You Can Be Anti-Drug and Pro-Reform

Le résumé fourni par la source

care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.--Thomas Jefferson Introduction For over a decade Australian illicit drug policies have been subjected to a great deal of scrutiny. Ideologically driven, the discourse and debates fall roughly into two camps. On the one hand those who favour the extension of harm reduction policies that define drug use in normalized public health terms and secondly, those who seek a return to prohibitionist or zero-tolerance policies that define drug use solely as a criminal or moral issue. This paper invites you to consider the 'politics' i.e. the political factors and forces that determine government illicit drug policies. The material provides you with an opportunity to commence an analysis of the influence of ideas and ideologies around the causation of illicit drug use, potential solutions, and the impact of different local interest and lobby groups including the increasing impact of global politics, social policy and trends. This paper is divided into three parts: The first part examines the introduction of a drug education strategy introduced to Victorian schools in the late 1990's. The strategy and the that followed were based on the recommendations of the 'Premier's Drug Advisory Council' and the widespread concern of Victorian citizens about the misuse of drugs and young people. The second part examines recommendation 4.9 of the Council's report. Essentially the recommendation sought to encourage the Victorian Government to support the Australian Capital Territory's decision to undertake a 'heroin trial'. At the time of this recommendation the streets of most major cities in Australia were awash with cheap high-grade heroin and deaths were spiraling out of control. I examine the reasons for opposition to the trial including some of the 'behind the scenes' pressure that was brought against government decision makers and interested stakeholders. Part three of the paper examines a recommendation (7.1) to decriminalize the personal use and possession of 'small amounts' of marijuana. Ultimately the recommendation was found to be unacceptable and a media led opposition to reform won the day. A compromise was later reached with the introduction of a Police Cautioning Program. In an attempt to offer some additional evidence based research in relation to the 'harm' done to those entering the criminal justice system, I examine the findings of the National Drug Strategy Committee (1998). Report of the Premier's Drug Advisory Council As a starting point I have re-visited the 'Report of the Premier's Drug Advisory Council'). The rationale for the report is set out below. It should be noted that this document represented the most comprehensive and scientific study of its type undertaken by any Australian state government. It is considered a benchmark for future research and commentary. The PDAC commented: Victorians are justifiably concerned about widespread misuse of drugs in our community. Experimentation among young people is widespread. Use of drugs such as cannabis and amphetamines is high by international standards, despite prohibitionist laws and a strong commitment to law enforcement. Concerns have become apparent about increasing adolescent initiation into heroin, and the proliferation of intravenous administration of amphetamines and the use of derivatives of this group such as Ecstasy. Use of multiple drugs is common as the same criminal source may offer a variety of drugs. There has been an increase in the number of deaths directly attributable to illicit drug overdose in the past three years. These are all reasons for re-evaluation of policies and programs (Premiers Drug Advisory Council, 1996, p.iii). The task is to make some sense of the debate and reflect on the 'roadblocks to reform'. …

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.