Program prac agencji EMCDDA

Poniżej znajduje się moja wypowiedź, którą wygłosiłem na dzisiejszym posiedzeniu komisji LIBE na temat strategii narkotykowej i programu prac agencji EMCDDA.

LIBE 25 January 2016

Progress report in the EU’s 2013 – 2020 Drugs Strategy and 2013 – 2016 Action

Plan on Drugs

  • Presentation by the Commission

Dear colleagues,

  • Firstly, I would like to thank you all for the presentation of European Drug Strategy, which I believe is a good basis to promote better, safer and healthier Europe. The main principle is – the reduction of the demand and of the supply of illicit drugs, but also starting much more cooperated and coordinated common European efforts for reducing the risks of drugs addressed to the societies.
  • Since the entering into force of the strategy and later of the action plan, we have observed a lot of public initiatives, taken among several Member States in order to raise the European society’s awareness. Healthy lifestyle promotion and multiple awareness campaigns, which aim is to foster the self-consciousness of possible health and social issues related to drug abuse, in my opinion – are the key points to reduce the supply and consumption mechanism of illicit drugs in Europe. Treatment, rehabilitation, and recovery also need to receive increased attention in order to promote the social reintegration of people with the drug abuse past. And it should be strengthened.
  • But on the other hand – the problem lies in too big differences among Member States: in how advanced they are in the drugs policy.
  • Secondly, the drug strategy, adds a value to the MS’s national policies by offering a platform for coordination in relation to international issues and promoting the EU approach to tackle drug problem. It is important to continue to encourage the national institutions and EU agencies to promote the research and analysis, based on EMCDDA indicators, in order to duly understand, monitor and evaluate drugs supply and consumption issues. It is crucial for Europe to maintain high level of promotion of all good practices and experiences among all 28 MS.
  • Coordination; international cooperation; risk assessment, research and monitoring included within the plan of 54 actions, together with the list of 15 indicators gives us a wide range of national and international measures for effective cooperation and wide-open exchange of views which give us opportunities to tackle the drugs related problems.???????
  • We need to have the real assessment of the readiness of particular countries to participate in common undertakings. It is a key because the drug market is more and more cross border, so coordinated actions are more and more required for the efficiency of the European Strategy on drugs.
  • The lack of common European Strategy on New Psychoactive Substances is unfortunate, a bad example – there are many problems with starting the trilogues, after the Commission and Parliament work on the proposal of the new framework for solving that problem.
  • We have to assess: what the reason is : the lack of political will ? , or the fear of too much coordination at the European level? Or the sufficient and relevant policies made by the Member States, at least by some of them.
  • Thirdly, the EU institutions and Member States should improve the speed of detection and assessment of NPS in order to be able to respond rapidly and effectively to the emergence of new psychoactive substances.
  • Now, the whole procedure takes a long time and I believe that we need some possibilities to do it faster. We are working on the new solutions that are a bit blocked in the Council but we hope that during the Dutch Presidency we will be able to move forward in this important file.
  • And fourthly, I have also three additional questions:
  • What are your plans regarding NPS for this year?
  • Also, in the context of UNGASS conference? How important will be the NPS topic there?

3) One of the aims in the Action Plan highlights the cooperation with the civic society. Could you give us some examples of actions planned or undertaken in this area? Are they linked to ay financial instrument?

European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA)


  • Presentation by the EMCDDA Director Mr Alexis Goosdeel of the EMCDDA’s

strategy and work programme for 2016-18 and the work programme for 2016


  • Dear Mr Goosdeel, first of all I would like to congratulate you for your nomination as a Director of EMCDDA.  Thank you very much for your presentation of strategy for EMCDDA in 2016-2018 and the action plan. There are many key measures, and activities, which will allow the Agency to play the real role in the area of the early warning system by knowledge related to the risk analysis corresponding with drug demand/supply changes in Europe and assessments of the new phenomena.
  • I believe we have learned a lot about your short-terms plans.
  • But I would like to ask you about your long-term strategy that you are planning to prepare and implement for the period of 2016-2025. You have told us in September when you were still a candidate for a position of Director of EMCDDA, that you want to prepare a strategy to position the EMCDDA as ‘the EU agency that delivers drug-related information and analysis that make a difference for its customers’. You want to ‘consolidate the contribution of the EMCDDA to a more secure and to a healthier Europe’. Transforming EMCDDA into the information centre will require – that you look for the efficiency in objectives that you strive for. How do you want to achieve those goals?
  • I have also some more specific questions, as I am the Rapporteur of the New Psychoactive Substances Regulation. I hope, that step by step, also thinking about the new shape of this regulation, we need to consider how to adjust the Agency to the new expectations related to the new task – stronger fight against NPS.
  • I would like to ask you about EMCDDA capabilities to tackle more assessment procedures and to do it faster, as well as EMCDDA role in the Early Warning System. I believe that we need to speed up the process of assessing the risk related to the new NPS. And for these reasons, I would like to hear your opinion about it.
  • In the budget for 2016 – where the general expenditures are at the level of 15.5 millions Euro- on the goals related to the early warning procedures we have only dedicated 490 thousands Euro. We need to change it in the future. I hope that LIBE Committee will fully support the bigger budget for the Agency for stronger capability for better results.
  • I was also wondering about the possibility to strengthening cooperation with national laboratories and possibly streamline the process of assessment – by using some of the tests results, already performed by national authorities. Would it be possible, reasonable and if yes – to what extent?