The Week Online:
The new drug strategy calls for a trial safe-injection room to be set up
in the ACT, and recent news reports suggest that the issue will be debated
soon in the Assembly. What do you think are the odds that legislation
will be passed this month that will allow it?
Michael Moore: As a
Minister working with a minority government it is always difficult to assess
timing of controversial issues. The most common way to handle difficult
issues is by the use of delay tactics. I will be working hard to
get the legislation through as soon as possible and am still hoping to
have a safe-injecting room open by the end of the year.
WOL: You've been working
hard to promote harm reduction strategies in the ACT. Do you feel
your efforts are paying off in terms of a more informed and receptive Assembly?
What about law enforcement (the strategy speaks much of a need to integrate
law enforcement and public health approaches, an alliance that would be
at best uneasy here in the U.S.)? And the general public?
MM: The police in the
ACT already have adopted harm minimisation approaches in a number of ways.
For example, police do not attend overdoses when an ambulance has been
called, to ensure that there is no reluctance to call the ambulance.
They are accepting of needle exchanges and do not target them as a method
of tracking down drug users. However, the police union is not quite
so open-minded. One of the interesting things to come out of the
debate is that the police union is saying that they would prefer to have
a heroin provision (maintenance) trial rather than a safe-injecting room.
So would I.
However, it is a first step
-- even if it a small one.
Meanwhile, the public debate
is becoming more rational in the ACT, especially with a strategy that puts
the illegal drugs in the context of damage done by alcohol and tobacco.
WOL: The report mentions
that there is still support for a heroin maintenance trial in the ACT,
echoing comments you made to DRCNet in April. Is this dream edging
closer to reality?
MM: The heroin maintenance
trial is in the strategy, which has been approved by the government and
tabled in the Legislative Assembly. However, we work in a Federal
system of government and the Prime Minister has the responsibility of approaching
the international Narcotic Control Board. Until we find a way around
his personal objections, he changes his mind, or we get a change of Prime
Minister (I don't mind which), we will not be able to proceed. We
do know that the USA has influenced Prime Minister John Howard considerably
on his approach to illicit drugs. It is a shame he could not have
celebrated the successes of Australian Harm Minimisation strategies and
been prepared to take the next steps.
