Priorities
6-Sep-2005Peter Debnam, the new leader of the Liberal-National Coalition opposition in NSW says:
[...]we would look at closing that injecting room and diverting those funds into treatment of drug addicts.
Bravo to D. Hurst for this letter in Yesterday’s SMH.
Barely 24 hours into the job, you might have expected the new Liberal leader to make his mark by going after a policy area of great importance to the people of NSW such as transport, hospitals or education. But no, Mr Debnam has clearly nailed his hard-right colours to the mast by choosing a soft target like the Kings Cross injecting room. If this is the cardboard cut-out figure the Liberals plan to present to the electorate, Labor has it made.
D. Hurst Lindfield
Sure, nobody knows who Morris Iemma is, but with priorities like Debnam’s nobody will need to know his name when they come to vote.
Some quick talking points about the Kings Cross Medically Supervised Injecting Centre:
- There is strong local community support for the centre.
- Drug-related crime has dropped in Kings Cross.
- Operating funds are drawn from the Confiscated Proceeds of Crime Account, and not taxes (directly, I guess :).
- The total social and economic cost to Australia in 1992 of drug use (including prevention and treatment, loss of productivity in the workplace, property crime and law enforcement activity) was $18.8 billion, including tobacco $12.7 billion, alcohol $4.5 billion, and illicit drugs $1.7 billion. (from the MSIC FAQ)
The Injecting Centre saves lives and minimises the damage caused by drugs to the Kings Cross community and to the human beings who are addicted. Mr Debnam seems to want to abandon the community and only treat the drug users that survive.






This seems to be a classic difference in the way liberals and conservatives think. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Politics for some discussion. “An OD is the consequence of your foolish actions, and the threat will make you stop” vs “If we prevent the OD, we can pull you back from the brink”.
I thought we had enough empirical evidence that the former just doesn’t work – ignoring its moral correctness or otherwise – but that may not matter when your objective is garnering votes.