Illicit Drugs And The Family: Parliamentary Report Lacks Credibility And Pragmatism, Australia

It is wearisome that we had to submit to yet another expensive exercise in investigating the well documented and significant impact of illicit drugs on the family. The parliamentary Family and Human Services Committee's "The Winnable War on Drugs: the impact of Illicit Drug Use on Families" report is extremely discouraging to, and disparaging of, those who work with and understand the complexity of the issues. On the other hand it is encouraging that the report has received little airtime and almost universal condemnation.


The Australian Drug Foundation is appalled at the tone and recommendations contained in the report. In our near 50 year history we have rarely seen a less considered and less credible report on Australia's drug problems. If this purports to chart a way forward in a very difficult area the Australian community, its families and their children are being placed in a perilous situation.



Whilst some committee members sought to distance themselves from the way in which the chairperson treated many expert witnesses, their objections were rather meek. Any reading of the transcripts and the subsequent report clearly illustrates that this was a committee led by someone with a predetermined set of outcomes underpinned by a moralistic and evidence-free base.


No one denies that illicit drugs have a major and sometimes disastrous impact on some families. So does alcohol but that is, apparently, another matter! But to deride those who work in the public health and alcohol and drug fields with such vehemence is disingenuous in the extreme. It is cowardly to label these committed people as 'the drug industry' when they are essentially silenced in the report and the report itself provides little by way of substantive alternatives to their work.



Many individuals and organisations working in this field were either ignored or treated with contempt. Their years of experience and their willingness to apply best practice and evidence-based strategies to achieve best possible outcomes is characterized as the work of 'the drug elite'. Resorting to name calling reflects the absolute paucity of practical options or credible and researched alternative policy and practices.



The Australian Drug Foundation was singled out as a force of darkness and I seem to have achieved some level of notoriety for 'calling it as it is'. The ADF stands behind the fundamentals that underpin our programs and services. After all, they are consistent with and supportive of the National Drug Strategy and the philosophies and practices of most credible practitioners and kindred organisations. The resort to illogical and unsubstantiated allegations would be worrying were it not part of such a nonsensical and unconstructive report.



I attach the ADF's view on drugs and drug use in our community that forms the basis of the organization's strategic direction. I suggest that this short statement provides a more credible way to ensure that everyone is as safe as possible from drug use and misuse (alcohol included!) than does the 400 pages of this report.



I have a hunch that the community as a whole and the public health field in particular are just getting wearisome of such profligacy and waste in producing such an embarrassingly poor document. We all want to get on and deliver the best possible programs and services to ensure everyone is as safe as possible.



Australian Drug Foundation