Steve Fielding … Fuck Off!

How long will we have to put up with this ignorant, self righteous twat? This part time clown, part time politician has no qualms about mouthing off about subjects that are too complex for his tiny, pea sized brain. Like arguing against doctors and drug addiction experts, when he has little knowledge about the subject.

Greens High On Soft Drug Policy: Fielding

Australia. to News

June 2010

Family First Leader Senator Steve Fielding says the Greens are up to their old tricks with their plan to stick heroin injecting rooms on street corners across the country.

Senator Fielding’s comments come after it was revealed that the Greens will continue their soft stance on drugs ahead of this year federal election.

“As a community we should be getting tougher on drugs not softer,” Senator Fielding said.

“We have a wave of alcohol fuelled violence on our streets and we shouldn’t be making it easier for people to be taking illegal drugs and causing even more problems.

“This is just typical of the Greens warped policy ideas which will just erode away the moral fabric of our society.”

Senator Fielding said the policy of introducing heroin injecting rooms would only support the supply of illegal drugs and line the pockets of dealers.

“Melbourne has already had one drug war too many, just imagine the increase in demand for these illegal narcotics if the Greens were able to get their way,” Senator Fielding said.

“Illegal drugs rip families apart and there is no way we should be making it easier for these people to get their next hit."

Senator Fielding said if voters couldn’t trust Labor and Liberal they certainly couldn’t trust the Greens with their soft stance on drugs.

“Family First is the only party looking out for ordinary Australians without taking things to extremes like the Greens,” Senator Fielding said.

Steve Fielding should do us all a favour and fuck off! He is a fear mongering, morally vacant, self serving ponce. Let me tell you why.

Fielding’s latest response was to public health specialist and Greens’s candidate, Dr. Richard Di Natale. But calling a doctor "Soft on Drugs" because he recommends a scientifically proven program that saves lives is just typical of Fielding’s messed-up moral maelstrom. Fielding’s objection to safe injection clinics in Victoria is based on nothing more than ideology and political profiting. These clinics have been established in several countries and they all have been deemed a huge success. Opposing them with little more than anti-drug rhetoric just shows how shallow Steve Fielding really is.

How apt is it that this weekend, Alex Wodak and Ingrid van Beek have both been appointed as Members of the Order of Australia, mostly for their work establishing the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC) and other so called, “soft on drugs” programs like the needle exchange program.

Like most modern conservative Christians in politics, hypocrisy is part of the game. And in this game, Fielding’s target who “will just erode away the moral fabric of our society” is also his political opponent who may just unseat him in the upcoming election. 

Fielding's rejection of science is not welcome in 2010. Fielding believes the world is only 10,000 years old and dinosaurs roamed the the earth with humans. He believes that a man called Noah gathered 2 of every species(including all birds, insects, whales etc.), put them on a boat and saved them from a giant flood that wiped out life on the planet. Maybe Richard Dawkins was correct when he described Fielding as having an IQ lower than an earthworm.

Dawkin’s comment may be more poignant through than just a dig at a well know buffoon. Steve Fielding has a self confessed learning disability. Add to this his bizarre views of evolution and his credibility is not looking too good. Publicity stunts like dressing up as a beer bottle and semi-stripping in a protest march doesn’t help either. This is what he said to SBS News a few days ago.

The Greens are up to their old tricks. They’re soft on drugs and really this is the wrong message to be sending Australia. We’ve got a huge street violence issue and going soft on drugs is going to make it worse not even better.

-- Steve Fielding

Does this even make sense? It sounds a lot like a bunch of choice, scary words randomly joined together. 

As with all self righteous, anti-drug warriors, the drug using population are often portrayed as some sort of dark evil that corrupts society. Rarely are they grouped into their appropriate classes - recreational users and addicts. Mostly, these two groups are worlds apart but usually they are lumped in together under the title of scumbags, druggies or junkies. It’s this ignorance that might explain comments like this:

Illegal drugs rip families apart and there is no way we should be making it easier for these people to get their next hit

-- Steve Fielding

These people? Does he mean, “these people” who are someone’s friends or family or co-workers. Or does he mean those faceless junkies who should be stopped from using drugs at any cost? I would love for Fielding to explain how providing safe, medical facilities for “these people” is making it easier for them to buy their drugs? 

As a community we should be getting tougher on drugs not softer

-- Steve Fielding

What the hell does, “soft on drugs” actually mean? Whenever we hear this term, it usually refers to evidence based strategies that save lives or reduces harm. If that is being “soft on drugs”, then Fielding has some moral dilemmas to work through. Does he just choose to ignore the ample evidence showing the "War on Drugs" has failed along with our own ”Tough on Drugs" policy?

Fielding was elected with just 2519 first preference votes (0.08%), and his party as a whole received just 56,376 votes (1.9%) for the Federal Senate in Victoria

--Wikipedia

It mightn’t be headline news that Fielding is an utter fuckwit but when he shares the balance of power in the senate, it should be of major concern for all Australians. Ironically, Steve Fielding and Family First are not in the senate through popularity but because of the preference system in Australia. Only 2519 people voted for him. I wonder why?

Sophie Mirabella - Another “Tough on Drugs” Looney Lib

They’re at it again.

This is where Labor’s rhetoric once again diverges from reality. Despite declaring a pre-election “war on drugs” in 2007, the Rudd Government has largely abandoned the “Tough on Drugs” initiative that was so successful under the Howard Government.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Oh dear, those silly Libs. Always harping on about someone being “Soft on Drugs” or how the Howard government was so successful at fighting the drug scourge while the Rudd government is doing nothing.

Funding has been cut for both the Tough on Drugs initiative and the Customs and border protection services that so effectively prevented tonnes of dangerous drugs from being imported and getting to our streets.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Yes, I remember the success. Like the heroin epidemic that Howard proudly announced was beaten with help from the Australian Federal Police (AFP). At the time, heroin use did drop significantly in Australia and there was plenty of back patting and victory speeches. Amazingly, Howard’s “Tough on Drugs” policy was also working overseas and countries like Australia who were supplied heroin by Burma had a record drop in heroin use. Simply amazing! Several years later though, AFP head, Mick Kelty dropped a bombshell and explained that Burma and other S.E. Asia crime syndicates had switched to methamphetamines(ice) and ditched their heroin business. Oops. Just to rub it in, it was later revealed that the use of ice had been growing for the previous 5 years and peaked around the time the government announced that methamphetamines were starting to become a problem in Australia. By the time the media and government started screaming “Ice Epidemic”, methamphetamine use had already started to decline. The short story being that whilst the Howard government was busy taking credit for something they didn’t do, ice had slipped in unnoticed ... all on their watch.

Since the Rudd government took over, the “Tough on Drugs” campaign has taken a back seat while they focus on a much bigger problem called alcohol. This is driving the Libs crazy as they had previously defended the massive alcohol industry although it causes much more carnage on Australia than illicit drugs ever will. Sussan Ley, Jamie Briggs, Mathias Cormann, Colin Barnett, Christian Porter, Barry O'Farrell etc. have all had a go at the Rudd government for not being “Tough on Drugs”. Joining this groups of desperates is Sophie Mirabella, Liberal Party Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare, Women & Youth. Although Sophie Mirabella is already well known as a twat, she confirmed it by writing a piece for The Punch last week. In her article, she attacked Rudd and co. for being “Soft on Crime” highlighting how they have neglected to follow up the success of the Howard government and their “Tough on Drugs” policy. Well, here’s the thing Sophie ... “Tough on Drugs” doesn’t work. When you say “Soft on Drugs”, you mean being sensible, rational and following the facts. You mean reconsidering a failed policy that has cost millions of lives around the world. You mean breaking away from the US centric "War on Drugs" that has cursed that country into having the largest rate of drug users on the planet. Like I commented on the The Punch site - “But there’s the catch. If they really believe the propaganda they spin to the public then they are dumb as a hammer but if they are rational thinking adults and know it’s not true, then they are liars. Any guesses?”. My guess is that you know damn well what’s happening but you can’t get your head around addiction being a medical issue. You see drug use as immoral except for that most dangerous of drugs, alcohol. You think we are simply not tough enough on drug users and a worldwide concerted effort will produce a drug free world. Like most nutters from the far right, you accept druggies dying or being wrongly imprisoned as an unfortunate side effect of maintaining public morality. Yes, the quest for a perfect society that gave us Hitler, apartheid, jail for homosexuals, the over throwing of democratically elected governments, the loss of civil rights, a massive prison population, the stolen generation, rampant corruption and of course, the "War on Drugs". In your world Sophie, there’s no room for science or compassion if it interferes with conservative values.

At the Annual UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna in March this year, our “tough” Government actually protested that the term “harm reduction” had been pointedly excluded from a political declaration – effectively betraying Labor’s real “soft on drugs” approach and putting us at odds with our traditional ally, the US.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

Mirabella’s latest rant in The Punch is straight from a neocon handbook. It’s probably called How To Win Friends And Influence People (Using Fear & Lies). Neocons believe it’s okay to lie to the public if it’s in the best interest of the country and Mirabella wants to determine what that is. Who cares if it ruins lives? Who cares if it doesn’t work? And why would Mirabella criticise the government for wanting the term Harm Reduction included in the UN’s official drug policy? It is after all, part of Harm Minimisation which is Australia’s official drug policy. The reason is simple. The US have a Zero Tolerance policy for drugs and it was them who pressured the UN not to include the term Harm Reduction. As a neocon, Sophie believes the US is the motherland spreading law& order, freedom & democracy, free markets and capitalism, Christianity, family values & moral direction. There’s no place for Harm Minimisation in a US inspired world.

The "War on Drugs" has failed miserably but there are many Australian politicians who still want Australia to adopt more of the US Zero Tolerance policy. Funny enough, we actually do base most of our drug strategies on the US model with a dash of Harm Reduction. The call for tougher drug sentencing is purely political. Why would we want more of the US Zero Tolerance policy when the US has the highest level of drug use per capita in the world? Is this the “success” we want? Do we want 1 in 37 citizens in the criminal system like the US? Do we want special armed forces shooting innocent bystanders in the crossfire with drug gangs? Do we want millions of people unable to get decent jobs or receive government aid just because they once smoked pot? This is the reality of Sophie Mirabella’s suggestions but there’s no room for such inconvenient truths when you are busy spinning the “Tough on Drugs” line.

The link between illicit drug use and crime is well established and is described as “mutually reinforcing”. So if the Labor Government is tough on crime, as Minister Gillard declared, there’s a clear imperative that it also be tough on drugs.
-Sophie Mirabella - The Punch

On a final note, Sophie’s rant includes a classic anti-drug tactic that is rarely challenged by anyone - the reverse link. Making the connection between illicit drugs and crime is simple enough. You take something that is very popular like drugs and ban them. Huge demand creates extremely inflated prices and since some drugs are highly addictive, users have to regularly resort to crime to pay for them. Because they are banned and with so much money involved, the black market attracts organised crime who run the industry using violence and fear. This is called prohibition. For some reason, there are those who get it mixed up and say that the effect of drugs themselves cause users to delve into crime. Like a group of friends sitting around having a joint when suddenly one of them announces that she is going to become a dealer in illegal firearms. There is a good minute of silence before it sinks in. Under the influence of drugs, others soon declare their intentions for a criminal career as well. A bank robber, a credit card scammer and 2 car thieves. Incredible! But that’s drugs for you.

Tough On Crime Is An Empty Slogan For ALP
The Punch
by Sophie Mirabella
November 2009

The ability of Prime Minister Rudd and his Government to “talk tough” has never been in question. It’s the one thing Labor actually do well.

Remember that first heady year in office when they declared a war on virtually everything – from childhood obesity and whaling, to banker’s salaries, unemployment and even the global financial crisis itself?
Conveniently, the rhetoric has never had to bear resemblance to reality.

Julia Gillard talked tough during her faux stoush with the Unions, while at the same time delivering them unprecedented power and access in the workplace.

Wayne Swan solemnly warned of a “tough budget for tough times” before he delivered one of the biggest spending budgets in our nation’s history.

Kevin Rudd seriously claimed his changes to border security were “tough”, while at the same time creating a situation where the people smugglers are clearly back in business with a record number of illegal boats bobbing in Australian waters.

Heck, the rhetoric can even swing a full 360 degrees to suit the mood – declaring oneself an economic conservative one year, and writing a long treatise on the evils of capitalism the next.

No problem. Whatever suits perceived changes in the tide of public opinion. Whatever gets airplay. Or whatever suits as a distraction from other government failures.

The Prime Minister is currently “spinning” in India, where, just a few weeks back, Julia Gillard spent five days trying to reassure worried Indian families that Australia was a safe place, following violent incidents involving Indian students studying in Australia.

Ms Gillard declared that the Australian Government was tough on crime, adding: “We have zero tolerance towards any violence towards Indian students, any violence at all in our country.”

If only that was the case.

Just this week, in the Annual Report of the Office of Public Prosecutions, the Senior Prosecutor in Victoria Jeremy Rapke QC, accused the State’s judges of lenient sentencing, particularly in drug cases. In so many cases, these Judges have been appointed by Ms Gillard’s Labor colleagues.

Rapke rightly pointed out that the penalties imposed by Courts in drug cases continue to be inadequate having regard to the insidious effect drugs have on society and said that sentences should reflect “the huge public disquiet about the prevalence of drugs”.

The link between illicit drug use and crime is well established and is described as “mutually reinforcing”. So if the Labor Government is tough on crime, as Minister Gillard declared, there’s a clear imperative that it also be tough on drugs.

This is where Labor’s rhetoric once again diverges from reality. Despite declaring a pre-election “war on drugs” in 2007, the Rudd Government has largely abandoned the “Tough on Drugs” initiative that was so successful under the Howard Government.

Funding has been cut for both the Tough on Drugs initiative and the Customs and border protection services that so effectively prevented tonnes of dangerous drugs from being imported and getting to our streets.

At the Annual UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna in March this year, our “tough” Government actually protested that the term “harm reduction” had been pointedly excluded from a political declaration – effectively betraying Labor’s real “soft on drugs” approach and putting us at odds with our traditional ally, the US.

When it comes to being “tough on crime”, Labor’s own policy platform also betrays them, with Chapter 7 declaring “Labor will promote the principles of restorative justice as a just and effective way to be tough on crime.”

Restorative justice? What exactly is that? A core principle in restorative justice is to “balance offender needs, victim needs and the needs of the community as well” (Bazemore and Umbreict 1995).

Note the “offenders needs” are pretty high up on that list. And that’s the sticking point.

At its best, restorative justice gives victims of crime a voice. That’s a good thing. For first offences and petty crimes it is a method of dispute resolution that can be effective if both parties enter into the process with good will.

But more and more often the principle is being applied to serious criminal behaviour.

For judges who philosophically support restorative justice that often means keeping an offender out of jail wherever possible…the theory being that they are unable to “make amends” if confined in prison.

This is an approach pretty much at odds with the “do the crime, do the time” deterrent to criminal behaviour which has long underpinned the system and reflects the sentiment of most of the Australian community.

But leniency and the philosophical belief that “offender needs” must be considered in sentencing mean we continue to see many cases where the time simply does not fit the crime. Nor does it reflect community standards and expectations.

Many Judges, like the Labor Party itself, see the principles of restorative justice as the most “just and effective” approach. That’s certainly debatable – and I don’t have the space in this column to go into all the pros and cons. But one thing restorative justice couldn’t be described as is “tough”.

So how can Labor claim to be tough on crime when their party platform says the opposite? Moreover, and perhaps more significantly given our proud history of judicial independence, Labor are appointing more and more judges who conveniently share Labor’s “go soft” beliefs.

The Victorian State Attorney General Rob Hulls is a case in point. His appointments now make up half the State’s judiciary – among them two “Lawyers for Labor”, a former Labor candidate, and four senior officials from the left-leaning “Liberty Victoria”, along with many other “activist” Judges.

Without commenting on their individual qualifications, I do question whether their collective views are representative of mainstream values. I wonder if the balance is skewed.

As a Barrister myself, I believe it’s important for the judiciary to maintain the confidence of the public by broadly reflecting the community’s concept of “justice”.

As outlined earlier, the Senior public prosecutor in Victoria also seems to think this is important.

As evidenced in some of his appointments, the Labor State Attorney General clearly does not.

Meanwhile, half a world away, our tough talking Labor Prime Minister continues to declare his Government is “tough on crime”.

Plenty of feel-good rhetoric, but reality will inevitably bite.

For some local insight into Sophie Mirabella, check out Ray Dixon’s Alpine Opinion.


Related Articles:
Sophie Mirabella, tough on crime, the war on drugs, blather about liberal softies, and a black dull Friday the 13th indee - Loon Pond
The Liberal Party on Drugs
Jamie Briggs - The MP Who Drank the Kool Aid with Lolly Water
Liberal Party Can't Shake Off Howard's Australia
The Unwinnable War On Dickheads

Soft on Drugs Causes Ambulance Call Outs to Rise

Queensland Disgrace

Ambulance call outs rise while politicians argue whose tougher on drugs.

I have regularly said that drug users and addicts are just fodder in the political world and they are treated as chess pieces for politicians in their never ending game of gathering voters. But when I read this article in the CourierMail I felt there was something I was missing . Then it struck me. The politicians involved were so tied up in their political games that they forgot to even try to appear sincere.

Drug-Related Paramedic Callouts Up 15 Per Cent 

Rosemary Odgers 

CourierMail 

January 2009 

PARAMEDICS are treating more than 30 Queenslanders a day for drug-related conditions including overdoses, a rise of 15 per cent in two years.

New figures reveal that ambulance officers across the state attended 11,429 cases involving drug-affected people last year.

Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg said the figures were proof the Government was not doing enough to tackle the growing problem of drugs in the community.

He called for a review of drug awareness campaigns to ensure they were targeting the problem.

"We've known for years that Queensland is the amphetamine capital of Australia and these figures show the problem is getting worse and yet this government has sat on its hands," Mr Springborg said.

"We need zero tolerance to drugs, harsher penalties for people caught trafficking and supplying drugs, and money spent on better drug awareness campaigns rather than on ads promoting the Government."

But Police Minister Judy Spence rejected the Opposition's suggestion the Government was soft on drugs.

Ms Spence said about 10 per cent of prisoners in Queensland were jailed for drug offences. "The Government and the Queensland Police Service are continually increasing our resources and arrests with respect to drugs, and Queensland Health run continuous drug awareness campaigns," she said.

"Parents and indeed all members of the community need to join with government to help society understand that far from being harmless and recreational, illicit and illegal drugs can lead to hefty fines, prison sentences and in the cases of drug use, death."

The war of words follows the tragic case of Rosie Bebendorf, 28, who died on New Year's Day after taking two ecstasy tablets allegedly bought from a Fortitude Valley nightclub.

Her grieving parents have pleaded with young people to stay away from party drugs.

Kroy Day of the union representing ambulance workers said the latest figures supported anecdotal evidence that paramedics were dealing with more drug cases.

But he said drug and alcohol abuse had always been part of their workload, and paramedics were more concerned about the growing level of violence associated with drug use.

"The Government has increased penalties for people who assault officers but what we don't want is people to be deterred from calling us (to cases involving drugs)," he said.

"We're not interested in being a police force. They will only be called if there is a safety issue for our members."

The latest figures, obtained by the Opposition through a Question on Notice, revealed paramedics attended 11,429 drug-related cases including overdoses in 2007-08, compared to 11,214 the previous year and 9907 in 2005-06.

With ambulance call outs rising in Queensland, there was no mention of what health factors are involved or whether contaminated drugs were hitting the streets. No mention that people were dying or dropping like flies. The only concern of the opposition was which party was toughest on drugs!

New figures reveal that ambulance officers across the state attended 11,429 cases involving drug-affected people last year. Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg said the figures were proof the Government was not doing enough to tackle the growing problem of drugs in the community.

Why is it that at every mention of a drug related issue, politicians feel the need to appear "tough on drugs"? Even with more people being rushed to hospital, the only solution for these boneheads is to announce tougher measures. 

"We've known for years that Queensland is the amphetamine capital of Australia and these figures show the problem is getting worse and yet this government has sat on its hands," Mr Springborg said. "We need zero tolerance to drugs, harsher penalties for people caught trafficking and supplying drugs, and money spent on better drug awareness campaigns rather than on ads promoting the Government."

Queensland Opposition Leader, Lawrence Springborg is a twat. A slippery, sleazy self serving twat. Capitalising on the issue of people overdosing or being rushed to hospital and then transforming it into a point scoring slanging match is not acceptable from someone in his position. Apart from being a reflection on his priorities, it shows his lack of values that is so common for many of our politicians. This type of behaviour is becoming increasingly obvious to the public as merely political posturing and considering it involved people’s lives, Springborg deserves any contempt he receives . Queensland Police Minister Judy Spence is also a twat. The issue of growing ambulance call out rates somehow got lost in her response to the opposition’s rant. In a contest of who’s toughest on drugs and crime, she proudly stated that 10% of prisoners were in for drug offences and the arrest rate was growing. WTF?!?! During this period of prison overcrowding. concerns for the sentencing wars between political foes and the question of whether sending drug addicts to jail is self defeating, Judy Spence’s response shows how out of touch she is with the world outside Queensland. 

But Police Minister Judy Spence rejected the Opposition's suggestion the Government was soft on drugs. Ms Spence said about 10 per cent of prisoners in Queensland were jailed for drug offences. "The Government and the Queensland Police Service are continually increasing our resources and arrests with respect to drugs, and Queensland Health run continuous drug awareness campaigns," she said.

Her proud approach of punitive actions and the flippant referrals to real life consequences are scary, to say the least. Note the casual addition of ‘minor’ issues like drug awareness campaigns and oh, yeah, if you’re not caught and jailed you might also die. 

"Parents and indeed all members of the community need to join with government to help society understand that far from being harmless and recreational, illicit and illegal drugs can lead to hefty fines, prison sentences and in the cases of drug use, death". 

-Queensland Police Minister Judy Spence

Recently, there has been some widely publicised cases of people failing to ring an ambulance for a drug overdose due to the fear of involving police. A coroner’s finding into the drug overdose of Queenslander, Melanie Boyd found that her death could have been avoided if an ambulance was called. 

After taking drugs, Melanie Boyd was left without medical help after her friends decided not to ring an ambulance for fear of getting in trouble with police. Coroner Brian Smith made five strong recommendations, including an awareness campaign that calling an ambulance does not automatically mean police would be involved. He called on the Queensland Ambulance Service to consider the distribution of a pamphlet called 'calling for an ambulance when illicit drugs have been taken' to avoid similar situations. The need to be able to call an ambulance without fear of legal action is vital and has become common practice worldwide. I doubt if this mattered though during the latest chest beating event from Lawrence Springborg and Judy Spence. 

Readers Comments: As usual, there was a barrage of inane comments from some brain dead readers. 

compulsory reporting to the police if you go to an emergency room with an OD. if you choose to take the drugs, you should be grown up enough to accept that drugs have got very nasty side effects. none of this weak judiciary not recording convictions, or giving wholly suspended sentences. drug use is a cancer to our society, and we need to fight it as you would fight a cancer - with strength and determination, rather than a wimpish "don't do drugs, kiddies, it's really bad for you". 

-Posted by: Andrew of Ipswich

One way of tackling the illegal drug problem is to not treat the scumbags. Once illegal drug use has been identified then they should be left to fend for themselves. 

-Posted by: Nickt of Wellington Point

With all the drugs avaible, someone isn't doing their job. More police are needed. We seem to follow the Yanks, or shouldn't say that as it might be raciest, why don't we follow them with their Justice system. Eighty years for murder. What do we give, maybe 10 if they are unlucky. 

-Posted by: WELL DONE of Redcliffe 

Its an epidemic! Why don't the police follow up and arrest these idiots! -Posted by: adrian of Bris So the ambulance in Brisbane has an increased work load due to drugs and they are just reporting this now? Alcohol is also a drug, why does the media keep separating it? Go to Sydney and Melbourne and see how bad it really is, with 3 times the drug overdoses than Brisbane and the grubby Gold Coast. If people CHOOSE to take drugs leave them to their own devices. Maybe letting a few of these people "go to God" (which of course we wouldn't), might make some of the others wake up to themselves. Many people take drugs knowing the risk of overdose, because they know the ambulance will come if needed, and they will get treatment in a hospital at taxpayers expense. If the services did not attend to theses people's chosen stupid acts, the word would soon spread, and the overdose rate, even drug use, would fall almost immediately. We have to stop wrapping these losers in cotton wool and pampering them, because the "feel good" approach does not work. 

-Posted by: Shannon of Brisbane Simple, 

The paramedics can treat them then call the Police to charge them with drug offences. After that the cost of the medical treatment should also be recovered due to illness by an illegal substance. 

-Posted by: Ron from Albany Creek

Is this just a Queensland police issue under the watchful eye of Police Minister, Judy Spence? Crime is crime, right? On the Queensland Police website, there is a whole page dedicated to the Queensland Police - Party-Safe Program which has information on hosting a party including guidelines, check lists, links to related sites, the Party Safe registration form etc. Considering the recent push to inform the public that ringing an ambulance in a drug related emergency does not necessarily involve police, I expected the message to be given priority. Apart from non-police related contact details for drug counselling services and a warning that drinking alcohol or taking drugs affects your ability to make safe decisions, there was only two other references to drugs or ringing an ambulance: 

Party Safe for Guests 

Point 5: It is a criminal offence to have illicit drugs including cannabis.  You could be charged and convicted.  This could involve paying a fine or serving a prison sentence.  Your future may be affected as you could have a criminal record for the rest of your life.  This could also impact on your future job or travel opportunities. 

Party Safe Checklist Point 2: Have relevant telephone numbers available at the party, including the police, ambulance, taxi company and contact details for parents of young people attending.

UPDATE: Terry Sweetman from The CourierMail has also noticed the disgraceful behaviour from Lawrence Springborg and Judy Spence. 

Read his great article here