cocaine per capita in Europe and the second-largest consumer of it in the world, according to the OECD. The National Crime Agency estimates that in 2023, England, Scotland and Wales consumed 117 tonnes of the drug. It is worth mentioning that around 52% of homicides are drug-related, and there is evidence that cocaine use is fuelling domestic violence. In 2023, a pilot scheme found that 59% of domestic abuse offenders arrested in seven police force areas tested positive for cocaine and/or opiates. The status quo is not working. The second substance is ketamine.”