Joint Release: Government's new $17 million campagn to combat illicit drug use in Aus

[Crankinit]

^
If only, They should be putting that cash towards making a compulsory balanced documentry for all students in year 10. What they need to realise that only stating the bad things about drugs means that if someone tries them and find out all the benefits that way, all previous things lose credability. Thats what happened to me, and the reason I started doing my own research.

Teenagers with this sort of topic should be approached like adults instead of like children.

Yup, it's a classic case of boy who cried wolf. When you're young, you're lead to believe all sorts of terrible things about drugs, then when you take drugs and realise that you didn't die or go to hospital or end up braindamaged and actually just really had a good time, you realise all that propaganda was BS and instead just start dismissing everything the govt. say about drugs, including the stuff they say that's true. It drives people in the opposite direction and probably does more harm than good by making young people lose their trust in the government.

 

[hyroller]

$17mil?
Maybe I should aim to get into govt advertising with my degree, I could do a hell of lot better than these boneheads with their current and past ad campaigns!

 

[thestudent14]

@crankinit
Yup exactly!

@hyroller
DO IT! We need some bluelight brains in the governments

 

[berocca]

Phase dancer, great post.

I think if they gave BL that 17mill, we would do better with it, and reduce more harm. Imagine the type of AD campain we could run with that money, that would educate more then the goverment ever could.

Maybe if you just used the $17 million to specifically educate the government itself we'd all be better off (and I don't mean bribery).

 

[Sykik]

Ture words berocca.

I get into enough trouble trying to enlighten intelectual friends who I think are open to logic. I would have no hope with politicians. Unless of course I drew some graphs using statistics, they tend to quote them at least, but I have no doubt they have no friken idea what a standard divation even is!

</stops derailng>

 

[givemeword]

why not just sell pill testers... or even hand them out for free since your throwing away 17m anyway.

 

[hyroller]

$250 000 is fuck all. There's about $1 billion a year spent on the drug war in Australia.

$17mil for the latest campaign.... >.<

 

[thestudent14]

^
I wish, but in their eye's that would solve no problems. It would just mean less pipz and more MDMA. Which would increase the black market for pills because of how much better time we'd be having instead of all the shit that floods our markets.

Ture words berocca.

I get into enough trouble trying to enlighten intelectual friends who I think are open to logic. I would have no hope with politicians. Unless of course I drew some graphs using statistics, they tend to quote them at least, but I have no doubt they have no friken idea what a standard divation even is!

</stops derailng>

You and me both syklik. It amazes me how some of my smartest friends can still reject some basic logic just because they have such a bad view to drugs. *sigh* It dissapoints me greatly =(

 

[phase_dancer]

I would have no hope with politicians. Unless of course I drew some graphs using statistics, they tend to quote them at least, but I have no doubt they have no friken idea what a standard divation even is!

More often than not they are given what their advisers recommend. If it fits with the general approach, it can be cited as evidence, even if the majority of professionals working in AOD have data indicating the contrary.

That's simply the nature of politics, particularly in relation to drugs; pick an agenda, then find things to support the policy and which lend credence to the claims. Unlike the scientific arena where claims are scrutinized and tested via the peer review process, government does not have to prove anything if the public knows no better. Mr Rudd's assurances of accountability and openness have produced a government that is as veiled and secretive as the former government.

 

[chemi]

There's about $1 billion a year spent on the drug war in Australia.

Wait, what? Can you post source please?

 

[phase_dancer]

Google is your friend

Drug and Alcohol Review
2008, Vol. 27, No. 4, Pages 404-413

The size and mix of government spending on illicit drug policy in Australia
Timothy J. Moorereindeer poop scooper1† and Timothy J. Moorereindeer poop scooper1†
1Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia

Timothy J. Moore MEc(Hons), Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.
†Correspondence: Timothy J. Moore, Department of Economics, University of Maryland—College Park, 3105 Tydings Hall, College Park, MD, 20742-7211, USA, +1 301 442 1785 [email protected]
†Correspondence: Timothy J. Moore, Department of Economics, University of Maryland—College Park, 3105 Tydings Hall, College Park, MD, 20742-7211, USA, +1 301 442 1785 [email protected]



Aim. To estimate how much governments in Australia spend on reducing and dealing with illicit drug problems. Methods. Government documents and supplementary information sources were used to estimate drug-related expenditure for the financial year 2002–03, in Australian dollars. Public sector expenditure on reducing drug problems (‘proactive expenditure’) was classified into four policy functions: prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement. Expenditure related to the consequences of drug use (‘reactive expenditure’) was included as a separate category. Results. Spending by Australian governments in financial year 2002–03 on all drug-related activities was estimated to be $3.2 billion. Proactive expenditure was estimated to be $1.3 billion, comprising 55% on enforcement, 23% on prevention, 17% on treatment, 3% on harm reduction and 1% on activities that span several of these functions. Expenditure on dealing with the consequences of drug use was estimated to be $1.9 billion, with the majority the result of crime-related consequences. Conclusion. Several insights result from estimating these expenditures. First, law enforcement is the largest drug policy component, with Australian governments also spending significant amounts on treatment and prevention programmes. Secondly, apart from the prevention component, Australia's drug policy mix is strikingly similar to recent international estimates. Finally, expenditures associated with dealing with the consequences of illicit drugs are large and important for assessing drug-related public sector expenditure. [Moore TJ. The size and mix of government spending on illicit drug policy in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2008;27:404–413]

Informa

 

[chemi]

Great, thanks very much for the info PD.

That is just disgusting. Over 18 times more money devoted to enforcement than harm reduction.......

I understand a lot of this will be busting commercial operations. I'd be very interested to know how much cash was spent patrolling the end user at concerts, on the train and what-not.

 

[phase_dancer]

Gotta remember this was before the widespread introduction of sniffer dogs and the crackdown on Biker gangs. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the proactive expenditure amount was significantly higher in recent years, with the HR fraction being closer to 1%.

 

[puckboy]

I found it amusing when I heard some news on the radio today regarding Kevin Rudd's health reform plan. He was saying how the opposition are spreading a scare campaign about his health reform plans.

I just thought to myself 'a scare campaign eh?... you'd know all about that'. With the constant scare campaign against drugs.

 

[Sub_Jester]

I think at the end of the day it comes down to the position of power, Yeah its Mr. Rudds job to run this country and keep it afloat and to do that he has to get votes and lest face it more of the Australian voting population is Anti drug so what looks good in there eye? All this shock horror picture of green toilets claiming this is where your drugs are made and if you take them you WILL get fucked up, scare the kids that will stop them and that makes people vote for him, anti-drug/closed minded parents don't want harm reduction programs they WANT there kids to not be doing drugs at all because they them selves have grow up with the "drug will mess your shit up" idea. So instead of spend $17mil of this bullsh*t plan of there what should be happening is companies being set up to make these substances in controlled environments where people know what there getting and how much is safe and is cleaner and cheap then street drugs and for them to be taking and properly education children and parents on how to use them safely and creating a fell safe environment for teens to be exactly that teenagers and as much as this makes sense it will most likely never happen (probely not in our life time anyway) because doing this the government loses it hard earned power in two way, voter lose respect for the party because there "pro" drug now (witch is the way it should be it's better to prevent people taking these so called "DODGY LAB" made drugs then trying to bring them back to life when something does go wrong like overdoses because people are going to continue to do them regardless) when they are really not and secondly there is all that cr*p about people who take drugs start to rise up against the government, people stop buying big T.V's and fancy cars, maybe if the government wasnt so closed minded and let people live there life the way they wanted to there would be less of these problem if people wanna eat Acid drive mini vans "live off the land" its there choice, and who's to say they are hurting anyone and i can safely say all the acid eating, DMT smoking "stoners" i have met in the doof scene i would trust 17 million times more then the holden driving burbon sculling lunatic's i see within the city but what they do is legal and there for socially and morally acceptable, BullSh*t. Im not trying to say drug are good and alcohol is bad i drink and i take drugs, but i respect that everyone has a right to have a good time and go home alive and well and i know some drug user out there dont view this the way i do and there is probably nothing anyone can do to stop these people other then themself but for me say be going out and get caught with a few pill's and then have a criminal record for just wanting to have a good time is down right wrong.

I did not try and stereo type anyone in this it is simply my view on the the way the government handles these situation .

peave
Jester XD

 

[HiLiKuS]

enforcement = revenue raising.

 

[psytaco]

Great, thanks very much for the info PD.

That is just disgusting. Over 18 times more money devoted to enforcement than harm reduction.......

I understand a lot of this will be busting commercial operations. I'd be very interested to know how much cash was spent patrolling the end user at concerts, on the train and what-not.

I imagine that 'enforcement' constitutes all of the criminal justice system, not just the police end. Alot of money would go to paying for the prosecution of cases through the courts.

Sad that only 3% should be spent on harm minimisation. Unfortunately, governments are often more concerned in staying in power than improving society, at least as far as drugs go. The government is well aware that enforcement of drug laws, and anti-drug advertising has little effect on drug use. However, to admit otherwise and to go down the path of legalisation or decriminalisation would sadly be political suicide.

 

[thestudent14]

^ I can't wait for the day though we get a politician in power who is willing to bring a bit of controversey to the board, It sure would be interesting to see how the public would vote.

 

[chemi]

^ I know how they would vote. Against legalisation for any current illicit drug.

 

[drazzilB]

^
What they need to realise that only stating the bad things about drugs means that if someone tries them and find out all the benefits that way, all previous things lose credability.

Very True, I think this is a big reason behind the infamous "gateway drugs"

^
I can't wait for the day though we get a politician in power who is willing to bring a bit of controversey to the board, It sure would be interesting to see how the public would vote.

Not going to hold my breath

I had a sad laugh at how every problem stated about drugs in that article was directly due to prohibition haha