The first parliamentary debate on medical cannabis in the UK under the new Labour administration has shattered hopes of a more progressive stance on reform.
Despite impassioned speeches from members of various parties, unanimously calling for the UK’s ‘patchwork’ cannabis regulation to be revisited and reformed, the government responded with the same tired reasoning for the lack of progress as the previous government.
This was all the more frustrating given that Labour’s Minister of State for Health and Social Care, Karin Smyth, has herself delivered heartfelt pleas for government action on medical cannabis reform while in opposition.
However, now in power, it seems Smyth has retreated to the same boilerplate responses she had previously criticised, telling the room: “Before we see routine prescribing of these unlicensed medicines, the NHS must have greater assurance on the clinical and cost effectiveness of these medicines.”
Labour clearly unwilling
Matt Hughes, Co-Founder and Director of Medcan Family Foundation, which helps parents and carers of children with epilepsy, was present at the debate.
Despite forthcoming support for his organisations campaign while in opposition, he says the party’s position appears to have changed in recent months.
“Our recent paper, Open Secrets, highlighted the desperate situation that hundreds of families in the UK currently find themselves in, forced to resort to illegal cannabis products due to the barriers to NHS prescribing,” he explained, adding that the government is fully aware of this but is ‘choosing not to act’.
“Labour’s support for our campaign while in opposition was commendable, making today’s response all the more disappointing. Despite previous conversations with the DoH under the former government, Labour has now made it clear they are unwilling to engage with Medcan or take proactive steps to protect our vulnerable children.”
‘We do not want to be back here in two years rerunning this same debate’
After the opening remarks from the DUP’s Jim Shannon, a long-time proponent of reform, laid out a comprehensive argument for why the current system needs changing, other arguments from across the political spectrum added weight to each of these now-well-worn points.
However, it was the Conservative’s Dr. Luke Evans who presented the most damning case against the government’s continued inaction.
He highlighted a ‘particularly strong contribution’ from the then Shadow Health Minister, Ms Smyth, during a similar debate on medical cannabis from 2021.
“Given that she now holds power,” Evans told the room, “I feel it is fair to ask her the very same questions she posed to the then-Minister.”
Quoting her contribution directly, he continued:
“It would be helpful if the Minister could set out what steps he is taking to empower and accelerate research in this space. I hope he will not dodge the question by saying that this issue is simply one for clinicians. The government has a responsibility.
“There seems to be a lack of urgency on this issue, which is concerning. People are suffering right now. We have heard again and again about children suffering from seizures—sometimes over 100 per day. Accessing care is, in some cases, pushing families to the brink of destitution. We should do everything we can to support these people.
“If research is needed before clinicians feel comfortable prescribing, then it is incumbent on this government to support clinicians. We need more streamlined clinical trials and better engagement with clinicians. We do not want to be back here in two years rerunning this same debate.”
He concluded by asking her, as she did four years earlier, what steps she has taken to accelerate research, streamline clinical trials, empower clinicians or, most crucially, support patients.
A disappointing response
For the patients, family members and advocates present at the debate, the response was not just disappointingly familiar but also smacked of hypocrisy.
In her own words, Ms. Smyth ‘dodged the question by saying that this issue is simply one for clinicians.’
“We’re all here as politicians, and it is right that whether to prescribe any medicine or treatment is a clinical decision, whether on the NHS or privately. It is not for us to influence these decisions, so I cannot comment on individual cases here today.”
As for the government’s ‘responsibility’ to ‘empower and accelerate’ research in this space, the onus has once again been passed directly to businesses to fund, supply and conduct the research.
“The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) and the MHRA are there to support manufacturers and researchers to develop new medicines and design quality studies. So I strongly encourage the manufacturers of these products to invest in research to prove they are safe and effective and meet the rigorous standards we rightly expect for all medicines.”
Despite stating that her government had inherited a broken system from the former administration, something few could argue with, Ms Smyth was happy to take credit for the only medical cannabis clinical trials currently taking place in the UK.
“I want to thank the Office of the Spokesperson for reading out my contribution and highlighting how proactive we have been—just seven months into this new government. I am proud that the trials we are conducting are world-first initiatives…
“We are not waiting for industry to respond to patient voices. The NIHR and NHS England have recently confirmed over £8.5 million in funding for clinical trials to investigate whether cannabis-based medicines are effective in the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsies.”
This trial, being conducted by the University College London and Great Ormond Street Hospital, was announced in October, 2024, but were first planned around five years ago, initiated by the the BPNA (British Paediatric Neurology Association).
The second trial into CBD and patients with neuropathic pain, being conducted by the University of Edinburgh, was announced back in 2023.
As Conservative MP Jerome Mayhew argued, medical cannabis medications are ‘personalised treatments,’ tailored to individual patients.
He continued: “However, we persist in applying a randomised controlled trial (RCT) model, which is not appropriate for personalised medication. As a result, licensing for these treatments is being blocked—even when anecdotal evidence overwhelmingly suggests they are effective.
“But let’s be clear—this problem is solvable. Licensing systems for medicinal cannabis have been effectively implemented elsewhere… If these first-world countries have developed safe and effective licensing models, then why can’t we?”
Rejecting calls for a cancelled ‘observational study with a small cohort’ to be relaunched, Ms Smyth said it would ‘not produce results as robust as a randomised controlled trial, which is the gold standard for clinical trials, nor would it add to the current evidence base.’
The post Labour’s ‘Disappointing’ Response to Medical Cannabis Debate Show Nothing Has Changed appeared first on Cannabis Health News.
Go to Source
Author: Business of Cannabis
