CLOSER TO A FIX ON DRUGS

THE agreement on combating drugs that emerged from yesterday's meeting
of the Council of Australian Governments (the old Premiers'
Conference) is couched in uncompromising language.

In a joint communique the Federal, State and Territory governments
declare an "explicit rejection" of illicit substances and commit
themselves to get "tough" on drugs in the community, schools, and prisons.

This muscular talk disguises, however, the true significance of the
new approach adopted at the meeting.

>From now on, most drug offenders will be diverted from the criminal
justice system onto the road of rehabilitation. This represents an
important shift in thinking away from the idea that drug addiction is
primarily a law and order problem to a more enlightened view that it
is essentially a health issue.

This promises obvious benefits to those addicted to drugs or at
serious risk of addiction - they will avoid prison and be helped to
return their lives to normal.

But it is also an approach that offers benefits to the
community.

Treatment is an alternative to imprisonment that should prove much
more effective in the long run in cutting down on drug-related crime.

Of course, this outcome won't result unless adequate funds are
provided for treatment and all governments remain committed enough to
the approach to give it a chance to work. The Prime Minister, Mr
Howard, has pledged $220 million over four years to help finance,
among other things, rehabilitation programs.

That may or may not be enough.

It is certainly more than the $27 million Mr Howard allocated to
non-government treatment facilities when he first unveiled his "Tough
on Drugs" strategy in November 1997. But presumably those
cash-strapped voluntary organisations that run these facilities - and
hence provide most of the rehabilitation services - will soon have
their workloads dramatically increased.

Certainly the Premiers wanted more money from Canberra, as Premiers
tend to do. But over time, this new approach may deliver significant
savings to them from their prisons budgets.

In any event, Mr Howard has made a start and there will be opportunity
to discuss funding again when the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy
reports on the details of implementing the new approach later this
year.

Yesterday's meeting agreed to strengthen the attack on drug use in
schools but disagreed over whether to label this "zero tolerance".
That was sensible.

It allows those, including Mr Howard, who champion zero tolerance to
claim they gave no ground but leaves opponents of the approach,
including the NSW Premier, Mr Carr, and the Victorian Premier, Mr
Kennett, enough flexibility to get around it. This kind of
give-and-take over politically charged rhetoric will make it easier
for all sides to stick with a co-ordinated strategy.

The issue of heroin trials may not have gone away, but it is clearly
now on the backburner. And with an alternative approach to
imprisonment soon in place, that is not a bad thing.

Proposals for heroin trials always had a note of desperation about
them, as if nothing could be done to defeat an addiction.

Still there are questions that remain unanswered about how addicts can
be kept alive long enough to ensure they get a chance at treatment.

Mr Howard can take a good deal of credit for the generally positive
outcome of yesterday's meeting.

It was he who, by entering the drugs debate in February, brought a new
impetus to the search for an effective national approach to the problem.

It was also Mr Howard who pushed for the issue to be made a key item
on the premiers' agenda.

This is not the end of the war on drugs.

But it is a hopeful new beginning.