|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Australian Federal Police - Platypus Journal/Magazine |
Young Australians face an increasing battle with illicit drugs
In an address to the First International Conference on Drugs and Young People in Melbourne recently, Commissioner Mick Palmer highlighted the need to ensure young Australians are better equipped to resist the tempation of illicit drugs.
An important step in achieving this, he said, was in developing a comprehanesive, multi-faceted approach to the war on drugs, which embraced education, health and law enforcement strategies. While law enforcement agencies would continue their efforts to reduce the supply of illicit drugs, they must also become more effective supporters of the efforts being promoted on the demand side, by way of harm minimisation, demand reduction and other education strategies - strategies which would have the best chance of success in an environment which had better control over the supply of narcotics.
He also stressed the importance of forging stronger links with youth networks, which was an ai of the conference.
We all know that, without our youth, there is no future. The challenges and temptations facing the youth of today are far greater than those which existed when I was growing up.
As parents, friends, teachers and counsellors we, like generations of forebears, constantly look at our young and worry about how they are going to turn out; we wince when they do something that makes us want to say "no don't do that", and we continually wrestle with the question of how to get our messages across to them so that they can make an ‘informed decision' on an issue which may affect them for the rest of their lives.
They, in turn, look at us and say we just don't understand; we are too old; too rigid; and put too much pressure on them to conform to our notion of correctness, which they see as staid, boring and outdated. Truth lies in both camps.
To be properly identified and actioned it needs mutual understanding, trust and credibility.
Within the range of temptations open to youth, I am sure that licit and illicit drugs rate as substances most likely to cause us to have anxiety attacks. We know that tobacco is linked to cancer and alcohol is a major contributor to road and other accidents, serious illness, drowning and violence.
Overseas research also suggests that there is a significant correlation between the use of tobacco, alcohol and solvents and the later use of illicit drugs. If this is so, I have no doubt that Australian research would show a similar correlation.
Looking at the illicit drug which most concerns Australians — heroin — statistics show that in 1996 there were 526 heroin-related deaths in Australia. Eighty-five per cent of those deaths involved people who were not in treatment. Over 40,000 hospital bed days are used each year on drug-related medical care, with a national cost of more than $7 billion each year.
With statistics and costs such as these, we could not be surprised at the amount of debate currently going on in our society over drug use, treatment and law enforcement. Also, these figures take no account of the personal and family anguish or the personal and financial costs of violence and property crime, so frequently caused by, or related to, heroin use and dependency.
But all is not doom and gloom. The war (if it must be called a war) is not lost and never must it be. It is, though, a difficult and more complex war than previously understood — requiring more comprehensive and cohesive strategies and responses. The health and future of our youth, and indeed the health of our great country, in all its dimensions, is too important for us not to be fully committed and as successful as humanly possible.
Whilst as a law enforcement officer I am not sure I can provide new solutions to tackling the issue of drugs and young people, I hope that I can outline what the Commonwealth Government and law enforcement agencies in Australia are trying to do as part of this coordinated, comprehensive approach, and to leave the clear message that we are prepared to listen to ideas. I also want to share some personal ideas and options which, experience tells me, might make a positive difference.
Current Commonwealth drugs policy emphasises an educational and harm minimisation approach to the demand for illicit substances, and a zero tolerance to drug importation and trafficking on the supply side.
It is an approach for which there is wide agreement and support in the Ministerial Council for Drug Strategy which comprises the Health and Police Justice Ministers of the Commonwealth, States and Territories.
This type of three-tiered approach has also become fairly common in various other Western countries.
The National Illicit Drugs Strategy, announced by the Government under its ‘Tough on Drugs' initiative in late 1997, was underscored by a three-pronged approach over three years, namely attacking the drug barons, protecting our children and rehabilitation and research.
This first instalment of NIDS was reflected in funding commitments in supply reduction, education, new treatment programs, support for front-line professionals, research and innovative treatment options. This was complemented by an expressed commitment for additional work in consultation with other Australian governments, parents, teachers, health professionals and non-government organisations to develop further measures.
Heads of Government, through the Council of Australian Governments, agreed to join the Illicit Drug Strategy and supported a second instalment of NIDS including a community-wide education and information campaign, changes to sentencing practices, expanded treatment services and improved intelligence sharing and cooperation.
The second NIDS sought to continue the balanced approach to supply reduction, harm minimisation and demand reduction underlying the first instalment.
Two broad categories of measures were addressed, namely demand reduction and supply reduction. Included in the former were enhanced non-government organisation treatment services, community education and information, monitoring drug use, and establishment of the Australian National Council on Drugs.
Included in the supply reduction measures were additional mobile strike teams and new overseas posts for the AFP, intensified targeting by the National Crime Authority, development of a Law Enforcement Cooperation Program in the Asia/Pacific region, additional analysts for law enforcement and funding for a drug abuse monitoring program.
On the legal and law enforcement side, this means that:
• The Commonwealth and States have a raft of legislation in place covering drug offences, extraditions, barrier controls, money laundering and proceeds of crime.
• Australia is a signatory to a range of United National anti-drug protocols and is an active member of Interpol (an organisation which plays a significant role in the fight against international crime).
• Through the AFP's overseas liaison officer network, which sees some 35 federal agents stationed in 14 countries around the world, we have taken the fight against drug traffickers offshore.
• Increasingly, law enforcement agencies across Australia are working in multi-agency investigation teams involving State, territory, national and international law enforcement agencies. (One such example gained significant publicity in October last year, with the seizure of 390kg of heroin off the coast of northern NSW.)
• Proposals are being developed on the introduction of a Model Criminal Code in relation to serious drug offences.
It is generally recognised that the criminal environment today is complex and multi-faceted. Nowhere is this more evident than in investigations which have a link with the trafficking and supply of illicit drugs.
Policing in Australia is facing an international crime environment which is vastly different from that of five years ago:
• Major changes to international borders, with the break-up of the former USSR being the most obvious example.
• Increasing globalisation of trade and commerce.
• Dramatically changing economic and social circumstances in countries within our region.
• Rapidly changing telecommunications systems and revolutionary new technology.
These developments have provided new opportunities for sophisticated, highly structured, international organised crime groups and alliances to broaden their spheres of influence.
Law enforcement agencies, too, have changed dramatically in the past few years. Police services have become more flexible, adaptable, prepared to consider revolutionary — as distinct from evolutionary — shifts in practices and procedures. Nowhere is this more so than in relation to illicit drugs. Commissioners recognise:
• Drug abuse and the drug trafficking which lives off it is threatening our social fabric.
• Law enforcement is only a small — albeit significant — part of the approach to dealing with the issue of illicit drugs.
• The traditional ‘arrest and prosecute' response to drug-related crime is too rigid and restrictive when dealing with low level use and possession.
• They must be prepared to speak out and, if necessary, challenge the existing conventions to consider new and innovative measures.
It has to be recognised that despite the world-wide debate on the legalisation of drugs, no country has abandoned the prohibition of illicit drugs and measures to reduce supply.
Part of the reason is clearly the ‘politic real', which nationally and internationally reflects an opposition to illicit drugs — a reasoning based upon a recognition that illicit drugs are harmful and their use should not be accepted or encouraged by governments.
I believe this umbrella position is both sensible and responsible.
Firstly, it recognises that demand reduction strategies are far less likely to be effective in an environment which has no control over the supply of narcotics. Secondly, unlike alcohol, it seems probable that wherever the boundaries of legality are set (either in terms of drug description or levels of toxicity) the illicit industry will flourish outside of them.
Whatever the reality, there is a clear recognition of the fundamental importance of a comprehensive, multi-faceted approach which embraces education, health and law enforcement strategies. As part of this approach there is an increasing realisation on the part of law enforcement that the personal use of illicit drugs is more an issue for the health and education systems than for the legal system.
Within this context, low-level drug users should be able to be diverted into treatment and rehabilitation facilities, to be issued with cautions rather than feel the full brunt of the processes of the law, or be able to have access to needle exchange schemes.
In the education arena, the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs has endorsed the goal of ‘no illicit drugs in schools'.
An important component to reduce the demand for drugs and the incidence of substance misuse among school children is that $7.4 million has been provided under the NIDS initiative to develop the National School Drug Education Strategy.
This strategy includes providing new, high quality curriculum, professional development to assist teachers deliver drug education in schools, and research in use of drugs by school-aged children. Given the release of the first national survey of illicit drug use in secondary schools recently, the success of this initiative is crucially important in our fight against drugs.
Australia's approach to addressing the drug problem is based on a commitment to harm minimisation. Critics of this approach argue that the Government is condoning drug use. This is not so.
Harm minimisation recognises that abstinence is the best way to reduce the harm associated with drug use. While it emphasises the importance of educating people of the dangers of drug use, it also recognises that some people will make a choice to use or to continue to take drugs.
The harm minimisation approach is concerned with reducing supply and demand, and reducing the harm caused by use when it occurs, including the adverse consequences both to society and to users themselves. Within this framework, the Federal Government is committed to zero tolerance of imported narcotics and of those who seek to financially profit from the misery of others.
The challenge is to integrate or interrelate the various demand and supply initiatives so as to maximise their educational, as well as health and law enforcement effectiveness — and to use the experiences gained from these results to fashion new strategies. Our aim must be to fashion opinions, particularly in the young, change behaviours and reduce demand: not simply ‘health protect' the victims and prosecute the traffickers.
But, if we are to be effective and give perhaps new and innovative demand reduction strategies the time to bite, then enforcement must continue to play a role. We have to deal with the ‘now' while we prepare for the ‘future'.
The National Drug Strategy is a cooperative venture between the Commonwealth and State/Territory governments as well as the non-government sector, with the common aim to minimise the harmful effects of drugs and drug use in Australian society.
It attempts to provide a balanced effort in addressing problems of drug misuse in Australia.
One element of the National Drug Strategy is the development of the National Drug Strategic Framework. This document provides a framework for cooperation between agencies and individuals and sets the strategic directions for the Government's National Drug Strategy until the year 2002.
A key to its success will be the strengthening of existing partnerships and their expansion to other areas, including local government, non-government and ordinary people whose lives have been affected by the use of alcohol and other drugs. One area where the strategy will focus is on issues affecting young people. It will do this by forging stronger links with youth networks, and this conference is an important step in the process.
The Federal Government, under its ‘Tough on Drugs' National Illicit Drugs Strategy, has established an Australian National Council on Drugs to provide high-level, essentially non-government, advice to Government to deal with both licit and illicit drugs.
The council brings together a wide range of community representatives with experience in dealing with all aspects of the illicit drugs problem. It includes people from the Salvation Army, the Damien Trimingham Foundation, the Ted Noffs Foundation, and other drug and alcohol organisations.
The council provides individuals and organisations, mainly from outside government, with an ongoing opportunity to contribute to the development of policies and programs to address drug-related harm. This extends from community groups that support the drug users and their families to those involved in the dismantling of the organised criminal syndicates involved in drug trafficking.
Most importantly, it includes those community groups which traditionally have close links with youth. These groups will be most important in focusing on the prevention and reduction of illicit drugs in their own communities.
As part of the Federal Government's strategy, it has recently announced funding of more than $30 million in grants to 24 community and 60 non-government organisations for innovative programs and treatment services.
The grants are geared so that a range of agencies and groups can form alliances to provide appropriate prevention services, thereby increasing the capacity of local communities to address drug issues.
Police must work closely with these groups and strive to increase their understanding of, and interaction with, preventive strategies and the people involved in their delivery.
The council will fill a much needed gap by facilitating an enhanced partnership between governments and the non-government and community sectors in the development and implementation of policies and programs to address all drug-related harm. The first priority of the council has been to develop an interim work plan which will lead into the development of a five-year work plan reflecting the strategies and priorities contained in the National Drug Strategic Framework to 2002, the focal point of which is the development of community partnerships.
The National Illicit Drugs Strategy was announced by the Prime Minister in November 1997, and has provided significant funding for a concerted attack on both the supply of, and demand for, illicit drugs.
The strategy attempts to attack the illicit drugs problem in a comprehensive and properly integrated way, emphasising an education and harm minimisation approach to demand issues, and zero tolerance towards drug importation and trafficking.
Key supply reduction elements within the strategy are:
• The establishment of AFP mobile strike teams throughout Australia.
• The establishment of new AFP overseas liaison posts in East Asia and the enhancement of existing posts.
• The establishment of a national heroin signature program which is designed to identify sources of heroin nationally and internationally in order to gain strategic insights into patterns of heroin trafficking, support operations against traffickers and provide additional evidence for prosecutions.
• The enhancement of the effectiveness of key overseas law enforcement agencies, through training, international assistance and operational support. The AFP has received funding to enable Australia to provide this assistance.
• The enhancement of the Australian Customs Service cargo profiling system and examination facilities.
• The enhancement of the ACS coastal surveillance and detection capacity in the Torres Strait.
• The employment of additional intelligence analysts by the ACS.
• The increased targeting of South-East Asian organised crime groups by the NCA.
Following reports recently of increases in the availability of heroin in Australia and a disturbing increase in deaths attributed to heroin overdose, the Australasian Police Ministers' Council recognised that there was a need to examine current law enforcement strategies, and it directed that a National Heroin Supply Reduction Strategy be developed which would suggest new strategies to deal with the problem.
A working party, comprising representatives from a number of law enforcement agencies, including the Australian Customs Service, was formed to develop the strategy.
That document has been endorsed by all jurisdictions and is currently being implemented. It contains a range of strategies dealing with improving agency cooperation, intelligence, technology and legislation. It recognises that there must be a balance between law enforcement, health and education initiatives.
Australian law enforcement agencies and health authorities are of the view that implementation of the strategies outlined in the document have the potential to make a real difference in reducing the quantity of heroin available to the Australian community.
This law enforcement strategy will complement the initiatives of the health and education sectors.
An important part of the strategy deals with legislation, and as many would know, our federation concept has resulted in a myriad of legislation.
It is not unusual to find Commonwealth, State and Territory legislation on similar subjects to be significantly at variance. But this is changing.
In 1994, both the Commonwealth Government and the State and Territory Premiers' Leaders Forum endorsed the development of the Model Criminal Code project as one of national significance. This project has led to a comprehensive review of existing laws to ensure that offences and penalties across Australia are more consistent and effective.
A number of discussion papers have been released covering issues such as fraud, corruption, assault, rape, murder and contamination of goods.
Other discussion papers have been released on serious drug offences, and these cover both Commonwealth and State offences.
A report on Commonwealth drug offences was released late last year, and more recently, a report proposing greater consistency and improvement to State and Territory laws governing serious drug offences has been released.
A Model Criminal Code report has also been released recently on forensic procedures. This model legislation, which incorporates a national DNA database, will improve the ability of law enforcement agencies to gather evidence against criminals who cross State and Territory borders.
There have been recent initiatives in Victoria and NSW to break the cycle for first time offenders caught in the criminal justice system because they have been found in possession of a small quantity of illicit drugs, generally cannabis.
The Victorian Premier has announced the state-wide introduction of a program that allows police to caution low level cannabis users, rather than automatically charging them with a criminal offence.
The NSW Government is currently giving consideration to the establishment of a pilot trial of one or two drug courts in NSW, based on the USA drug courts program.
Under the US program, specialised drug courts have been established which combine intensive judicial supervision, mandatory drug testing, escalating sanctions, and treatment to help substance abusing offenders break the cycle of addiction and the crime that often accompanies it. The drug courts program operates in more than 40 US States and appears to have had significant positive outcomes in reducing drug abuse and recidivism.
Research in Australia and the United Kingdom also highlights the positive effect of diversion programs over incarceration. Among the benefits are:
• Resolution of the underlying drug problem is more likely to be achieved by a diversion program.
• Diversion programs can lead to lower rates of crime in the community.
• Diversion programs are supported by the community.
• Diversion programs are much cheaper than placing minor offenders in jail.
The Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy is currently funding the development and evaluation of a national community-based approach to drug law enforcement in four sites across Australia. The sites, which are in WA, Victoria and NSW, are different in terms of their demographic features and the profile of their drug problems, but in each of these sites, a community-based structure will be established consisting of a range of local service providers including the police, health and welfare agencies, and local government, working together with the general aim of reorienting local level illicit drug law enforcement activities toward attaining drug harm reduction outcomes.
This program is being evaluated and will study the processes in the development of intersectoral partnerships between the police and local community stakeholders. It is hoped the key outcome of the project will be the successful forging of partnerships and the development of greater reciprocal trust and understanding between law enforcement, health and welfare agencies and the community.
The challenge to the community is to create an environment that actively discourages drug usage by our youth and provides:
• Early drug education in a variety of forums.
• Opportunities for drug users and the rehabilitated, while removing or minimising the stigma presently attached to low-level drug use and related convictions.
• Increased employment opportunities and alternatives to improve and increase self-esteem and confidence.
• Family support.
• A safety net for those who fall — they must be given a chance to get up.
This will take time. I think we would all hope we are moving in the right direction. Law enforcement agencies must and will continue their efforts to reduce the supply side of the illicit drugs equation but must also become more effective supporters of the efforts being promoted on the demand side by way of harm minimisation, demand reduction and other education strategies.
Realistically, it is doubtful any education or public awareness campaign will show any impact for some years. In the meantime, law enforcement agencies must continue to combat the activities of organised criminal syndicates who will exploit the demand for illicit drugs in Australian society. We must be especially vigilant against attempts by these groups to target our youth.
Law enforcement will only ever be a part of the solution, but has an important deterrent role to play.
Organised criminals frequently engage in ‘whole of life' criminal activity. They are motivated by greed and power, show little regard for rules, regulations or human suffering and they use violence and intimidation. They corrupt systems and governments. They will go where the risk is lowest or the profit highest. They will trade in the commodities that offer the best results — whatever the commodity may be. Today heroin, tomorrow amphetamines, guns or people.
To give up on fighting such criminal enterprises and activities is to give up on our way of life. It is not a war on drugs per se, but rather a war on criminals who, for now happen to trade in drugs.
Technology, intelligence sharing and international cooperation has improved dramatically in the past few years — the results will and must improve.
The importation of illicit drugs might appear to be an almost unsolvable problem but drug trafficking is not impenetrable — it is carried out by real people who use real communications and move goods in real planes and ships. These people leave trails and they do make mistakes. Good police investigations can be successful, no matter what the product of the crime may be.
It must be remembered that there has never been a concentrated national/international effort against drugs before: technology and levels of cooperation are higher and better than ever before and opportunities and avenues now exist to achieve results thought highly unlikely a few years ago.
Law enforcement strategies are only a part of the overall matrix in the fight against drugs.
The real concentration, in the future, has to be on the education of our children, in providing options, real and credible, as deterrents to drugs — using real-life scenarios — users, addicts, police, health workers and relief workers, in face-to-face workshops and television advertisements.
Health strategies have to be better integrated with other strategies and police, relief and health workers must explore and develop ways to better support each other, increasing mutual understanding — to interface in counselling sessions.
It must be recognised that one size will not fit all. No single approach can ever hope to work completely: cohesiveness, flexibility, constant review, idea sharing, innovation, courage and perseverance will be needed if we are to be successful in our fight against drugs.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUFPPlatypus/1999/3.html