National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

More documents

Recommendations

Info

120 Table 6.2: Examples of domestic law enforcement initiatives to address the supply of precursors to the illegal market Formal arrangements National network of Chemical Diversion Desks, working in close partnership with industry A chemical industry Code of Practice for Supply Diversion into Illicit Drug Manufacture The use of ACC coercive powers to gather information on trends and threats Workforce development Training of specialist investigators to enable effective responses to suspicious precursor chemical-related activity and clandestine laboratories Awareness raising for pharmacies about diversion methods and preventative measures Awareness raising for prosecutors and judiciary on the serious nature of precursor diversion and ATS production Enhanced forensic capabilities and training Development of a national remediation framework for clandestine laboratories Intelligence sharing and targeted interventions The continuation and cultivation of local and national partnerships in joint police operations, including sharing intelligence and resources Project STOP Enhanced intelligence collections through the ACC National Clandestine Laboratory Database Enhancements in the collection and dissemination of information on industrial chemical importation and usage Analysis of industry controls for chemicals and equipment to respond to the increased risk of thefts and fraud Legislative responses The development of model legislation as a step towards national consistency for drug types and amounts Rescheduling of pseudoephedrine based cold and flu medications to restrict availability to ‘pseudo runners’ Strengthening of State and Territory laws surrounding precursor chemicals and equipment The introduction of laws in some jurisdictions prohibiting the possession of a tablet press without lawful excuse Community activity Awareness raising within the community of the signs of clandestine laboratory activities Source: Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy Joint Communiqué 16th May 2007 ‘NATIONAL LEADERSHIP FORUM ON ICE – COMPENDIUM OF JURISDICTIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS’ http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/ publishing.nsf/Content/mcds-16may07-communique Several jurisdictions have since enacted legislation to implement the model offences: Tasmania (2001), Victoria (2001), ACT (2004), South Australia (2005), and the Commonwealth (2005) (see Table 6.3 for examples). There are differences between jurisdictions in implementing legislation. NSW made some legislative changes based on the model laws, but has not fully enacted the model offences. In Queensland, unlike some other states, law enforcement personnel are unable to carry out telephone intercepts and other forms of detection due to the legislative inadequacy for precursor chemicals under the
121 Drug Misuse Act 1986 (Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2006). Similarly, offences such as the intention to manufacture amphetamine have been enacted in Queensland, NSW and Victoria, and are yet to be introduced in other states. Although the content of the legislation differs in each jurisdiction, the central themes are the same. Penalties are higher for those found to be dealing in drugs than those possessing them for their own use, and people convicted of trafficking large amounts of drugs are liable for a greater penalty than lower level dealers. Drug trafficking is a serious offence and conviction may result in life imprisonment. Most jurisdictions have enacted legislation allowing the seizure and forfeiture of assets derived from drug dealing. Table 6.3: Examples of legislative changes in different jurisdictions NSW In 2006, enacted a number of amendments to drug misuse and trafficking laws including listing chemicals that are precursors to the drug GHB as prohibited drugs and creating a number of new offences including: • sale, commercial supply or display of crystal methamphetamine pipes in a shop for a commercial purpose; • exposing a child to the manufacturing or production of a prohibited drug or to chemicals stored for that purpose; and. • procuring a child to supply or take part in the supply of a prohibited drug. In 2006, introduced separate legislation to create a new offence of indoor, hydroponic cultivation of cannabis plants for a commercial purpose. These new laws also contain supplementary offences of cultivation in the presence of children. QLD In 2006, enacted laws to create a new offence of possession of prescribed substances or items for the production of a dangerous drug, which has a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment. This offence is aimed at “the developing market for persons who supply illicit methamphetamine manufacturers with chemicals and apparatus but who do not personally engage in the manufacture of the final dangerous drug. The laws also create a new offence of possessing a prescribed combination of items for the production of a dangerous drug, which has a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment. This means that when a clan lab is located and the prescribed combination of items is identified, the remainder of items seized will not need to be forensically tested as the prosecution will not be seeking to prove that production has occurred. The laws also introduced evidentiary provisions to remove the requirement for forensic testing of sealed pharmaceuticals and alleged clan equipment unless challenged by the defence. Other laws enacted in 2006 allow police to enter pharmacies for the purpose of monitoring excessive sales of chemicals that are used to make amphetamines such as base. WA In 2003, introduced laws that place controls on suppliers of chemicals and apparatus that can be used in the manufacture of illicit drugs.137 In 2003, also enacted laws to allow police to issue an infringement notice to a person who is reasonably believed to be cultivating, possessing or using cannabis within the specified limits. Outside these limits, offenders are subject to criminal prosecution. Persons issued with an infringement notice have the option of paying the penalty, attending a cannabis education session or having the matter heard in court. This reform in Western Australia was advocated by the Community Drug Summit held in August 2001. South Australia introduced a similar scheme in 1986. NSW does not have an infringement notice scheme but in 2000 it introduced the Cannabis Cautioning Scheme to allow police to issue cautions in relation to minor cannabis offences.139 In 2004, enacted laws to make it an offence for a declared drug trafficker to consort with another person whom the police have warned them is also a declared drug trafficker. The maximum penalty is 2 years imprisonment. In 2005, laws were amended to prohibit the diversion of precursor chemicals and equipment for use in the illegal manufacture of methamphetamine. The use, sale and supply of drug use paraphernalia such as ‘ice pipes’ were banned.
Page 1:
National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant
Page 4 and 5:
ii Acknowledgments This research wo
Page 6 and 7:
iv Table of contents Acknowledgemen
Page 8 and 9:
vi List of tables Table 1.1: Amphet
Page 10 and 11:
viii
Page 12 and 13:
2 The NDS framework and the Law Enf
Page 14 and 15:
4 Table 1.1: Amphetamine-type stimu
Page 16 and 17:
6 particularly on the Pacific Coast
Page 18 and 19:
8 Figure 1.1: MDMA (ecstasy) tablet
Page 20 and 21:
10 a 10-year period. While some of
Page 22 and 23:
12 Figure 1.4: Forms of methampheta
Page 24 and 25:
14 Figure 1.5: Median purity of met
Page 26 and 27:
16 As noted, the route of administr
Page 28 and 29:
18 Chapter 2: Setting the Context T
Page 30 and 31:
20 Figure 2.2: Prevalence of ecstas
Page 32 and 33:
22 19 years (Dunn et al., 2007). Th
Page 34 and 35:
24 The use of MDMA among police det
Page 36 and 37:
26 this survey is conducted with th
Page 38 and 39:
28 models might be useful. On the o
Page 40 and 41:
30 the questionnaire in February 20
Page 42 and 43:
32 2.5 Summary According to the lat
Page 44 and 45:
34 anxiety, agitation, tremor, teet
Page 46 and 47:
36 may be stronger than the link wi
Page 48 and 49:
38 Srisurapanot and colleagues (200
Page 50 and 51:
40 Psychiatric problems appear to o
Page 52 and 53:
42 In 2005, there was a total of 68
Page 54 and 55:
44 The most recent EDRS survey foun
Page 56 and 57:
46 same reasons they use the drugs
Page 58 and 59:
48 Shoptaw and Reback (2007) review
Page 60 and 61:
50 It has also been speculated that
Page 62 and 63:
52 Parental ATS use In addition to
Page 64 and 65:
54 The Minnesota Department of Heal
Page 66 and 67:
56 Chapter 4: Prevention and Harm R
Page 68 and 69:
58 should cover the full range of d
Page 70 and 71:
60 specific drug (Spoth et al., 200
Page 72 and 73:
62 be applied regularly and systema
Page 74 and 75:
64 Strategies targeting vulnerable
Page 76 and 77:
66 Examples of particular periods t
Page 78 and 79:
68 At-risk workplaces There is incr
Page 80 and 81: 70 The consultation forum with Abor
Page 82 and 83: 72 young people was noted in the su
Page 84 and 85: 74 and/or others); mental health ef
Page 86 and 87: 76 of the fact that frequently peop
Page 88 and 89: 78 Sexual risk behaviour is a furth
Page 90 and 91: 80 • Cleaning up; • Transport o
Page 92 and 93: 82 Assessing the risks of illicitly
Page 94 and 95: 84 4.4 Challenges of applying preve
Page 96 and 97: 86 but a number of studies are now
Page 98 and 99: 88 The pack included a video, train
Page 100 and 101: 90 Chapter 5: Treatment and Service
Page 102 and 103: 92 to the occurrence of amphetamine
Page 104 and 105: 94 In relation to the need for spec
Page 106 and 107: 96 These studies replicate earlier
Page 108 and 109: 98 addressed not only the drug user
Page 110 and 111: 100 Research conducted in the subse
Page 112 and 113: 102 users, data that may be general
Page 114 and 115: 104 that limit brain exposure to me
Page 116 and 117: 106 only significant difference was
Page 118 and 119: 108 through the use of antipsychoti
Page 120 and 121: 110 to develop the capacity of the
Page 122 and 123: 112 It was also suggested that link
Page 124 and 125: 114 as new evidence emerges. New ps
Page 126 and 127: 116 border in 2000 (McKetin et al.,
Page 128 and 129: 118 Table 6.1: Number of clandestin
Page 132 and 133: 122 Tasmania In 2004, strengthened
Page 134 and 135: 124 Recommendations from the consul
Page 136 and 137: 126 Although there are a number of
Page 138 and 139: 128 illegal drugs. When incarcerate
Page 140 and 141: 130 heroin) (Payne et al., 2007). I
Page 142 and 143: 132 Some examples of diversion prog
Page 144 and 145: 134 Other research has compared psy
Page 146 and 147: 136 Rehabilitation in Corrections T
Page 148 and 149: 138 Synthetic Drugs measure will im
Page 150 and 151: 140 • Stealing from motor vehicle
Page 152 and 153: 142 criminal offences There continu
Page 154 and 155: 144 • Increase international coll
Page 156 and 157: 146 • Ensuring offence and penalt
Page 158 and 159: 148 Law enforcement agencies are pl
Page 160 and 161: 150 Appendix 1 National consultatio
Page 162 and 163: 152 Appendix 2 Written submissions
Page 164 and 165: 154 Australian Institute of Health
Page 166 and 167: 156 Bowers, J. & Johnson, S. (2003)
Page 168 and 169: 158 Crits-Christoph, P., Siqueland,
Page 170 and 171: 160 Drug & Alcohol Services South A
Page 172 and 173: 162 Halkitis, P.N., Parsons, J.T.,
Page 174 and 175: 164 Hull, P., Rawstorne, P., Zablot
Page 176 and 177: 166 Leek, L., Seneque, D., & Ward,
Page 178 and 179: 168 McKetin, R., McLaren, J., Kelly
Page 180 and 181:
170 NSW Health (2006). Psychostimul
Page 182 and 183:
172 Ressler, K.J., & Nemeroff, C.B.
Page 184 and 185:
174 Small, W., Kerr, T., Charette,
Page 186 and 187:
176 United Nations Office for Drug
Page 188 and 189:
178
Page 190:
180
show all

National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?