Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Temporary Class Drug) Order 2026

I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Temporary Class Drug) Order 2026 (S.I., 2026, No. 613). It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. The statutory instrument, which was laid before Parliament on 10 June, places controls on a new, highly lethal class of drug. Orphines are a type of synthetic opioid, which emerged in force in the UK drugs market last spring. In that time, they have been involved in at least 22 deaths, 14 of which were between December and March. Between 2024 and April 2026, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime received 206 reports from multiple countries of drug samples containing orphine compounds. The report of 30 April from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, for which I am very grateful, stated that, “the risk to the population from these recently emerging compounds is sufficiently great that urgent steps are required to protect public health.” We have taken those urgent steps. Less than six weeks after the report was published, we enacted a temporary class drug order—the first in a decade—to control seven orphines. I will spare Committee members the complex chemical names, but they are all set out in the order and the explanatory memorandum. I confirm that three of the seven have been involved in UK deaths, and the European Union drugs agency has notified that the other four are present in the EU drugs market. The TCDO makes it a specific offence to produce, supply or offer to supply those seven orphines; to possess them with an intent to supply; and to import or export them. Penalties are the same as for class B drugs—namely, maximum sentences of 14 years in prison. The TCDO also provides that the substances should be treated as if they were listed in schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. Schedule 1 covers substances with no known medical uses, as is the case here, and requires anyone who needs to make legitimate use of them—for example, for research—to obtain a Home Office licence. Unusually, the statutory instrument comes under the made affirmative procedure, by which it comes into force but then requires the active assent of both Houses—in this case, by next Friday. That reflects the fact that we are expanding the scope of the criminal law, but there is a pressing danger to public safety. Whatever views hon. Members may have about the harms of some drugs, I hope we can all agree that these drugs are a clear and present danger that must be quickly controlled. We have also accepted the recommendation of the advisory council to make these substances—and some broader generic definitions of orphines—class A drugs. That is not for today. We will introduce draft legislation as soon as possible, as the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has urged us to do, and a different Committee from this one will have the chance to debate it. I cannot give a precise timetable for that, but I assure the Committee that we are mindful of the fact that the TCDO lasts for just one year. The statutory instrument is vital to keep our communities safe, and I commend it to the Committee.

Thank you, Mr Vickers, for chairing today’s debate. For the avoidance of doubt, I want to be clear that the Opposition support the Government’s decision, and welcome what I hope is a first step to stop the proliferation of these dangerous substances. The evidence that the Government and our international partners have presented on orphines shows them to be dangerous substances that we must stop being used as quickly as possible. We must act expediently to crack down on new and dangerous substances without medical uses and stop them making their way into our society. Orphines have already been involved in at least 15 deaths since spring 2025, and I share the concerns of both the Government and the ACMD about the urgent steps needed to protect public health. In that light, the important question for the Government is: when do they expect to transition from the temporary order to a permanent measure that will offer enhanced powers to stop their use? We all recognise that a transition in leadership can cause difficulties in Ministers offering assurances, but it would be helpful if they could set out a timeline for when we might expect the change to be made. Recognising the dangers posed by this compound, we must also acknowledge the need to be agile and have robust enforcement. A presentation by the Australian Prompt Response Network in June this year, on the emerging threat of new synthetic orphines, identified 14 analogues. Although the three most frequently identified on the digital market are covered by the order, it leaves open the possibility of new substances entering the market without being controlled. The continuing evolution of these drugs means that it is necessary to identify at speed which items are entering the market before they result in further deaths. We have a responsibility to those who have died to be ready to identify any changes. As such, does the Minister know whether conversations have been held with police forces about recognising the new substances? Moreover, given the decrease in police officers, is there sufficient capacity to respond to changes? The order is necessary and comes with the support of the ACMD. We must be ready to confront the changing dangers posed by new synthetics, so I sincerely hope that the Government act fast to introduce all the measures that they have accepted.

To follow on from the point made by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West, the ACMD recommends that orphines should be classed as class A, whereas under a temporary class drug order, they can be placed only within class B boundaries. My understanding is that the Minister has accepted the recommendation to bring them into line with class A. Does she recognise that it is important to introduce the permanent controls as quickly as possible?

I have a few questions for the Minister. These are extremely harmful drugs that threaten the people who take them. Can the Minister update the Committee on whether they are arriving in the country in their final form or whether they are synthesised in this country from raw products, and how are they being administered right now? It is clearly important for enforcement to know whether we need to stop them at the point of entry or whether we need to take action in the community to identify the drugs and seize them. Can the Minister update us on whether the ingredients of these harmful drugs can be brought in legally but then synthesised in this country? That will have an effect on enforcement as well. Finally, have the police established the prevalence of these products? I completely accept the number of deaths that have been caused, but equally, the drugs might be being used in a more widespread way.

I thank hon. Members for their points and for welcoming the changes that we are making. As I explained, we have accepted that orphines should be classed as class A, but there is a different parliamentary process through which we will make them class A. We will do that as quickly as possible. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West, asked when it will happen. I cannot give a specific date, but two things are true. First, we will do it as soon as possible, and secondly, the order lasts for only a year, so we will have to do it within that time anyway. We will ensure that we do it well within that time. It is the right thing to do, and we have accepted what the ACMD has suggested. When we introduce the legislation to make orphines class A, we can use a more generic definition. The shadow Minister made a point about different forms of these substances, and the generic definition will help us to cover more substances as they get made. He is right to say that as we pick up and act on certain new synthetic opioids, new ones pop up along the way. The hon. Member for Harrow East asked where the drugs are coming from and how they are presenting themselves. There is a risk of them being made in this country and coming from abroad, but they are mainly coming from abroad. I think there have been two cases where nitazenes—similar substances—have been found being produced in Scotland. I will write to the hon. Gentleman if I have the wrong drug type, but there are two cases where production has been found in Scotland. Sadly, Scotland has much higher levels of deaths than we do with the problems that it has. The National Crime Agency, which would happily do a wider briefing on this issue, is very good at identifying new and emerging drugs and keeping them at bay. It is much harder to manage and reduce problems with the more traditional drugs that are coming in extreme quantities, although the NCA does good work in that space, too. It has been good thus far, and perhaps better than other countries, including America, which has seen a huge increase in fentanyl. We have not quite seen that, but we are seeing significant numbers and deaths across the country. Through the National Crime Agency, we will ensure that we are keeping our borders as safe as we possibly can to stop drugs coming in while keeping on top of production. The hon. Member for Harrow East also asked how the police are recognising these drugs. We have a partnership across Five Eyes in particular, and we have relationships with other countries. We are introducing early warning systems through which we tell the police when drugs are emerging either across the EU or in some of our partner countries, such as Australia and the US. We tell them what these things physically look like so that they know what to look out for and what to expect. We have those partnerships under way. This is a constant battle, as all Members know, and the order will make a helpful difference as we work quickly towards making orphines a class A drug. Question put and agreed to.