Our proposed drug reform policy at the policy development meeting back in 2013 goes down as the single most controversial policy we ever debated. The people on the working group, including @AndrewDowning, @MarkG and myself argued for a more liberal drug policy than we got, it was obvious on the floor of the meeting we were going to lose the vote, so we removed the second sub-point here in order to have a drug policy at all:
Substances which are non-addictive and have a reversible impact on the user will be legalised, i.e. removed from any schedule that prohibits their use.
Marijuana will be made available subject to appropriate health warnings and quality assurance.
Limited psychedelic drugs (LSD and psilocybin) will be made available subject to appropriate health warnings, quality assurance, and assessment by an expert panel to ensure no significant health impacts result from legalisation.
I doubt enough has changed within the party that we could get the extra clause up at the next congress, but if there is general support it may be worth putting forward again, or something similar.
I support the legalisation of all the drugs mentioned so far in the thread.
This would be the easiest one to take on, lowest health risk, widest popularity, stupidest prohibition (along with Salvia, but Salvia isn’t as popular). LSD has much stronger effects, but neither really compare to too much alcohol (a previous next door neighbour died recently from multiple organ failure due to alcohol poisoning, she was only 30). If you use alcohol as a yard-stick, most drugs should be legalised.
[Edit] Here are the most recent Australian drug use statistics.