Michael Pettersson’s plan to decriminalise illicit drugs, treating possession of small amounts as a health issue rather than a criminal offence, backed by the ACT Government earlier this week, has met a mixed reaction. While the community sector welcomes it as a humane reform, the police union and conservative politicians fear it will be disastrous.
Opponents of the scheme claim relaxing laws on drugs could make Canberra the drug capital of Australia, with an increase in organised crime, violence, and road deaths.
Federal Police commissioner Reece Kershaw stated earlier this year that relaxed drug laws would create ‘narco-tourism’ – a view echoed by Zed Seselja and Bill Stefaniak, both former Canberra Liberals leaders.
- Seselja: Drug laws must keep our kids safe (March 2022)
- Canberra narco tourism capital of Australia? (December 2021)
“Naturally, this current ACT Government has ignored this advice from one of the few groups of professionals who really know what they are talking about,” Mr Stefaniak, convener of the Belco Party, said. “They have to deal with the effect hard drugs like have on users and the crimes they commit whilst on hard drugs.”
Mr Stefaniak will hand a petition from concerned citizens to the Legislative Assembly later this month.
“The bill as it stands is self-indulgent, decadent nonsense that will do nothing to achieve the supposed aims behind it,” he said.
The Australian Federal Police Association supports harm minimisation processes, but believes this bill will lower criminal convictions without reducing harm.
“The ACT Minister for Health, Ms [Rachel] Stephen-Smith, says this is the next logical step in harm minimisation,” AFPA president Alex Caruana said. “I fail to see how decriminalising heroin, cocaine, and [methamphetamine] MDMA [ecstasy] with heavy weight limits as proposed could be the next logical step.
“This rests purely on the shoulders of the ACT Government Cabinet. I’m not going to single out individual ministers for their short-sightedness. But, collectively, as a Cabinet, they have decided this course of action, and as a Cabinet, they haven’t given due deference to the advice provided by ACT Policing and the AFPA,” Mr Caruana said.
Although the AFPA appeared at the public hearing for Mr Pettersson’s bill, the ACT Government did not consult the AFPA while drafting the legislation, he said.
Liberal MLA Jeremy Hanson wrote on Facebook the AFPA was “right to raise concerns”.
Weight limits
Under the new laws, those found in possession of small amounts of hard drugs could be fined or referred to rehab, rather than facing a two-year prison sentence. The Australian Federal Police Association believes the weight limits in the bill are too heavy, and give an ‘instant defence’ to drug dealers, who will operate below the weight limit.
“Would the community think that it’s acceptable for someone to have 20 heroin hits in their pocket, which is what 2 grams of heroin would provide?” Mr Caruana demanded.
“If someone has five MDMA tablets on their person while sitting inside a nightclub, do they really need five tablets for personal use? I would suggest they have other motives, but this legislation in its current form will give that person an instant defence.
“Organised crime syndicates are smart, and they’ll work in teams, each carrying just below the weight limit. Police will have no grounds to pursue these drug dealers, as they’ll have a legislated defence. So the Government may as well write a cheque for organised crime and roll out the welcome mat.”
While Mr Stefaniak believes penalties are not heavy enough. All the bill does, he said, was to make the possession of ice and other hard drugs an offence that carried a “paltry” fine of $100.
“You have to pay three times as much if you drive through Civic at 45 kph! Where is the logic in that?” Mr Stefaniak asked.
Ms Stephen-Smith stated that the ACT Government would continue to take a strong stance against drug dealers; thresholds for trafficking offences would not change; and drug dealers and traffickers will be targeted and prosecuted.
The ACT Government would move amendments to the bill, including those regarding the list of drugs and quantities, Ms Stephen-Smith said.
“These amendments will take into account usage patterns, lived experience and expert advice, to ensure that the levels reflect a small amount for a person who uses drugs.”
Research indicates that drug use is not strongly linked to levels of punishment for personal possession, Ms Stephen-Smith stated; however, the Government will carefully monitor drug trends following any changes to legislation.
“Decriminalisation reduces the harm to people by reducing contact with the criminal-justice system for a health issue,” she said. “The ACT Government does not condone illicit drug use – it is not safe.”
Driving and violence
Nor would police be able to tell if someone was driving under the influence of drugs, or have any power to stop that person from driving, Mr Caruana claimed.
That is a concern for Mr Stefaniak, whose own son was killed in a car crash in 2018 because the driver of the car he was in was on ice.
“Unless this bill is substantially amended, more ACT citizens will die or be seriously injured,” Mr Stefaniak said.
In the last six months, he said, nearly every serious violent crime in the ACT occurred because the perpetrator was on ice or a combination of ice and other hard drugs.
The AFPA was also concerned the reform might undo the ACT Government’s good work decreasing family violence in the ACT.
“Making dangerous, addictive drugs easier to obtain will not make it safer for women and children,” Mr Caruana said.
“Violent crime and drug driving are still crimes,” Ms Stephen-Smith replied. “There will be no changes to these offences and police powers in regard to enforcement. Possessing small amounts of drugs would still not be legal.”
More rehab services needed, police and agencies say
The AFPA believes the ACT Government needs to improve drug rehabilitation services before they decriminalise hard drugs.
“The ACT Government doesn’t have a good track record for providing people with rehabilitation options in the ACT,” Mr Caruana said. “As a result, spaces for rehabilitation are very limited in the ACT, and many people must travel interstate to receive treatment.”
He believes the government should boost and fund more services to support drug addicts before decriminalising drugs in a managed approach, gathering evidence as they go along.
“They have gone from zero to 100 instantly, without considering how this will impact road safety and the health, welfare, and first-response sectors,” Mr Caruana said.
The Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Association ACT (ATODA) has also called for more government investment in the drug treatment and harm reduction sector, which they say is under-resourced; they expect demand to go up as the legislation is enacted and stigma is reduced.
The ACT Government currently spends more than $22 million each year on drug treatment and support services (including alcohol and tobacco), in addition to investment made by the Commonwealth Government and the Capital Health Network, Ms Stephen-Smith said. Over the past three budgets, the ACT Government has invested almost $20 million in additional funding to increase services.
The government committed $4.87 million in the current budget to increase the capacity of the ACT treatment system, including setting up an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residential rehab facility, a static pill testing pilot, and a supervised drug consumption facility. It also secured $4.3 million in grant funding from the federal government to improve the infrastructure of alcohol and drug services. ACT Health Directorate is working with the alcohol and other drug sector to improve treatment services.
The ACT, Ms Stephen-Smith noted, has the lowest rate of illicit drug use of any Australian jurisdiction (according to the most recent National Drug Strategy Household Survey), and (pre-pandemic, in 2019–20) the second highest rate of (non-primary pharmacotherapy) clients receiving treatment: 1,100 per 100,000 population – almost double the national average (624 per 100,000).
Similarly, in 2021, the rate of opioid pharmacotherapy treatment clients on a census day was the second-highest in the country (24 per 10,000 population – only behind NSW at 30 per 10,000 population, compared to a national average of 23 per 10,000 population). In 2019-20, there were 6,295 closed episodes of alcohol and drug treatment in the ACT.
Diverting drug users
Mr Stefaniak claims the reforms do not provide a mechanism for police to divert people to drug rehab, and there are no measures in place to help people when diverted.
According to the government’s response, the ACT has an illicit drug diversion program where police officers can divert those in possession to education and assessment, and police will retain discretion to respond to the circumstances of specific situations, including fines, diversion to appropriate health services, or cautions.
The ACT has one of the highest proportions of diversion of people from the criminal justice system for drug possession offences in Australia, Ms Stephen-Smith stated, and the lowest rate of proceedings on primary illicit drug possession offences.
The ACT rate (38.9) is less than half the rate of the Victoria (84.2), the next lowest jurisdiction, and approximately 10 times lower than in the Northern Territory (398.3) and South Australia (376.3).
Content of the sessions is tailored to the individual, their drug(s) of choice, and their readiness for further treatment or need for harm reduction information, with a completion rate of nearly 90 per cent, Ms Stephen-Smith said.
Mr Stefaniak was also concerned the reforms did not educate potential users not to take drugs in the first place.
The ACT Government works closely with the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Association and other stakeholders to regularly communicate the risks of illicit drugs, Ms Stephen-Smith responded.
The ACT Government would propose a 12-month implementation timeline to ensure police were appropriately trained; guidelines for the simple drug offence notice (SDON) could be developed and updated for the diversion program if required; and communications could be developed in partnership with experts and those with lived experience.
