1 00:00:05,400 --> 00:00:05,800 Speaker 1: Kiota. 2 00:00:05,880 --> 00:00:09,080 Speaker 2: I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a 3 00:00:09,160 --> 00:00:16,840 Speaker 2: daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. New research 4 00:00:17,000 --> 00:00:21,040 Speaker 2: suggests our drug laws are stuck in the seventies and 5 00:00:21,120 --> 00:00:24,680 Speaker 2: that kiwis want to see a more health based approach 6 00:00:25,120 --> 00:00:29,440 Speaker 2: to tackling the country's drug issues. This month marks fifty 7 00:00:29,600 --> 00:00:34,320 Speaker 2: years since government passed the Misuse of Drugs Act. The 8 00:00:34,360 --> 00:00:38,760 Speaker 2: Helen Clark Foundation and University of Otago researchers estimate that 9 00:00:38,920 --> 00:00:44,080 Speaker 2: drug harm costs close to two billion dollars annually and 10 00:00:44,159 --> 00:00:47,639 Speaker 2: at least half a billion dollars alone. On responding to 11 00:00:47,800 --> 00:00:51,560 Speaker 2: drug use Today on the front Page, lead researcher doctor 12 00:00:51,680 --> 00:00:54,000 Speaker 2: Rose Cross, and it is with us to take us 13 00:00:54,040 --> 00:01:02,400 Speaker 2: through New Zealander's changing attitudes towards drug policy. Right, so 14 00:01:02,480 --> 00:01:06,600 Speaker 2: tell me about this report. It focuses on three key areas, 15 00:01:06,680 --> 00:01:10,119 Speaker 2: So where our drug funding is being spent, how people 16 00:01:10,200 --> 00:01:14,000 Speaker 2: would prefer to see that money be allocated, and whether 17 00:01:14,160 --> 00:01:18,520 Speaker 2: a deliberative democracy process to engage citizens is effective. Now, 18 00:01:18,560 --> 00:01:22,199 Speaker 2: first off, rows tell us where is that money being spent? 19 00:01:22,880 --> 00:01:26,200 Speaker 3: So at the moment, the New Zealand government spends about 20 00:01:26,319 --> 00:01:30,319 Speaker 3: half a billion dollars a year responding to illegal drugs, 21 00:01:30,880 --> 00:01:34,120 Speaker 3: so this doesn't include alcohol and tobacco. These are drugs 22 00:01:34,120 --> 00:01:37,440 Speaker 3: that are illegal under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Of 23 00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:41,280 Speaker 3: that money, over two thirds of it goes to law enforcement, 24 00:01:41,560 --> 00:01:47,000 Speaker 3: so sixty eight percent approximately is spent on enforcing our 25 00:01:47,080 --> 00:01:51,120 Speaker 3: drug laws. Treatment, so this is treatment for people who 26 00:01:51,120 --> 00:01:54,840 Speaker 3: have use disorders, is almost a quarter of that funding, 27 00:01:55,160 --> 00:01:59,720 Speaker 3: whereas prevention is much smaller at about five percent, and 28 00:01:59,800 --> 00:02:02,560 Speaker 3: high reduction is even smaller and again at just over 29 00:02:02,640 --> 00:02:04,360 Speaker 3: one percent of current funding. 30 00:02:04,680 --> 00:02:08,320 Speaker 2: Wow, and how would people prefer that money being spent? 31 00:02:08,919 --> 00:02:14,520 Speaker 3: So we asked a randomly selected representative set of New 32 00:02:14,600 --> 00:02:18,600 Speaker 3: Zealand citizens, if one hundred dollars of your tax was 33 00:02:18,639 --> 00:02:21,720 Speaker 3: to be spent responding to illegal drugs in New Zealand, 34 00:02:21,760 --> 00:02:24,480 Speaker 3: how would you like that to be allocated between those 35 00:02:24,520 --> 00:02:28,320 Speaker 3: different policy areas? And they came back with something that 36 00:02:28,480 --> 00:02:32,800 Speaker 3: was very different to the actuality. So what they said 37 00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:37,360 Speaker 3: was they actually wanted to have just over just over 38 00:02:37,400 --> 00:02:41,840 Speaker 3: a cert going to law enforcement. They allocated twenty four 39 00:02:41,919 --> 00:02:46,560 Speaker 3: percent two treatment, so somewhat similar, they allocated twenty five 40 00:02:46,639 --> 00:02:50,400 Speaker 3: percent to prevention and sixteen percent to harm reduction. So 41 00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:53,280 Speaker 3: what that means is they wanted much more money going 42 00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:57,240 Speaker 3: towards the health based approach rather than a criminal justice 43 00:02:57,280 --> 00:02:58,480 Speaker 3: approach to drugs. 44 00:02:58,880 --> 00:03:02,640 Speaker 2: And what does help based approach mean? And what's the 45 00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:05,919 Speaker 2: difference between U suppose prevention and harm reduction? 46 00:03:07,000 --> 00:03:07,240 Speaker 4: Yeah? 47 00:03:07,320 --> 00:03:09,640 Speaker 3: No, those are good questions, So I'll answer the second 48 00:03:09,720 --> 00:03:13,400 Speaker 3: question first. So prevention are the things that we try 49 00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:17,960 Speaker 3: to do to stop people from initiating drug use in 50 00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:20,320 Speaker 3: the first place. So this might be things that we 51 00:03:20,360 --> 00:03:24,040 Speaker 3: do at a population level, like intervention the education sorry 52 00:03:24,080 --> 00:03:29,680 Speaker 3: for example, or this might be early support or family interventions, 53 00:03:29,720 --> 00:03:32,200 Speaker 3: but the things that we do to try and prevent 54 00:03:32,280 --> 00:03:37,040 Speaker 3: drug use from beginning. In contrast, harm reduction is how 55 00:03:37,040 --> 00:03:40,560 Speaker 3: do we reduce harm for people who were using drugs 56 00:03:41,600 --> 00:03:46,280 Speaker 3: without necessarily requiring that they become abstinent. So that's things 57 00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:51,160 Speaker 3: like the needle exchanges where people can access safe injecting equipment. 58 00:03:51,880 --> 00:03:54,720 Speaker 3: Drug checking is a great example of harm reduction in 59 00:03:54,760 --> 00:04:00,720 Speaker 3: New Zealand overdose prevention medication to loxowine. So that's harm reduction. 60 00:04:01,600 --> 00:04:04,160 Speaker 3: So coming back to that first question about what is 61 00:04:04,240 --> 00:04:08,240 Speaker 3: a health based approach, What it effectively recognizes is that 62 00:04:08,360 --> 00:04:11,400 Speaker 3: drug use should be responded to as a health issue 63 00:04:11,520 --> 00:04:15,080 Speaker 3: rather than a criminal justice issue. That's what is at 64 00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:18,880 Speaker 3: the very core of a health based approach. It tries 65 00:04:18,920 --> 00:04:21,880 Speaker 3: to stop seeing drug use as a moral failing or 66 00:04:21,920 --> 00:04:25,799 Speaker 3: some kind of issue that must be punished in people, 67 00:04:26,320 --> 00:04:30,520 Speaker 3: and tries to respond in ways that recognizes that not 68 00:04:30,640 --> 00:04:34,720 Speaker 3: all drug use actually results in harm, but that for 69 00:04:34,760 --> 00:04:37,960 Speaker 3: the people who are experiencing harm, the best ways in 70 00:04:38,000 --> 00:04:40,480 Speaker 3: which we can help them are to respond to their 71 00:04:40,520 --> 00:04:43,520 Speaker 3: health and social needs rather than punishing them. 72 00:04:43,920 --> 00:04:45,960 Speaker 2: Yeah, and I can imagine in this country as well, 73 00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:49,200 Speaker 2: it would be quite difficult to seek help if you 74 00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:50,960 Speaker 2: are addicted. 75 00:04:51,080 --> 00:04:55,000 Speaker 3: Say, there's lots of reasons why people might choose not 76 00:04:55,040 --> 00:04:58,520 Speaker 3: to seek help, one of which, of course, is it's illegal, 77 00:04:58,560 --> 00:05:01,200 Speaker 3: and people are frightened they come forward and say I'm 78 00:05:01,200 --> 00:05:04,960 Speaker 3: really struggling with this. They're actually admitting to a legal behavior. 79 00:05:05,839 --> 00:05:09,320 Speaker 3: And the other issue is that drug use is really 80 00:05:10,040 --> 00:05:13,520 Speaker 3: is often really stigmatized, and so they're worried that people 81 00:05:14,360 --> 00:05:16,400 Speaker 3: don't want to seek help because they're worried about how 82 00:05:16,400 --> 00:05:18,839 Speaker 3: they might be treated, or how they might be judged, 83 00:05:19,560 --> 00:05:22,520 Speaker 3: or how other people might see them in respond to them. 84 00:05:23,000 --> 00:05:26,239 Speaker 3: So it is quite a big barrier to help seeking 85 00:05:26,839 --> 00:05:34,520 Speaker 3: What does deliberative democracy mean? Yeah, So deliberative democracy is 86 00:05:34,560 --> 00:05:39,400 Speaker 3: a way of engaging citizens more in our policy processes. 87 00:05:40,040 --> 00:05:43,839 Speaker 3: And what it is is more than just participation. It's 88 00:05:43,880 --> 00:05:48,600 Speaker 3: this idea that people to engage in policy discussions actually 89 00:05:48,640 --> 00:05:52,840 Speaker 3: need time to deliberate and try to build a group consensus. 90 00:05:53,400 --> 00:05:56,760 Speaker 3: So it's this idea that if we've got really big, complex, 91 00:05:56,800 --> 00:06:00,279 Speaker 3: tricky problems like drug use, but the best way which 92 00:06:00,279 --> 00:06:03,280 Speaker 3: we can resolve them is to come together and learn 93 00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:07,680 Speaker 3: together and deliberate and talk and try and reach group consensus. 94 00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:12,599 Speaker 3: So examples of deliberateive democracy are things like citizens assemblies 95 00:06:13,240 --> 00:06:18,280 Speaker 3: or citizens' juries or participatory budgeting. So there's all these 96 00:06:18,320 --> 00:06:22,200 Speaker 3: different ways in which deliberative democracy can be brought to life, 97 00:06:22,279 --> 00:06:27,160 Speaker 3: but it's really seen as a way of actually unpicking 98 00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:31,080 Speaker 3: some of these big, complex problems that societies face. 99 00:06:31,640 --> 00:06:33,719 Speaker 2: That leads me on to another question that I had. 100 00:06:33,760 --> 00:06:35,520 Speaker 2: What is a citizens assembly? 101 00:06:36,200 --> 00:06:40,080 Speaker 3: Yeah, so a citizen's assembly as a type of deliberate 102 00:06:40,120 --> 00:06:43,120 Speaker 3: of democracy. And so the idea with a citizens assembly 103 00:06:43,600 --> 00:06:48,480 Speaker 3: is that we would appoint a group of randomly selected 104 00:06:48,560 --> 00:06:53,680 Speaker 3: representative citizens who would come together to try and resolve 105 00:06:53,839 --> 00:06:58,400 Speaker 3: a complex policy problem like, for example, drug use and harm. 106 00:06:58,760 --> 00:07:02,040 Speaker 3: The real important things about a deliberative democracy is that 107 00:07:02,120 --> 00:07:04,600 Speaker 3: it would be the citizens themselves who would get to 108 00:07:04,640 --> 00:07:07,240 Speaker 3: set the agenda and say, well, here are the experts 109 00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:09,560 Speaker 3: that we'd like to hear from, here's what we'd like 110 00:07:09,600 --> 00:07:12,920 Speaker 3: to learn about, here's how we would like to engage 111 00:07:12,920 --> 00:07:15,520 Speaker 3: with each other. Then they'd come together and they would 112 00:07:15,560 --> 00:07:19,240 Speaker 3: hear from experts, they would seek more information, But the 113 00:07:19,320 --> 00:07:22,520 Speaker 3: really important part is that they would learn together and 114 00:07:23,160 --> 00:07:27,920 Speaker 3: debate and engage with the evidence and deliberate to try 115 00:07:27,960 --> 00:07:31,680 Speaker 3: and reach some conclusions in a set of recommendations. 116 00:07:31,960 --> 00:07:34,760 Speaker 2: Do you think people will be shocked to learn how 117 00:07:34,880 --> 00:07:38,880 Speaker 2: little is actually being invested in health based prevention, treatment, 118 00:07:38,960 --> 00:07:40,760 Speaker 2: and harm reduction at the moment. 119 00:07:40,640 --> 00:07:44,360 Speaker 3: I think it would be quite surprising to people. I 120 00:07:44,360 --> 00:07:48,920 Speaker 3: think the biggest gap was really in prevention. And the 121 00:07:49,000 --> 00:07:52,800 Speaker 3: thing about prevention is it was almost universally supported. So 122 00:07:52,880 --> 00:07:55,480 Speaker 3: in that polling data, there were demographics, so we could 123 00:07:55,480 --> 00:07:58,920 Speaker 3: look at say the difference between males and females, or 124 00:07:59,040 --> 00:08:03,480 Speaker 3: the differences by age group, or by political by voting preferences. 125 00:08:04,520 --> 00:08:09,040 Speaker 3: Everyone supported prevention was it was just across the board, 126 00:08:09,680 --> 00:08:12,960 Speaker 3: And so I think that people would be both surprised 127 00:08:13,000 --> 00:08:17,320 Speaker 3: and disappointed that we're putting a lot of money into 128 00:08:17,400 --> 00:08:20,360 Speaker 3: law enforcement, but not a lot of money into actually 129 00:08:20,400 --> 00:08:29,080 Speaker 3: preventing this from happening in the first place. If you 130 00:08:29,080 --> 00:08:31,840 Speaker 3: could weave a magic wand on drug reform in New Zealand, 131 00:08:31,880 --> 00:08:32,760 Speaker 3: what would it look like? 132 00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:35,480 Speaker 4: It would look quite a lot like the recommendations that 133 00:08:35,520 --> 00:08:38,320 Speaker 4: were made by the Law Commission back in twenty ten, 134 00:08:39,320 --> 00:08:41,920 Speaker 4: of which one of their first ones was to repeal 135 00:08:42,000 --> 00:08:45,040 Speaker 4: the Misuse of Drugs Act and replace it with legislation 136 00:08:45,200 --> 00:08:48,240 Speaker 4: administered by the Ministry of Health. To add to that, 137 00:08:48,880 --> 00:08:51,800 Speaker 4: if I had a magic wand, I would also replace 138 00:08:51,880 --> 00:08:54,440 Speaker 4: all of the people who've spent their careers working in 139 00:08:54,480 --> 00:08:59,960 Speaker 4: a prohibition paradigm with people who are actually interested in 140 00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:04,400 Speaker 4: evidence based drug law and a law that is focused 141 00:09:04,400 --> 00:09:08,840 Speaker 4: around the well being of people and not just criminalizing people. 142 00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:13,440 Speaker 2: Yeah. So one of the key recommendations is, of course, 143 00:09:13,480 --> 00:09:17,000 Speaker 2: that citizens assembly. What else are the recommendations? 144 00:09:17,400 --> 00:09:20,360 Speaker 3: So the first recommendation was, as you say that, yet, 145 00:09:20,400 --> 00:09:24,120 Speaker 3: we should hold a citizens Assembly on drugs in New Zealand, 146 00:09:24,600 --> 00:09:26,640 Speaker 3: And I'd like to point out so Ireland has recently 147 00:09:26,679 --> 00:09:29,280 Speaker 3: done something similar, so they held a citizens Assembly on 148 00:09:29,360 --> 00:09:33,520 Speaker 3: drugs as well. And the recommendations are really sensible and 149 00:09:33,640 --> 00:09:36,320 Speaker 3: nuanced and thoughtful and being considered by the government. So 150 00:09:36,320 --> 00:09:39,520 Speaker 3: we're not this isn't a something that hasn't been done 151 00:09:39,559 --> 00:09:43,520 Speaker 3: before or try it not radical, not radical. No. The 152 00:09:43,679 --> 00:09:49,720 Speaker 3: other recommendations are that we should increase the funding for treatment, prevention, 153 00:09:50,040 --> 00:09:54,720 Speaker 3: and harm reduction so that they proportionally match the community preferences. 154 00:09:55,000 --> 00:09:57,360 Speaker 3: And I think it's really important to point out here 155 00:09:57,880 --> 00:10:01,920 Speaker 3: that we're not recommending that law law enforcement funding be cut. 156 00:10:02,640 --> 00:10:04,640 Speaker 3: So what we're saying is that if we could hold 157 00:10:04,679 --> 00:10:08,840 Speaker 3: the proportion the amount of law enforcement funding the same, 158 00:10:09,280 --> 00:10:14,160 Speaker 3: but just increase those other areas so that proportionally it 159 00:10:14,280 --> 00:10:19,439 Speaker 3: looked like more towards the community preferences. Because I'm sure 160 00:10:19,480 --> 00:10:21,560 Speaker 3: that you know this shouldn't be seen as a cost 161 00:10:21,640 --> 00:10:25,240 Speaker 3: saving on police, that there are other things that that 162 00:10:25,400 --> 00:10:28,040 Speaker 3: money could be could be spent on by those law 163 00:10:28,120 --> 00:10:31,800 Speaker 3: enforcement agencies. So we're not recommending a cut. We're recommending 164 00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:37,000 Speaker 3: increasing that funding for the health based responses. We're also 165 00:10:37,200 --> 00:10:42,280 Speaker 3: in recommending that for prevention and harm reduction in particular, 166 00:10:43,080 --> 00:10:49,120 Speaker 3: we need to have a really evidence based program of responses. 167 00:10:49,240 --> 00:10:52,000 Speaker 3: This is more than just saying, oh, we're going to 168 00:10:52,120 --> 00:10:56,440 Speaker 3: run a national ad campaign that says, don't do drugs. 169 00:10:56,440 --> 00:11:00,880 Speaker 3: This is prevention, and harm reduction in particular should be 170 00:11:01,000 --> 00:11:04,280 Speaker 3: looked at from a system's perspective, and we should have 171 00:11:04,480 --> 00:11:09,719 Speaker 3: a program that has a whole set of interventions that 172 00:11:09,760 --> 00:11:13,719 Speaker 3: are proven to work and that work together. So we 173 00:11:14,320 --> 00:11:17,040 Speaker 3: kind of say, yes, they need money, but they need 174 00:11:17,200 --> 00:11:20,880 Speaker 3: more than money, They need a programmatic, planned approach. 175 00:11:21,559 --> 00:11:26,320 Speaker 2: If there has been significant and growing evidence that enforcement 176 00:11:26,760 --> 00:11:31,360 Speaker 2: alone isn't an effective approach to reducing harm from drugs, 177 00:11:32,040 --> 00:11:35,320 Speaker 2: then why do you think that is still the approach? 178 00:11:36,320 --> 00:11:40,400 Speaker 3: I think so. Obviously, I'm not a politician myself, not 179 00:11:40,520 --> 00:11:44,400 Speaker 3: a decision maker in this space, so I am somewhat speculating. 180 00:11:45,600 --> 00:11:48,600 Speaker 3: I think it comes back to some of the ideas 181 00:11:48,640 --> 00:11:51,559 Speaker 3: that we were previously talking about about stigma and about 182 00:11:51,600 --> 00:11:54,840 Speaker 3: the ways in which we see people who use drugs. 183 00:11:54,840 --> 00:11:59,040 Speaker 3: And I think that there is potentially a fear or 184 00:11:59,400 --> 00:12:03,600 Speaker 3: ae that we need to be tough on crime. You know, 185 00:12:03,679 --> 00:12:06,480 Speaker 3: it's that really strong, that's that narrative, right that we're 186 00:12:06,480 --> 00:12:08,200 Speaker 3: going to be that we're going to be tough on 187 00:12:08,280 --> 00:12:13,160 Speaker 3: crime without really stopping and thinking, but is this working? 188 00:12:13,640 --> 00:12:17,000 Speaker 3: Is this is this effective? Is this the way in 189 00:12:17,040 --> 00:12:21,200 Speaker 3: which we can achieve positive change. So I think that 190 00:12:22,160 --> 00:12:27,720 Speaker 3: drugs drugs are such a evalue lating area to work in. 191 00:12:27,880 --> 00:12:31,400 Speaker 3: We all we all think that we that we that 192 00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:33,680 Speaker 3: we know things, or that we've experienced things, that we've 193 00:12:33,760 --> 00:12:37,720 Speaker 3: seen seen movies about people who use drugs, and we've 194 00:12:38,520 --> 00:12:41,160 Speaker 3: we're kind of grown up in the war on drugs 195 00:12:41,160 --> 00:12:44,920 Speaker 3: and we've we hold this within ourselves, which means that 196 00:12:44,960 --> 00:12:49,400 Speaker 3: people have really strong moral judgment about drugs and the 197 00:12:49,440 --> 00:12:52,800 Speaker 3: people who use them. But the evidence is really clear 198 00:12:53,360 --> 00:12:56,840 Speaker 3: health based approach is what is effective at reducing harm. 199 00:12:57,280 --> 00:13:00,480 Speaker 2: What surprised you the most about the responses the data 200 00:13:00,520 --> 00:13:01,280 Speaker 2: that you collected. 201 00:13:01,640 --> 00:13:04,160 Speaker 3: So the third part of the project, which we didn't 202 00:13:04,200 --> 00:13:06,960 Speaker 3: really talk about as much yet, was the was the 203 00:13:07,040 --> 00:13:11,520 Speaker 3: deliberative workshops with a group of citizens in christ Church. 204 00:13:11,559 --> 00:13:16,000 Speaker 3: And these were ten retirees who were living in christ Church. 205 00:13:16,800 --> 00:13:20,800 Speaker 3: It was incredibly heartening to me to see where that 206 00:13:20,920 --> 00:13:25,800 Speaker 3: group got to. They decided to produce a consensus statement 207 00:13:26,040 --> 00:13:29,960 Speaker 3: about how they thought the government should respond to drugs 208 00:13:30,040 --> 00:13:33,600 Speaker 3: in New Zealand, and it was it was wonderful, it 209 00:13:33,640 --> 00:13:37,120 Speaker 3: was nuanced, it was thoughtful, it was compassionate, it was 210 00:13:37,240 --> 00:13:41,040 Speaker 3: evidence based. And this was a group of people who 211 00:13:41,080 --> 00:13:44,200 Speaker 3: had come together just out of interest, and they'd said 212 00:13:44,200 --> 00:13:47,120 Speaker 3: to me in the first session, Oh, I don't know 213 00:13:47,160 --> 00:13:49,400 Speaker 3: if I can be in your group because I don't 214 00:13:49,480 --> 00:13:53,080 Speaker 3: know enough. I don't know enough about drugs. And I said, no, 215 00:13:53,240 --> 00:13:57,080 Speaker 3: that's the that's the point, right, This is this is 216 00:13:57,240 --> 00:14:01,040 Speaker 3: about being willing to learn and being will to engage 217 00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:04,920 Speaker 3: in conversation and to deliberate together to try and reach 218 00:14:04,960 --> 00:14:10,240 Speaker 3: a common good. And what happened watching those that group 219 00:14:10,720 --> 00:14:16,480 Speaker 3: have those conversations over seven weeks was it was really 220 00:14:16,520 --> 00:14:20,880 Speaker 3: heartening to see how people could come together and in 221 00:14:20,960 --> 00:14:24,120 Speaker 3: this age that we live in where dialogue can get 222 00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:28,760 Speaker 3: a bit vexed and that you know, I sometimes worry 223 00:14:28,800 --> 00:14:32,960 Speaker 3: that we've lost the art of civilized conversation, it was. 224 00:14:33,040 --> 00:14:36,120 Speaker 3: It was wonderful to see this play out week after 225 00:14:36,200 --> 00:14:40,440 Speaker 3: week where people respectfully disagreed with each other or changed 226 00:14:40,480 --> 00:14:45,480 Speaker 3: their minds or ask tricky questions and really came together 227 00:14:45,520 --> 00:14:48,280 Speaker 3: as a group to say, actually, let's try and solve 228 00:14:48,360 --> 00:14:52,000 Speaker 3: this reach something good together. And never could have predicted 229 00:14:52,120 --> 00:14:54,720 Speaker 3: how lovely that process was going to be and how 230 00:14:55,040 --> 00:14:56,880 Speaker 3: how wonderful it would be to watch it. 231 00:14:57,880 --> 00:15:02,520 Speaker 2: Nice. Yeah, it's just the ability and openness of being 232 00:15:02,600 --> 00:15:07,520 Speaker 2: able to change one's mind with more information, I think 233 00:15:07,600 --> 00:15:10,120 Speaker 2: is something that we've probably lost a little bit as well. 234 00:15:10,200 --> 00:15:13,520 Speaker 3: But yeah, and then seeing it in action, it reminded 235 00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,840 Speaker 3: me that we can we can do this, We can 236 00:15:15,920 --> 00:15:18,080 Speaker 3: solve complex problems together. 237 00:15:24,640 --> 00:15:27,840 Speaker 1: The Czech Republic, for example, thought that some of their 238 00:15:27,880 --> 00:15:32,600 Speaker 1: drug problems were being caused by decriminalization. Then they realized 239 00:15:32,680 --> 00:15:37,320 Speaker 1: things actually got worse when they recriminalized, except you stayed 240 00:15:37,320 --> 00:15:40,640 Speaker 1: the same, but all of the more acute harms got worse, 241 00:15:41,120 --> 00:15:44,200 Speaker 1: and so they reversed it again. What we think is 242 00:15:44,400 --> 00:15:46,560 Speaker 1: or what we know to be the case from the evidence, 243 00:15:46,840 --> 00:15:50,520 Speaker 1: is that where countries have gone too far and gone 244 00:15:50,560 --> 00:15:54,880 Speaker 1: too liberal, introduced more of a commercial model, the harms 245 00:15:54,920 --> 00:15:58,200 Speaker 1: can increase. And I think that's one of the reasons 246 00:15:58,200 --> 00:16:00,760 Speaker 1: we're seeing a little bit of concern around the world 247 00:16:01,600 --> 00:16:05,080 Speaker 1: is that we have in parallel some commercial models that 248 00:16:05,080 --> 00:16:07,400 Speaker 1: have gone a bit too far, as well as just 249 00:16:07,440 --> 00:16:09,360 Speaker 1: a burgeoning international drug supply. 250 00:16:11,560 --> 00:16:14,320 Speaker 2: Has anyone in government responded to the research. 251 00:16:14,960 --> 00:16:17,400 Speaker 3: No, not at this stage. I would very much. I 252 00:16:17,760 --> 00:16:20,600 Speaker 3: would hope that they would. And what I think we're 253 00:16:20,640 --> 00:16:24,000 Speaker 3: calling for and what we're trying to demonstrate, is that 254 00:16:24,040 --> 00:16:28,400 Speaker 3: there's some really good opportunities for consensus on this and 255 00:16:28,480 --> 00:16:33,800 Speaker 3: to not use drug policy as a political football. For example, 256 00:16:34,360 --> 00:16:37,800 Speaker 3: there's a lot of room to move for our politicians 257 00:16:38,120 --> 00:16:40,760 Speaker 3: to be able to move closer to a health based approach. 258 00:16:40,840 --> 00:16:46,520 Speaker 3: The community preferences are there, there's a lot of willingness 259 00:16:46,680 --> 00:16:49,920 Speaker 3: from the community to be able to move in this direction. 260 00:16:50,200 --> 00:16:53,360 Speaker 3: So I think that there is space there that's been 261 00:16:53,440 --> 00:16:57,440 Speaker 3: created by this research. But I'd really like to see 262 00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:02,080 Speaker 3: some consensus on this research. And I think one of 263 00:17:02,120 --> 00:17:06,800 Speaker 3: the areas that there is the ability to achieve some 264 00:17:06,840 --> 00:17:13,120 Speaker 3: good consensus is around prevention and harm reduction, because they 265 00:17:13,200 --> 00:17:18,639 Speaker 3: are so underfunded compared to community preferences, and particularly for prevention, 266 00:17:19,640 --> 00:17:26,280 Speaker 3: people across the political preferences all supported prevention, so I 267 00:17:26,280 --> 00:17:31,560 Speaker 3: think there's a real an opportunity there to build consensus. 268 00:17:32,600 --> 00:17:35,840 Speaker 3: I also think that the Citizens Assembly should be something 269 00:17:35,880 --> 00:17:40,040 Speaker 3: that all political parties could get behind. Is effectively that 270 00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:43,720 Speaker 3: saying you know this is this is a tricky, complex 271 00:17:43,800 --> 00:17:47,000 Speaker 3: area that affects all kinds of people in New Zealand. 272 00:17:47,040 --> 00:17:50,280 Speaker 3: So's so let's see what a group of citizens can 273 00:17:50,280 --> 00:17:53,000 Speaker 3: come up with. Let's let's put this to the people 274 00:17:53,760 --> 00:17:59,280 Speaker 3: and support them to develop recommendations and conclusions. Important part 275 00:17:59,320 --> 00:18:02,800 Speaker 3: of that, of course, needs to be a commitment from 276 00:18:02,880 --> 00:18:05,640 Speaker 3: the government that if they get a set of recommendations 277 00:18:05,640 --> 00:18:09,240 Speaker 3: from a citizen's assembly, to act on them. What I'd 278 00:18:09,280 --> 00:18:11,919 Speaker 3: hate to see is for all this effort to be 279 00:18:12,000 --> 00:18:14,960 Speaker 3: put into a citizen's assembly and for then a government 280 00:18:15,040 --> 00:18:18,119 Speaker 3: to say okay and put the recommendations on the shelf 281 00:18:18,640 --> 00:18:21,600 Speaker 3: and not act on them. Because that's happened before with 282 00:18:21,960 --> 00:18:23,880 Speaker 3: drug policy reform in New Zealand. 283 00:18:24,400 --> 00:18:27,760 Speaker 2: And given the sheer amount of volume of drugs coming 284 00:18:27,760 --> 00:18:31,199 Speaker 2: to our shores at the moment, how urgent is just 285 00:18:31,280 --> 00:18:32,760 Speaker 2: doing anything right now? 286 00:18:33,520 --> 00:18:38,399 Speaker 3: Yeah? I think globally the drug supply is changing, It 287 00:18:38,480 --> 00:18:42,720 Speaker 3: is increasing, and it is becoming more volatile, and we 288 00:18:43,240 --> 00:18:45,560 Speaker 3: do not want to end up in a position, say, 289 00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:48,639 Speaker 3: for example, like the US or Canada have been in 290 00:18:49,200 --> 00:18:54,119 Speaker 3: terms of the overdose crisis from synthetic opioids. So the 291 00:18:54,160 --> 00:18:59,239 Speaker 3: world has changed. The modern drug supply has increased, it 292 00:18:59,280 --> 00:19:02,400 Speaker 3: has changed, it has become much more coordinated, and as 293 00:19:02,440 --> 00:19:08,000 Speaker 3: you say, there is increasing amounts of drugs, particularly methanphetamine 294 00:19:08,040 --> 00:19:11,600 Speaker 3: and cocaine at the moment reaching New Zealand. We've still 295 00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:14,720 Speaker 3: got drug policy settings that are over fifty years old. 296 00:19:15,520 --> 00:19:20,040 Speaker 3: The world in which those drug policies were made doesn't 297 00:19:20,080 --> 00:19:23,840 Speaker 3: exist anymore, and so I think it's really important that 298 00:19:23,880 --> 00:19:29,400 Speaker 3: we're ready for the drug supply that we're currently facing, 299 00:19:30,000 --> 00:19:32,400 Speaker 3: but also just a bit of a reality check to say, 300 00:19:32,400 --> 00:19:34,920 Speaker 3: there's almost no policy I can think of that's going 301 00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:38,680 Speaker 3: to be exactly the same fifty years on. It's time 302 00:19:38,720 --> 00:19:39,520 Speaker 3: for a reset. 303 00:19:39,760 --> 00:19:41,840 Speaker 2: Thanks so much for joining us, Throws. 304 00:19:41,680 --> 00:19:43,040 Speaker 3: Thank you very much for having me. 305 00:19:46,160 --> 00:19:49,399 Speaker 2: That said, for this episode of the Front Page. You 306 00:19:49,440 --> 00:19:53,320 Speaker 2: can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage 307 00:19:53,359 --> 00:19:57,439 Speaker 2: at enzadherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is 308 00:19:57,520 --> 00:20:00,919 Speaker 2: produced by Jane Ye and Richard Martin, who is also 309 00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:05,600 Speaker 2: our editor. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to The Front Page 310 00:20:05,640 --> 00:20:09,280 Speaker 2: on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune 311 00:20:09,280 --> 00:20:12,320 Speaker 2: in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.