Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Can I firstly begin by acknowledging Simeon Brown. He's actually been working on this kaupapa since June 2013. I wonder if he remembers when he was a member of Manurewa Local Board and Peter Dunne came and accepted a petition to stop a High Zone store in the middle of our community? So it is something that this member has been working on and I want to acknowledge that.What I now want to acknowledge however is actually the beginning of my colleague Nick Smith's contribution tonight. In saying that can I acknowledge everybody who was on the Justice Committee. I was not a member of the Justice Committee so I didn't get to hear from the 78 submitters. I just want to note that of those 64 were individual submitters 14 were organisations 18 supported. So 23 percent of those who submitted supported the legislation and 68 percent opposed and there were 9 percent who were a little bit ambiguous.But I do want to highlight who the 45 people who have died are because actually in my community the 45 people who have died are homeless people Mr Nick Smith. They are the poor and they are the vulnerable. Unfortunately in some communities the people who have manufactured these products like to test them on people and they've chosen to use my community as one of those test stops. And the other thing they do is they get these people who are addicted to these products to then sell them to their community. So I'm speaking about mine. I've had three people die in Manurewa and they were homeless people. I didn't hear from the parents and the families and the young people who were affected. If you look at definitions we're looking at party pills legal highs and then synthetic cannabis and it's the synthetic cannabis that seems to be killing a number of people who currently are affected by the availability of this substance.Now we can go back in history and look at the Psychoactive Substances Act and the fact that in the principal Act we wanted to regulate these substances so they're not prohibited substances. We actually said We're going to allow New Zealanders to purchase them." And that's the context within which this legislation should be viewed because this is an amendment to the Psychoactive Substances Act—it's an amendment bill. So that's the Act that we are actually amending tonight. So what we're saying is that we now want to treat a non-regulated non-prohibited psychoactive substance as either a class C—in terms of this legislation; I've heard other colleagues say A—drug and want to focus on punishment.So I want to agree with my colleague Nick Smith that the people who will be punished—given they are the same people who have died—will be the poor and the vulnerable and also in my community it is Māori because overwhelmingly over 90 percent of them are Māori and they are the homeless people living in my community.So what did the submitters say that I particularly want to highlight? I actually want to highlight this whole theory that deterrence works. So if we put up these penalties it's going to stop people from—Hon Member: It'll help stop.LOUISA WALL: Well can I actually highlight what the bill says. Who is this bill going to affect? It's going to increase the penalty for selling or supplying. I find it fascinating that if you look at the definition of trafficking it talks about the preparation of a drug of dependence for distribution and it talks about manufacturing of an illegal drug. They aren't the people that are targeted by this legislation. They are the people that are selling or supplying.We know from the police that the people who are selling or supplying are actually those likely to use the substance. They are people with addictions. This is such a flawed piece of legislation and I actually want to highlight what Peter Dunne said. He said that this is naive nonsense and I agree with him 100 percent. So our focus as a Government absolutely has been on treating people who have an addiction not sending them to jail for eight years or 14 as I've heard tonight. That is a completely failed strategy if you want to actually address the issue. So why don't you change it? You should have focused on the manufacturers.Can I just say that I also want to highlight Massey University's SHORE & Whariki who again reinforced that all increasing penalties actually does is increase the number of people in prison. It does not reduce drug price it does not reduce drug availability and I agree with the New Zealand Medical Association: the big question we all should be asking ourselves is how do we reduce demand? You do not reduce demand by penalising in this case the suppliers and sellers and making them go to prison for more time—oh unless we're going to I guess agree that it's in prison that they're going to get the health support that they need. So maybe that's the irony and perversity of this piece of legislation: that actually by sending people there who we know are drug addicted likely to be homeless vulnerable marginalised Māori people they'll get into a system that actually will care for them and look after them. So let's hope that there is a perverse consequence to this piece of legislation going through.I'd also like to take the opportunity to highlight internationally this growing piece of research that I highlighted in terms of Massey University's SHORE & Whariki's perspective. Internationally the evidence quite clearly now says we must focus on cultural attitudes about drug users and addictions. I'm anticipating that our mental health and addictions inquiry actually is going to highlight how substances are used by people who have mental health and addiction issues. What it will say is that people use drugs and alcohol to mediate and to moderate their mental health issues and that actually addictions are a symptom. So we need people to start acknowledging the fact that they have addictions and seek support.That's what we intend to do as a Government and quite clearly that was articulated in the select committee report because our main rationale for not supporting this piece of legislation is because as a Government we now philosophically believe in a health-based approach to drug use. We will not support punitive measures—deterrents that actually do not work. So I want to highlight how proud I was in the congruency of that philosophy that when our Prime Minister was over in the UN she did not sign the Global Call to Action on the World Drug Problem.And can I just say in highlighting that there were particular elements of this call to action and we've done quite a few of them actually. We've strengthened international cooperation through the Maritime Powers Extension Bill. How do I know? I'm on the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee—it was a bill that we discussed. And actually it complimented—and I want to acknowledge my colleague the Hon Meka Whaitiri in the House—her Customs and Excise Bill which colleague Tim Macindoe was also involved in because actually it was creating a fit for purpose organisation that would be part of intercepting these drugs before they got here. It was absolutely about reducing supply. So if you look at the whole framework we know that we've got issues of supply but fundamentally in our own country the biggest issue is demand. So from our perspective we agree that we should develop a national action plan—and I want to reiterate—to reduce demand for illicit drugs. You know Simon Bridges said he would have signed it. Well this says we need to have a national action plan to reduce demand. That's not sending addicts to prison actually—which is what this bill is going to do. And so that's why we will not support this piece of legislation. But what we do commit to—and I know my colleague the Hon David Clark is here in the House tonight—is implementing the recommendations that will come from our mental health and addictions inquiry that make sure that New Zealanders are getting the help they deserve and need to reduce the demand for drugs in New Zealand. Kia ora."