The Joint Committee on Drugs Use was established by the Government to consider the Report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use and to make a reasoned response to each of its 36 recommendations.1 On 22 October 2024, the Committee published its Interim Report.2

Context

The Committee included members from across the spectrum of political parties (not just Government parties).3 The Joint Committee on Drugs Use Interim Report is based on the Committee’s seven meetings held between June and September 2024. At these meetings, presentations were made and questions asked of members of Government Departments and other State bodies, representatives of organisations working in the drugs use and addiction sector, and academic institutions with an interest in the field.3 Rather than working through each of the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendations in turn, Committee meetings considered drugs use in Ireland more broadly.4

The Committee identified four modules to inform its work. These are: drugs policy, the national drugs strategy and a whole-of-government approach; engagement on decriminalisation, depenalisation, diversion and legalisation; engagement on a health-led approach; and family and community. The first two of these modules are addressed in the Interim Report.

Recommendations

The Interim Report reflects the complexities involved in addressing the challenges associated with drugs use in Ireland. As mentioned above, the orders of reference for the Committee outlined its role: ‘the Joint Committee shall consider the Report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use (‘the Report’) and shall provide a response to the subject matter of the Report, including a reasoned response to each of the 36 recommendations contained in the Report’
(p. 4).5

The Interim Report presents each of the Assembly’s recommendations, alongside the Committee’s response which takes the form of one or more sentences/statements to provide context to its position. Overall, the Committee agrees with the recommendations of the Citizens’ Assembly – although it acknowledges that it did not have enough time to explore them all in adequate depth. The only recommendation it did not explicitly agree with was that which called for an annual report on drug-related expenditure which would be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General (Recommendation 20). More time was required to consider this.

The Committee used the report to make 59 additional recommendations of its own. Many of these recommendations duplicated findings from the Citizens’ Assembly. Some recurring themes in these recommendations were: to adopt a health-led approach to dealing with drugs use; addressing stigma and trauma experienced by people who use drugs; the decriminalisation of people who use drugs; removing barriers to treatment and recovery, including housing; increasing the capacity of treatment services; ensuring the community’s role in addressing drugs use, including the involvement of the Drug and Alcohol Task Forces; increasing the availability of harm reduction services, including naloxone; addressing the causes of poverty, criminal activity and drugs use; improving service provision in prisons; and an improved funding structure that would include increased resources and multi-annual funding structures.

Legislative change

While the Committee’s recommendations tended to be in line with those of the Assembly, there was also some divergence, most notably on the question of legislative change to reduce the harms of drugs use.

Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendation

As previously reported, a core element of the work of the Citizens’ Assembly was to recommend the legislative changes that the State could make to reduce the harms of illicit drugs use.6 A structured and systematic approach was taken in the Assembly to explore the possible options. After much discussion and debate, five models were included in a ballot carried out with the Assembly members. In its simplest terms, the options ranged from maintaining the status quo to the legalisation and regulation of drugs. The Citizens’ Assembly voted for the State to introduce a comprehensive health-led response to possession of drugs for personal use.

As outlined in a previous article, ‘under this approach, the State would respond to drug use primarily as a health rather than a criminal justice issue. While possession of drugs would remain illegal, those found in possession would be afforded extensive opportunities to engage voluntarily with health-led services. This would minimise or potentially completely remove the possibility of criminal conviction and prison sentences for simple possession. At its core, this model combines diversion, decriminalisation, and dissuasion’ (p. 9).6

While the Assembly favoured this approach for all drugs, the vote was particularly close in relation to cannabis. The comprehensive health-led model received one more vote than the legalisation and regulation model (39 versus 38 votes) when it came to cannabis. However, the comprehensive health-led approach was the model voted for by most Assembly members across all drug types considered. This resulted in Recommendation 17 of the Report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use – that the State should introduce a comprehensive health-led response to possession of drugs for personal use.

The Committee’s response and recommendations

The Committee states that it agrees with the Assembly’s recommendation. In response, it makes three statements: that a health-led response should be made operational; it recommends decriminalisation of the person in relation to possession for personal use; and that healthcare should be voluntary and not mandated. However, the Committee’s own recommendations adopt a different position to that of the Citizens’ Assembly in relation to cannabis. Two of the Committee’s recommendations (numbers 43 and 44) deal with researching and introducing a regulatory model for ‘an Irish not-for-profit regulated cannabis market’ (p. 14).1 As outlined above, this was not a move recommended by the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use.

Concluding comment

The Citizens’ Assembly adopted a systematic and transparent approach to its selection of recommendations. While the Committee’s Interim Report states that it agrees with the recommendations of the Assembly in relation to legislative changes, its own recommendations would suggest otherwise in relation to cannabis. It is unclear from the report how this divergence should be addressed. The dissolution of the Government in November 2024 stopped the work of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Drugs Use. The lack of clarity about how it would progress is recognised in the Cathaoirleach’s foreword to the Interim Report. However, there is a commitment in the new Programme for Government to re-establish the Committee.7

1    The Citizens’ Assembly (2024) Report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use. Volume 1. Dublin: The Citizens’ Assembly. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/40393/

2    Joint Committee on Drugs Use (2024) Joint Committee on Drugs Use Interim Report. Dublin: Houses of the Oireachtas. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/42080/

3    Dillon L (2024) Oireachtas Joint Committee on Drugs Use. Drugnet Ireland, Issue 89 (Autumn): 13–14. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/42091/

4    To view a video or read a transcript of the Joint Committee on Drugs Use meetings, visit:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/committees/33/drugs-use/debates/

5    For the Joint Committee on Drugs Use orders of reference, visit: https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/33/committee_on_standing_orders_and_dail_reform/reports/2024/2024-02-28_orders-of-reference-for-special-committee-on-drugs-use_en.pdf

6    Dillon L (2024) Final report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Drugs Use. Drugnet Ireland, Issue 87 (Winter Supplement): 2–12. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/40651/

7    Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Independent TDs (2025) Draft Programme for Government 2025: Securing Ireland’s Future. Dublin. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/42537/