← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Spiking Incidents: Prevention — [Esther McVey in the Chair]

11 January 2023

Lead MP

Richard Graham
Gloucester
Con

Responding Minister

Thomas Tugendhat

Tags

No tags
Word Count: 14122
Other Contributors: 20

At a Glance

Richard Graham raised concerns about spiking incidents: prevention — [esther mcvey in the chair] in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

Mr. Graham requests a simple amendment to existing law to make spiking completely illegal without creating a new offence. He believes such an amendment would help clarify the legal status of spiking and encourage victims to report incidents more frequently.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Gloucester
Opened the debate
Mr. Richard Graham is concerned about the prevalence of spiking incidents, particularly affecting young females in the night-time economy. He cites data from the National Police Chiefs' Council showing nearly 5,000 reported cases of spiking for the year ending August 2022, including 2,581 cases involving needles and 2,131 cases involving drinks. Graham highlights that despite Home Office promises to research this issue, no specific proposal has been forthcoming.

Government Response

Thomas Tugendhat
Government Response
Acknowledged significant steps taken by various Ministers to protect women and girls from spiking. Discussed the reclassification of drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act, investment in protection projects, public safety measures, and efforts to address spiking through legislation. Emphasised ongoing examination of whether further criminal offences are necessary to address spiking adequately.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.