Page 995 - Week 03 - Thursday, 10 March 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Illicit drugs are also a significant contributor to crime, road accidents and domestic and public violence. In 2014-15, 2,346 random roadside drug tests were conducted by ACT Policing and 344 positive results were recorded. Methamphetamine use is commonly detected among people who test positive in these circumstances. It is also worth highlighting that pharmaceutical drug misuse in Australia is common and ranks highly among other forms of illicit drug misuse.
With knowledge of the flow-on effects of drug use and abuse, the three pillars of harm minimisation—that is, demand reduction, supply reduction and harm reduction—work together in a careful balance to protect our community from the impact of drugs. Supply reduction strategies in this jurisdiction focus heavily on individuals and criminal groups who deal in large quantities of drugs for profit rather than on those who possess small quantities for personal use.
This is demonstrated in two key ways. First, our data from sentencing shows that convictions for drug possession offences and subsequent penalties are consistently proportionate with the relative seriousness of the offence type. While the data does not account for the amount of drugs in each case or the overall circumstances of the offences involved, it gives useful insights into the pattern of sentences imposed by our courts.
For example, between July 2012 and November 2015 in the Magistrates Court, of 135 offences for possessing a drug of dependence, the most common sentence imposed was a good behaviour order—40.7 per cent—and most commonly for a period of 12 months. The court imposed a fine in just over a quarter of all cases, with most fines ranging from $250 to $500. Similar sentencing patterns can be seen with the offence of possessing a prohibited substance. While approximately 20 per cent of offenders spent a period of time in full-time or periodic detention, these offences were normally sentenced in combination with a number of other offences.
Over the same period 162 offenders were sentenced for the offence of possession of up to 50 grams of cannabis. A fine was imposed in 75 per cent of cases, with most fines ranging between $50 and $100. A good behaviour order was imposed in approximately 20 per cent of cases for periods of between one and 12 months.
The second key measure taken by the government has been the introduction of the Criminal Code (Controlled Drugs) Legislation Amendment Regulation in 2014, which amended the Criminal Code Regulation 2005 by changing the trafficable quantities of the four most common drugs, that is, heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine and ecstasy and their associated substances, and adopting a “mixed weight” regime for determining the amount of a drug.
The government took expert advice and undertook extensive research and consultation on where to draw the line between personal use and a presumption of trafficking. The amendments ensure that if there is evidence of actual trafficking, even if the quantity is low, a person can still be prosecuted for trafficking. But these reforms are even more important as they allow police, prosecutors and the courts to more effectively respond to trafficking offences. This avoids individual drug users being caught by more serious offences which carry significant penalties simply for personal use.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video