Ending the War on Drugs
The cost of the war on drugs
Prohibition in New Zealand is based on the false assumption that making a substance illegal will deter people from consuming it.
The reality is that drug consumption will occur regardless of legality, and the illegal status does little to reduce use rates.
According to the New Zealand Drug Foundation, before they turn 21 years old, 80% of New Zealanders will have tried illegally-obtained cannabis at least once. If New Zealand could convict 100% of the people who break drug laws, the vast majority of the population would have a drug conviction.
Drug prohibition all together, is estimated to cost tax-payers around $1.8 billion a year. The social costs could be even higher.
A person who is convicted of a drug crime most likely won’t fit the stereotype assigned to them by angry politicians. I imagine anyone from hard-working labourers to elected officials have taken illicit substances or perhaps still do. Most people who consume drugs are probably like you – perfectly capable of making positive contributions to society.
A person who is convicted of a drug crime will obtain a criminal record which will inhibit their ability to obtain employment potentially for the rest of their lives. If they cannot be employed, they have two main options: state welfare, or income-generating crime. Neither of which is an ideal outcome.
Convicts who resort to crime to generate income are likely to be convicted again, and fall into a cycle of being in and out of the justice system for their whole lives. This was not an effect of their drug consumption, this was an effect of drug prohibition. And tax payers are funding it.
Has prohibition worked?
Did You Know?
The global War on Drugs began under the Nixon administration as a ploy to disenfranchise people of colour and the anti-war left.
“Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
– John Ehrlichman
John Ehrlichman was one of Richard Nixon’s key advisors and Watergate co-conspirator. He admitted that the intent behind drug prohibition had nothing to do with the drugs at all.
The solution
Legalisation + Regulation + Rehabilitation
Legalisation
Legalise all drugs to varying degrees based on harm, from a lightly regulated private market to sole government distribution.
Regulation
Regulate the consumption and production of drugs in order to prevent harm and ensure safe consumption.
Rehabilitation
Approach the issue of drug consumption as a health issue and work to rehabilitate users.
Legalisation+Regulation
How would Legalisation work?
- Licenses to sell cannabis and other low risk substances such as psilocybin (mushrooms), LSD, mescaline and MDMA should be sold through a regulated private market;
- These licenses would ensure sellers have the capability to produce and sell drugs that are safe to consume. They should be inexpensive and easy to obtain. People with prior drug convictions would be able to obtain a license to sell;
- A pigouvian tax would be set, and implemented via the tax-and-dividend model.
The alternative is black market where drugs are consumed dangerously. For example 25-i NBOMe (a high risk psychedelic) is often sold as LSD (a low-risk psychedelic), resulting in people thinking they are taking a harmless substance, and lethally overdosing on one they had no idea they were consuming.
Under Young ACT’s proposal, the market would be legitimate, and safe. People are guaranteed that the substances they consume are as advertised. People will be more educated about how to consume drugs safely and minimise any adverse health outcomes. A minimum purchasing and consumption age can be put in place making drugs less available to our most vulnerable. Help will be sought more freely, will be better quality and more available.
A more Just system
Under the status quo, New Zealand spends an estimated $500 million on drug prohibition annually. A person who is convicted of a drug crime will end up with a criminal record that could inhibit them for the rest of their lives. Some will be incarcerated which could prevent some people from perhaps feeding their families or otherwise working. Criminal records prevent people from easily obtaining employment, meaning that convicts are often limited to two options – state-welfare, or income-generating crime. Going through the criminal justice system makes non-violent criminals (such as drug convicts) statistically more likely to commit violent crime in the future. Prohibition turns people who are often otherwise hard-working, contributing members of society into criminals who end up stuck in cycles of poverty and crime. Prohibition exacerbates the racial disparity in the justice system. With all of this, comes costs which will stack up to make drug prohibition not only far more expensive, but far more harmful than the drugs it aims to protect us from.
Under Young ACT’s proposal, the criminal aspect will be far reduced. The cost and damage done by the enforcement of drug prohibition, minimised. Police will be able to reallocate their time and resources to more pressing issues like domestic and sexual violence. The government will have millions (if not billions) of dollars to spare which could be spent helping people with addiction, or funding nation-wide essentials like our hospitals and our schools. Non-violent people will no longer have their lives derailed for a crime that had no victims.
A regulated private market
What would a regulated private market look like with regards to drug legalization? The answer is a private market where entry requires a license given out on the basis of compliance with regulation. These licenses require vendors and producers to assure quality information and safety of the drugs within the market.
Limit access to young people
Licenses should only be distributed to those who maintain age restrictions. Similar to the manner alcohol vendors operate.
Potency and Quality control
In a regulated market, all sales would be bound by the Consumer Guarantees Act (1993) to ensure that its contents are as advertised. Drugs would no longer be cut with deadly compounds such as Fentanyl or 25i-NBOMe.
More information
Consumers are provided with accurate information about the drug in question will affect them and risks and dangers.
Gather Data
Private markets allow the government to collect accurate information about sales and consumption.
Collect taxes provide employment
Private markets as opposed to black markets provide tax and legitimate employment.
Enfranchise users
A regulated market turns users into consumers who have legitimate say into the system of administrator and licensing.
Taxing the private market
How it would work
The tax rate should be set no higher than the cost to offset estimated externalities of drugs, but low enough to ensure the market price does not exceed that of the black market.
Case study: The Swiss Model
Switzerland notoriously endured one of the world’s worst opiate crises to date. Overdose deaths were common, and HIV infections were high.
After the years of failure and lack of progress Switzerland adopted a new approach to drugs.
The Swiss currently boast a harm reduction approach that has reduced crime rates, deaths, HIV infection, and helped addicts get back on track.
How does it work?
The innovative policy allows medical-grade, injectable heroin, methadone, and buprenorphine to be prescribed to patients with opiate use disorder. Patients are provided clean needles and safe administration of their prescription.
Since black market heroin is often cut with substances like fentanyl (notorious for its high overdose potential), the Swiss system allows the drug to be taken safely.
But the system also has other added benefits, it keeps money out of the hands of drug dealers. Furthermore because the methadone is free users do not have commit crimes in order to fuel their addiction, and can get their lives back.
Finally the system also makes the problem a public health issue and better connects health services and government with users.
Within a decade of implementing this policy, opiate overdose mortality rates more-than halved. The number of opiate users with HIV was reduced by more than 50%.
Switzerland pioneered a drug policy that has enormously reduced drug harm and helped addicts regain control of their lives.
This approach should be adopted in New Zealand for highly addictive drugs such as methamphetamine and heroin.
Rehabilitation
By legalising all drugs we also open the door for a new approach to rehabilitation. Through legalization we close the gap between users and addiction services. NGO’s and government agencies can more easily interact and help users and become more involved at the point of usage and sale. Heroin addicts are able to obtain their drug without the economic burden of obtaining it illegally. This allows them to remain employed and have more money to spend on food and housing.
Portugal’s decriminalisation program has seen a massive uptake in people undergoing drug related treatment by up to 60%. This means more people getting help, rejoining the workforce and regaining control of their lives.
The Bottom Line
Young ACT rejects the very premise of drug prohibition – that the government should decide what you should put in your own body on your own property. We believe that there is nobody better to decide how you should live your life, than you. The government should not derail your life for ingesting a substance.
We know that prohibition has failed. Tough and criminally punitive drug policies have historically resulted in more drug deaths, harm, and social costs related to drug consumption. In fact, we would assert that prohibition causes more harm than the drugs it prohibits.
Young ACT wants to put an end to this harmful, expensive, and failed policy. New Zealand has the capacity to pioneer an innovative and effective drug policy that simultaneously reduces drug harm and maximises your personal freedom.
