So Much for The Government’s "Tough on Drugs" Strategy

What a joke!

Crack-downs on pill presses, biker gangs, over the counter medications, music festivals, chemical precursors, drug paraphernalia and cannabis laws. Increases in police sniffer dogs harassing people, military style police raids, street sweeps, multi-million dollar anti-drug propaganda campaigns from the government, media drug hysteria, ranting politicians, welfare quarantining, roadside drug testing, cannabis arrests(over 55,000 ), drug arrests(83,873). etc. etc. etc.

With more than $5 billion dollars being wasted each year implementing all these measures, what are the results? More hard drugs. More local drug production. More dangerous drug labs. More drug arrests. More drug users in jail. More drug users. Younger drug users.

If this was any other policy, it would be shut down instantly with the opposition screaming for blood. The media would be in a frenzy and the public would demand the resignation of the PM. So why is there is a deafening silence from the media, opposing political parties and the law? Simple … because they also support the current useless and failed drug policies. What a joke!

Record High For Illicit Drug Seizures

The Australian 

By Rebecca Puddy

June 2010

POLICE seizures of party drugs such as ice and ecstasy were the highest on record last year, indicating the nation's appetite for amphetamines continues unabated, a report released today by Australian Crime Commission says.

Cannabis remains the most prevalent drug in Australia, accounting for two-thirds of national illicit drug arrests, while almost 20 per cent of the 83,873 drug arrests were for amphetamine abuse.

But a record number of cocaine arrests and a doubling of heroin seizures in 2008-09 suggests that hard drugs are more readily available.

The commission's Illicit Drug Data Report also finds the number of clandestine drug labs uncovered has tripled since the start of the decade, with the greatest number of drug labs found across Queensland.

"The record number of drug seizures and drug lab detections in Australia pose a significant risk to the environment and to the community,'' ACC chief executive John Lawler said.

"The illicit drug trade feeds drug habits, which in turn leads to more crime in a destructive cycle,'' Mr Lawler said.

The report found the number of clandestine drug labs detected by authorities increased from 150 in 1999-2000 to 449 last year. Western Australia had the sharpest increase, up from 30 in 2007-08 to 78 in 2008-09.

More than 13 tonnes of illicit drugs were seized overall in 2008-09, up from 8.5 tonnes in 2007-08.

Heroin seizures at the border increased from 99.3kg in 2007-08 to 150.6kg last year.

BTW, have a read of Greg Barn’s excellent article in The Punch.

Poland to Allow Personal Use of All Drugs

The dichotomy between Europe and Australia regarding drug policy is becoming greater all the time. Even our Zero Tolerance masters, the good old US of A is doing the unimaginable by decriminalising cannabis use, introducing medical marijuana and even proposing the legalisation of recreational cannabis use.

More and more countries are taking notice of the carnage caused by the "War on Drugs" and deciding to do something about it. And it’s not what most politicians expect by cracking down even further on drug users but implementing new strategies based on research, evidence and expert opinion. 

Most people don't realise that ex PM, Bob Hawke is responsible for introducing our most successful drug policy to date - Harm Minimisation. Compare that to the last 2 previous PMs who back Zero Tolerance via the "Tough on Drugs" policy? The world moves forward ... Australia moves backwards.

Will our government ever give in to evidence and facts or keep pushing the most useless and failed drug policy in Australia’s history ... "Tough on Drugs”?

Poland Set To Liberalise Drug Law

The News

May 2010

The Ministry of Justice has prepared a draft amendment to Poland’s drug laws, allowing prosecutors to drop charges if someone is caught in possession of substances for personal use only.

According to the Rzeczpospolita daily, which claims to have seen the draft bill, prosecutors will be able to terminate criminal proceedings against someone with a small amount of drugs for personal use.

Charges can be dropped if it can be proved that no financial transaction was to occur, although this is conditional on where the arrest takes place, for instance at a school or other places where young people congregate.

Rzeczpospolita says that the term "small amount of drugs" is not defined in the draft legislation, however.

Related Articles

Mexico Decriminalises All Drugs (for small amounts) - The Start of a Trend in South America?

Now We Have Proof - Decriminalising Drugs Works

Giving Free Drugs to Addicts

New Victorian Police Chief and Legalisation

Cannabis is OK - The Debate is Over

It's Official - "Tough on Drugs" Causes More Crime & Violence

Now, it's official. Police crackdowns and prohibition causes more violence and crime than it stops.

I have been saying this for years ... drug related violence is because of our drug laws not drugs themselves. The presumed connection between drugs and violence is severely misguided by the public. Any mention of alcohol violence, hold-ups or street thuggery and some people will ignorantly claim that being high on drugs is to blame. This is simply not true. The violence stemming from drugs is either from addicts committing crimes to procure money for their habit or those in the drug business fighting it out on the streets. Whether they are intoxicated is not important as most drugs rarely cause aggression or violence. It's amazing the reaction I get when I make this comment online which often results in being called a looney, an idiot or an obvious drug user. 

The whole point is, the effects of drugs do not usually make someone violent. It's the illegality that causes violence. Business disputes between drug dealers are not settled in court but on the streets with guns, knives or very large thugs. Think about an addict committing a break-in - it's because they need money to buy drugs that they have run out of. They are most most likely not high at all but suffering massive withdrawals which makes them desperate enough to commit the crime. The drugs they seek are illegal which makes them very expensive and crime is usually the only way addicts can afford them. It's a nasty cycle in today's climate of drug hysteria.

The usual course of action by police, under direction from the government, is to crackdown heavily on drug users and dealers. This has been the failed strategy for 60 years plus. We have completely ignored the havoc caused by US alcohol prohibition and overlooked the mounting evidence from experts while the "War on Drugs" continues to reek carnage on society. As the number of victims increase under the "Tough on Drugs" strategy, we have to ask ourselves if we will continue to allow politicians to base their decisions on political posturing, misguided personal beliefs and pressure from moral crusaders. Science and evidence should determine drug policy, not politicians taking a position on drugs because it is politically advantageous to do so. 

Crackdowns On Drug Dealers Led To Rise In Violent Crime, Study Finds

The Independent 

By Cahal Milmo, Chief Reporter

April 2010

Police crackdowns to cut the supply of illegal drugs by removing dealers and criminal overlords actually lead to rises in drug-related violence, gun crime and murder, according to an international study. A review of 20 years of research into drug enforcement has found that attempts to snuff out the trade in illegal substances have the opposite effect to that intended, by creating a power vacuum when drugs barons are imprisoned which is rapidly filled by competitors eager to fight each other for the newly-vacated territory.

Campaigners for the reform of drugs policy said the findings, which follow numerous studies showing that prohibition has failed to stop narcotics from becoming more plentiful, added to the pressure on governments to declare the "war" on the £200bn global illicit drugs industry over, and adopt a policy of controlled legalisation.

The study by the Canada-based International Centre for Science in Drug Policy (ICSDP) found that heavy-handed tactics, ranging from attempts by the American-sponsored Colombian armed forces to eradicate drug cartels to the arrest of dealers in Sydney, had led to increases in violence. Often, this violence is fuelled by criminals arming themselves to profit from price rises caused by seizures of drugs or the dismantling by police of dealing networks.

The assessment of 15 reports on the relationship between violence and drug enforcement, presented yesterday at an international conference in Liverpool, found that 87 per cent of studies reported that police seizures and arrests led directly to increased violence.

Dan Werb, co-author of the ICSDP document, said: "The convention has been that law-enforcement action to reduce the availability of drugs, thereby increasing drugs prices and decreasing supplies, also has the effect of reducing violence. Not only has prohibition been found to be ineffective with regard to price and supply; this study has also shown that it is accompanied by an increase in drug-related violence.

"Prohibition drives up the value of banned substances astronomically, creating lucrative markets and worldwide networks of organised crime. Unfortunately, the evidence suggests that any disruption of these markets through drug-law enforcement seems to have the perverse effect of creating more financial opportunities for organised crime groups, and gun violence often ensues."

The study, which highlights the drug-related violence gripping Mexico as an example of the vicious circle fuelled by crackdowns, said researchers in Florida had recorded a five-fold increase in violence and property crime linked to drug arrests. Another study of six US cities found that attempts to shut down crack markets led to increased homicide rates in four of them.

A six-year Australian investigation into drug dealing in Sydney found that the arrest of dealers and subsequent disputes between rivals had contributed to murders and a substantial rise in non-fatal shootings with handguns.

Campaigners for a regulated market in drugs said the study bolstered the argument for legalising drugs and introducing a sliding scale of controls, ranging from membership of coffee-shop style premises for the sale of cannabis to licensed pharmacies selling cocaine.

A spokesman for the Transform Drug Policy Foundation said: "We have a government in pathological denial of the negative impact of a prohibition-based drugs culture. Which other global industry worth £200bn is left in the hands of organised criminals rather than being taxed and properly regulated?"

Related Articles

Even The Feds Want Drug Policy Changes

Soft on Drugs Causes Ambulance Call Outs to Rise

The Liberal Party on Drugs

Sophie Mirabella - Another “Tough on Drugs” Looney Lib

Stop Repeating Yourselves ... You’re Wrong

Stop Repeating Yourselves ... You’re Wrong

How many times do we have to witness and ultimately pay for this ridiculous attempt to please an ignorant public, boofhead politicians and the moral police? Once again, at The Big Day Out, police caught only a small percentage of attendees with drugs while thousands got through. There were dozens of officers, sniffer hounds and public searches all meant to deter drugs from entering the festival. It happens all too often now with the costs mounting up and the shock value decreasing significantly.

Year after year we repeat the same warnings before the event starts, but every year there are still people who stupidly try to get past us and fail
-Superintendent Rod Smith

Why do the police keep doing the same thing, over and over, but expect a different result? According to many, Albert Einstein made a similar observation and claimed it is a sign of insanity. Repeating the same flawed strategy again and again but somehow expecting the latest result to miraculously be different. You get the drift here. The police keep giving out dire warnings that anyone bringing in drugs to a music festival like The Big Day Out, will be caught and dealt with harshly by the courts. Each year though, only a few people get caught. Most are given a caution while thousands simply bypass the sniffer dogs and continue on like the police never existed. This is repeated for each music festival in every state. Insanity? ... or just another fault with the prohibitionist model for dealing with drugs? It doesn’t take a genius like Einstein to work this out and in fact it didn’t. The cliché was actually coined by novelist, Rita Mae Brown.

Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results
-Rita Mae Brown, Sudden Death (Bantam Books, New York, 1983), p. 68

Not only do the police re-enact the same old strategy but they try to turn it around and put it on the people who attend these festivals. This gets to the crux of the futile approach taken by our government on drug control. We are historically consumers of drugs and we are always going to partake especially young people at a music festival. Whether the constabulary are there or not, drugs are going to be smuggled in and unless every single person, including the staff, the musicians and the police themselves are stripped searched, there will be plenty to go around. That olden but golden observation becomes apparent once more - if we can’t stop drugs getting into prison, how are we going to stop drugs getting into ... the Sydney show grounds, the Melbourne show grounds etc.

A total of 381 people were arrested, with police laying 104 drug possession charges, 12 drug supply charges, six assault charges and one malicious damage charge. Police also issued nine cannabis cautions, ejected 11 drunk people and caught 18 people trying to jump the fence into the venue.
-(AAP) PerthNow

It’s becoming all too common for the police to join the chorus of crooked politicians and agenda driven anti-drug zealots pushing out fear, exaggerated harms and lies. Droning on about “no drug is a safe drug” or “we’re putting drug dealers and drug users on alert ... we will catch you!”, might keep those “crooked politicians and agenda driven anti-drug zealots” happy but it’s not really productive. Like so much of the typical anti-drug rhetoric from the media and politicians, messages from the police are often produced just to please converts of the drug war or exploitable parents who have already been paralysed with fear. Think about the hundreds of thousands who use ecstasy, speed, cannabis etc. when they go out or on special occasions. Most of them have never had a problem with their drug taking or even seen any lasting negative effect. They have undoubtedly seen booze cause some major upsets but rarely does the same happen with recreational drugs. In fact, I’d dare say it’s the opposite and they have an absolutely cracker of a night. These are the supposed targets of these anti-drug messages but with the constant stream of dire warnings never coming to fruition, the message fails to make an impact. The truth is, and it’s a hard truth ... recreational drugs are taken so often because they are enjoyable, exciting and exhilarating with very little downside. You don’t hear this mentioned very much.

There is this idea with some young people that taking drugs enhances their day out, in reality, they are putting their lives at risk by taking illegal drugs sold by people out to make a quick buck.

They might think this is just an ecstasy pill, but as police members, too often we see the tragic effect of these foolish decisions.

Make no mistake, there is no such thing as a safe party drug.

[...]

No overdoses were recorded among the 10,500 people that attended the event
-Detective Inspector Mark Zervaas - (AAP) The HeraldSun

Yep, you read that right. After all the dire warnings, his last reported comment was, “No overdoses were recorded among the 10,500 people that attended the event”. And we wonder why these messages are over looked by the target audience as just more anti-drug babble.

Apart from being totally pointless, the attempt to stop drugs entering The Big Day Out raises a bigger issue. Why is such a dangerous drug like alcohol allowed to flow freely whilst so much effort is put into stopping safer drugs like cannabis, LSD and ecstasy? This elephant-in-the-room just keeps eluding us over and over as the anti-drug zealots come up with new, fanciful arguments over and over. Remember the constant grind about dope being a gateway drug? That took 40 years of repeated research proving it a myth. Then cannabis supposedly caused all sorts of madness including psychosis, schizophrenia and amotivational syndrome. After numerous studies, they too was finally narrowed down to effect only a tiny group of people with amotivational syndrome being a complete furfie. Since then, cannabis has been blamed for causing testicular cancer, lung cancer, making us sterile, changing personalities and being anti-social. They too are loosing out to science and research which means the anti-drug brigade will have to devise new symptoms of cannabis use to scare the public.

But it’s ecstasy(MDMA) that’s getting the fear treatment at the moment. It wasn’t too long ago that ecstasy was touted as the new drug scourge crippling society. Warnings of massive depression, holes in the brain as seen in CT scans and of course addiction ... all after even one pill. The hype was so intense that the anti-methadone campaign in the US, One Pill Can Kill was mistakenly taken up by anti-ecstasy groups, the police and local nutters.

Ecstasy was perfectly legal until it hit the dance scene in the US. The DEA in spectacular form, ignored a scientific court ruling and rushed through an emergency law to class it as a schedule I drug. This put an end to promising research into Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and other psychological problems. It seemed that too many young(and old) Americans were just having too much fun for the DEA. But it was a Newsweek article that put MDMA on the most feared list in the US. Newsweek cited flawed research that just one pill could create “holes” in the brain and they provided a CT scan to prove it. It was later revealed that the test subject monkeys had been injected with pure methamphetamine instead of MDMA and the hole in the brain scans really meant nothing. But the damage had been done. Much to the delight of anti-drug crusaders, ecstasy was now seen as a killer. It took over 2 decades of overseas research to eat away at the myths surrounding ecstasy and only now is the real truth coming out. Not addictive, very few deaths, very few problems, statistically safer than riding a horse.

Det-Supt Charlie Carver, of the Serious and Organised Crime Squad, said many seized ecstasy pills contained harmful chemicals such as chalk and washing powder.
-The Sunday Times 

The latest strategy by the anti-drug nutters is not aimed at MDMA itself but the contaminants that are mixed in by manufacturers to extend their product. You have probably read about ecstasy being be cut with glass, rat poison, cleaning agents, heroin etc. The reality is that ecstasy is now being cut more than ever but usually with other mind altering drugs like PMA, Mephedrone, caffeine and ketamine. As far as I know, the claims of glass, heroin and poisons being included in ecstasy pills are myths.

Ecstasy has never been cheaper or more dangerous in Perth, a major new study reveals.
 -The Sunday Times 

Ironically, it’s the drug laws themselves that present the most danger. An unregulated industry(prohibition) breeds crime and a black market where there is no age restrictions, health guidelines or quality control. To top it off, the federal and state governments won’t allow doctors to run pill testing booths at music festivals or raves. This leaves users at the mercy of criminals and what they decide goes in the mix. If you have a complaint, don’t ring The Office of Fair Trading or contact a consumer rights group. The illicit drug industry handles complaints in their own special way - usually with intimidation and violence.

If we look to the club scene in London for setting the trends here in Australia, we should be worried. As MDMA is becoming scarce in London, most ecstasy pills are being filled with steroids, caffeine and mephedrone, a drug we know very little about. This has caused the arrest rate for possession of MDMA to drop significantly in London over the last few year. From 1,197 in 2006 to 773 in 2008. 2009 is looking to be less than 500. This is not a case of drug manufacturers trying to extend their profits but because of a crack down on MDMA precursors by the authorities`. China is now the sole manufacturer of the main precursor for MDMA with exports coming from only 2 countries. They are all heavily regulated and monitored with less than 5 litres in total being sold in 2008 and 2009.

Our philosophy is that we don’t want people to die in order to learn a lesson
 -Students for Sensible Drug Policy

This might keep the AFP, DEA and other drug enforcement agencies happy but as usual, their mindless obsession and limited thinking is killing people. In other words, cracking down on the relatively safe drug MDMA, has caused a surge in PMA, mephedrone, BZP, GHB and other more harmful drugs. Why are anti-drug agencies and groups so inept with logic? They think that if you simply make it harder to get a certain drug then users will just stop taking all drugs? Or when a certain area is targeted by the police - drug users just don’t give up and the dealers quit to get legitimate jobs. The drug scene simply moves somewhere else. Haven’t they ever heard of the Balloon Effect? - squeeze one end and a bulge appears somewhere else.


Insanity
So when will this farce stop? We have silly, ignorant politicians making all sorts of comical statements mixed in with deceitful politicians blatantly lying for some selfish agenda. Giving their support, are the moral crusaders who are mostly happy clappers from the religious right or the new breed of racist, Howard loving, pro-Israel, Tim Blair arse licking neo-conservatives. And in case you still have missed it, we have the sensational and heavily biased Murdoch media pumping out myths, lies and inane opinion pieces designed to brainwash a susceptible public.

Anyone with a hint of intelligence should be able to see the massive flaws in the current system. For example, why do we still have a major drug problem after 50 years of being “Tough on Drugs”? Why is alcohol still legal when it kills 10 times the number of people who die from all illicit drugs combined? Where are the masses of drug induced mental health patients? Why are there still so many drugs available when every week we hear that a new bust was supposed to greatly reduce drug supply?

Where is the common sense and pragmatism? Why do we spend billions on stopping drug supplies but drugs are now easier to obtain than ever before? Why do we keep rolling out the same expensive “Tough on Drugs” strategy when it never meets it’s targets? Why aren’t politicians caught out by the media for lying when they make brash, non-truthful statements? Most anti-drug claims by politicians are simply lies with no scientific evidence but for some reason, opposing political parties don’t just let it slide by but usually try to out do them. This childish banter of “I’m tougher on drugs than you” is purely political and only exacerbates the societal damage already inflicted. And the damage is real, costing many lives and causing incredible carnage. Why is this allowed to continue without any real scrutiny from the media?

While advances in science and medicine bound along exponentially, the approach to drug use lingers in the dark ages. Keeping the public ignorant and fearful of drugs is the prime objective for politicians because it’s a vote winner. That would change if the public were more aware of the facts but with decades of propaganda, myths and fear being forced on them, they don’t have hope. It’s spooky to think that just 10-20 minutes on the intertubes would expose a 100 years of misinformation and lies with the truth there for anyone who cares to find out.

Police Arrest More Than 300 People At Big Day Out
(AAP) PerthNow
January 2010

MORE than 300 people were arrested over the two-day Big Day Out music festival in Sydney, with one person caught with 24 ecstasy tablets, police said today.

Police, including officers from the Dog Squad and Commuter Crime unit, targeted drug and alcohol-related crime and anti-social behaviour at the festival in Homebush on Friday and Saturday.

A total of 381 people were arrested, with police laying 104 drug possession charges, 12 drug supply charges, six assault charges and one malicious damage charge.

Police also issued nine cannabis cautions, ejected 11 drunk people and caught 18 people trying to jump the fence into the venue.

Ambulance officers were also kept busy, with 1587 people treated by St John Ambulance volunteers over both days, while 36 patients were taken to hospital.

Many of those revellers were treated for dehydration, as temperatures climbed into the 40's on both days.

Drugs seized during the police operation included cannabis, ecstasy, ice, LSD, cocaine and amphetamines.

"One person was found entering the venue allegedly in possession of 24 ecstasy tablets," police said in a statement.

Superintendent Rod Smith said most festival-goers enjoyed themselves responsibly, but some people still hadn't got the message.

"Year after year we repeat the same warnings before the event starts, but every year there are still people who stupidly try to get past us and fail," Supt Smith said in a statement.

"The results also show that anti-social behaviour won't be tolerated, and those charged over the last two days will have to face the consequences at court."

Sophie Mirabella - Another “Tough on Drugs” Looney Lib

They’re at it again.

This is where Labor’s rhetoric once again diverges from reality. Despite declaring a pre-election “war on drugs” in 2007, the Rudd Government has largely abandoned the “Tough on Drugs” initiative that was so successful under the Howard Government.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Oh dear, those silly Libs. Always harping on about someone being “Soft on Drugs” or how the Howard government was so successful at fighting the drug scourge while the Rudd government is doing nothing.

Funding has been cut for both the Tough on Drugs initiative and the Customs and border protection services that so effectively prevented tonnes of dangerous drugs from being imported and getting to our streets.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Yes, I remember the success. Like the heroin epidemic that Howard proudly announced was beaten with help from the Australian Federal Police (AFP). At the time, heroin use did drop significantly in Australia and there was plenty of back patting and victory speeches. Amazingly, Howard’s “Tough on Drugs” policy was also working overseas and countries like Australia who were supplied heroin by Burma had a record drop in heroin use. Simply amazing! Several years later though, AFP head, Mick Kelty dropped a bombshell and explained that Burma and other S.E. Asia crime syndicates had switched to methamphetamines(ice) and ditched their heroin business. Oops. Just to rub it in, it was later revealed that the use of ice had been growing for the previous 5 years and peaked around the time the government announced that methamphetamines were starting to become a problem in Australia. By the time the media and government started screaming “Ice Epidemic”, methamphetamine use had already started to decline. The short story being that whilst the Howard government was busy taking credit for something they didn’t do, ice had slipped in unnoticed ... all on their watch.

Since the Rudd government took over, the “Tough on Drugs” campaign has taken a back seat while they focus on a much bigger problem called alcohol. This is driving the Libs crazy as they had previously defended the massive alcohol industry although it causes much more carnage on Australia than illicit drugs ever will. Sussan Ley, Jamie Briggs, Mathias Cormann, Colin Barnett, Christian Porter, Barry O'Farrell etc. have all had a go at the Rudd government for not being “Tough on Drugs”. Joining this groups of desperates is Sophie Mirabella, Liberal Party Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare, Women & Youth. Although Sophie Mirabella is already well known as a twat, she confirmed it by writing a piece for The Punch last week. In her article, she attacked Rudd and co. for being “Soft on Crime” highlighting how they have neglected to follow up the success of the Howard government and their “Tough on Drugs” policy. Well, here’s the thing Sophie ... “Tough on Drugs” doesn’t work. When you say “Soft on Drugs”, you mean being sensible, rational and following the facts. You mean reconsidering a failed policy that has cost millions of lives around the world. You mean breaking away from the US centric "War on Drugs" that has cursed that country into having the largest rate of drug users on the planet. Like I commented on the The Punch site - “But there’s the catch. If they really believe the propaganda they spin to the public then they are dumb as a hammer but if they are rational thinking adults and know it’s not true, then they are liars. Any guesses?”. My guess is that you know damn well what’s happening but you can’t get your head around addiction being a medical issue. You see drug use as immoral except for that most dangerous of drugs, alcohol. You think we are simply not tough enough on drug users and a worldwide concerted effort will produce a drug free world. Like most nutters from the far right, you accept druggies dying or being wrongly imprisoned as an unfortunate side effect of maintaining public morality. Yes, the quest for a perfect society that gave us Hitler, apartheid, jail for homosexuals, the over throwing of democratically elected governments, the loss of civil rights, a massive prison population, the stolen generation, rampant corruption and of course, the "War on Drugs". In your world Sophie, there’s no room for science or compassion if it interferes with conservative values.

At the Annual UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna in March this year, our “tough” Government actually protested that the term “harm reduction” had been pointedly excluded from a political declaration – effectively betraying Labor’s real “soft on drugs” approach and putting us at odds with our traditional ally, the US.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Mirabella’s latest rant in The Punch is straight from a neocon handbook. It’s probably called How To Win Friends And Influence People (Using Fear & Lies). Neocons believe it’s okay to lie to the public if it’s in the best interest of the country and Mirabella wants to determine what that is. Who cares if it ruins lives? Who cares if it doesn’t work? And why would Mirabella criticise the government for wanting the term Harm Reduction included in the UN’s official drug policy? It is after all, part of Harm Minimisation which is Australia’s official drug policy. The reason is simple. The US have a Zero Tolerance policy for drugs and it was them who pressured the UN not to include the term Harm Reduction. As a neocon, Sophie believes the US is the motherland spreading law& order, freedom & democracy, free markets and capitalism, Christianity, family values & moral direction. There’s no place for Harm Minimisation in a US inspired world.

The "War on Drugs" has failed miserably but there are many Australian politicians who still want Australia to adopt more of the US Zero Tolerance policy. Funny enough, we actually do base most of our drug strategies on the US model with a dash of Harm Reduction. The call for tougher drug sentencing is purely political. Why would we want more of the US Zero Tolerance policy when the US has the highest level of drug use per capita in the world? Is this the “success” we want? Do we want 1 in 37 citizens in the criminal system like the US? Do we want special armed forces shooting innocent bystanders in the crossfire with drug gangs? Do we want millions of people unable to get decent jobs or receive government aid just because they once smoked pot? This is the reality of Sophie Mirabella’s suggestions but there’s no room for such inconvenient truths when you are busy spinning the “Tough on Drugs” line.

The link between illicit drug use and crime is well established and is described as “mutually reinforcing”. So if the Labor Government is tough on crime, as Minister Gillard declared, there’s a clear imperative that it also be tough on drugs.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

On a final note, Sophie’s rant includes a classic anti-drug tactic that is rarely challenged by anyone - the reverse link. Making the connection between illicit drugs and crime is simple enough. You take something that is very popular like drugs and ban them. Huge demand creates extremely inflated prices and since some drugs are highly addictive, users have to regularly resort to crime to pay for them. Because they are banned and with so much money involved, the black market attracts organised crime who run the industry using violence and fear. This is called prohibition. For some reason, there are those who get it mixed up and say that the effect of drugs themselves cause users to delve into crime. Like a group of friends sitting around having a joint when suddenly one of them announces that she is going to become a dealer in illegal firearms. There is a good minute of silence before it sinks in. Under the influence of drugs, others soon declare their intentions for a criminal career as well. A bank robber, a credit card scammer and 2 car thieves. Incredible! But that’s drugs for you.

Tough On Crime Is An Empty Slogan For ALP
The Punch
by Sophie Mirabella
November 2009

The ability of Prime Minister Rudd and his Government to “talk tough” has never been in question. It’s the one thing Labor actually do well.

Remember that first heady year in office when they declared a war on virtually everything – from childhood obesity and whaling, to banker’s salaries, unemployment and even the global financial crisis itself?
Conveniently, the rhetoric has never had to bear resemblance to reality.

Julia Gillard talked tough during her faux stoush with the Unions, while at the same time delivering them unprecedented power and access in the workplace.

Wayne Swan solemnly warned of a “tough budget for tough times” before he delivered one of the biggest spending budgets in our nation’s history.

Kevin Rudd seriously claimed his changes to border security were “tough”, while at the same time creating a situation where the people smugglers are clearly back in business with a record number of illegal boats bobbing in Australian waters.

Heck, the rhetoric can even swing a full 360 degrees to suit the mood – declaring oneself an economic conservative one year, and writing a long treatise on the evils of capitalism the next.

No problem. Whatever suits perceived changes in the tide of public opinion. Whatever gets airplay. Or whatever suits as a distraction from other government failures.

The Prime Minister is currently “spinning” in India, where, just a few weeks back, Julia Gillard spent five days trying to reassure worried Indian families that Australia was a safe place, following violent incidents involving Indian students studying in Australia.

Ms Gillard declared that the Australian Government was tough on crime, adding: “We have zero tolerance towards any violence towards Indian students, any violence at all in our country.”

If only that was the case.

Just this week, in the Annual Report of the Office of Public Prosecutions, the Senior Prosecutor in Victoria Jeremy Rapke QC, accused the State’s judges of lenient sentencing, particularly in drug cases. In so many cases, these Judges have been appointed by Ms Gillard’s Labor colleagues.

Rapke rightly pointed out that the penalties imposed by Courts in drug cases continue to be inadequate having regard to the insidious effect drugs have on society and said that sentences should reflect “the huge public disquiet about the prevalence of drugs”.

The link between illicit drug use and crime is well established and is described as “mutually reinforcing”. So if the Labor Government is tough on crime, as Minister Gillard declared, there’s a clear imperative that it also be tough on drugs.

This is where Labor’s rhetoric once again diverges from reality. Despite declaring a pre-election “war on drugs” in 2007, the Rudd Government has largely abandoned the “Tough on Drugs” initiative that was so successful under the Howard Government.

Funding has been cut for both the Tough on Drugs initiative and the Customs and border protection services that so effectively prevented tonnes of dangerous drugs from being imported and getting to our streets.

At the Annual UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna in March this year, our “tough” Government actually protested that the term “harm reduction” had been pointedly excluded from a political declaration – effectively betraying Labor’s real “soft on drugs” approach and putting us at odds with our traditional ally, the US.

When it comes to being “tough on crime”, Labor’s own policy platform also betrays them, with Chapter 7 declaring “Labor will promote the principles of restorative justice as a just and effective way to be tough on crime.”

Restorative justice? What exactly is that? A core principle in restorative justice is to “balance offender needs, victim needs and the needs of the community as well” (Bazemore and Umbreict 1995).

Note the “offenders needs” are pretty high up on that list. And that’s the sticking point.

At its best, restorative justice gives victims of crime a voice. That’s a good thing. For first offences and petty crimes it is a method of dispute resolution that can be effective if both parties enter into the process with good will.

But more and more often the principle is being applied to serious criminal behaviour.

For judges who philosophically support restorative justice that often means keeping an offender out of jail wherever possible…the theory being that they are unable to “make amends” if confined in prison.

This is an approach pretty much at odds with the “do the crime, do the time” deterrent to criminal behaviour which has long underpinned the system and reflects the sentiment of most of the Australian community.

But leniency and the philosophical belief that “offender needs” must be considered in sentencing mean we continue to see many cases where the time simply does not fit the crime. Nor does it reflect community standards and expectations.

Many Judges, like the Labor Party itself, see the principles of restorative justice as the most “just and effective” approach. That’s certainly debatable – and I don’t have the space in this column to go into all the pros and cons. But one thing restorative justice couldn’t be described as is “tough”.

So how can Labor claim to be tough on crime when their party platform says the opposite? Moreover, and perhaps more significantly given our proud history of judicial independence, Labor are appointing more and more judges who conveniently share Labor’s “go soft” beliefs.

The Victorian State Attorney General Rob Hulls is a case in point. His appointments now make up half the State’s judiciary – among them two “Lawyers for Labor”, a former Labor candidate, and four senior officials from the left-leaning “Liberty Victoria”, along with many other “activist” Judges.

Without commenting on their individual qualifications, I do question whether their collective views are representative of mainstream values. I wonder if the balance is skewed.

As a Barrister myself, I believe it’s important for the judiciary to maintain the confidence of the public by broadly reflecting the community’s concept of “justice”.

As outlined earlier, the Senior public prosecutor in Victoria also seems to think this is important.

As evidenced in some of his appointments, the Labor State Attorney General clearly does not.

Meanwhile, half a world away, our tough talking Labor Prime Minister continues to declare his Government is “tough on crime”.

Plenty of feel-good rhetoric, but reality will inevitably bite.

For some local insight into Sophie Mirabella, check out Ray Dixon’s Alpine Opinion.


Related Articles:
Sophie Mirabella, tough on crime, the war on drugs, blather about liberal softies, and a black dull Friday the 13th indee - Loon Pond
The Liberal Party on Drugs
Jamie Briggs - The MP Who Drank the Kool Aid with Lolly Water
Liberal Party Can't Shake Off Howard's Australia
The Unwinnable War On Dickheads

The Liberal Party on Drugs

Early this week, the Sunday Times in WA asked Attorney General Christian Porter and his opposition counterpart, John Quigley a series of questions on law and order. The first question was whether WA cannabis laws need to be changed and why. Attorney General Christian Porter gave this disturbing answer:

It remains a top priority of the Liberal National Government to repeal Labor's soft-on-cannabis legislation. This government will not tolerate laws which sanction the use of illicit drugs, particularly drugs that have been shown to cause severe mental health issues.
-WA Attorney General Christian Porter(PerthNow)

With the current cannabis laws in WA achieving their aims including a continuation of decreased drug use, it seems a little weird that the government would want to change them. But the phrase, “soft-on-cannabis”, exposes what’s really behind the government’s push for harsher cannabis laws ... ideology. This has opened up the WA government for legitimate criticism that they are ignoring the evidence before them and pursuing an outdated and flawed strategy based on nothing but pure fantasy. And why it “remains a top priority” must surely be a worry with so much else going on at the moment. Last week, Federal Member for Mayo and former John Howard advisor, Jamie Briggs also made some remarkable comments concerning illicit drugs:

Drugs are the No. 1 risk young people face and the Federal Government's focus on binge drinking means it is missing the problem
-Jamie Briggs - Federal Member for Mayo (Courier-Mail)

The Liberals are still having a hard time getting over the fact that alcohol causes many more problems than all illicit drugs combined. The mindset that all drugs are evil and alcohol is just part of society is firmly intrenched in politics as it is a clear vote winner. The Rudd government needs some kudos for targeting alcohol especially for their efforts to change the drinking culture in Australia. The government has wisely focussed on a long term strategy which might take 10-20 years to take effect. It’s certainly not a shrewd political move or a vote winner and has become an easy target for the opposition who prefer the more immediate policy of appearing to be “tough on drugs”. And here lies the problem. Focussing on a failed drug policy which has never worked for any government of any country, is bound to fail again. The definition of stupidity is often cited as repeating the same old strategies over and over but expecting a different result. Sound familiar? The Rudd government isn’t much better on drug policy from what we have seen but at least they are focussing on the more serious problem of alcohol. 

Christian Porter and Jamie Briggs’ are not alone though and their inane comments about drugs are only two of many made by the Libs over the last year. Remember a newly appointed opposition leader, Malcolm Turnbull coyly admitting to smoking pot whilst attending university? Remember the cheeky schoolboy grin and matter-of-fact explanation that quickly evolved into a lecture, damning those who follow in his footsteps? Did Malcolm’s sensibility suddenly become overrun with hard line, Liberal Party ideology? Did he forget for a moment that under his own parties’ “Tough on Drugs” polices, he would have never made it to where he is if he was caught smoking that bong? Who knows? I have looked back over the last year or so and discovered some many challenges from the Libs to the government about who is “toughest on drugs”. I must say that the complete avoidance of investigating a sensible, evidence based drug policy is startling. The Greens and what’s left of the Democrats have much more rational drug policies but are often damned by the major parties as being loopy. It’s a sad day for society when intelligent, well thought out policies backed up with empirical evidence are considered radical whilst maintaining a useless and unsuccessful policy. I have compiled from the last 12 months some classic Liberal Party nonsense dressed up as their “Tough on Drugs” strategy. Keep in mind that these people are supposed to be adults in a position of power and responsibility who are meant to represent us. It is also worth noting that there is ample information and research debunking most of their drug policies and is readily available on the internet. 

NOTE: Some items are extracts and some articles have been edited for the sake of readability. For the full articles, click on the links provided. Items of special interest are coloured red.

JAMIE BRIGGS MP - FEDERAL MEMBER FOR MAYO

Booze Focus Misses Top Risk Of Drugs, Says Jamie Briggs 

By Emma Chalmers (Courier-Mail)

April 2009

DRUGS are the No. 1 risk young people face and the Federal Government's focus on binge drinking means it is missing the problem, a Liberal MP and former adviser to John Howard has warned. South Australian MP Jamie Briggs yesterday said The Courier-Mail's recent series on the drugs scourge exposed how cheap and available illicit drugs were to young people. "What (The Courier-Mail's) series of reports showed is the people walking into clubs can buy for $25 something which is mind-altering," he said. "You don't know where it's made, there's no standards for it and in many instances it's very dangerous." Mr Briggs, who replaced former foreign affairs minister Alexander Downer in the seat of Mayo, said that while the Rudd Government was focused on binge drinking and the alcopops tax, it was missing a bigger issue. "If you're serious about addressing issues which are relevant to young people then ecstasy and party drugs have to be part of that," he said. The Rudd Government on Wednesday said it would try again to impose a 70 per cent tax increase on pre-mixed alcoholic drinks popular with young people after its last attempt sank in the Senate by just one vote. Mr Briggs said the Government should widen its alcohol education program - which it will fund with some of the revenue from the tax hike - to include information about all risks relevant to young people, especially drugs. He also called for more police resources to be devoted to the problem.

Excise Tariff Amendment And Customs Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No 1) Bill 2009 

Jamie Briggs MP: Speech to the House

February 2009 

Minister, I never would have undertaken any activities and broken the law—this was binge drinking after 18! It is not a new problem. Binge drinking is a very serious issue and it is a major concern, particularly for those of us who have young children, going forward. We need to educate our children on how to deal properly with alcohol use. It is also not the only problem for young people in society today. We have seen in recent times the problem with illicit drugs, particularly ecstasy at some of these dance and rave parties that have occurred or even at festivals sponsored by a very well-known Australian funded broadcaster. It is not the only issue that haunts young people and that is a challenge to young people. In fact, I would contend it is not the major issue which challenges young people. The truth is that the majority of people in our society use alcohol properly. They do not drink to excess and they do not become a statistic of violence or some of the other problems that occur with overindulging in alcohol. The other truth is that the alcohol industry is a major employer in Australia. Whether it be through the wine industry in my electorate of Mayo in the state of South Australia or through the distilled industries, it is a major employer. So those on the other side should be careful not to take too much of a wowser approach to alcohol, because we are dealing with people’s jobs and people’s lives. What we on this side of the House wanted to see when this was announced was a genuine attempt at addressing a serious issue—not just the issue of binge drinking but the multiple issues that affect young people as they grow into adults and go through the pressures of becoming a young adult. Of course, many of them do overindulge in alcohol. But, as I said earlier, many of them also have issues with illicit drugs, which cause a great deal of harm to many young people in our community. Unlike alcohol, which you can use in a measured way—and most do—illicit drugs of course you cannot. So many of our young people get caught in the cycle of trying different illicit drugs, and it all too often damages their lives. It seems to me that if we were serious about addressing this binge drinking issue, we would also be looking at that as one of the other challenges for young people moving into adulthood. Of course, illicit drugs have to be a major part of that strategy. It is disappointing to us to see that the promise of hundreds of millions of dollars on a preventative health campaign turned into simply $50 million designed to run some ads, as it appears to have done.

The myth that relaxing with one or two drinks is vastly different to drug use, again rears it’s ugly head. Those like Briggs push the image of drugged out, crazy eyed zombies or junkies slumped in an alley with a syringe dangling out of their arm as the guaranteed result of any drug use. The idea that someone can smoke just a little pot to relax or take just one ecstasy tablet for a night of fun is inconceivable to the pro alcohol / anti-drug brigade. Of course, the "use to excess" drug myth was debunked in the 1970s but incredible still remains a valid argument for seasoned liars. The fact is, a small amount of alcohol like “relaxing with one or two drinks” affects the brain and causes a reaction like taking any sort of mind altering drug.

BARRY O'FARRELL MP - NSW STATE LIBERAL LEADER

Call For Anti-Drug Campaign, Ban On Term ‘Recreational Drugs’s

By Barry O'Farrell MP (Media Release)
April 2009

Crime statistics revealing significant increases in drug offences and drug use across NSW highlighted the urgent need for a high profile campaign to alert the community to the dangers of illegal drugs. These alarming statistics require an urgent and strong response from the State Government. They require a high profile, strong public education campaign that warns people about the dangers of illegal drugs. It should also seek to equip parents with information on how to identify signs their children are using illegal drugs and where to go for help. Official federal figures reveal that NSW spends less money on drug prevention than any other State or territory. We should also seek to banish the term ‘recreational drugs’ from the vocabulary of both the community and the media. We’re talking about harmful and dangerous drugs. Use of the term ‘recreational drugs’ sends a far different message about them. We need to warn young people about the dangers of drugs – we haven’t had such a campaign since the drugs summit ten years ago. Current State policy is failing to tackle the scourge of illegal drugs in our community. NSW needs greater investment in a comprehensive, public program aimed at preventing use of illegal drugs like cocaine and ecstasy. These latest crime figures demonstrate that use of illegal drugs is a growth industry in NSW. They suggest we have taken our eye off the ball. We must use their release to better educate families about the dangers of illegal drug use.

Campbell Drops The Ball On Drug Testing For Rail Workers: A Positive Test Every Five Days 

By Barry O'Farrell MP (Media Release) 

February 2009 

Transport Minister David Campbell needs to step up the random drug testing of rail workers after the latest figures reveal a decline in the number of tests, but a rise in the number of positive results. As Seven News reported this evening, a rail worker tests positive for drugs every five days. 

Year            Tests    Positive 

2004/05        4,498    47 

2005/06        8,744    74 

2006/07        4,017    51 

2007/08        5,136    71 

Passenger safety is put at risk if a train driver or guard is affected by drugs. It makes no sense to be cutting the number of random drug tests if the positive test results continue to increase. The minority of rail workers who abuse drugs need to be weeded out and the public needs to be assured that strong action is being taken. They need to know that repeat offenders lose their jobs. Rail commuters already face enough transport stress without having to worry about whether their train driver or guard is affected by drugs. NSW Police don’t cut back on the number of random alcohol tests they carry out. CityRail shouldn’t be cutting back on their drug tests. David Campbell needs to get serious about tackling this dangerous behaviour on the rail network.

See a problem here? Tests haven’t declined, they have increased. That’s only part of the issue though. Most illicit drugs stay in your system much longer than alcohol but have a diminished effect on your performance after 12-24 hours. Cannabis can linger in your blood for 30 days but any real effect from the THC disappears after about 4-5 hours. Other drugs can stay in your blood for 48 hours to weeks with any effects disappearing after 12-24 hours or so. I agree that drug use at certain jobs is extremely dangerous but being picked up a week after you took drugs is a problem that needs some attention.

MIKE GALLACHER MLC - NSW SHADOW POLICE MINISTER

Crime Rises Tied To Economic Conditions: Labor Unprepared 

By Mike Gallacher MLC (Media Release)

April 2009 

Recorded crime statistics released by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research today reveal increases in crime rates tied to economic conditions, the affects of which the NSW State Labor Government are ill prepared for. [...] Of equal concern are the dramatic increases in drug possession. While much of this can be put down to increased enforcement at drug use hotspots; it is obvious the anti-drug message is not getting through. The NSW State Labor Government needs to get serious about organised crime, and about cutting the supply of drugs off at the source. Sniffer dogs and overt enforcement of drug laws send a clear message to the wider public that drug use is a crime; but the decrease in narcotics use over the last decade has shown us habitual drug users will not stop until the drug supply is cut off at the source.

For an aspiring police minister, Mike Gallacher is extremely naive. That’s if he actually believes in what he is saying of course. Berating the government for not cutting off the drug supply at it’s source is worth a giggle or two considering the Mexican army can’t even do it in their country. What’s your solution Mike? “Sniffer dogs and overt enforcement of drug laws sending a message”? [more giggles] Yes Mike, you’re a joke.

JILLIAN SKINNER - NSW SHADOW MINISTER FOR HEALTH

Victory For Families And Opposition On Drugs Pamphlet, But Review Must Involve Frontline Educators 

By Jillian Skinner (Media Release)

June 2008 

The pulping of a Iemma Government pamphlet giving school children the green light to take illegal drugs is a victory for families and the State Opposition. The pulping of this offensive document was the only option Health Minister Reba Meagher could take. The decision of the Health Minister’s department to produce this document in the first place casts fresh doubts about Reba Meagher’s judgement. If further demonstrates how incompetent the Health Minister is. It also confirms this pamphlet was distributed beyond the small group suggested by various Iemma Government spokespeople. Once again, the Iemma Government has been caught out trying to spin its way out of trouble one minute, and then dithering and trying to cover its tracks the next. Reba Meagher needs to confirm how many of these pamphlets were produced, and how much it cost taxpayers? The review of all drug education material handed out in our schools, announced today, is long overdue. For too long this kind of mixed message has been coming out of the Iemma Government, it has to stop. To be effective this review must involve all people involved in drug education. If this is just another statement to get the media and concerned families off Reba Meagher’s back, it’s going to backfire – we will not rest until this review is made public and all relevant parties are allowed to have their say. Drug education must carry the simple message that it is never safe to take illegal drugs. Only the incompetence of the Iemma Government could stuff up giving this vitally important message to school children.

“The pulping of this offensive document was the only option” 

So telling the truth is offensive? Saving lives is offensive? Facing reality is offensive? When will the reality of drug use finally sink in their cold, hard, shit encased brains? Are they really that stupid and if so, what are they doing representing us? Even scarier is that they really do know the reality but are just scumbag liars scurrying for votes. “Drug education must carry the simple message that it is never safe to take illegal drugs” - Again, are they really that stupid? Doesn’t Jillian Skinner have kids or realise that lecturing false promises of life ruining carnage from any drug use at all is simply dismissed as lies? Kids (and adults) who see many friends or family use drugs and not suffering the promised personal apocalypse tend to just ignore the steady stream of doomsday messages. Sadly, they will probably ignore a message which may one day actually be important. Maybe Jillian Skinhead should read the book, The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

COLIN BARNETT - WEST AUSTRALIAN PREMIER

Drug Bin Trial To Go Ahead Despite Opposition 

News Article (ABC News)

March 2008 

The West Australian Premier, Colin Barnett, says he will not stand in the way of police trialing drug amnesty bins at major events, even though he does not support the concept. Police are expected to trial the bins at a music concert in Joondalup on Sunday. The trial follows the death of 17-year-old Gemma Thoms, who died in hospital after taking ecstasy tablets at the Big Day Out music festival in Perth in February. It is believed she swallowed the tablets after fearing police, who were searching people, would find them. Concert goers will be able to use to the bins to dispose illegal drugs before entering the venue without facing any charges. Mr Barnett says he does not like the idea. "The Police Commissioner wants to trial that so he can do that," he said. "It's not something that I believe gives the right message and harm minimisation has been a failure and absolute failure in the treatment of drugs in this state."

Straight from the smelly bowels of those lying anti-Harm Minimisation zealots. If HM is such a failure, why are so many countries now implementing it into their drug policies? For a state premier to blatantly lie by assuming it’s a non-scientific issue without evidence, indicates how out of touch Barnett really is. His views might be fluffy ideology but HM is based on science and medical research with qualified results. The opposite to just “sending the wrong message” or other feel good policies.

SUSSAN LEY MP - FEDERAL SHADOW MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CUSTOMS

Labor Soft On Border Protection, Soft On Drugs 

By Sussan Ley (Media Release)

April 2009

The Minister for Home Affairs Bob Debus must move swiftly to tighten controls on pill presses being imported into Australia. The smallest of pill presses is capable of pumping out about 6000 pills in just one hour. Considering the use of ecstasy has risen steadily from 1.2% of the population in 1993 to 3.5% in recent years, and we know that the precursor chemicals are slipping though the net all the time, a ban on importing pill presses by unlicensed members of the public is a sensible way of attacking the problem at the sharp end – where manufacturing takes place. The Rudd Labor Government cannot continue to allow organised criminal groups and outlaw motorcycle gangs to use the postal service to make and receive their illicit drug supply. Minister Debus has said there are no plans for even a review of the policy to import pill presses. How can the Rudd Labor Government claim they have a Tough on Drugs strategy when they will not even consider banning the drug making machinery? At the annual UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna in March this year, the Rudd Labor Government protested that the term ‘harm reduction’ had been pointedly excluded from a political declaration. This puts Australia at loggerheads with our traditional ‘tough on drugs’ ally, the United States. This further proves the Rudd Labor Government is taking a soft approach to illicit drugs. Experience has proven that harm minimisation has failed and hard-hitting measures are needed. Minister Debus needs to come out of his hole and start making some tough decisions to protect Australia from the flood of illicit drugs crossing our borders.

More from Sussan Ley - Liberal Party News

Sea containers house the largest volumes of illicit drugs that come into Australia and criminals and organised criminal syndicates rely on workers in the maritime environment to move illicit drugs from one country to another. It is impossible to say what quantity of illegal drugs is slipping through the net but we do know that the prices pad for illegal narcotics in Australia are the highest in the world so there is every reason for organised crime syndicates to target this country 

-Rudd Needs To Clarify: Are Criminals Running Our Docks? - 27, February 2009 

If people smugglers are getting savvy, then so will importers of drugs, weapons and other contraband, so Rudd and his Government need to get savvy too. 

-Rudd And Debus Prove They’re Unable To Protect Our Borders - April 16, 2009 

With Australia being seen once again as a ‘soft target’ by people smugglers and the increasing numbers of illegal vessels arriving on our shores we must put more focus on patrols without taking away from other customs duties such as preventing illicit drugs and weapons entering the country, illegal fishing, and wildlife smuggling. 

-Rudd Leaves Our Borders Vulnerable - April 9, 2009 

Customs Officers are charged with protecting the Australian community by intercepting illegal drugs, weapons, dangerous plant species and smuggled wildlife, not to mention interdiction of people smuggling vessels in our northern waters. 

-Shameful Labor Cuts Customs Staff Pay By Stealth - March 30, 2009 

Gang related crime can happen at our wharves as well as our airports and the Rudd Government needs to shape up on port security to prevent organised criminals smuggling drugs, guns and money through Australia’s docks. It is clear that maritime security is our most vulnerable defence against terrorism, drug trafficking and the illegal movement of people and weapons. 

-Criminal Gangs Exploiting Our Wharves - March 23, 2009 

It is shameful that the Rudd Labor Government feels it is OK to waste $10 million when we have drugs on our streets, and weapons in the hands of outlaw bikie gangs. 

-Kevin Rudd, Robbing Peter To Re-Badge Paul - March 23, 2009 

If the Government cares about stamping out the supply of illicit drugs in Australia, they should admit they made an error in cutting Customs and AFP funding and reverse the cuts in the up-coming Budget. 

-Customs Cocaine Bust Underscores Risk In Labor’s Budget Cuts - February 17, 2009 

In conjunction with several other tasks, Customs are responsible for overseeing mass volumes of imports and exports, along with detecting illicit drugs and prohibited imports to ensure they do not get through the gate. Customs are the front line in protecting our borders from these threats and the Rudd Labor Government has taken this for granted when they recklessly slashed funds to our border protection and law enforcement agencies. 

-Border Security Disaster Looms - December 17, 2008 

Ms Ley said sea containers house the largest volumes of illicit drugs that come into Australia and criminals and organised crime rings rely on workers in the maritime environment to move illicit drugs from one country to another. 

-Changes Needed To Make Australian Ports Secure - October 9, 2008

Like all loyal members of the Liberal Party, Sussan Ley really has an obsession with illicit drugs especially those being smuggled into Australia. After all, it’s her role as Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs to keep the government honest about customs and border security. But maybe she should be honest herself. Not once has Sussan Ley mentioned that only about 10% of illicit drugs coming into this country are detected or confiscated. Fiddling around the edges is not going to stop drugs being imported into Australia. Ending prohibition will.

SENATOR MATHIAS CORMANN - SHADOW PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY FOR HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

What About The Winnable War On Drugs Prime Minister? 

By Mathias Cormann (Media Release)

November 2008 

Kevin Rudd needs to commit to the ‘war on drugs’. In his first year in office the Prime Minister has been leading a ‘war’ on just about everything. Why is it then that his Government has abandoned the critically important war on drugs? More than a year after the release of the comprehensive House of Representatives Committee report “The winnable war on drugs – The impact of illicit drug use on families” the Rudd Government still has not provided any response to the Parliament. In the Government’s propaganda paper on its first year in office the battle faced by too many families against the enemy of drug abuse hardly rates a mention. The time for more Committees and reviews on the challenge of drug abuse is over. This is the time to make decisions and take action. We need decisions focused on winning the war, not on helping the enemy gain more strength. The story in today’s Daily Telegraph is a shocking demonstration of how a completely misguided harm minimisation approach by Labor in NSW is failing young people and their families. Our children don’t need lessons on how to use harmful and illicit drugs. They need to get the clear message that drugs are bad. Of course we have to provide effective treatment to anyone with a drug problem – but it should never ever be done in a way that normalises drug use. Any parent would be shocked and horrified to read the advice that has been circulated to children in NSW schools, including comments such as:

• If you don’t already have a reliable dealer, try to find one and stick with them
• When you’re using a new batch (of speed) only try a little at first - you can always use the rest later if you need to
• Budget for food, rent and bills BEFORE you spend money on drugs
• Don’t buy drugs on credit

It is time the Prime Minister showed some national leadership on this. Teaching 14 year old kids how to use illicit drugs is just outrageous. This is another ‘harm minimisation’ booklet that should be pulped immediately! I look forward to meeting with Darren Marton, the founder of the ‘Drugs - No-Way’ campaign in Canberra on Wednesday, along with Ms Bronwyn Bishop, who chaired the House of Representatives Inquiry into Illicit Drugs last year.

Anyone who seriously thinks Bronwyn Bishop’s report, “The Winnable War on Drugs” is worth consideration should instantly be ignored. Topping it up with “Kevin Rudd needs to commit to the ‘war on drugs’” and “this is another ‘harm minimisation’ booklet that should be pulped immediately” only backs it up. Maybe they should learn that it’s better to say nothing when you have nothing useful to say. Nothing highlights this better than Cormann’s criticism of the practical tips given to those kids who have started using drugs. Read more here.

THE HON CHRISTOPHER ELLISON - SHADOW MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

My Decision To Retire From Politics 

By Christopher Ellison (Media Release)

September 2008 

As Minister for Schools, he helped to implement national benchmarks for literacy and numeracy and oversaw a revision of funding for non-government schools. He also set up, for the first time, a National Advisory Committee on School Drug Education. As part of the Prime Minister’s Tough on Drugs Strategy, Senator Ellison oversaw the development of the $7.4 million Schools Drug Education Strategy with the national goal of no illicit drugs in schools.

Looks like his goal of no illicit drugs in schools was a fizzer. Do they really believe these goals of a drug free society? Heck, we can’t even stop drugs getting into prisons but magically we were going to stop drugs in schools. Again, some basic questions need to be asked - Are they really that stupid? If yes, why the hell are we listening to them. If no, they are being deceitful because they know the goals are unachievable.

MIKE HORAN - QLD LIBERAL NATIONAL PARTY(LNP) JUSTICE SPOKESMAN

LNP Justice commitment- Major Sentencing Audit and Law Reform 

By Mike Horan (Media Release)

March 2009 

A major sentencing audit to achieve community standards was a key part of the LNP’s Government commitment to restore confidence in the States struggling Justice System. People were sick and tired of Labor’s weak sentencing laws that allowed serious criminals such as rapists and armed robbers to walk free from court. An LNP Government would conduct an immediate audit of criminal sentencing laws, the results of which would underpin any changes to the laws. The LNP will make Queensland’s drug laws the toughest in the country to stop the scourge of drugs upon young people and crime. As part of the LNP’s commitment to overhaul sentencing laws in Queensland, drug traffickers and serious drug producers can expect serious jail time. An LNP Government would ensure that serious offenders such as drug traffickers serve 100 per cent of their jail sentences. The LNP is committed to introducing telephone interception powers to assist our police in catching the drug producers and dealers. The LNP would provide effective rehabilitation options for first-time young offenders and examine the use of mandatory drug rehabilitation orders for others. The LNP believes that the hard work of our police in catching these criminal should be backed up by tough, effective sentencing. Making excuses for drug dealers and drug criminals needs to end, now. We need a system of justice that holds these people accountable for their actions and puts community safety first. Other LNP Justice Policy Commitments include:

• Immediate Sentence Audit
• Remove detention as a last resort from Juvenile Justice Act
• Establishment of youth training centres to break the cycle of crime and provide a chance for reform
• Mandatory Minimum 3 months Jail for serious assaults on police
• Introduce voluntary intoxication by drug or alcohol as a circumstance of aggravation for all serious violent offences
• Criminal Law Reform- ‘One punch can kill laws’
• Graffiti clean up and tough gate-crashing laws
• Mandatory minimum sentences for Drug traffickers
• Telephone interception powers for police
• No sex offender will be released without having completed a rehabilitation program and considered safe
• Support of Justice staff and career opportunities

Drug Traffickers Should Do Time 

By Mike Horan (Media Release)

February 2009 

The failure of a court in Cairns to sentence a drug trafficker to any real jail time is further evidence that sentencing laws in Queensland need to be reformed. Drug trafficking and illegal drug use was the underlying cause of most robberies and property crime in Queensland. The community expects to see such drug traffickers sent to jail not released with a slap on the wrist. Punishment for crimes must reflect community standards and also protect the community. An immediate parole order release for a serious drug trafficking offence shows the sentencing laws under the Bligh Government are failing. Sentences need to send a clear message to would-be criminals and the rest of the community that such behaviour will be dealt with harshly. If sentences don't reflect community standards it's our job as law-makers to ensure they do ... drug trafficking puts the lives of every Queenslander at risk. Labor has made an art-form of pretending to be tough on crime. They have gone about increasing maximum penalties for offences, but nothing to ensure tough penalties are applied at court, where it counts." 

Mandatory Rehab For Druggies 

By Mike Horan (Media Release)

November 2008 

Changes to Queensland's court system were needed to ensure addicts undertook rehab to break the drug-crime-cycle. Research by the State's Crime and Misconduct Commission showed pressing all people with serious substance abuse problems into mandatory rehab had to be considered as a viable option to just voluntary rehab. The findings of the CMC's study were very welcome and he called on the Bligh government to respond to redress the major problem of drug-linked crime. Queensland is a major source of amphetamines and other hard drugs and we need to ensure people addicted to drugs have access to the support they need. If we can break the cycle of drug crime it will save society in the long term. Figures released in the Corrective Services annual report show 70 per cent of people currently going through the Drug Court do not finish rehab and less people have been going through the program. We need to invest more in the drug rehabilitation and court system to ensure it works. The CMC research shows offenders with drug and/or alcohol abuse problems don't need to be psychologically ready and motivated for treatment to get results with about 65 per cent of those who underwent treatment reporting positive outcomes regardless of whether the treatment was mandatory or voluntary. The CMC research paper, Mandatory treatment and perceptions of treatment effectiveness, looked at the risks and needs of 480 non-custodial drug offenders in Qld. The results suggest people with serious substance abuse problems need support and encouragement to access treatment, so mandatory treatment for offenders may be an effective option.

How do people like Horan get in these positions of power? I can’t fathom how someone is given the justice portfolio and then encourages even more useless law and order initiatives that have failed consistently in other countries including Australia. In the business world, Horan would be sacked and shamed for being completely incompetent. There are so many suggestions from Horan that have failed previously that it resembles a parody comedy skit. Comments like “drug trafficking puts the lives of every Queenslander at risk” and “If we can break the cycle of drug crime it will save society in the long term” have no substance at all but reflect the mindset of a government without real solutions. It’s always easy to get “Tough on Drugs” using standard, vote friendly rhetoric but it doesn’t actually address the problems. If Horan can be so wrong on this issue, why should we trust him with anything else?