National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy 2008-2011
1.6 How has the Strategy been developed?
The Strategy has been developed, under the guidance of and support from a Project Management Group and three Reference Groups, by a Project Team from the National Drug Research Institute (NDRI; Curtin University of Technology) and the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC). The Project Team engaged in national consultations and a review of the research literature and evidence.
Project Management and Reference Groups
A Project Management Group (PMG) was established to oversee the development of the Strategy. The PMG included membership from the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, the Australian National Council on Drugs, the Intergovernmental Committee on Drugs, and representatives from a consumer body, law enforcement, health ,and education sectors (see Appendix 2). Three Reference Groups were also established to provide advice to the PMG and the Project Team throughout the development of the Strategy. These Reference Groups had representation from law enforcement, mental health, general practice, emergency medicine, consumers, research and education (see Appendix 2). The three Reference Groups were the:- Law Enforcement Reference Group;
- Public Health and Treatment Reference Group; and
- Research Reference Group.
Sources of information used to develop the ATS Strategy
The method used to develop the National ATS Strategy was consistent with that previously endorsed for the National Cannabis Strategy and National Alcohol Strategy. This involved:- Reviewing existing knowledge and research;
- Engaging in a comprehensive national consultation process with key stakeholders in metropolitan and regional Australia, including consultation forums in each state and territory; and
- Seeking written submissions.
- The National Amphetamine Type Stimulants Strategy 2006-2009 (Law Enforcement Component) (Led by the Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department and endorsed by all IGCD and MCDS jurisdictions);
- The outcomes of the ‘National Leadership Forum on Ice’ organised by the New South Wales government prior to the MCDS meeting, December 2006;
- The National Illicit Drugs Campaign Phase III (Qualitative Research Report, prepared by Blue Moon Research and Planning);
- Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD)(2007) Methamphetamine: Position Paper; and
- The National Cannabis Strategy 2006-2009 and National Alcohol Strategy 2006-2009.
Consultation process and written submissions
Between March and June 2007, community members and representatives from a range of sectors were invited to attend consultation forums occurring in every state and territory.Forums were held in all capital cities and selected rural sites across Australia (a total of 15 locations). Separate consultations also occurred with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, young people and consumers. These groups were also represented at more general forums. The forums were open to any interested member of the community, but in particular those from community organisations, law enforcement, criminal justice, Indigenous services,education and health were targeted. A number of individuals and organisations (e.g., Australian Government Attorney General’s Department; Australian Customs; Drug and Alcohol Office of Western Australia) were consulted in meetings separate to the forums.The following provides a summary of the consultation process:
- 40 members of the Project Management and Reference Groups
- Consultations with 515 stakeholders
- 19 consultation forums around Australia
- 67 feedback forms received
- 22 written submissions received
Processes used in development of the Strategy
The Project Team embraced similar processes to those employed in developing the National Alcohol Strategy and the National Cannabis Strategy. These included:- Considering trends in use and problems;
- Broad national consultation;
- Building on existing activities, policies and strategies;
- Being informed by available evidence;
- Focussing on key areas such as at-risk groups and contexts of use and the range of interventions (prevention; law enforcement; reducing problems; treatment); and
- Identifying responses that could be realistically implemented in a timely manner.


