Drug Free Australia has called on the 2020 Summit to take a serious look at Australia and its current stance on how illicit drug issues are handled.

We have the highest rate of illicit drug use in the OECD, according to the United Nations World Drug Report (2007)’, says Jo Baxter, Executive Officer.

‘If we continue at the current rate there will be escalating social and financial costs that will draw on the public health system, together with the cost of long term disability pensions for young people unable to participate in the workplace. Added to this will be the mental health and co-morbidity issues that are becoming increasingly complex in terms of service provision and an impossible strain on effective, sustainable rehabilitation.  Crime and violence will increase, while Police services, which are already experiencing a strain on resources, will be rendered less effective. Family and relationship breakdowns will reach unprecedented scales.

We need to move from a Harm Minimisation policy to one of Harm Prevention within the next 1-5 years – well before the year 2020. Thousands of Australians have joined us in our campaign to commence the process.’

Most of the answers are already in two Parliamentary Reports which have yet to be acted upon – These are – ‘The Road to Recovery Report’ 2003 and ‘The Winnable War on Drugs’ 2007.

From an operational perspective, this would include 5 main components:

1. Transitioning Drug Policy so that it is bipartisan, to ensure consistent prevention measures such as demand reduction, and supply reduction can be implemented long term. 
2. Progressively increasing drug control measures – with a vision of a ‘drug free’ society. This has been done in Sweden,  and they now have the lowest illicit drug use rate in Europe and the OECD - (refer to the UNODCP's 2007  report, ‘Sweden’s Successful Drug Policy – a review of the evidence’, page 17)
3. Greater community consultation prior to implementing harm reduction measures such as needle exchange programs. When (and if) these are introduced to new areas, they should be more accountable for treatment and rehabilitation referrals.
4. Planning and development of coordinated policies and inter-sectoral cooperation between government (politicians, public servants) education (community, schools an tertiary), law enforcement (police and customs), health workers, (agencies for early  intervention, treatment and rehabilitation).
5. Greater emphasis and funding placed on the more compassionate option of  sustainable rehabilitation that is recovery-based.