Fielding hits out at Greens drug policy

[WantDaChronic]

THE Family First party's sole senator says it is absolutely outrageous that Labor is making a preference deal with the Greens, due to the Greens' drug policies.

 

Greens leader Bob Brown said earlier today that his party and Labor were close to announcing a deal in which the Greens would preference Labor in the lower house in all seats except in Tasmania, and Labor would preference the Greens in the Senate.

 

"It is absolutely outrageous to think that Kevin Rudd would want to preference the Greens, knowing their stance on drugs," Senator Fielding told ABC television.

 

"Whether there was a deal or not you've got to ask the question why would Labor want to see the Greens holding the balance of power in Australia?

 

"Most people would think that was absolutely strange that Labor is saying that they're for families, for small business, and want the Greens to hold the balance of power in Australia.

 

"That's jumping out of the frying pan into the fire."

 

But Senator Fielding said he was talking to all parties, including Pauline Hanson's anti-immigration Pauline's United Australia Party, about preferences.

 

Senator Brown responded that the Greens' policies on drugs were for harm minimisation.

 

"I'm a doctor. I hate drug addiction. But we've got to have sensible policies to meet it and we will make sensible policies."

Source: www.news.com.au

 

sounds like the politicians are trying to make the greens look bad because they'll have the balance of power in the senate which will make them able to stop any bullshit laws from getting passed one can only hope that the greens prevail, end up with the balance of power and in turn decriminalize marijuana

[Frazz]

Senator Fielding is known to grossly mishandle the truth in addition to being a very dangerous wanker!! .. this is not the sort of person we want anywhere outside of Sunday School

 

The man is a false prophet !!! ... should stone the mongrel to death by rights

 

EDIT: Rememeber that ALL Senator Fielding's Family First votes are passed onto Liberal Party ina prefference deal !!!! :

[mull]

I'll vote for WDC.

 

Actually saw this interview on abc this morning. The family first guy was very close to saying the greens party are EVIL.

 

Ahh the games they play for a lil power/cash.

 

[billos]

what eva happen'd to the green tomato party, and the party, party, party? .....is there any other greenly tinged parties other than the greens?

[freddie]

Brown pushes drugs harm minimisation approach

Article from: AAP

 

October 29, 2007 09:08am

 

AUSTRALIAN Greens Leader Bob Brown has defended his party's stance on illegal drugs, saying a harm-minimisation approach makes more sense than punishing drug users.

 

The Greens have been criticised by their political opponents for being too soft on drugs.

 

But Senator Brown said his party's harm-minimisation approach is based on the best medical expertise across Australia.

 

"I hate the scourge of drugs but we have to try to get people who are addicted out of that addiction and back into Australian society," he told ABC radio.

 

Senator Brown said the stance of Family First and the Coalition on drugs is too tough to be effective.

 

"The problem is that (Family First senator) Steve Fielding and some of the people in the Government are somewhere back in last century with policies which would make the problem a great deal worse in Australia," he said.

 

"The nastiness of the fundamentalist view-points from the right which wants to punish such people, would add enormously to the cost of Australia and is simply not going to suppress a huge problem which needs to be dealt with through sensible medical, educational and, where there's drug dealing involved, prison outcomes."

 

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...5001028,00.html

 

I was going to start another thread with this but it kind of fits here. Bob brown sums it up well. The family first is a nasty fundamentalist party which belongs in the American bible belt, not here in Australia.

[torture]

everyone should enter the poll just above the start of the article on that page btw... nice to see a fair percentage believe in harm minimisation

[WantDaChronic]

i just voted in that poll and here are the results so far:

Poll Results

 

Thanks for voting, here are the results so far:

 

Do you think harm minimisation is the best policy on drugs?

 

Yes

60% (1049 votes)

No

33% (579 votes)

I'm undecided

5% (93 votes)

Total votes

Total of 1721 votes

[roid]

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...5001028,00.html

 

I was going to start another thread with this but it kind of fits here. Bob brown sums it up well. The family first is a nasty fundamentalist party which belongs in the American bible belt, not here in Australia.

 

Too true. It's scary how Bush's presence in the hot-seat has given these people such confidence, they are rising up in Australia. I'm not sure what to do about it.

 

 

btw I tried to vote on that poll, it wouldn't let me. Just gave me a blank page with "Vote Now!" written on it, no buttons, something is broken or perhaps Newscorp pulled the poll. (they've been doing that a bit lately - pulling polls that give inconvenient results)

 

edit: 1 hour later the poll is working again

Edited November 4, 2007 by roid

[Al B. Fuct]

The zero-tolerance brigade have been on a real crusade of late- and they have Bronwyn Bishop in their pocket. If you can suffer through it, read this Hansard transcript. As chair of the Standing Committee, Bishop should be neutral, seeking good information on which to base policy and legislation... but noooooo, she swallowed Drug Free Australia's zero-tolerance lies and sings them from the rooftops.

 

Bishop's abuse in this hearing of Dr Alex Wodak, one of the few sensible Australian minds in the field, was totally reprehensible. The recommendations of this particular hearing basically came down to taking away the children of people with drug problems. Yeah, that'll work... that, along with spinning 'zero-tolerance' to the media with the meaningless term 'harm prevention,' which the ZT mob is using to introduce public confusion about 'harm minimisation' which actually is a genuine and workable drug policy strategy. When you see some moron using the bogus term 'harm prevention,' you'll know the speaker believes that jail cures addiction.

 

The recommendations Bishop's ridiculous hearing produced are contained in a paper called 'The Winnable War On Drugs.' The desperation of the zero-tolerance mob is palpable when they have to spin, spin, spin. They know damned well ZT ain't working and have to spin it til they like it- or at least until it makes a good sound bite for the general public's housefly-level attention span for the science and psychology of drug use and abuse.

 

See Tony Trimingham's response to Bishop's biased garbage.

 

Commentary

 

* At the very start the Inquiry demonstrated that it had a clear ideological bias with its terms of reference.

 

* There is no logical reason to include a specific term of reference on the impact of one type of approach to drug policy.

(unless the outcome of the inquiry is already predetermined- as this one was. -Al)

 

* The exclusion from the terms of reference of the drug of greatest harm to families – alcohol – makes little sense if the goal of the inquiry is to assist families.

 

* The committee's focus on discussing and questioning witnesses on their support for harm minimisation throughout the inquiry was of little relevance or assistance to families trying to cope with the impact of drug use.

 

* The lack of reference in the report to the many submissions from families – particularly those who expressed support for the National Drug Strategy's harm minimisation approach.

 

* Throughout the inquiry the conduct of the Chair and some members was so clearly biased either in favour or against witnesses and their evidence that it became an embarrassment to those who believe parliamentary inquiries should be conducted in a professional and investigative manner.

 

* The report fails to address many areas of concern for Indigenous communities and families, with some of the recommendations likely to cause distress for many Indigenous people if implemented, such as the proposed default adoption approach in child protection matters.

 

* The report's recommendations fail to reflect the specific cultural issues facing Indigenous families and culturally and linguistically diverse families.

 

* The ability of the committee to table an edited, printed and bound report within 3 weeks of the final submissions being received and hearings being concluded raises serious doubts about how well the committee considered the totality of the evidence it received.