CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs

British statutory advisory non-departmental public body

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 4, 2026
Entity authorityQ4686856
Source-derived summary

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is a British statutory advisory non-departmental public body, which was established under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

Mandate

Its terms of reference, according to the Act, are as follows:

to keep under review the situation in the United Kingdom with respect to drugs which are being or appear to them likely to be misused and of which the misuse is having or appears to them capable of having harmful effects sufficient to constitute a social problem, and to give to any one or more of the Ministers, where either Council consider it expedient to do so or they are consulted by the Minister or Ministers in question, advice on measures (whether or not involving alteration of the law) which in the opinion of the Council ought to be taken for preventing the misuse of such drugs or dealing with social problems connected with their misuse, and in particular on measures which in the opinion of the Council, ought to be taken

a) for restricting the availability of such drugs or supervising the arrangements for their supply;

b) for enabling persons affected by the misuse of such drugs to obtain proper advice, and for securing the provision of proper facilities and services for the treatment, rehabilitation and aftercare of such persons;

c) for promoting co-operation between the various professional and community services which in the opinion of the Council have a part to play in dealing with social problems connected with the misuse of drugs;

d) for educating the public (and in particular the young) in the dangers of misusing such drugs and for giving publicity to those dangers;

e) for promoting research into, or otherwise obtaining information about, any matter which in the opinion of the Council is of relevance for the purpose of preventing the misuse of such drugs or dealing with any social problem connected with their misuse.

Functioning

One of the key functions of the ACMD is to recommend classification of new or existing drugs, which may be misused.

The sources of evidence that the ACMD uses are

formal surveys undertaken for, or on behalf of, government including the British Crime Survey, the Forensic Science Service statistics, general population surveys, school surveys as well as international/European surveys such as European School Survey Project on Alcohol and other drugs;

the law enforcement agencies;

voluntary sector organisations with concerns and responsibilities for those who misuse drugs;

professional bodies;

published and unpublished scientific literature;

submissions from special interest groups and the general public.

In order to have a rough but quantitative measure of the harms of a drug, the ACMD uses a risk assessment matrix, where nine different aspects of harm for each drug are evaluated:

Physical harm

Acute

Chronic

Parenteral (i.e. intravenous harm)

Dependence

Intensity of pleasure

Psychological dependence

Physical dependence

Social harms

Intoxication

Other social harms

Healthcare costs

Criticism

In 2006, the Science and Technology Select Committee of the UK House of Commons conducted a series of case studies examining the government's handling of scientific advice, risk and evidence in policy making. The second of its case-studies focused on the relationship between scientific advice and evidence and the classification of illegal drugs. It examined the workings of the ACMD.

A summary of the findings, vis-a-vis ACMD:

In the course of this case study, we have looked in detail at the role played by, and workings of, the Government's scientific advisory committee on drug classification and policy, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). We have identified a number of serious flaws in the way the Council conducts its business. Although the Council has produced useful reports explaining the rationale behind its recommendations on drug classification decisions, we found a lack of transparency in other areas of its work and a disconcerting degree of confusion over its remit.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs” is british statutory advisory non-departmental public body. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Advisory, Council and Misuse, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1971, 2006—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Advisory, Council and Misuse is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “british statutory advisory non-departmental public body” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 4, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4686856. VIAF identifies the subject as 127180447. The Library of Congress control number is n79150896. 1 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1971 and 2006.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs primary sources, Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs archive and Advisory research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.