DOCSLIB.ORG

Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 Submission - Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 Submission - Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 Introduction • My name is Loren Paul Wiener, thank you for considering my submission. My perspective is a bit unique and I hope of some value. I hope to address based on my experience working with the Australia Government on the original Cannabis Access bills, that the current “Barriers to Access of Medicinal Cannabis in Australia in 2020” , has to consider equally or more so there is an issue of addressing the current “Australian Government’s Political Ideology “ being anti-Cannabis (also for medical use) causing issues of access we see today. That is, as a Government Australia cannot equally block, and demonise legal REAL Cannabis for medical use and also act surprised there is market confusion a growing black market and access issues for legal medicinal Cannabis. • This does not make the Government, Health Department, or popular patient activists and groups funded by the pharmaceutical companies mean or evil. On many fronts it is just a business ideology also. Real Cannabis for medical use (as in Canada and the USA) is not as profitable as the pharmaceutical products that make up the majority of the government preferred Australia medical Cannabis market products. The side effect is then the needless red tape, new Government created black markets since 2016 (by accident of course) and access issues, not processing challenges as the media and some pharmaceutical activists, and discussions seems to support. • Impact of Recent Cannabis Law Reform on Access in 2020 - To address the present issues you need to look at the brief history of the issues. - My views are on my experience working with the amazing Cannabis community that supports law reform and also with the Australian Government on multiple Cannabis Bills, and Acts since 2014, and my own Amendment in the 1st Cannabis Access bill in Australia in 2016, working with Government, the VLRC (Victoria Law Reform Commission) , LIV (Law Institute Victoria) and others. • Cannabis Law Reform - I come from a military and law enforcement family, and became interested in Cannabis Law Reform living in California for many years before it was legalised, in 1995-1996. I was working with California state government, law enforcement, and others including NORML (National Organisation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), and with much compromise, I saw first-hand the benefits, process and problems but legalisation of what we have to call ‘REAL’ Cannabis for medical use in California in 1996. • “Pharmaceutical & Medical Cannabis” for medical use (preferred by the Australia Government into law) would not be legal for another 5 years and not on the market for another 2 years with the launch of a product by Bayer R&D (now Bayer-Monsanto) for and with GW Pharmaceutical UK called “Sativex”. GW Pharma UK is still the largest supplier of pharmaceutical cannabis for medical use in the Submission - Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 world, including to Australia. GW Pharma with their other and newer GMO product Epidiolex (pure CBD) being really popular and preferred by anti-Cannabis governments like Australia. • My own motivations - Having lost my father, then my brother and almost my sister to cancer, I appear to come from a cancer prone family. My brother living in California from 1968 to his passing in 2013, became a legal supplier of Cannabis to many legal Cannabis dispensaries all working within the law, and greatly benefited from REAL Cannabis oils known as FECO and RSO in Australia Bills, for his own cancer. Unfortunately, many things were not known in 2013 like dosages that are known in 2020, and on the best use and practice of using REAL Cannabis for medical use. With Australia talking about Cannabis law reform, after losing my brother, and being semi-retired in Australia, I decided to travel the world at my own expense in 2014-2015 speaking to doctors, politicians, law enforcement, global investors, pharmaceutical companies, patients, cannabis activists (some real many not supporting law reform, some even paid large sums by the pharmaceutical industry). I also me pharmaceutical activists, and those in the black market, (also in Australia unfortunately not interested in law reform) to get an understanding of the big picture, in California, Colorado, Amsterdam and here in Australia. • Back in Australia, speaking to politicians in all parties (for and against Cannabis for medical use (REAL and otherwise), patients, GPs for and against Cannabis for medical use, and pro and anti-Cannabis pharma activists, I learned things were not all they seemed, and many agendas were at foot from those claiming to support patients, again mostly NOT supporting law reform as they see REAL Cannabis being illegal a better opportunity to make money than supporting law reform. This also then impacts patient access. • My Inspired Activism - I have been greatly inspired by those that inspired the changes in Cannabis law reform in Australia in 2016, politicians with open minds to patient needs and concerns, , and I still consult / write for legal publications like the Law Review USA, and SCL (Sydney Criminal Lawyers) occasionally, and we recently surpassed 60,000 followers globally on social media and our discussions on Cannabis law reform podcasts are still heard around the world. How the Government Cannabis Ideology Formed, That Has Led to Medical Access Issues In 2020 And Beyond? • In 2014-2015, I got invited by the VLRC (Victoria Law Reform Commission) on the initial public consultations to explain the VLRC requirement from the Government to design the framework for the 1st Cannabis Law Reform in Australia, and how the community requirements might be GREATLY different. This CANNOT be under emphasized. The laws and framework to legalise Cannabis were already defined and the public consultations were to only be to validate the Governments requirements. Submission - Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 • This framework and ideology on Medical Cannabis Access has not greatly evolved from 2014 to 2020. Cannabis law reform would begin in Victoria, and initial discussions concerned me enough to seek discussions with political parties and the LIV (Law Institute Victoria) prior to the 1st Cannabis Access Bill 2016 and many times since on other Cannabis bills when asked in Victoria for other Cannabis Bills and Acts. • This resulted in me working with political independents and mainly the VERY anti-Cannabis Liberal government (in opposition) in Victoria, that told me I had ZERO chance of changing minds, (to prevent my view of the impending access issues) but they were happy to listen and eventually they would ask me to consult on bills or acts. • This resulted in my own amendment in the Cannabis Access Bill 2016, working with the Liberal health minister, and on future bills but in this case 100% based on my concerns on how new bills, acts, laws and more so definitions would in my opinion negatively impact patient access to medicinal Cannabis in Australia prior to the 1st laws ever being passed. Unfortunately, I was correct. In my case my amendment remains in the Bill and on record in Hansards. I have since consulted on the pending Labor NSW Medical Cannabis Bill that failed in 2017, and 2018 but will be likely tabled again in early 2020, and other bills when requested by the Liberal health minister. Meanwhile, REAL Cannabis for Recreational use becomes legal from 31 Jan 2020 in the ACT, of which 50% or more are expected to be medical users. • My own Cannabis Access Bill submission and amendment in 2016 was simply inspired, due to the issues raised above, mainly the change of definition of what Cannabis is being re-defined as different to the rest of the world, and a great issue for Access to Cannabis for medical use. The Australian Government Ideology and The Creation of The ODC (Office of Drug Control) to Change the Definition of Cannabis ONLY in Australia, Impacting Access In 2020. From Cannabis Bill Australia • I was delighted to be invited to hear about the creation of and meet with the TGA and their sister team at the new ODC, (Office of Drug Control) on multiple occasions around 2015-6 and in multiple correspondences as a “law reform activist” and later as a journalist. Strong in their views the ODC with the rest of the Department of Health, and more so, the professional and polite team leader (Bill Turner) of the ODC and TGA even before Pharma Cannabis for medical use was made legal actually addressed the new government ideology, that was going to result in the change of definition of what Cannabis is, different to the rest of the world as mentioned, and even said all these changes he was Submission - Current Barriers to Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in Australia - Jan 2020 creating, “Required the use of a lot of constitutional lawyers in the room today” In retrospect, this was enabling the new Government ideology to be legal (but in in my opinion not necessarily ethical if legal), and very confusing to patients, GPs and anyone interested in the facts. • Australian Government “Hate” For Medical Cannabis Use. – The ODC and TGA did NOT create the ideology, against Cannabis, they just introduced the processes for medical use. The anti-Cannabis ideology was founded by the Australian Department of Health and while also funding “NDARC” and more
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Special Report on ASX-Listed Cannabis and Hemp Stocks
    Special Report on ASX-listed Cannabis and Hemp stocks An exciting new sector 24 March 2020 From humble beginnings in Canada around ten years ago the cannabis and hemp industries have blossomed into a major force to be reckoned with by investors the world over. Australia is no exception, with many cannabis and hemp companies having gone live on ASX over the last five years. However, many investors are unfamiliar with the dynamics of this exciting new sector. Pitt Street Research now seeks to close that information gap with our Special Report on Cannabis and Hemp, released 24 March 2020. Welcome to the cannabis and hemp revolution Cannabis and hemp have fuelled a major investment boom since 2014 largely because of the known therapeutic benefits of medicinal cannabis. Governments around the world have responded to the scientific evidence and made it easier for patients to access cannabis-based medicine. Concurrently, voters in many countries have become more favourably disposed towards the legalisation of recreational cannabis. These two trends have fuelled a boom in cannabis, while hemp, from a different plant, had also benefited as investors have moved to use this plant for a variety of purposes, most notably in food. It’s fair to say that cannabis and hemp have quickly become respectable industries worthy of investor attention. Many have come to the view that cannabis and hemp are agents of serious economic change, with potential to seriously disrupt Subscribe to our research HERE sectors as diverse as drinks, building materials and, of course, medicine. Analyst: Stuart Roberts Why should the Canadians have all the fun? Tel: +61 (0)447 247 909 Canada was the origin of the current cannabis and hemp boom because the regulatory framework changed in that [email protected] country around 2013 in a way that allowed entrepreneurs to flourish while the public equity markets allowed large amounts of capital to be raised.
    [Show full text]
  • WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence Pre-Review ……………
    WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence Pre-Review …………….. Cannabis plant and cannabis resin Section 5: Epidemiology This report contains the views of an international group of experts, and does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the World Health Organization 1 © World Health Organization 2018 All rights reserved. This is an advance copy distributed to the participants of the 40th Expert Committee on Drug Dependence, before it has been formally published by the World Health Organization. The document may not be reviewed, abstracted, quoted, reproduced, transmitted, distributed, translated or adapted, in part or in whole, in any form or by any means without the permission of the World Health Organization. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted and dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. The World Health Organization does not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and correct and shall not be liable for any damages incurred as a result of its use.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis Dictionary
    A MEDICAL DICTIONARY, BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND ANNOTATED RESEARCH GUIDE TO INTERNET REFERENCES JAMES N. PARKER, M.D. AND PHILIP M. PARKER, PH.D., EDITORS ii ICON Health Publications ICON Group International, Inc. 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, 4th Floor San Diego, CA 92122 USA Copyright 2003 by ICON Group International, Inc. Copyright 2003 by ICON Group International, Inc. All rights reserved. This book is protected by copyright. No part of it may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Last digit indicates print number: 10 9 8 7 6 4 5 3 2 1 Publisher, Health Care: Philip Parker, Ph.D. Editor(s): James Parker, M.D., Philip Parker, Ph.D. Publisher's note: The ideas, procedures, and suggestions contained in this book are not intended for the diagnosis or treatment of a health problem. As new medical or scientific information becomes available from academic and clinical research, recommended treatments and drug therapies may undergo changes. The authors, editors, and publisher have attempted to make the information in this book up to date and accurate in accord with accepted standards at the time of publication. The authors, editors, and publisher are not responsible for errors or omissions or for consequences from application of the book, and make no warranty, expressed or implied, in regard to the contents of this book. Any practice described in this book should be applied by the reader in accordance with professional standards of care used in regard to the unique circumstances that may apply in each situation.
    [Show full text]
  • CBD Sixth National Report
    Australia’s Sixth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity 2014 2018 ‒ 24 March 2020 © Commonwealth of Australia 2020 Ownership of intellectual property rights Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia (referred to as the Commonwealth). Creative Commons licence All material in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence except content supplied by third parties, logos and the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. Inquiries about the licence and any use of this document should be emailed to [email protected]. Cataloguing data This report should be attributed as: Australia’s Sixth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity 2014‒2018, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2020 CC BY 4.0. ISBN 978-1-76003-255-5 This publication is available at http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/international/un-convention-biological-diversity. Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment GPO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone 1800 900 090 Web awe.gov.au The Australian Government acting through the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment has exercised due care and skill in preparing and compiling the information and data in this publication. Notwithstanding, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, its employees and advisers disclaim all liability, including liability for negligence and for any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of accessing, using or relying on any of the information or data in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2020 (E/INCB/2020/1) Is Supplemented by the Following Reports
    INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL BOARD Report 2020 EMBARGO Observe release date: Not to be published or broadcast before Thursday 25 March 2021, at 1100 hours (CET) UNITED NATIONS CAUTION Reports published by the International Narcotics Control Board for 2020 TheReport of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2020 (E/INCB/2020/1) is supplemented by the following reports: Celebrating 60 Years of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and 50 Years of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 (E/INCB/2020/1/Supp.1) Narcotic Drugs: Estimated World Requirements for 2021 — Statistics for 2019 (E/INCB/2020/2) Psychotropic Substances: Statistics for 2019 — Assessments of Annual Medical and Scientific Requirements for Substances in Schedules II, III and IV of the Convention on Psychotropic Sub- stances of 1971 (E/INCB/2020/3) Precursors and Chemicals Frequently Used in the Illicit Manufacture of Narcotic Drugs and Psycho tropic Substances: Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2020 on the Implementation of Article 12 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 (E/INCB/2020/4) The updated lists of substances under international control, comprising narcotic drugs, psycho­ tropic substances and substances frequently used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, are contained in the latest editions of the annexes to the statistical forms (“Yellow List”, “Green List” and “Red List”), which are also issued by the Board. Contacting the International Narcotics Control Board The secretariat of the Board may be reached at the following address: Vienna International Centre Room E­1339 P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Selling Cannabis Regulation: Learning from Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012
    ISSN 2054-1910 Selling cannabis regulation: Learning From Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012 Emily Crick*, Mark Cooke¥ and Dave Bewley-Taylorp Policy Brief 6 | November 2014 Key Points • In November 2012, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon voted on ballot initiatives to establish legally regulated markets for the production, sale, use and taxation of cannabis.1 Washington and Colorado’s measures won by wide margins, while Oregon’s lost soundly. • A majority of voters view cannabis in a negative light, but also feel that prohibition for non-medical and non-scientific purposes is not working. As a result, they are more likely to support well-crafted reform policies that include strong regulations and direct tax revenue to worthy causes such as public health and education. • Ballot measures are not the ideal method for passing complicated pieces of legislation, but sometimes they are necessary for controversial issues. Other states often follow in their footsteps, including via the legislature. • The successful campaigns in Washington and Colorado relied on poll-driven messaging, were well organised, and had significant financing. The Oregon campaign lacked these elements. • The Washington and Colorado campaigns targeted key demographic groups, particularly 30-50 year old women, who were likely to be initially supportive of reform but then switch their allegiance to the ‘no’ vote. • Two key messages in Washington and Colorado were that legalisation, taxation and regulation will (i) free up scarce law enforcement resources to focus on more serious crimes and (ii) will create new tax revenue for worthy causes. • National attitudes on legalising cannabis are changing, with more and more people supporting reform.
    [Show full text]
  • The Opportunities Party Real Deal Cannabis Reform
    The Opportunities Party Real Deal Cannabis Reform PART 1: INTRODUCTION Our current drug law is outdated and not fit for purpose. The prohibition model set out under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 is a barrier for people seeking help if they need it. Drug addiction, like alcohol addiction tears families apart – but so does our drug law, which not only fails to protect people from harm, but actually adds to it.1 In overhauling this outdated Act The Opportunities Regular usage of cannabis is associated Party has developed an evidenced-based policy with health risk such as: that will more accurately reflect the internationally recognised intention of drug policy – to reduce harm. • problems with healthy brain development among youth; Assessing harm is an area that the current system • depression or anxiety injury; fails to effectively do. While the goal of the current • symptoms of chronic bronchitis;2 criminalisation policy is harm-minimisation based on the familiar strategies of controlling supply, However as with alcohol and cigarettes, reducing demand and limiting the problem – it fails abstinence is unrealistic. Prohibition flies in the to account for the effects of exposing users and face of popular demand and leads to illicit supply growers to gangs and to the criminal justice system. and usage.3 The evidence shows that criminalisation The evidence is mounting that these consequences of cannabis has had no significant statistical impact have greater detrimental impacts than those from on reducing use, nor is there any evidence that cannabis use itself. The criminalisation approach decriminalisation increases use.4, 5, 6, 7 The health also ties up criminal justice resources that could risks listed above are still prevalent with or without be more effectively directed elsewhere.
    [Show full text]
  • The Myth of Medical Marijuana
    DRUG FREE AUSTRALIA The ACT Medical Cannabis Conundrum Why legislate an inferior product? 1. The Greens Bill is premised on an ignorance of the currently legal status of medical cannabis 2. The Greens ‘medical’ Bill has not been requested by the medical establishment 3. The Greens Bill ignores 74% of addicted teens in Colorado sourcing cannabis from medical marijuana patients 4. The Greens Bill does not recognise that it is legislating trafficable quantities of cannabis 5. The Greens Bill, perhaps unwittingly, aligns with drug legalisation strategies worldwide 6. The Greens Bill ignores the heavily evidenced harms of crude cannabis to users and their community 7. The Greens Bill will proliferate recreational cannabis use, which most Australians condemn Central Issues & Compiled Evidence DRUG FREE AUSTRALIA Executive Summary - Seven Central Issues for ACT Legislators 1. The Greens Bill is premised on an ignorance of the currently legal status of medical cannabis ‘Medical Marijuana’, (which is a misnomer) has been legally used in Australia since the mid-1990s, when the THC capsule developed in the US called Marinol was imported into Australia under TGA Special Access for 100 patients. Marinol can be imported today under the same arrangement. Alternatively, the whole-leaf extract of cannabis, called Sativex, was approved by the Australian TGA in 2012 for MS spasticity. Both medications are pharmaceutically standardised in terms of dosage, strength and purity, which crude cannabis products are not. Both medications can be used for maladies where clinical trials have previously shown promise – nausea, AIDS wasting, chronic pain and MS spasticity. A third pharmaceutical medicine which is high in CBD, Epidiolex, is currently being tested in the US and could be tested here under similar arrangements – CBD is the element within cannabis believed to be responsible for the relief of severe seizures in epilepsy-like syndromes for some sufferers, including children.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into the Use of Cannabis in Victoria
    LC LSIC Inquiry into Use of Cannabis in Victoria Submission 1358 Inquiry into the use of Cannabis in Victoria Ms Ashleigh Stewart Organisation Name:Burnet Institute Your position or role: Research Assistant SURVEY QUESTIONS Drag the statements below to reorder them. In order of priority, please rank the themes you believe are most important for this Inquiry into the use of Cannabis in Victoria to consider:: Public safety,Public health,Accessing and using cannabis,Young people and children,Education,Mental health,Social impacts,Criminal activity What best describes your interest in our Inquiry? (select all that apply) : Academic and research Are there any additional themes we should consider? Select all that apply. Do you think there should be restrictions on the use of cannabis? : Personal use of cannabis should be decriminalised. (Decriminalised: there are no criminal or civil penalties instead a person is referred to a drug diversion program or other health/ treatment service),Personal use of cannabis should be legal. ,Sale of cannabis should be legal and regulated. ,Cultivation of cannabis for personal use should be legal. YOUR SUBMISSION Submission: Do you have any additional comments or suggestions?: FILE ATTACHMENTS File1: 5f4c8ee620641-Cannabis_submission_31082020.pdf File2: File3: Signature: Ashleigh Stewart 1 of 13 LC LSIC Inquiry into Use of Cannabis in Victoria Submission 1358 DIRECTOR and CEO – Professor Brendan Crabb AC PhD PATRON-IN-CHIEF – The Honourable Linda Dessau AC, Governor of Victoria Committee Manager, Legislative Council Parliament House Spring Street MELBOURNE VIC 3002 To the Inquiry, Re: INQUIRY INTO USE OF CANNABIS IN VICTORIA (2020) We are responding on behalf of the Burnet Institute to the call for submissions from the Legal and Social Issues Committee to the Inquiry into the use of Cannabis in Victoria, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Candidate General Scorecard.Xlsx
    Office Sought Ballot Name US SENATOR - R John Barrasso US SENATOR - D Gary Trauner A A A A B A A A A US REP - R Liz Cheney US REP - D Greg Hunter A A A A A A A A A 1) Industrial hemp (marijuana plants with no THC) should be moved off of the Schedule 1 drug list. 2) Medical marijuana should be an available choice for individuals with life-threatening conditions. 3) Medical marijuana should be available to individuals who have chronic conditions such as seizure disorders, chonic pain, GOVERNOR - R Mark Gordon and severe autism. 4) Decriminalization: Giving those caught with maijuana fines instead of jail time is a good idea. GOVERNOR - D Mary A. Throne B A A A D C A A A SECRETARY OF STATE - R Edward Buchanan B A A F F D A C B 5) Legalization: Marijuana should be legal to consume as long as the person is over 21. SECRETARY OF STATE - D James W. Byrd A A A A D D B B A STATE AUDITOR - R Kristi Racines STATE AUDITOR - D Jeff Dockter A A A A A B A A A Should be available period. 6) The extra money Wyoming would receive from taxing marijuana sales makes legalization a financially smart move. STATE TREASURER - R Curt Meier SUPT. OF SCHOOLS - R Jillian Balow STATE SENATOR 01 - R Ogden Driskill STATE SENATOR 03 - R Cheri E. Steinmetz Declined 7) Do you support medical marijuana? STATE SENATOR 03 - D Marci Shaver Declined STATE SENATOR 05 - R Lynn Hutchings B B B C F F C B B STATE SENATOR 07 - R Stephan A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition the History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options for Reform
    TRANSNATIONAL I N S T I T U T E THE RISE AND DECLINE OF CANNABIS PROHIBITION THE HISTORY OF CANNABIS IN THE UN DruG CONTROL SYSTEM AND OPTIONS FOR REFORM 3 The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition Authors Dave Bewley-Taylor Tom Blickman Martin Jelsma Copy editor David Aronson Design Guido Jelsma www.guidojelsma.nl Photo credits Hash Marihuana & Hemp Museum, Amsterdam/ Barcelona Floris Leeuwenberg Pien Metaal UNOG Library/League of Nations Archives UN Photo Printing Jubels, Amsterdam Contact Transnational Institute (TNI) De Wittenstraat 25 1052 AK Amsterdam Netherlands Tel: +31-(0)20-6626608 Fax: +31-(0)20-6757176 [email protected] www.tni.org/drugs www.undrugcontrol.info www.druglawreform.info Global Drug Policy Observatory (GDPO) Research Institute for Arts and Humanities Rooms 201-202 James Callaghan Building Swansea University Financial contributions Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP Tel: +44-(0)1792-604293 This report has been produced with the financial www.swansea.ac.uk/gdpo assistance of the Hash Marihuana & Hemp Museum, twitter: @gdpo_swan Amsterdam/Barcelona, the Open Society Foundations and the Drug Prevention and Information Programme This is an Open Access publication distributed under (DPIP) of the European Union. the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which of TNI and GDPO and can under no circumstances be permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction regarded as reflecting the position of the donors. in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. TNI would appreciate receiving a copy of the text in which this document is used or cited.
    [Show full text]
  • Position Statement - Updated August 2019
    Position Statement - Updated August 2019 The Case Against Legalising, Regulating or Decriminalising Illicit Drug Usage in Australia Drug Free Australia supports a balanced and humane illicit drug policy that aims at demand reduction, primary prevention and recovery-focussed rehabilitation. This can never be achieved if illicit drugs are condoned through their legalisation. There is a maxim that remains constant - availability, accessibility and, of course, the key component permissibility all increase consumption’. Legalisation equates to ‘regulation’ in the illicit drug context in this Position Statement. Background There is a growing, coordinated, well-funded movement in many parts of the world, (including Australia) that is committed to liberalising illicit drug policies, under the guise of public health and human rights for people who choose to use these substances. The history and philosophy of this movement is well documented.1 Known as the ‘Harm Reduction’ movement, it morphed into the ‘Harm Minimisation’ policy in Australia in the 1980’s and has been the cornerstone of our drug policy for more than 30 years. This has resulted in Australia becoming one of the highest users (per capita) of illicit drugs in the world, particularly amphetamine-type-stimulants.2 More recently Harm Reduction has re-surfaced internationally in the form of the ‘Global Commission on Drug Policy’, which used high profile, often wealthy people, (such as Richard Branson) most of whom have no expertise in the complex issues related to illicit drugs and the harms they cause to our families and communities. From highly publicised media statements made by this so-called ‘high level’ group, other groups have emerged, including, in this region, ‘Australia21’, under the banner of ‘drug law reform’.
    [Show full text]