Denis Bright continues the discussion on the challenges posed by substance abuse in Australia. Should the focus of responsible campaigns continue to be on law enforcement and education programmes to control illicit drug use?
As in other consumer societies, substance abuse in Australia is a mainstream activity. Excessive use of tobacco, alcohol, patent and alternative medicines, dietary supplements, foods laced with sugar, salt and other additives occupy a respectable grey area within everyday commercial transactions.
Igna Ting of the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) has simplified the patterns of illicit drug use.
There is bipartisan commitment to stronger law enforcement and public education programmes to control experimentation with the use of methamphetamines in particular.
Igna Ting adds that Australia has some of the world’s highest rates of illicit drug use of ecstasy, opioids, amphetamines and cannabis.
Reliable local data on the size of the black economy in illicit drugs needs a serious update from Australian research agencies.
Nick Evershed of the Guardian Online estimated that this component of the black economy amounted to 2.1 per cent of the Australian GDP in 2010-11.
The illicit drug niche in just one section of Australia’s black economy represents more than national defence spending.
Add-ons are necessary to cover the costs of law enforcement, losses to the Australian Taxation Office from cash transactions and the enormous health and social costs to drug users.
This situation calls for more precise estimates of the size of the black and grey economies of both illicit drug use and overdependence on other substance abuse.
The national survey of substance abuse by high school students in 2014 also reveals interacting patterns of substance abuse of both legalized and illicit products (Australian Department of Health 2016).
The national survey of substance abuse by high school students in 2014 also reveals interacting patterns of substance abuse of both legalized and illicit products (Australian Department of Health 2016).
Although the use of many illicit drug options has stabilized since 2013, even the most discerning new users are exposed to a black economy with little quality controls on the products available.
Conventional wisdom favours stronger law enforcement.
At a national level, convictions for drug offences increased to almost 60,000 in 2014-15. 75 percent of offenders are under 40 years of age (ABS 1 March 2016).
Some Australian jurisdictions have experimented with the decriminalization of small quantities of cannabis (Legal Services Commission of South Australia 2017). Police diversion programmes do not necessarily extend to minor possession of other drugs but Court Diversion Programmes do exist (Legal Aid Queensland 2017).
Mixed Messages from the European Union
Some overseas jurisdictions are more lenient about possession of small quanitities of illicit drugs. Even within the European Union, there are a diversity of legal responses.
After an upsurge in illicit drug use, Portugal chose to decriminalise possession and use of drugs for personal use in 2001 (Transform Online 2014).
While Portugal seems to have coped well with its more tolerant approach to recreational drug use, the extension of this approach across the European Union (EU) would exceed the constitutional limits of the Treaty of Rome protocols.
Conventional drug education programmes and enforcement laws in Britain have not been successful in curtailing either illicit or wider substance abuse levels (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 2016).
The futility of relying on strict law enforcement to deter potential users from their quest for some magic moments is reflected in the high rates of MDMA use in Britain. and the Czech Republic.
Europe’s open borders are of course a challenge to law enforcement.
Potential users can easily avoid the harshest drug enforcement regimes by travelling short distances across the boundaries of the harshest jurisdictions.
Future Australian drug enforcement responses
This healthy alternative to substance abuse is diffult to sell in all cultures where substance abuse has a real hold. It has instant appeal to many busy people on a voyage of discovery.
Support from public health programmes may have to extend to medical prescriptions for certified users of illicit drugs. These prescriptions would offer quality controls to protect users from toxic additives that creep into workshop production lines. Negotiated alternatives should be available for the most harmful substances.
Mental health problems have been exaccerbated by the stresses of life in a consumer society and experimentation with substance abuse in mainstream society.
This is not the time to discourage bulk-billing of Medicare funded consultations and home visits through a freeze on payments to doctors and other specialist services as fostered by the federal LNP.
The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) provides ample feedback on the extent of mental health problems which are contributing to both substance abuse and family violence. Preventative action against such problems requires access to extended consultations with family doctors and referral services to specialized agencies.
The current freeze by the federal government on payments to doctors for fully bulk-billed services allows mental health conditions which foster all forms of substance abuse to continue.
The latest political response from the federal government involves the trial of a community action programme (LDAT) to support the Durg and Alcohol Foundation with $19.2 million to combat the use of methamphetamine, including ice.
Substance abuse in whatever form is a significant and growing niche in the prevailing market economy. Offering more market access to purchase unknown substances from unknown producers is unlikely to offer real solutions to the enduring problems of alienation in consumer societies which claim best practice in the application of popular democracy.
[textblock style=”6″]
[/textblock]
