探花系列

Person arrested for prohibited substances Person arrested for prohibited substances

Illicit drugs: government spending lowest on prevention and harm reduction, shows new report

Play icon
Ben Knight
Ben Knight,

Governments in Australia spent nearly $5.5 billion on illicit drug countermeasures in 2021/2022, but less than 10 per cent went towards strategies aimed at preventing use and reducing negative consequences.

Australian governments spend more on law enforcement in illicit drug policy than treatment, prevention and harm reduction combined, says a 探花系列 Sydney report.

The findings published today聽reveal that state and federal governments spent approximately $5.45 billion in the 2021/2022 financial year聽on illicit drug countermeasures.聽Nearly 65聽per cent聽($3.5 billion) was spent聽on law enforcement programs, including $1.8 billion on routine policing against drugs.聽Less than 2聽per cent聽($90 million) was spent聽on harm reduction measures such as needle syringe programs and supervised injecting聽facilities.

鈥淕overnments do invest a significant amount of money on proactive drug policy, and聽where they spend that money shows what they consider as important in responding to drugs,鈥澛爏ays聽聽AO, the聽report鈥檚聽lead author and drug policy specialist聽at the聽Social Policy Research Centre,听探花系列 Arts, Design & Architecture.聽鈥淭his research provides the foundation for evaluating the investment and whether Australia is on the right path to reducing drug-related harm.鈥

Media enquiries

For enquiries about this story and interview requests, please contact聽Ben Knight, News & Content Coordinator, 探花系列 Arts, Design & Architecture.

笔丑辞苍别:听(02) 9065 4915
贰尘补颈濒:听b.knight@unsw.edu.au


Nearly 65 per cent ($3.5 billion) of government spending against illicit drugs was on law enforcement programs, including $1.8 billion on routine policing against drugs. Photo: Adobe Stock.

Proportion of spending down on prevention and harm reduction

The聽Australian 鈥榙rug budget鈥:聽Government聽drug policy expenditure聽2021/22聽is the most recent report in the聽鈥榙rug budget鈥櫬爏eries, which聽estimates聽spending on聽proactive responses to illicit聽drugs by governments across Australia.

The proportion spent on prevention, such as in-school education programs, slightly decreased since the last report in 2009/10, down from 9.5聽per cent to 6.7 per cent聽in 2021/22. Spending on harm reduction also decreased from 2.2聽per cent聽to just 1.6聽per cent.

Spending on law enforcement remained relatively stable, slightly down from 64.9 per cent to 64.3 per cent of expenditure. Meanwhile, spending on drug treatment services rose from 22.0聽per cent to 27.4 per cent.

Dr Annie Madden AO, Executive Director of Harm Reduction Australia (HRA), says the report reveals the true extent of governments鈥 chronic under-investment in harm reduction.

鈥淎ustralian governments have continued to claim their position as a global leader in harm reduction over many decades. In this case, however, the evidence does not lie,鈥 Dr Madden says. 鈥淲e know that frontline harm reduction services such as needle and syringe programs, opioid treatment, take-home naloxone, drug consumption rooms and drug checking services reduce potential harms including drug-related deaths.

鈥淭he fact that harm reduction spending has continued to decline in the face of unprecedented evidence of impact and effectiveness is deeply concerning for many reasons, not the least of which is the undeniable fact that harm reduction saves lives.鈥

State and territory governments spent the most against illicit drugs, accounting for 76 per cent or $4.11 billion of the total proactive expenditure, the majority of which ($2.87 billion) was for state law enforcement.聽

鈥淭he聽lion鈥檚聽share of the investment is from state governments and continues to be in law enforcement, and聽that鈥檚聽related to the policing of drugs, which we know is an expensive activity,鈥澛燩rof. Ritter says.聽鈥淎t the same time, the amount聽that鈥檚聽invested in helping people who are experiencing problems with illicit drugs is significantly less as a proportion of spending.鈥

Professor Alison Ritter AO. Photo: 探花系列 Sydney.

Illicit drug use is a significant health, social and economic聽issue for Australia, with the latest聽聽population survey showing a small increase last year in use, Prof. Ritter says. There聽has聽also been聽a noticeable聽shift in the types of illicit drugs聽being used, including聽crystal methamphetamine and hallucinogens.

CEO of Alcohol and Drug Foundation, Dr Erin Lalor AM, says despite鈥痚fforts from law enforcement, there鈥檚 been a concerning increase in the number of Australians experiencing drug-related harms, such as hospitalisations and fatal overdoses. She says prevention is a crucial part of a comprehensive approach needed to reduce the impact of drug-related harms, particularly among young people.鈥

鈥淭he number of drug-induced deaths in Australia is unacceptably high and has sadly been increasing since 2006,鈥 Dr Lalor says. 鈥淭hese heartbreaking deaths are mostly preventable and聽have a ripple effect on the community, with friends and families suffering.

鈥淲e need increased, long-term funding commitments for evidence-based prevention initiatives that reduce risk factors for harmful illicit drug use and boost protective factors, as well as targeted education campaigns in populations at greater risk of harm and those that address stigma.鈥

While the total amount spent by governments against illicit drugs more than tripled from the last report in 2009/10 ($1.7 billion), the 2021/2022 estimate represents just 0.63聽per cent聽of all government spending, down from 0.80聽per cent in the last report.

鈥淭hese figures suggest that despite a significant increase in proactive government spending on drugs since the last report, this reflects overall growth in government spending and not growth in spending on drug countermeasures,鈥澛燩rof. Ritter says.聽鈥淗owever,听what鈥檚聽striking is that despite the percentage reduction in proactive expenditure, there聽hasn鈥檛聽been any significant shift in the proportion of investment amongst the four domains of drug policy.鈥

Most people, on average, want governments to spend equal amounts on policing, treatment and prevention.
Professor Alison Ritter AO

Impact on service providers

The Network of Alcohol and聽other聽Drugs Agencies (NADA) is the peak body for NGO AOD service providers in NSW. Its CEO, Dr Robert Stirling, says services on the frontline are suffering from the lack of聽growth in investment

鈥淲e have a noticeable, growing unmet demand for services in the sector from underfunding, demonstrated by increasing wait times for treatment and workforce shortages from a lack of secure working conditions,鈥 Dr Stirling says.聽

鈥淎t the NSW level, money for treatment has predominantly been spent on new services rather than investing in existing services to ensure they can deliver quality services and create healthy workplaces and conditions.聽

鈥淢eanwhile, at the Commonwealth level, funding has been going backwards, leaving services struggling to retain staff and needing to reduce services to communities.鈥

Emma Maiden, General Manager of Advocacy and External Relations for Uniting NSW.ACT, says governments should consider removing criminal聽penalties,听and redirect funding towards the other pillars of drug policy.聽

鈥淭o see that the largest expenditure in the latest Australian 鈥榙rug budget鈥 is once again directed to law enforcement, and how that spending monsters what聽is spent聽on drug treatment, prevention and harm reduction programs, is of great concern,鈥 Ms Maiden says. 鈥淲e need our governments to have the courage to take action and invest the lion鈥檚 share of our drug budget in the things we know will make a difference.鈥

Prof. Ritter says the聽report聽does not assess the effectiveness of the investment across domains, and the relative value of the estimates is more important than any absolute value.聽

鈥淭here is no line item in government expenditure estimates that explicitly lays out how much they spend on illicit drugs,鈥澛燩rof. Ritter says.聽鈥淪o, there are some assumptions behind every figure, which we have accounted for in our sensitivity analysis.鈥

The latest聽National Drug Strategy Household Survey also聽shows Australians want roughly equal investment across education, treatment, and law enforcement in illicit drug policy.

鈥淢ost people, on average, want governments to spend equal amounts on policing, treatment and prevention,鈥澛燩rof. Ritter says.聽鈥淪o, the current investment mix does not necessarily match how most Australians would prefer governments to allocate funding across the domains of drug policy.鈥