Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 13 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4184 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

population. If Colombia, for example, gets a $10 billion profit from drugs, perhaps the United Nations or the United States could pay Colombia $11 billion to develop another crop and offer assistance through the United Nations if the drug lords there are so strong that they could prevent the Colombian Government from doing so. That might amount to military assistance.

I should think that there would be a number of drug-producing countries throughout the world - often they are poor countries - where a concerted international approach would be of great assistance in drying up the drug trade. In fact, I think that the only place where that may not work would be Afghanistan because of the very nature of that place. If that were combined with a greater push in Australia for assisting people to get off drugs in a more concerted way than we have at present, both nationally and in coordination with the States, I think that would be of great assistance, too. We seem to be making inroads in terms of large customs seizures lately and the good work of various police forces. A lot more can be done there and a lot more can be done, too, on rehabilitating people who are defined as addicts. I do not think we are necessarily doing enough there. That is a very real problem for this country.

I do not think that having a safe injecting place or shooting gallery, call it what you will, is the right answer. There are too many legal problems with it, given the fact that the drugs are largely the proceeds of crime. It would appear from the fact that there is a large number of amendments that there are huge problems with how it will run. I think that there are real problems with the message it will send, despite the very best intentions of the members of this house who want it to occur.

We are taking steps towards having better education. There is a lot more that we can do there. I have tabled the results of the survey of young people because of the suggestions therein of young people themselves. It is up to us to act on those suggestions as there is a lot more that we can do there. It is of crucial importance, Mr Speaker, that we take a positive attitude to this matter. I fear that by going down the track proposed we are just reinforcing the fact that it is all too hard, that we cannot really avoid it, that it is something that we will just have to tolerate.

It is hard. It is going to take a long time to beat this problem, Mr Speaker. We will probably never get to the stage where our society will be free of illegal drugs. But it is only a fairly recent phenomena and I would hope that, with a concerted effort in terms of better rehabilitation, perhaps more effective law enforcement, assisting addicts more than we do and trying naltrexone and alternative forms of treatment, we will be able to get rid of this scourge of society.

Unfortunately, I do not think that having a safe injecting place is the way to go. I think it sends all the wrong messages. My colleague Mr Smyth says that if it saves one life it will be worth it. I suspect that, because of the wrong messages and the problems that it will cause, we might well see more people die because of it than would die if we went down the track of trying our very best to prevent people taking up drugs and to help cure those who are addicted at present.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .