Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Acting Deputy President. I only need to do a short amount of research to see the issues with the advocacy of the sorts of policies that Senator Shoebridge advocated for. I suggest to Senator Shoebridge—through you, Mr Acting Deputy President—that he looks at a research article from the Portland State University, hardly a cesspit of far-right thinking, the Impacts of Successive Drug Legislation Shifts: Qualitative Observations from OreganLaw Enforcement. Oregon introduced exactly this same policy. What does this study suggest happened? This is what the research says:

In 2021, M110 decriminalized possession of controlled substance (PCS), and effectively downgraded certain quantities of PCS from a misdemeanour to a E-violation (i.e., a citation), resulting in a maximum $100 fine or a completed health assessment.

This is exactly sort of policy the ACT government is embarking upon. This is what they found. In its first point, the executive summary says:

As a result of M110, officers have less cause to search, which they note has affected their ability to make arrests for "collateral crimes" that often could accompany a possession crime (e.g., weapons offense, stolen property).

That was the first point. The second point the research indicated was the loss of informants.

According to officers, reclassifying PCS as a violation also negatively impacted their ability to cultivate confidential informants.

Why? Because there's nothing to bargain. Why would you become an informant? It doesn't matter; you're just getting a fine, as Senator Cash said, that's less than a parking fine. Why would you be an informant? So what does that do? That protects the gangs, the organised criminals, who are importing the prescribed substances into the ACT. The third theme, decreases in proactive policing, says:

Many officers noted that the state's lack of interest in drug crimes has promoted the decrease in proactivity. The shifting of roles from proactive to more reactive, response-based policing, is perceived to be having a negative impact on officer morale and motivation.

Why would you be a police officer in that environment? The problem for this chamber is that it is the Australian Federal Police through their community service arm who have the obligation to actually enforce these laws. These laws are inextricably linked to the Australian Federal Police, which is created by statute by this parliament.

Theme 4 is the perceived lack of accountability. It states:

The most common theme officers discuss is a perception of lack of accountability for defendants and individuals in possession of drugs …

Why get help? Nothing is going to force you to get help. It's all carrot and no stick. Why get help?

Theme 5 is hesitancy to issue citations. It states:

Although there was variability, most of the officers in jurisdictions we talked to commented that they had given out few or no … citations.

That's under the Oregon law. Why would you bother? Why would you bother doing the paperwork? That is what is happening in Oregon—exhibit A.

What's happening in San Francisco? Let's read some of the articles. It's the San Francisco model that the Labor-Greens government in the ACT wants to import to Canberra. The 'City by the bottom' summer 2023 article states:

People from all districts have lost faith in San Francisco's governance. A 2023 … Research survey found that the majority of San Franciscans (57 percent) have an unfavorable view of the mayor, and 73 percent believe that the city is on the wrong track.

…   …   …

Officials need to listen to what law-abiding citizens want and stop catering to radical groups like the Coalition on Homelessness, which has made it nearly impossible to get people off the street and into shelter. The city needs to provide people suffering from mental illness and addiction with real care, not ever more radical harm-reduction methods … No one wants to shop (or work) in stores and malls that are being looted, or to patronize restaurants and bars with outdoor areas filled with human waste—and wasted humans.

That's what's happening in San Francisco. Senator Shoebridge is talking about harm reduction et cetera. This is what is happening on the ground in San Francisco. The article entitled 'The encampment state' states:

This past December, a San Francisco toddler overdosed on fentanyl, after coming into contact with it while playing in a park … "[a]nother kid across the street collected syringe caps and floated them down the stream of dirty gutter water for fun."

That is the sort of dystopian future those sorts of policies lead to. The evidence is there. You only have to look at San Francisco. Go back to your office and put 'San Francisco Tenderloin district' into YouTube and see what comes up. It is an absolute dystopian nightmare.

In the Sacramento Bee an op-ed from a local sheriff and a district Attorney in California talks about the departure of major businesses from San Francisco. It states:

The departure of Nordstrom, Whole Foods and other retailers from San Francisco may not be the most critical data point on this issue, but we believe these events demonstrate that no one, regardless of socioeconomic status, is immune from the quality of life deterioration that our communities are experiencing due to homelessness.

Our once-great cities are being hollowed out.

That is the practical impact of these policies. It states:

Several large Democratic states have low homelessness rates, such as New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan and Illinois.

We believe there is a reason for this: All these states have much stronger hard drug laws than California.

In our opinion, fentanyl, heroin and other hard drug addictions—and the associated mental health crises that these drugs sometimes entail—are the root cause of California's homeless crisis.

That is the practical impact of the implementation of the policies that the ACT government is rolling out. It absolutely astounds me that the ACT government would go down this path. To some extent they have self-government, so to some extent, sure, it's their democratic choice, but it's going to have an impact on all of Australia. The ACT is not island in Australia. It's going to have an impact on everyone in this country, including upon the Australian Federal Police who have the community policing obligation.

There are also a number of other points which are raised in the reference to my committee, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, which I chair. Questions were raised with respect to the interaction with Commonwealth law, including the application of ACT laws to other territories, aircraft and seagoing vessels. Those are real issues about the impact these laws will have in relation to aircraft and seagoing vessels. So there are lots of issues in relation to this.

There are many issues. As Senator Cash said, think about the impact on social services. Senator Shoebridge talks about recovery services et cetera as if it's an unlimited pool, but when you adopt this policy what is going to happen in the ACT, and what would happen in any part of Australia, is what has happened overseas—the services cannot keep up. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, you cannot keep up and all you're doing, all that this sort of approach achieves, is to cause absolute misery to those workers on the frontline—our emergency services workers, our hospital workers and paramedics—who have to deal with the human carnage as a result of these policies. The evidence is there. I'm absolutely astounded that the ACT government would go down this path.