Health Bill

At first sight, I warmly support the amendments tabled by the noble Earl. There is one tricky difficulty which should be raised. The noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, will be reassured to know that there is apparently no clear scientific evidence of a statistical nature relating to the danger of smoking the various medicinal and herbal preparations and others to which the noble Earl referred. We have no evidence as to whether that is harmful. Of course, in the case of smoking tobacco, it is not the actual nicotine that is the carcinogenic substance, but the hydrocarbons that are produced by the high temperature at which the smoke is produced in the burning cigarette or, to a lesser extent, in the burning cigar or pipe. As yet, we do not know whether similar harmful carcinogenic agents are produced by smoking the kind of preparation to which the noble Earl referred. In passing, I should mention the sensitive and difficult issue of cannabis, because the House Select Committee on Science and Technology carried out a major survey some time ago into the medicinal properties of cannabis and its dangers. It was clear then that there was some statistical evidence—nothing like as strong as for tobacco—to indicate that the smoking of cannabis is carcinogenic. But clearly it would not be appropriate in regulations produced by the Government to specify issues relating to the smoking of a substance that is, in any event, illegal. The whole issue of cannabis should not be considered further in this context. Nevertheless, a great deal of important information might be derived from including this kind of amendment in the Bill.