NCETA contributes to strategic policy debate and development

March 2018

NCETA welcomed the opportunity to contribute to two recent policy debates / developments both nationally and in South Australia.

1. Submission to the consultation draft of the National Alcohol Strategy 2018-2026

In its submission to the, NCETA noted that the draft Strategy appropriately focuses on alcohol-related harms and potential strategies to address those harms. Some of the key issues in NCETA’s submission were:

  • The importance of the workplace as a setting for the implementation of effective alcohol harm reduction, early intervention and prevention strategies
  • A need for the AOD and broader healthcare workforces to develop the knowledge and skills to identify and provide support to clients experiencing family and domestic violence
  • Enhanced collaboration between health care and aged care services to better prevent and respond to problematic alcohol use among older people
  • Reinforcing the Work Health Organization’s emphasis on raising awareness about the relationship between alcohol and cancer
  • The need for specific strategies aimed at reducing the prevalence of alcohol use and responding to related harms in remote communities.

2. Submission to the South Australian Government’s Inquiry into the development of a model for mandatory assessment and/or treatment for those at immediate risk

Internationally, nationally and locally there has considerable debate about the pros and cons of mandatory treatment for responding to AOD issues. The South Australian Government recently conducted an Inquiry into mandatory treatment and the model they are considering is based on Victoria’s Severe Substance Dependency Treatment Act, 2010. NCETA’s response to the Inquiry was framed around the issues of efficacy, need and cost effectiveness and noted that the extent to which mandatory treatment would benefit the South Australian community, both from an AOD treatment and cost effective perspective was unclear. NCETA also noted that any potential benefit for the small number of suitable clients was likely to be at the expense of more comprehensive and evidence services to the broader community.

Copies of both of these submissions are available from NCETA’s website.