Bennett David: Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
Bennett David: Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4602] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I reiterate what the Hon Trevor Mallard just said. I thought that was a pretty good summary of the situation we have and it followed on from what the Minister of Transport said about how the Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4) is really just a starting point. When we look at the idea of drug-impaired driving we know that sensible citizens would expect that it would be illegal anyway. They would not expect a Government in 2009 to have to pass legislation prohibiting it but the reality is that it is not illegal. The other reality is that if we look at the statistics that came before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee we see that there were a large number of potential cases where drug-impaired driving had had a very detrimental effect on road safety and where many people had lost their lives. It is long overdue that something is done about the issue and this legislation is the starting point in trying to address it. In no way is it the final solution in making sure we cover off all the angles but it is a very good starting point. 
I congratulate the Minister on the work he has done in promoting this bill through the House. He has made it a personal endeavour to make sure we get this legislation through the House in a timely way and that has met with public opinion and also with the need to get some runs on the board in regard to having the prohibition of drug-impaired driving delayed no longer. I also thank members of the select committee from both sides of the House. I think Trevor Mallard should be singled out for his contribution to this legislation. He was the most senior member in respect of experience on the committee. That showed and we were grateful for his experience so I say thank you to Trevor for his work in regard to that committee and the legislation. That was good stuff. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: That’s a beautiful thing. Well done! 
DAVID BENNETT 
: We actually gave him a letter of thanks so it was good. 
When we look at the legislation people have to understand that technology is not where we want it to be— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No more praise David thank you. It’s causing trouble. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: No I say to Mr Mallard that his political career is over anyway. The politics of this debate will be lost on some. 
In regard to the nature of the legislation we found that the technology was not quite at the level of the political will. If the technology had been at the level it is in relation to drink-driving—where we can easily test on the side of the road and within a quick and cost-effective testing regime pick whether someone is under the influence—we would have taken on board a much stricter approach. This legislation really does reflect the level of technology out there which is not at the level we would expect for drink-driving technology. 
A case that has been highlighted this week is another example of the other point the bill shows which is that in relation to drugs it is very difficult to cover off all the bases. It is probably a lot easier to detect the place of alcohol in the system of the human body and at a relevant point in time whereas drugs have the potential to be tested and seen in the body for a long time after they have been consumed. There is also a range of drugs ranging from those that are prescribed to those that are illegal. There will be a huge market for drugs in the future and although there will no doubt be drugs that will be very beneficial to people’s lives we may not want to have people driving high under the influence of those drugs. So there needs to be a bit of flexibility in this legislation because it is dealing with a pretty fluid area. There is constant change in the number and use of drugs in our community but this bill is primarily aimed at those drugs that are basically controlled or illegal. Any genuine citizen out there would expect that anyone caught in a car accident under the influence of those drugs would face a conviction. That has not been the case up to now but will be changed under this legislation. 
In relation to drug-impaired driving a two-part test has been introduced in the bill. The first part is quite a simple impairment test which goes back to the good old days of the drink-driving test before that technology advanced. Following that test is a much more expensive blood test. In effect we are creating a situation where the number of cases that will go through that full testing regime is reduced to those cases that are most likely to have a success rate for conviction. In doing so we reduce costs and the workload on our police in undertaking those testing regimes. The impairment test seems to be a test that the police will need some help in enforcing in the sense that they will need to be trained and given some idea of what potentially could be seen as part of that test in the future. A lot of work has to be done in implementing this legislation to make sure it is a reality not only in regard to the police but also in regard to any blood-testing arrangements. There will be development issues as we go forward in implementing the legislation. 
Another thing we probably need to look at in this legislation and which became much more of a subsidiary issue is the issue of the motor vehicles register. This issue has been sitting there for a while in the sense that a lot of people have felt their privacy has been compromised and that they need to have a situation where they can protect some of their personal information. This bill attempts to do that in a way that protects the legitimate interests and uses of motor vehicles register information but at the same time provides personal protection for individuals. All in all I think there is a good balance in regard to the motor vehicles register. The issue was much simpler in the sense that we could suggest stringent rules that would apply and know that those rules would be seen to be effective in the areas sought for them. 
The drug-impaired driving part is still a work in progress and will be so for many years as technology develops as changes come in drug use and as Parliament looks at all the options available—through not only the Misuse of Drugs Act but also the drug-impaired driving legislation. 
All in all I thank members of the committee the officials and all those who submitted on this legislation. The bill was introduced in the previous Parliament and has been carried through. I think that it is a good start in that process; it is not the final solution but certainly it is the good start we need. It will give us a very strong base to work from as we work towards making sure that drug-impaired driving is not legal on our roads any more.