NEWS: Sydney Morning Herald - 08/02/2007 'Parliament to hold drug inquiry'

[lil angel15]

Parliament to hold drug inquiry
February 8, 2007 - 3:04PM

The impact of illicit drug use on families will be examined by a federal parliamentary inquiry.

The House of Representatives Family and Human Services Committee will tell the government how to address the impact on families of the importation, production, sale, use and prevention of illicit drugs.

Committee chair Bronwyn Bishop said families had to be adequately supported so they could help prevent family members taking drugs.

More than 2.5 million Australians aged 14 years and older - about one in six - had used drugs in the past year, according to a 2004 national survey.

More than three per cent had used speed, about the same number had used ecstasy and almost one in fifty Australians had injected drugs.

"Illicit drug use can have a devastating impact on families," Ms Bishop said.

"Mothers, fathers and children are on the front line in dealing with the effects of illicit drug use by a family member."

Ms Bishop said more than 7,300 people were referred by a family member to rehabilitation or counselling for drug use in 2004-05.

The committee is taking public submissions until March 23.

SMH

 

[koggi]

Why don't those idiots include alcohol in this enquiry


edit: I retract this question. Rush of blood uknow?

 

[hoptis]

Standing Committee on Family and Human Services: Inquiry into the impact on illicit drug use of families: homepage:

Submission being accepted from the public:

The Committee invites public submissions by 23 March 2007 on:

• the financial, social and personal cost to families who have a member(s) using illicit drugs, including the impact of drug induced psychoses or other mental disorders;
• the impact of harm minimisation programs on families; and
• ways to strengthen families who are coping with a member(s) using illicit drugs.

From Media Release

Another enquiry? Do they actually plan to listen this time?

 

[AcidRain]

ways to strengthen families who are coping with a member(s) using illicit drugs.

they're going about this all the wrong way...

here's an idea, its not a new one: legalize and control the production/use.

would solve almost every problem mentioned here.

 

[phase_dancer]

Another enquiry? Do they actually plan to listen this time?

I suspect they're most interested in a parliamentary inquiry that yields results they want to hear i.e. to suit the current political flavour.

With other recent inquiries there's been a - possibly unexpected - degree of input which isn't exactly conducive with an anti drug/ anti harm minimisation stance. Users, researchers, activists etc have all added weight to a more liberal and sensible approach.

By formatting an inquiry solely on the impacts of drug use on families - particularly within the stated terms of reference - the Standing Committee on Family and Human Services has essentially chosen "topics" where submissions are most likely to be predominantly in support of the notion that HR is non-effective or even detrimental towards families in general. In other words, there will possibly be a far greater number of submissions from those who have experienced problems, and therefore the end result may not be truly representative of the number of families that have benefited from HR, or for whom drug use is not viewed as problematic.

Where the AOSD attracted submissions which presented compelling arguments both for and against a prohibition focused policy, this inquiry is hardly likely to present as much of a balanced opinion as based on experience. How many parents would be willing to stand up and argue for the benefits of HR, particularly if that means admitting knowledge of, or even condoning their kids' recreational drug use? To state it's non-problematic will be almost impossible, as opponents would argue that they are setting their kids up for future problems and as such are unworthy, irresponsible parents.

However, if a significant number of parents who's kids have been assisted either directly through interventions, or indirectly through education etc came forward and submitted their views on Harm Minimisation, perhaps the end result could be a more balanced one. The biggest problem with this as I see it, is that so many kids don't tell their parents about such interventions, and so their parents are not only unaware of the trouble their kids got into, but in many cases they're also oblivious to the fact their kids take drugs at all.

 

[Flexistentialist]

* the impact of harm minimisation programs on families;

^ This inquiry is being set up as a direct attack on harm minimisation. I'd encourage people to submit their stories about harm minimisation saving their family members from the perils of drug use, because this is going to get ugly.

 

[Tronica]

I can see where you are coming from, especially the way it has been worded. However, there are some vocal harm min supporters in the family drug area, namely Family Drug Support / Tony Trimmingham. Many of the same players who supported HM in the amphetamines inquiry can be expected to provide similar support for the harm min approach for families who are affected too.

I think it would be more accountable if the most recent senate inquiry report was finished/released and commented upon before starting another senate inquiry into drug use...

 

[hoptis]

NEWS: The Age - 14/02/2007 'Mums and dads need drugs education, says Keelty'

Mums and dads need drugs education, says Keelty
February 14, 2007 - 3:29PM

Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty says he would like to see pamphlets sent to parents around the country warning of the dangers of modern drugs such as ice.

The commissioner told a parliamentary committee in Canberra today that drugs being used by young people today were markedly different to those used by older generations, and parents might need to be educated about new dangers.

Mr Keelty spent some time explaining to politicians taking part in the committee, the difference between drugs such as heroin, ecstasy, speed and crystal methamphetamine - or ice.

"I think there's a lot of misinformation about amphetamines, what amphetamines are the different types of amphetamines," Mr Keelty told reporters outside the committee.

"I think there's a general education gap there for both mums and dads and for users so I think anything that increases our knowledge and therefore helps reduce demand could be a positive step."

He said the pamphlet drop could be expanded to schools.

"I think a broad community education program (would be good), so that we actually understand the risk of amphetamines and actually understand what they are," he said.

"There's been a lot of popular press about ice and yet many people wouldn't understand the difference between crystal methamphetamine and liquid ecstasy and the other types of amphetamines."

AAP

The Age

 

[hoptis]

Christ... spend five minutes picking through the errors Mick Keelty has made in the simple statements above and it makes you wonder just what sort of "education" mum's and dad's of Australia will get from these pamphlet's he intends to produce. 8)

 

[hoptis]

Keelty call to educate parents over ice threat
Craig Skehan
February 15, 2007

A PAMPHLET, and possibly a TV ad campaign, were needed to help parents better understand the dangers posed to their children from amphetamines and methamphetamines such as ecstasy and ice, according to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner, Mick Keelty.

"What I would like to see is help for mums and dads to communicate with their children," he said.

Mr Keelty told a federal parliamentary committee yesterday older Australians were more knowledgeable about drugs such as heroin, cocaine and marijuana than newer drugs.

Mr Keelty said the AFP hoped to open an office in India by the end of the year to combat a worrying new source of precursor chemicals for these drugs.

He pointed to Burma and southern China being major producers, as well as huge laboratories uncovered in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Pacific islands.

In Australia, there has been big jump in the number of laboratories detected and dismantled - up from less than 60 in the mid-1990s to more than 380.

Mr Keelty said an estimated one in 10 Australians, most of them in the 16 to 34 age group, had tried methamphetamines. There were some 100,000 regular Australian users.

A nationally circulated pamphlet would assist parents to learn about differences, for example between crystal methamphetamine, known as ice, liquid ecstasy and other types of amphetamines.

Mr Keelty was asked by the committee's chairwoman, Bronwyn Bishop, if he would support a television education campaign.

"I would support any campaign that helps reduce the demand for drugs," Mr Keelty said.

He said campaigns linking the injection of drugs with HIV had unintentionally created a false perception that drugs which could be taken orally or smoked were relatively harmless.

He said there was insufficient understanding of the dangers posed by amphetamines and methamphetamines; be it serious psychiatric damage or from risky behaviour such as unprotected sex and dangerous driving.

Mr Keelty pointed to the production of pills with what effectively were brand names implying quality, popularity and style. "There is a powerful marketplace," he said.

Mr Keelty was particularly concerned by the involvement of Chinese organised crime in the smuggling of amphetamines and methamphetamines into Australia. Organised crime had penetrated Pacific island countries such as Fiji, where a secret laboratory was uncovered.

As well as expanding co-operation with China, the AFP was about to send four of its agents to Afghanistan to gain intelligence on heroin smuggling routes through Pakistan.

Sydney Morning Herald

 

[hoptis]

Families hit by ice wave
Ben Packham
February 15, 2007 12:00am

AUSTRALIA'S most senior police officer is urging a national campaign to warn families of the dangers of the deadly methamphetamine "ice".

Australian Federal Police chief Mick Keelty said that information on the new wave of drugs hitting the streets should be sent to every home.

The call follows the tragic case of a four-month-old baby who died this month while in the care of his allegedly ice-addicted parents.

Ice is a potent and highly addictive form of crystal methamphetamine.

It is cheap, readily available and frequently causes extreme violence in users.

Mr Keelty said many people did not realise the dangers new drugs such as ice presented.

"I think there's a lot of misinformation about amphetamines," he said.

"I think there's a general education gap for mums and dads, and for users, so anything that increases our knowledge . . . could be a positive step."

Mr Keelty called for the campaign at a hearing of a federal parliamentary committee on drugs and their impact on families.

"A broad community education program (would be good), so we actually understand the risk of amphetamines and what they are," he said.

"There's been a lot of popular press about ice, yet many people wouldn't understand the difference between crystal methamphetamine and liquid ecstasy and the other types."

A recent study found more than 114,000 Victorians used ice or powdered methamphetamines in the past 12 months.

The Australian National Council on Drugs report found 500,000 people nationwide had used methamphetamines in the past year.

Mr Keelty explained the differences between drugs such as heroin, ecstasy, speed and crystal methamphetamine to members of the Family and Human Services Committee.

Some rehabilitation experts say ice is far more damaging than heroin.

Its use has been described as of epidemic proportions in Melbourne's western and northern suburbs.

In 2005-06, the AFP and partner agencies seized more than one tonne of illicit drugs before they reached the community.

The AFP and Customs report that while the supply of heroin has fallen, there is evidence of increased traffic in amphetamines, methamphetamines and ecstasy.

POLICE picked up just 16g of ice in a three-month drug operation in the ACT, but said the drug was still a major concern.

From November to January, ACT police targeted 63 potential dealers and searched 31 properties.

Herald Sun

 

[Splatt]

Wish they would stop putting MDMA and meth in the same group. They have nothing to do with each other and the effects are the total opposite. Hell, morphine and even LSD has methamphetamine in its structure and i'm sure a bunch of other drugs do too.

 

[hoptis]

Just for reference; two articles in the thread - NEWS: Advertiser - 25/12/2006 'Newborn addicts double in five years' reference this inquiry.

 

[lil angel15]

Thanks for that link Flexistentialist.

Below are some direct links to the Parliamentary proceedings reports so far.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES Hansard - Canberra: Wednesday 7 February 2007

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES Hansard - Canberra: Wednesday 14 February 2007

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES Hansard - Canberra: Wednesday 28 February 2007

 

[drplatypus]

This is a disgrace... To use a senate inquiry to attack one of Australia's pre-eminent researchers in the field drugs policy is a flagrant assault on academic freedom and typical of religiously oriented right-wing politics.

Researchers and academics amongst you; be warned- this is the price of silence in the face of rabid politicians. Don't think for a second it will stop here. If a vigorous response is not mounted, by the research community at large, it'll be YOUR research next. If you are publishing anything of quality, it probably already contradicts government policy. Pick your sides now...

The List predicted this a while ago, and Johnboy and I will be submitting a suitable response... For those of you interested, check out a book called "silencing dissent" about the erosion of academic freedom in Howard's Australia. No one is safe, I'm afraid...
8(

 

[sharaz]

"I would support any campaign that helps reduce the demand for drugs," Mr Keelty said.

This is an interesting statement as alcohol and tobacco are both drugs. I wonder how he would feel if he wasn't allowed to have his beer after work!

 

[ayjay]

Pretty horrifying stuff. Both the Australian Drug Foundation and the Alcohol and other Drug Council of Australia have released statements condemning the anti-harm reduction garbage coming out of this committee.

You can actually read the submissions to date:
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/fhs/illicitdrugs/subs.htm

4 of the 5 come out in support of harm reduction, so that's a good sign. The exception is submission #4, which seems to suggest that anti-terror legislation should be used to target drug dealers. The author of this submission is involved in "Australian Parents for Drug Free Youth" - check out their webpage for a giggle:
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~apfdfy/

Actually it's not funny - Drug Free Australia ( http://www.drugfree.org.au/home/ ) got a grant of around $600K last year (from memory - exact figures/date may be wrong!) from the federal government - again - check their marvellous website for some dire anti-harm reduction rhetoric.

 

[Cyberdyne]

good god...had a bit of a read...

All I can say is Phase Dancers initial analysis appears spot on...This is a carefully couched, well planned and insidious attack...Some of your politicians make our anti-drugs lobby in new zealand appear pro liberalisation...

The very best of luck to you all...

 

[hoptis]

OPINION: Sensationalism no way to fight drug addiction
Andrew Macintosh
March 20, 2007

Drugs policy arouses strong emotions. People see drug users and fear the unknown. The traditional response from politicians, particularly conservatives, has been to exploit these fears for political gain. The outcome has been an over-reliance on law enforcement as a means of stamping out both the supply and use of harmful drugs.

In 2003, the House of Representatives standing committee on family and community affairs inquired into drug abuse and produced a report that was in keeping with the history of drug policy. It called for the abandonment of harm minimisation as the principal objective of the National Drug Strategy. The committee wanted prevention and abstinence-based treatment to be the focus of government policy.

This position is partially reflected in the Federal Government's "tough on drugs" policy. Penalties have been increased for drug offences, funding has been increased for drug law enforcement, the Government has run several prevention campaigns based on dramatic images of the dangers associated with drug use and money has been directed to abstinence-based treatment services. All the while, harm reduction and other treatment services have remained chronically under-funded.

Given this history, the recently released report on amphetamines and other synthetic drugs by the federal Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission is a brave document.

Most notably, in contrast to the report from the House of Representatives Standing Committee, the committee unanimously supported harm minimisation and recommended that "harm-reduction strategies and programs receive more attention and resources".

In its conclusions, the committee said "prohibition, while theoretically a logical and properly intentioned strategy, is not effective". It also argued that "the current national approach to illicit drugs - supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction - will achieve greater outcomes if a better balance between these approaches can be reached". In common parlance, this means there should be less emphasis on law enforcement and more on education and drug treatment.

Unfortunately, it is a rare event when any government body decides to make drug policy recommendations that are based on evidence. The report was not received warmly by the Government.

The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs has also launched another drug-related inquiry, seemingly to counter the recommendations made by the joint committee. And in its recent hearings, the chairwoman of the committee, Bronwyn Bishop, attacked representatives from the Department of Health for publishing documents containing harm minimisation messages, saying "this document is full of harm minimisation. The Prime Minister said that he is opposed to harm minimisation and that we do not have it."

Professor Margaret Hamilton, a respected drug expert with more than 30 years' experience in the field, received a particularly harsh broadside for also using this type of terminology, as well as for making the sensible observation that moral considerations have historically played too great a role in drug debates.

Bishop is on a mission to ensure the Government's drug prevention programs are sensationalised, going as far as calling for a campaign based on the message that "this is going to scramble your brains".

In this climate, the Government's drug policy is unlikely to change markedly in response to the joint committee's recommendations. Yet the members of the committee have signalled that there are now politicians from across the political spectrum prepared to listen and act on the evidence.

It is hoped there will come a time when enough politicians recognise that drug use disorders are a health problem that cannot be solved by harsh drug laws or sensationalised advertising.

Andrew Macintosh is deputy director of the Australia Institute.

The Age

 

[madmick19]

i attended a focus group on this issue here in canberra recently held by families australias submission into this..

very interesting