E-Substance August 2008

8 August 2008

Welcome

Dear reader,

Welcome to the 08/08/08 issue of the New Zealand Drug Foundation's monthly e-newsletter - e-Substance!

In this issue we share some insights from last month’s Beyond 2008 forum in Vienna, and update you on the latest developments in the ongoing Aussie alcopop tax debate (who would have thought the alcohol industry would manipulate data as part of a public relations exercise?).

We also give you a taste of what to expect in our latest Matters of Substance, which will be in the mail later this month;
NZ First MP Doug Woolerton responds to Nandor Tanczos' guest editorial from our previous Matters of Substance;
Barack Obama shares his views on the “War on Drugs” – he’s not a believer;

Also in the news, as submissions fall due on George Hawkins' liquor bill, the government announces their own plans on alcohol law and policy – including a major 2 1/2 year review by the Law Commission. And there’s still fun and games with party pills. As usual, we bring you the website of the month, important events and situations vacant.

We hope you will find these stories stimulating. Please send us your feedback (editor@drugfoundation.org.nz).

Thank you for your continued interest in our work!

 

Beyond 2008: What went down in Vienna

The Austrian capital, Vienna, was host to Beyond 2008, the forum of 300 NGOs from around the world reflecting on their achievements and setting a new direction for international drug policy.

The chief outcome from the forum is a Declaration and three supporting resolutions agreed by consensus (literally, each line of this document was agreed by all 300 NGOs!), which will be presented to the 52nd Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna next March. Visit the Vienna NGO Committee website for a copy of this historic Declaration (links to PDF file).

We’ll cover the forum in more detail in our August Matters of Substance. In the meantime, many bloggers provide a great insight into the workings of the forum, including the outrageous behaviour of the US government who sought to influence a civil society gathering.

  • For a Beyond 2008 primer, watch this great video documentary by the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union: Three Days in Ten Minutes (we’re most impressed with the video advocacy of the HCLU, so we took a camera too and are currently compiling our own documentary of the event)
  • The Australian Heroin Diaries provides good coverage, especially about the stunt pulled by Drug Free Australia at the conclusion of the forum. Also from our Trans-Tasman colleagues, this account of the grandstanding by Drug Free Oz and a response from Australian National Council on Drugs Executive Director Gino Vumbaca. The New Zealand delegation shares the views of Mr Vumbaca.
  • Our International Harm Reduction Association friends blogged about each day here, here, here and here
  • The Director of the American Civil Liberties Union Drug Law Reform Project also gave a daily update, including an exposé on the US government dealings, day 1, day 2 and day 3
  • And Martin Jelsma, co-ordinator of the Transnational Institute's Drugs and Democracy Programme, concludes Beyond 2008 was a truly remarkable event.


Pictured: NZ delegates to Beyond 2008. From left: Tim Harding (Care NZ), Charles Henderson (Needle Exchange NZ), Michael Bird (Consumer Network), Brandon Hutchison (Christchurch Drug Policy Network), Lynette Hutson (Salvation Army), Martina Melis and Ross Bell (NZ Drug Foundation), Philip Siataga (Pacific Treatment Forum).

Newsflash: Alcohol industry misleads public

The Australian Drug Foundation said the alcohol industry deliberately misled the public over the impact of tax increases on alcopops. (As reported in last month’s e-Substance, Kevin Rudd’s Labor Government increased the tax on alcopops).

The Foundation's chief executive John Rogerson said independent survey results show overall alcohol consumption is down by more than five percent compared with the same time last year - not up by 46 percent as the alcohol industry recently claimed.

Mr Rogerson does agree with the industry that is is unfair to only target ready-to-drink products. "We need to be looking at all the taxes across all the alcohol products," he said. "The Henry Commission, I understand, is going to do a total review of the alcohol tax system and clearly that's something that's much-needed and something that's going to have a significant impact in reducing alcohol-related harm."

Australian Drug Foundation's Geoff Munro attacked the liquor industry in his blog on Australian media website Crikey: “If the spirits industry is worried that people are risking their health by drinking straight spirits, instead of the pre-mixed variety, what will it do now to protect the health and well-being of their valued customers? And was it so smart of the industry to refuse every attempt to have warning messages on placed on bottles of spirits, now that the Distilled Spirits Industry Council of Australia fears that spirits drinkers aren’t able to drink the product safely, because the bottles contain more than one standard drink? Surely now the manufacturers and retailers are honour bound to introduce straight talking warnings of excessive consumption on all spirits labels? And good, concrete advice on what constitutes unsafe drinking? Or is the whole story a load of industry-inspired, government-bashing, self-regarding hokum that is intended to give the Senate an excuse to reject the alcopops tax bill?"

Opinion: Why would you listen to alcohol lobbyists on health issues?

Gino Vumbaca, Executive Director, Australian National Council on Drugs

The liquor industry's reaction to the increase in the alcopop taxation has been loud, vitriolic and uncompromising. More than that, the debate on alcohol taxation has given an interesting insight into the power and influence of the liquor industry. Every day seems to bring yet another press release questioning the increased tax rate on some alcopops. The latest is yesterday's announcement by the Liquor Merchants Association of Australia that while there was a 30% fall in the volume of ready-to-drink alcohol sold between April and June, sales of full-strength bottled spirits over the same period increased by 46%. It's not just media releases. Spending some of their substantial corporate profits to campaign against the Government in the Gippsland byelection was considered fair by one part of the industry in the battle for public support.

Indeed, someone reading only the liquor industry's releases would be forgiven for believing that the most damaging decision possible by a government against its people had just been perpetrated. Yet this is only the public face of the lobbying. Behind the scenes, a brace of slick liquor industry lobbyists armed with their own targeted polling data and economic modelling are pressuring politicians to change the Government's plans.

So let's stand back a little and reflect on what has really happened. The Rudd Government has increased the taxation on a single alcohol product as the first part of a wider effort to reduce binge drinking. No-one is suggesting that this is the extent of the effort needed. In fact, the Prime Minister and the Health Minister Nicola Roxon have repeatedly said that a comprehensive response is being developed and that this is just the first step. What about the "tax grab" claims, now the basis of an industry-funded website to supposedly count the tax collected every second? Again, the Government has been clear that these funds will be substantially directed to funding a range of health-prevention initiatives being developed by the new National Preventative Health Taskforce.

Is anyone really disputing the negative impacts of binge drinking or other harmful drinking levels? No, it is true there is debate on whether these levels have changed over time but the reality is that in some age and gender categories we have seen increases, in others decreases, and in still others no real changes. We can argue at the margins on the overall change but generally all accept that the problem exists at unacceptable levels and negatively affects far too many families and communities. If you want confirmation of this just speak to anyone who works in a hospital emergency department or at police station on a Friday or Saturday night. If we stop to think about the reaction to this first small step taken by the Rudd Government, it is no wonder previous governments have been reluctant to venture into health-related alcohol policy issues.

In 2000 when the GST was introduced, the Howard government was targeted by the liquor industry over a potential small increase in the price of beer. Then treasurer Peter Costello said of their campaign: "The Government can't be pressured by big money interests to not introduce its policy." In the end, this GST measure was reversed by the Parliament. Now that's influence, especially given the strong views on the impact of the GST on books voiced at the same time, yet books still remain within the GST net.

Quite simply the Rudd Government deserves strong support and encouragement for starting the difficult task of tackling this issue in the face of the powerful and rich liquor industry. There is a truism in health-based alcohol policy that the things that are most effective are the least popular (such as taxation changes) and the things that are least effective are the most popular (such as short-term public education campaigns). Many will, of course, want the Government to tackle the bigger issues of wider taxation reform on alcohol, advertising, marketing and so forth but if the Government cannot even get past this first hurdle then this is unlikely to happen and the liquor industry will have been successful in maintaining the status quo with alcohol policy reform stalling – yet again.

It is something all federal senators should bear in mind when they make their way back to Parliament from their winter recess. There will still be those who believe the liquor industry has a legitimate role to play in defining alcohol-related health and safety policies. If this is to be the case, then let's first see some real commitment to the issue by the industry. A good start would be providing substantial funds for alcohol treatment programs, refuges, homeless shelters and other services that often clean up the mess caused by their products. Casinos and lotteries in Australia are often required to fund problem gambling initiatives, so why not the liquor industry?

Let's also see the industry provide a regular release of alcohol sales data so that a range of policy decisions can be more evidence-based — as opposed to its release of selective data and when it serves its purpose to fight any change. If you still think that the liquor industry deserves to be influential on this issue then the logical conclusion is that the Marlboro man should be able to ride into Canberra to advise on tobacco policy or Colonel Sanders could determine how to tackle Australia's obesity problems, and given his rank, maybe review our defence policy whilst he is there.

Seriously, if you wanted the government to reduce the public health and safety harms associated with alcohol what would you trust most. Advice from people with hundreds of years of collective expertise and knowledge in reducing alcohol related harm, such as the members of the National Preventative Health Taskforce and the Australian National Council on Drugs, as well as organisations dedicated to protecting public health or advice from those gaining hundreds of millions of dollars each year from making, promoting and selling the alcohol?

(Reprinted with permission. An edited version of this opinion piece first appeared in The Age, 29 July)

NZ First MP responds to Nandor's editorial

In our May Matters of Substance we featured a Guest Editorial from now-retired Green MP Nandor Tanczos. The editorial called "A view from the House" touched on many issues associated with drug policy making, especially the politicians themselves.

We invited feedback on this article, and are please to publish a response from New Zealand First MP Doug Wollerton. Go here to read Mr Woolerton's comments. You too can add your comments.

Matters of Substance out later this month

The latest issue of our Matters of Substance is due later this month. Here's a taste of the cover story on the fraught issue of drugs in schools

A high-profile Auckland school, trumpeting the battle cry of zero tolerance, kicked out 12 students for drug-related offences earlier this year, and in the process won kudos from its community. Other schools are critical and say excluding students does nothing more than pass on the buck along with the problem student. Health, drug and alcohol experts say principals and boards need to involve parents and the community in finding better ways of dealing with school drug problems. - By Radio NZ's education correspondent Gael Woods.

Westlake Boys High, a Decile 10 state on the affluent North Shore of Auckland City boasts of having "facilities to make your education experience enjoyable". And presumably, with its policy of zero tolerance, drug-free. Unlike, Westlake Boys, Napier’s William Colenso College does not operate a zero tolerance policy. On the contrary, its position on drug infringements could be described as very tolerant.

The principal, Mark Cleary, is well aware that drugs are a regular feature of some students' lives. "For all that, we make it clear that drug taking is not sanctioned, and we will take drastic action if students have drugs at school," he says. "But zero tolerance implies exclusion from school and New Zealand society cannot afford to have a significant group of young people not at school because of drug use." Cleary has little patience with schools adopting a zero tolerance approach. "They are abdicating responsibility for young people in their school. They're just passing the problem students on to other schools."

Also in this issue:

  • we brief you on New Zealand's role in developing a global alcohol strategy
  • Mythbusters come clean on methamphetamine
  • the Hospitality Association questions supermarkets' plans to expand their alcohol empire
  • we examine the global state of harm reduction
  • plus the usual quotes, news and views.

 

News

Party pills back in the public eye

Media interest in party pills continues with coverage of some findings about the ingredients in the “new-generation” non-BZP pills:

And while the Drug Foundation isn’t impressed with the conduct of the party pill industry, we’d also be keen for the media to engage with bigger drug policy issues. Listen here for a recent interview Drug Foundation Executive Director Ross Bell did with 95bFM.

“It's expensive, it's counterproductive, and it doesn't make sense." – Obama on the ‘War on Drugs’

Rolling Stone recently interviewed US presidential candidate Barack Obama on a range of topical subjects, including the "war on drugs". One wonders how might Obama's views be translated into change to the US approach to drugs if he’s elected in November; and what effect might that have on the current UN drug control review?

Rolling Stone
"The War on Drugs has cost taxpayers $500 billion since 1973. Nearly 500,000 people are behind bars on drug charges today, yet drugs are as available as ever. Do you plan to continue the War on Drugs, or will you make some significant change in course?"

Barack Obama
"Anybody who sees the devastating impact of the drug trade in the inner cities, or the methamphetamine trade in rural communities, knows that this is a huge problem. I believe in shifting the paradigm, shifting the model, so that we focus more on a public-health approach. I can say this as an ex-smoker: We've made enormous progress in making smoking socially unacceptable. You think about auto safety and the huge success we've had in getting people to fasten their seat belts.

The point is that if we're putting more money into education, into treatment, into prevention and reducing the demand side, then the ways that we operate on the criminal side can shift. I would start with nonviolent, first-time drug offenders. The notion that we are imposing felonies on them or sending them to prison, where they are getting advanced degrees in criminality, instead of thinking about ways like drug courts that can get them back on track in their lives — it's expensive, it's counterproductive, and it doesn't make sense."

Action on alcohol – Giving communities a voice

Submissions close next Friday (15 August) on George Hawkins’ Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill. This bill seeks to give communities greater power in objecting to liquor license applications. The Drug Foundation certainly supports the intent of Mr Hawkins’ bill, but we don’t think it quite does the job. We’ll be seeking changes to bill to strengthen it.

And this week, the government finally come forward with its own bill to crack down on the proliferation of liquor outlets.

"The Bill will give communities a greater ability to object to licensing applications, and licensing authorities will be able to take social impact into account when making licensing decisions. The Bill will also make it unlawful to supply alcohol to a minor, without the permission of the minor's parent or guardian. These decisions represent major advances in the thinking around the supply and use of alcohol in our society," Lianne Dalziel said.

Not only has the government introduced a fairly comprehensive bill, they’ve also announced a wide-ranging review of New Zealand's liquor law and policy, to be undertaken by the Law Commission over the next two and a half years.

"There have been many changes in society and many ad hoc changes to the liquor laws since the last comprehensive review (the Laking Report) in the mid-1980s," Lianne Dalziel said. "The time has come to revisit the legal framework, identify the kinds of outcomes we want from 21st century liquor laws, and have a look at the whole balance of rights and responsibilities again."

For more information:

Website of the month

National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction’s Workplace Resources

NCETA should be one of the first places to visit for good information on addressing alcohol and drug issues in the workplace. The information is well supported by good research and evidence, and is presented in easy to read and understand language. The website includes information for employers and employees on developing an alcohol and other drug policy; types of drugs, their effects, and potential consequences for workplace; training and educating employees; and other useful prevention and intervention strategies. All of that at www.nceta.flinders.edu.au.

Upcoming events

  • Cutting Edge, September 4-6, Christchurch
  • CAYAD National Hui, September 9-12, Wellington

For details on these and other events, and to submit your event, visit www.drugfoundation.org.nz/events

Job vacancies

  • Social Worker, Medical Detoxification Centre, CADS, Auckland
  • Clinical Psychologist, Tamaki Oranga Recovery Centre, Auckland
  • Alcohol and Drug Counsellor, Waikeria Prison, Auckland

For these and other vacancies, and to submit your vacancy, visit www.drugfoundation.org.nz/jobs.