The Herald's War on P series last year produced an overwhelming reaction from readers and a swift response from the Government. This week, we revisit the people and the issues to find out what has changed.
After years of warnings and a week-long Herald "War on P" campaign, the Government came up with its promised answer to the methamphetamine crisis last October.
Although public debate focused on the virtual banning of P ingredient pseudoephedrine from cold and flu medications, the package contained several other important measures,
including tougher law enforcement and more treatment for addicts.
The Weekend Herald asked three experts closely connected to the debate - Alistair Burry, chairman of the anti-P charity the Stellar Trust, Mike Sabin, director of drug consultancy group Methcon and Massey University drug researcher Chris Wilkins - to rate the Government's actions so far. Here are their views on the changes.
Ban on P ingredient
Background: Pseudoephedrine, the main ingredient in P, will be virtually banned, although the change will not take effect for more than a year. The decision has drawn protests from some pharmacists and cold and flu sufferers.
Alistair Burry finds the negative media coverage of this angle disappointing and describes the fact that some cold sufferers have lost their favourite medication as "collateral damage" in the wider battle against a dangerous drug. "It's unfortunate but there's a greater good that you've got to focus on."
Burry supports the change and thinks the effect on the public may be exaggerated. He believes so many pharmacists have already switched to the alternative drug phenylephrine (which cannot be used to make P) that many patients may already be using a pseudoephedrine-free brand without realising it.
Mike Sabin sympathises with the public and thinks that a decade ago it might have been possible to introduce a less prescriptive change - such as pharmacists recording sales on a national database, so that police could follow up suspicious purchases.
Sabin argues that the business is now so firmly entrenched that criminal gangs would simply employ more "pill shoppers" to buy the same overall number of tablets. He doesn't believe the ban will hurt top criminals but it could help shut down smaller "Ma and Pa" P labs, where young children are often present.
Chris Wilkins describes the move as a good "short- to medium-term shock" for methamphetamine manufacture, which should work well when combined with the other strategies.
More Customs officers and police
Background: About 140 Customs staff (or 40 fulltime equivalents) have been redeployed to frontline drug duties. As a result Customs and police have found more pseudoephedrine coming into the country and have been able to react faster to catch those responsible.
Alistair Burry applauds the shift in priorities but is sceptical that it is portrayed as a boost, when staff have simply been shuffled around. "I want to see some more resources in Customs and police - yes, they've put some in but they've taken them from other places and that's cheating. You really need to have some significant bolstering of resources in there."
Mike Sabin calls it a positive move but says no one should get too excited about Government press releases announcing that seizures have tripled over the same time last year. The P trade is a multibillion-dollar industry, he says, so when law enforcement improves slightly, criminals just take the hit and carry on. Often they react by increasing supplies to make up for the confiscated product.
Chris Wilkins says Customs are much better at finding pseudoephedrine than they were several years ago, so putting more resources into border control makes sense. He says New Zealand is well-placed to keep drugs out of the country, as it did for decades with heroin after the collapse of the Mr Asia syndicate.
Seizing criminals' assets
Background: The courts will be able to seize assets, unless criminals can prove they come from a legitimate business. The change was due to happen anyway but police and Crown prosecutors see it as a crucial step in fighting drug crime, which is now dominated by P.
Alistair Burry supports the change, strongly backed by his colleague on the Stellar Trust advisory board, Crown Solicitor Simon Moore QC. Discussing the potential of the new Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act last year, Moore referred to American gangster Al Capone, who evaded the FBI and police for years but eventually fell to the powers of the US tax department.
Mike Sabin agrees the change is a definite step forward, after years of rhetoric on police powers to tackle organised crime which have not been matched by action.
Chris Wilkins says it targets the reason why people become high level dealers - money. "Prison and the chance of being arrested are just the costs of business for those kind of professional criminals. If they can make millions of dollars and then spend a couple of years in prison, it looks pretty good to them."
The law should tackle the injustice of drug dealers walking out of prison and heading back to their mansions and luxury launches. "I think potentially this could have a big impact."
More treatment
Background: An extra $7 million a year for three years will provide about 20 short term detox beds (where addicts come off the drug) and 60 long term residential beds (for live-in treatment to break the habit). The Government is considering a law change to make it easier to admit addicts for treatment at their families' request.
Alistair Burry says the extra beds are a good response to pleas for help from families. He admits he feels uncomfortable about the idea of forcing addicts into rehab centres but supports it because treatment is in their own best interests.
Mike Sabin says the extra beds are a nice gesture but hopelessly inadequate for the scale of the problem. "Twenty more detox beds in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch - how does that help someone in Kaitaia, Gisborne, Taranaki or Invercargill?"
Chris Wilkins says getting addicts into treatment stops them using, buying and selling, which is an essential first step to addressing their underlying problems. He thinks the coercive element in the proposed law change sounds moderate, considering many people are already nudged into treatment as an alternative to prison.
Education
Background: This has become bogged down by disagreement over what drug education can achieve or even whether it is counter-productive. The Stellar Trust is keen to warn school children about the dangers of P but academics and senior officials remain sceptical.
Alistair Burry says the trust is struggling with official disapproval and even debate within its own ranks about drug education in schools. His own view is children need to know about the dangers so they can make an informed decision. However he admits it is hard to prove the effectiveness of warnings to intermediate school children, who may not be exposed to a drug like P for several years.
Mike Sabin strongly supports drug education in school and believes the Government has missed the wider issue. He argues that demand for drugs will continue as long as we have a policy of harm minimisation (accepting that drug use occurs and dealing with the consequences) rather than harm prevention (not tolerating drug abuse and aiming to reduce it to zero).
Chris Wilkins thinks the Government is right to be cautious. He says well-known anti-P campaigns in US states such as Montana raised community awareness of the problem but did nothing to stop young people trying the drug - and may even have persuaded some to try it as a form of rebellion. He says overseas experience shows is possible to run successful campaigns against abuse of drugs, alcohol and tobacco but the message and the people delivering it must be credible to the target audience.
PROGRESS REPORT
Three frontline anti-P advocates were asked to rate the Government's policies. They gave it marks out of 10.
Alistair Burry - 7 out of 10
Stellar Trust chairman
Wants more police and Customs officers and faster change overall but credits National for taking the problem seriously.
Mike Sabin - 6 out of 10
Methcon director
A mixed score. Sabin gives the Government a 9 for cracking down on supply but 5 for treatment and only 2 for curbing demand.
Chris Wilkins - 9 out of 10
Massey University drug researcher
Sees the package as a good mix of strategies with measurable goals.