Your points are redundant. Comparing a licence to keep a reptile and a licence to drive a car, car registration and property rates is like comparing apples to oranges.
The revenue raised from vehicle registration, driver licensing fees and insurance is put to use in the form of maintaining roads and ensuring that vehicles on the road are safe (although I am a firm believer that the majority of car defects are questionable and don't actually make a car dangerous). Revenue raised through rates go towards infrastructure in your area, such as waste management and all the other things we all take for granted every day.
Reptile licencing doesn't really result in any benefits for keepers and the licencing is very rarely policed. In Queensland, a licence is handed out as soon as you pay the money, there is no test to see if one is capable of caring for a snake before the licence is granted.
At best, the very lax reptile licencing system is a poorly executed way of preventing animals from being poached from the wild. We all know that the licencing system that governs herp keepers does nothing to ensure that the safety of the animals that the licences are designed for.
So, your point is moot.
I would much rather see any animal in good condition owned by someone without a licence than see an animal in poor condition owned by someone who coughed up $70 bucks and has no idea what they're doing.
As for the drugs, that is completely irrelevant to the health of the reptiles in question, what he did in his personal life obviously made no difference to how he treated said animals.