FANCY A DASH OF BROMIDE IN THAT METHADONE?

SPEAKING personally, I'd cut their goolies off. It's the only
language these people understand. Why should they be allowed to
continue having children when they are a burden on the state? Haven't
they caused enough trouble without inflicting their offspring on
society, creating another generation of damaged sociopaths?

Yes, it's time to stop Labour MSPs like Duncan McNeil from
reproducing. They should have contraceptives introduced into their
beer. Or their wives' beer, or whatever they drink nowadays in
Greenock and Inverclyde. It's time to start playing hardball - or no
balls at all. If oral contraception doesn't work, castration has the
great merit of being 100% effective. I rest my case.

McNeil's plan for dosing the methadone of heroin addicts with
contraceptives may have been loopy, but there was political method in
the madness. Labour want to convince voters that they are tough on
smack in time for the next Holyrood elections. The squeals from
social workers and liberal lawyers that compulsory contraception is a
cruel breach of human rights were just what they wanted.

When the toddler Derek Doran died last year after drinking the
methadone prescribed for his mother, Jack McConnell gave the green
light to his backbenchers to think the unthinkable. They've been only
too willing to oblige.

However, a number of practical and ethical problems are presented by
Mr McNeil's plan: what about Catholic drug addict parents? Would they
be forced to consume contraceptives, which the Church insists is an
offence against the law of God and a grave sin? And why should it
only be women who are targeted? Surely the Labour sisterhood should
demand equal treatment for male drug addicts. How about a dash of
bromide in the methadone?

And if we are to stop drug addicts breeding, why not alcoholics?
Surely they too should be prevented from committing random acts of
procreation. You can' t rely on brewer's droop.

What about the criminal population? We don't want all those foreign
murderers and rapists released into the community by Charles Clarke
to start families. Asylum seekers could be given contraceptives in
their tea. Then there are people with disabilities .

Of course, the Scottish Executive has distanced itself from Mr
McNeil's proposals, but it is looking at other ways of dealing with
the children of drug addicts which are almost as alarming. The First
Minister has made it clear that he wants to see the children of drug
addicts taken into care, en masse if necessary. Presumably this is so
they can be properly trained in the ways of hard drugs, as children
in care are far more likely to end up using drugs than those who live
with their natural parents.

The recent changes to the rules on adoption, allowing same-sex
couples to adopt on the same basis as heterosexuals, was partly
inspired by the expected demand for care as the First Minister's
child snatch squads sweep the housing estates to liberate the
offspring of crack-heads. But I'm not so sure that any couple would
be keen to take on the responsibilities for 11-year-old addicts.

So, the state will inevitably become the parent of last resort. There
are around 50,000 children who live in families where at least one
adult is misusing drugs. That's an awful lot of children's homes
McConnell will be opening. Perhaps he could enlist the help of the
private sector. I'm sure Premier Prisons, which runs Kilmarnock jail
so efficiently, could open up secure units for drug children at a
very reasonable cost. Private sponsors could be encouraged to fund
these establishments, which could be called "homes of ambition".

This is, of course, a serious problem and we shouldn't make light of
it, but the Scottish Executive isn't making a lot of sense right now
- - and the likes of Duncan McNeil are positively inviting derision.
The First Minister seems to be untroubled by criticism from
children's organisations and from the Child Commissioner for Scotland
Kathleen Marshall that "yo-yoing" children in and out of care only
makes this problem worse. But last week, McConnell announced the
Hidden Harm - Next Steps programme which includes a new fostering
agency to look after the new charges of the state. He said that
"chaotic" drug abuse was incompatible with effective parenting. But
what about orderly drug taking? Perhaps if the addled parents were on
regular prescription doses of heroin, their children might be in less
obvious danger.

Contrary to popular belief, people can survive perfectly well for
many years and behave quite normally on heroin. A study last year by
Glasgow Caledonian University found that many were holding down
normal jobs and relationships and passing exams.

It may be difficult to envisage the state taking over the drugs trade
and providing a regular supply of narcotics to Scotland's 40-60,000
addicts, but it would keep them off the streets, and cut crime pretty
dramatically. The police themselves admit the war against drugs is
being lost, and some officers in Strathclyde have even suggested that
drugs should be legalised, even hard drugs such as heroin.

There's no guarantee that returning to the policies of the 1960s,
when heroin was prescribed to addicts by doctors, will stop the drugs
trade in its tracks. But one thing is certain: if we go on as we are
today, the numbers of people on drugs will only increase, as will the
danger to children.

And with MSPs like Duncan McNeil on the loose, there's no knowing
where things will end up.