“Croakey is right that ‘The Wire’ is a remarkable series and exceptional in that it depicts a complex reality from multiple perspectives.

But the argument advanced by David Simons, the primary series creator, that change in sensitive social policy areas is not possible while the news media (especially newspapers) are withering in the face of financial pressures and competition from the new media sources, is very doubtful.

At least in the case of drug policy, which is a major part of ‘The Wire’. Two decades ago, global drug prohibition was impregnable and unchallengeable. Now the USA has elected a President who has conceded publicly that the War on Drugs is ‘an utter failure’.

The demise of drug prohibition has not happened just yet but it is hard to deny that it is well on its way.

Have quality broadsheet newspapers contributed to that change? Not a bit.

The advent of the internet and e-mail has made this debate a much more level playing field. That has made a huge difference. Information released in Vienna, Washington DC or Kabul is available around the world almost instantaneously.

The result is that advocates of drug law reform have been able to use this information like never before. I am as much an admirer of quality broadsheet newspapers as anyone.

But quality newspapers have not been the reason that global drug prohibition looks like becoming an endangered species. Look at Australian newspapers today.

For every single published article or letter questioning the effectiveness of global drug prohibition we have several newspaper commentaries arguing that drug law enforcement can achieve in communities what it cannot even achieve in prisons.”

For Alex Wodak’s review of The Wire, see this Crikey article.

After only a few days, Release, a drugs and humans rights charity, was told by advertising regulators that the campaign would have to be withdrawn from London buses.

Doesn’t that sound like censorship to you? Doesn’t the response to this slogan simply illustrate the very point that the campaign was trying to make? What is so scary about the thought that some nice people might take drugs?

The Australian Crime Commission’s recent report on illicit drugs estimated that 5.8 million Australians, one third of the population, have tried cannabis at least once. Are all these 5.8 million Australians ‘bad’ people?

Release was told its slogan will have to be toned down before the advertisements can be reinstated. A second campaign may involve more buses.
Sebastian Saville, the chief executive of Release, said that ‘the removal of the “Nice people take drugs” adverts from buses was an overreaction to a legitimate message’.

A spokesman for the company which booked the advertisements said that the advertisements were being removed because the company should have submitted the copy  to a regulatory body, the Committee of Advertising Practice.

More information from The Guardian is available here.

This site has apparently had a lot of visits.

A similar incident occurred in the Washington DC public transport system a few years ago and subsequently resulted in a big win for free speech in the courts.

Last week by a majority vote of 63%, the Bundestag decided to allow heroin assisted treatment to become available in Germany as a therapeutic option for severely dependent heroin users who had not benefited from any previous treatment.

At present, heroin assisted treatment is an option for treatment resistant patients in three countries (England, Switzerland and the Netherlands). Later this year, Denmark will start making heroin assisted treatment available after all nine political parties agreed in 2008 (without requiring additional research).

Randomised controlled trials of heroin assisted treatment have now been conducted in five countries (Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain and Canada). All had very favourable results which showed that this treatment is effective, safe and cost-effective.

In the trial in the Netherlands, 55% of patients receiving heroin assisted treatment showed at least 40 % improvement in at least one of the outcome domains (physical, mental or social) compared to 22% of patients receiving only methadone treatment.  When heroin assisted treatment was withdrawn from therapeutic responders, 82% deteriorated substantially within two months.  Spain decided not to permit heroin assisted treatment despite the favourable results of their trial. The trials in Canada have not yet been published but positive results have been presented at conferences. Randomised controlled trials of heroin prescription treatment are now underway in the United Kingdom and Belgium.

Heroin assisted treatment has been provided to 5% of the 20,000 heroin dependent individuals undergoing treatment in Switzerland at any time. That proportion has been very stable for some time. Although heroin assisted treatment is more expensive than methadone treatment, it is reserved for more severe cases where the full range of treatments have been tried but without success. Economic benefits are about twice the cost of this treatment.

In the United Kingdom, a confidential 2003 report commissioned by the Blair Cabinet (later leaked to the public), estimated that the highest offending 10% of heroin and crack users account for more than half the drug related crime committed in the country. There are very compelling arguments for far greater flexibility of treatment options to ensure that this most severely dependent group of drug users are attracted , retained and benefited by treatment. This would benefit these individuals, their families and the entire community.

Perhaps reflecting the growing international scientific evidence for heroin assisted treatment, community support for heroin trials in Australia jumped in the absence of any sustained advocacy from 26% in 2004 to 33% in 2007. Almost half the community supported heroin trials when Federal Cabinet blocked further scientific research on this treatment in August 1997 on the grounds that such research would ‘send the wrong message’.

Annual heroin overdose deaths peaked at 1,116 in 1999. The number of these deaths has declined since the commencement of the heroin shortage in Australia in late 2000 and has been less than 400 per year for several years.

However, there is increasing evidence that heroin availability is starting to increase in Australia.  Heroin use and overdose deaths are certainly increasing in the USA. If heroin availability continues to increase in Australia, it is inevitable that the number of heroin overdose deaths will unfortunately also increase.

Sooner or later, discussion will inevitably turn once again to an Australian trial of heroin assisted treatment or, like Denmark, accepting that the evidence is strong enough after half a dozen major trials without the need for more research. Australia should also substantially expand methadone and buprenorphine treatment.

Afghanistan is now producing more than 90% of the world’s heroin. World production of heroin more than doubled in the last ten years. Virtually all the heroin reaching Australia comes from Burma (Myanmar) where production has been increasing again in the last few years. According to the theory of market balance, markets in glut usually eventually start supplying markets with scarcity. This suggests that there is always a risk that some of the stockpiles from production in Afghanistan may soon start heading our way.

This issue should be debated in Australia. Let’s hope that the next debate on this issue will be more rational, more based on evidence and more compassionate than the disgraceful ‘debate’ in 1997.