Legalising cannabis for medicinal purposes would reduce the drug’s side effects, MPs have heard, as a fresh attempt to change the law was brought before the Commons.
Labour’s Paul Flynn said the “tide of world opinion” was moving towards legalising the class B substance which he described as the “oldest medicine in the world”.
He acknowledged cannabis side effects exist but said there had been “no problems” that have arisen in countries which have legalised the drug for medicinal purposes.
Mr Flynn said: “If we do legalise drugs we reduce the side effects by taking the market out of the hands of the criminals and the scammers, and put it into a legal market that can be run by doctors on medical priorities.”
Moving his Legalisation of Cannabis (Medicinal Purposes) via a 10-minute rule motion, the former frontbencher said he had the support of the MS Society and two Police and Crime Commissioners for the move.
Mr Flynn said: “It’s time for us, I believe, to lead public opinion rather than follow it.
“I believe it would be an act of compassion and courage for us today to pass this Bill and allow the change – and it’s a very minor change – moving the cannabis from schedule one to schedule two, because at the moment the law says that cannabis has no beneficial effects and we all know it does.”
Parliament">Paul Flynn with campaigners outside Parliament (Stefan Rousseau/PA)
The Newport West MP dubbed the legislation the “Elizabeth Brice Bill” after the multiple sclerosis (MS) sufferer who campaigned as Clare Hodges for the legalisation of medicinal cannabis before her death in 2011.
He was given permission to bring in his Bill and he asked for it to be given a second reading on February 23.
It is unlikely to become law in its current form without Government support or sufficient parliamentary time.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here