Blog Post 1 – 15th February 2021

My first couple of weeks completing a placement at Drug Policy Australia (DPA) have centred around familiarising myself with the more technical administrative tasks such as updating DPAs online database, maintaining the website and writing emails. I have also been completing some research which has formed the basis for future article publications in the coming weeks and months. My work has been in close consultation with Greg Chipp – the Managing Director and Founder of DPA.

Having limited prior experience in the not-for-profit, non-government sector, I was particularly interested in how a small organisation grows, and accumulates the financial capital required to sustain its daily operations. While teaching me how to use NationBuilder, – the online software which DPA uses to administer its public communications, contact list, email directory and website – Greg also discussed the history of the organisation, how it was founded and how it is legally constituted as an Australian registered charity. In 2014, the legal definition of a ‘charity’ was expanded and now recognises charitable purposes to include the protection of human rights, the promotion of reconciliation and tolerance and the advancement of education and research. This legislative reform was crucial for the initial formation of DPA, which was founded in 2014. DPA is largely an advocacy body which promotes educational services around the safe consumption of illicit substances and argues for legislative reform at both the state, federal and international level. Prior to this substantive statutory redefinition within the Australian Charities Act, DPA would not have been eligible to register as an Australian charity, given its functional purpose. Australian Charities are eligible for a number of tax exemptions including fringe benefit tax rebates, goods and services tax concessions and income tax exemptions. Additionally, unlike statutory government bodies, the functional purpose Australian charities are determined by the charity and are not beholden to the objectives of government. This means that DPA can maintain its autonomy in advocating for legislative reform, while still being acquiring the financial benefits of the status of a charity.

This did give me a moment of pause. I obviously have organised this placement with DPA because I have a strongly held perspective that local and international policy frameworks which try to limit the harms associated with illicit drugs through prohibition are ineffective. The change to the Charities Act in Australia has benefited an organisation whose objectives I support. However, I cannot help but think that my view on this matter is framed by confirmation bias. What if, for instance, an organisation acquired status as a registered charity on the grounds of promoting educational services which I deemed to be unfavourable? The legal redefinition of ‘charity’ allows for a much broader collection of organisations to gain charitable status, and though this benefits an organisation that I support, I am uncertain about the broader ramifications of such reform might look like.