DRUG SUMMIT MUST BE DINKUM

The Government's planned drug summit will be worthwhile if it is a truly
open forum for considering a comprehensive range of responses to WA's
appalling substance-abuse problems.

The proposal for a summit was politically expedient for Labor in the
lead-up to the February election. It allowed Labor to avoid making specific
commitments on this divisive issue by, in effect, leaving it to the summit
to shape its policies.

However, this does not necessarily mean that the summit should be condemned
as a waste of time and money. Its usefulness will depend on how it will be
set up and run, and the range of expertise, experience and creative
thinking that it will bring together.

The summit proposal was politically clever not only because it provided
Labor with an escape from having to declare itself on contentious issues
such as safe injecting rooms, but also because it highlighted the
ideological paralysis of the former coalition government on drug abuse.

The former government closed itself off from new ideas, despite the growth
of problems of illegal heroin use during its term. It was content to rely
on its use of education to try to deter young people from drug abuse and
rhetoric about being tough on drugs.

There is, of course, no guarantee that the new Government will do any
better. But at least it has shown that it is prepared to consider ideas
with which it might not agree in looking for solutions.

It is important that the summit should not be closed to any point of view
and that the whole range of possible solutions to drug problems should be
debated and evaluated. The first test of the Government will be on the
composition of the summit, which should truly represent the community
rather than being ideologically weighted.

Although relatively few West Australians have serious drug problems, the
whole community is affected by them through drug-inspired crime, the need
to care for drug-damaged people and so on. Therefore, it is only right that
the community should have a direct say.

Issues to be considered should include not only possible solutions to
problems of drug addiction but also to how these might affect the wider
community. For example, if it is decided to establish officially tolerated
injecting rooms for heroin addicts, the possible effects on policing of
heroin trafficking should also be considered.

Will the police be obliged to ignore users at or near such rooms, even if
they want information about where the addicts got their drugs? Will they be
hampered by the operation of so-called safe rooms in their efforts to track
down traffickers?

If the police are obliged to ignore some illegal drug activities, will this
tend to make them seem to be compromised? As a matter of principle, it is
wrong to expect police to be selective in their enforcement of the law - as
the experience with prostitution has shown.

Although the Government temporarily has handed the job of finding solutions
to the problems to the summit, it will not be able to avoid responsibility
for policies it will decide to enact. The challenge that it will have to
confront will be to support what is likely to work in the community
interest, rather that what might seem to be politically expedient.