^ MR Blonde: You raise some good points.
MDP2P's label?
I have never heard of MDP2P being referred to as liquid ecstasy. Given all the problems with liquid ecstasy and GHB this is really going to confuse things further.
At first I assumed that the bust must have related to MDMA freebase, sitting as a liquid in those containers awaiting conversion into MDMA powder at a later date.
To refer to a precursor chemical as a liquid form of ecstasy is plainly wrong. These persons were guilty of possession of precursor chemicals, probably one of the most serious of all, and no doubt would have been involved in the eventual manufacture of MDXX substances at one or more chemical labs nearby.
(Or who knows, maybe they were simply in the business of supplying MDMA precursors to a number of different MDMA manufacturers across the eastern seaboard?!)
What this does show is the potential for a lot more MDA to be made. If the supply of MDP2P becomes widespread, expect some manufacturers to look to manufacturing MDA, because the other chemical required to transform the MDP2P to MDA is plain old ammonia (combined with appropriate reagents) as opposed to methylamine, one of the most watched precursors on Earth. I suppose you might say if they can get MDP2P then surely methylamine is not far away, but this may not necessarily be the case.)
Mick Keelty's comments are frustrating in some respects although good in others, as most would agree the media's fascination with ice has become overblown.
As Commish for the Federal Police he is of course mainly concerned with reducing the supply of illicit drugs across Australia, particularly from overseas, and ensuring that the really big time criminals do not profit from the drug trade. However, an implication of what he is saying is that ecstasy, at the street level, has the potential to cause as much harm as crystal methylamphetamine to the community generally and therefore warrants as much of a focus, a contention that I cannot agree with. If he is merely talking about the fact that the focus on ice has allowed the availability of MDMA to flourish then fair enough, but you would surely rather your community awash with MDMA than awash with high quality meth or heroin!
Drugs Laws
Secondly, why are they being charged with trafficking a 'drug of dependence'? I didn't think XTC was a dependance-forming drug, because of it's mechanism of action mainly, and also they weren't even transporting E; they were caught with the precursor. Isn't there a controlled substances/precursors/synthesis law they could be charged under?
The phrases used by the various legislatures to label chemicals are often misleading. In WA, "prohibited drugs" for the purposes of WA's Misuse of Drugs legislation, is defined to include "drugs of addiction". Drugs of addiction are simply defined to include all substances in schedule 8 and schedule 9 of both the National Scheduling Standard of Drugs and Poisons (SUSDP) and any extra ones specified in WA's Poisons Act.
MDMA is schedule 9 because it has high potential for abuse and "no recognised therapeutic use". As we well know researchers in the US are presently proving that last statement very wrong.
Another drug in schedule 9 is LSD. This is clearly not a drug of addiction in the sense of how you or I would understand that term, but labelled a drug of addiction nonetheless.
In WA there are also certain chemicals dubbed specified drugs and these drugs are also considered "prohibited drugs" for the purposes of WA's drugs legislation. In the list among other drugs such as steriods, which the WA government thought needed to be given special status even though not included in schedule 8 or 9, there are precursor chemicals such as acetic anhydride and P2P.
Therefore, you can, in WA at least, be charged for possession of a "prohibited drug" under the drugs legislation even though the chemical is a precursor. Other States may well be the same, where the term might instead be "drug of dependence" even though it is not a drug at all.
WA also has new precursor legislation for a large number of chemicals, although the penalties for these offences are substantially less than similar offences for "prohibited drugs". Of course, there is always the possibility that those in possession of precursors could be charged with attempting to manufacture a prohibited drug, but in a peculiar case such as this one it is probably not open.
Somewhat astonishingly, MDP2P is not presently listed as a specified drug so I am not entirely sure what charges would result should a similar find be located in WA. They may well be relatively minor which is quite remarkable!
All in all this is potentially 20 million 100 mg MDMA pills. I still think it is relatively significant.