Pubdate: Mon, 6 Sep 2010
Source: Age, The (Australia)
Contact:  2010 The Age Company Ltd
Website: http://www.theage.com.au/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/5
Author: Kenneth Davidson
Note: Kenneth Davidson is a senior columnist.
Referenced: Illicit Drug Data Report 
http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/publications/iddr/2007_08.htm
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Alex+Wodak

TIME TO START THINKING AGAIN ON DRUG LAWS

Huge Profits Ensure That New Traffickers Are Always Ready to Fill Any Gaps.

THE report by The Age and Four Corners on a major drugs bust 
(code-named Operation Hoffman) by state police forces under the 
direction of the Australian Crime Commission was a cracking story. A 
fascinating cast of goodies and baddies was set against the 
background of a global drugs distribution chain, which was broken by 
following the money trail.

The conclusion was that even with regular disruptions to the supply 
chain and the operators being given heavy jail sentences, the 
extremely high profits are more than enough to ensure that new drug 
rings will step into the breach.

If interruptions to supply chains were working, we would see low 
availability of drugs and high prices leading to reduced consumption. 
Evidence from overseas - where the policy emphasis is on cutting 
supplies - shows that drugs are in fact more readily available, 
prices have fallen dramatically, the purity of hard drugs is 
increasing and the market is growing.

But the conclusion drawn by the crime commission from Operation 
Hoffman is that it needs more resources to follow the international 
money trail.

The 2008-09 Illicit Drug Data Report ramps up the rhetoric. The drugs 
of choice for today's young are amphetamines and ecstasy. The report 
states that amphetamines, even in small doses, can cause 
cardiovascular problems and convulsions leading to death. Long-term 
use can trigger violent behaviour, and structural and functional 
changes to the brain, leading to psychosis.

According to the commission, ecstasy (in high doses) can result in 
liver, kidney or cardiovascular system failure and death. Long-term 
use can cause paranoia, insomnia, nausea, hypothermia and severe 
hallucinations, and can damage cognitive and memory functions.

I am sure that this is true, but it should be kept in proportion. The 
damage done to individuals and the harm caused to society by these 
drugs (even the most lethal illicit drugs, such as heroin) is small 
compared with the harm done by legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco.

According to a 2003 study undertaken for the British cabinet, and 
later published by The Guardian, heroin and/or crack users were 
responsible for the vast majority of the cost of drug-motivated 
crime, that ecstasy was unlikely to cause significant health damage, 
and that amphetamines had medium health risks.

Heavy use of amphetamines or ecstasy could affect users' ability to 
work and to care for others, but was unlikely to motivate crime.

Attempts at supply intervention should be concentrated on "hard" 
drugs, because heroin and/or crack users are the "high harm-causing users".

But as the British report said, even if supply interventions did 
successfully increase the price, the evidence was not sufficiently 
strong to prove that this would reduce harm. While shortages might 
drive some users to get treatment for their addiction, it might also 
induce some users to undertake more criminal activity to satisfy 
their addiction.

Let's put this into a historical context. Up until 1906, it was legal 
to import edible opium into Australia.

In a speech to the Lowy Institute, Alex Wodak, the director of 
alcohol and drug services at Sydney's St Vincent's hospital, quoted 
the 1908 annual report to the Commonwealth Parliament by the 
comptroller-general of customs, which said: "It is very doubtful if 
such prohibition has lessened to an extent the amount which is 
brought into Australia ...

"Owing to total prohibition, the price of opium has risen enormously 
.. the Commonwealth gladly gave up about UKP60,000 revenue with a 
view to a suppression of the evil, but the result has not been what 
has been hoped for. What now appears to be the effect of total 
prohibition is that, while we have lost the duty, the opium is still 
imported freely."

Victimless crimes - ranging from drugs to prostitution - are a 
sure-fire recipe for police and political corruption. Alcohol 
prohibition in the US led to corruption and organised crime.

Prohibition encourages consumers and suppliers to focus on drugs 
offering the greatest "hit" (and health risks) for users and the 
greatest profits for suppliers.

Greater expenditure on law enforcement, as advocated by the crime 
commission, goes against the trend in most countries (including 
Australia), which sees illicit drugs as primarily a health and social issue.

As drug reform pioneer Wodak (who introduced the first safe, but 
illegal, injecting facility in Australia) argues the war on drugs has 
failed comprehensively and the political elites know that prohibition 
does not work. It continues because it is politically popular.

According to Wodak, penalties for drug possession and consumption 
should be eliminated or reduced. He points out that resources 
allocated to high-cost but low-impact sectors such as customs, 
police, courts and prisons should be switched to low-cost and 
high-impact health and social programs.

Reforms would include regulation and taxing the sale of cannabis and 
possibly allowing the sale of some drugs in diluted small quantities, 
as was the case with edible opium before 1906, or cocaine in 
Coca-Cola before 1913.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake